Thank you, Mr. Minister. Supplementary, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Can the Minister inform us as to what reports or studies would be done to justify changes in the capital plan? For example, we know that Public Works does building condition reports on how much longer a building would be able to hold out. So, can the Minister inform us if those are used and if that is the case, in a 20-year needs assessment, what changes when it comes into the five-year capital plan window? There is no use spending renovation money on something for a couple hundred thousand dollars if it is being replaced in two years. Thank you.

Sorry, Mr. Roland, the Chair didn't hear a question there. I'll give you another opportunity. Ask a short question to the Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question then to the Minister is what reports or work is done to justify changes in the five-year capital plan? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. The honourable Minister responsible for the FMB, Mr. Handley.

Mr. Speaker, certainly Mr. Roland has mentioned some of them. Condition reports of existing facilities is clearly one. We are continually assessing the condition of our assets. Second, we have to look at program needs. If a program changes, then we have to make changes in our assets. A third one would be the resources that are available to us. We may not have the money that we had anticipated three years ago; we may not have it this year; we may be working with less money, so we need to look at how we do things differently. So, those would be the three main considerations, although, I am assuming that there are other things that may come into play as well, but, those would be the three main criteria.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Oral questions. The honourable Member for Deh Cho, Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Finance, also regarding capital investments in the communities. In my Member's statement, I stated that the process has to be fair and transparent and balanced. As one of the tools to ensure that, I have been trying to look at utilizing historical spending. It has been very difficult to follow how and where the dollars have been spent in terms of when you break it down by constituency. Today, we had a Member state that Yellowknife was falling behind in terms of line up for capital spending. I could see why that belief is there because when you look at accounting, certain projects do not fall into the community they are constructed in. We have, for example, the grader; a grader has been purchased for Enterprise but has only been used for the territorial highway instead of counted as part of Enterprise's budget. But, a $50-million jail in Yellowknife is not counted as part of that community's spending. Let the Minister explain to me how the accounting is decided. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Minister of Finance, Mr. Handley.

Mr. Speaker, annually we put out the geographical tracking expenditures that summarizes how and where our capital money is being spent. Within that you will find that there are categories that show the spending, expenditures that are made by community. There are others that are made on a regional basis and a territorial basis. So, a grader, for example, for a highway, is not included in a community expenditure. If a grader is used by the municipality, that would probably be included in that community's report but you will find that all of the highway projects, for example, are listed as territorial. They are not identified as expenditures for the nearest community or anything like that, unless they are used in that community. But the main source we have is the geographic expenditures report. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minster. Supplementary, Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would request the Minister review that because I don't believe that is really consistent. There are projects, and we could probably find a number of examples, but my point is that things have to be consistent and things have to be balanced. I would like to know, the Minister mentioned today that they would be looking at a new design, a new approach to capital allocations. I would like to know what would be included in there for balanced spending so that everybody would be ensured some dollars in the riding. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Minister of Finance, Mr. Handley.

Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned before, I would have to bring this to FMB and to AOC first. But, in my thinking what we could do, for example, is take all of your community projects, whether they are municipal works, water and sewage projects, those are clearly community. Recreation facilities, those are clearly community projects. Categorize those; all those projects are community-based. Then take the other things that are territorial and put them into a different category. Then allocate the budget. For example, you could allocate the budget accordingly because there is this much money for community projects; there is this much money for territorial projects. Then, within the community projects category, decide how you are going to allocate that money, and with the territorial one do the same thing there. So you don't have all these projects competing. Because I agree with the report of this committee on small communities. There is a problem when a huge territorial facility is competing for money with a little community project. Maybe we need a different way to categorize it. So that is what I am looking at. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Supplementary, Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the current capital process does not support a lot of projects as priorities. It doesn't reflect the need in the communities for office space, for crisis shelters and even medical facilities. I heard Mr. Lafferty indicate Wekweti needs a new nursing station and we can't get it on the readout screen. Also, communities like Hay River Reserve can't qualify for a lot of facilities because they are so close to Hay River. Yet the need is there. I would like to know if the Minister is looking at modifying the criteria to ensure that these types of community facilities are included in the capital funding process. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Minister of Finance, Mr. Handley.

Mr. Speaker, yes, certainly we will consider them. The committees, the Regular Members, everyone has articulated very well in telling us the difficulties with the current corporate capital planning process. So if there are better ways of doing it, then I want to hear from all the people, and particularly from the MLA's. I will take a proposal to FMBS and bring it to the committee as soon as I can. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Oral questions. The honourable Member for Range Lake, Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my question also goes to the Minister of Finance in regards to capital investment. Mr. Speaker, last Friday, the Minister made a statement with a great deal of conviction and pride about the fact that this government funds not on a per capita basis, but on a needs basis. He also stated that Yellowknife per capita gets $3,000 whereas another community might get $23,000 per capita over the last 10 years. The Minister also stated this is because communities are funded not on a per capita basis, but on need. I don't understand this. Am I to understand that Yellowknife needs $20,000 less per capita than any other community? What does he mean by funding by needs and Yellowknife getting $20,000 less than other communities? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. The honourable Minister of Finance, Mr. Handley.

Mr. Speaker, in centres where we have a large population, there are more people to divide up the cost of a particular contribution by. So if we contribute to the water and sewage system in Yellowknife, it's divided by 20,000 or so people. If we were to put in a water and sewage system in Colville Lake where there is only 100 and some people, then it will just show that it's costing us much more per capita in Colville Lake than it would in Yellowknife. So that's what I mean when we say we fund according to need. People have a right to clean water. We will put a water facility in even if it costs $15,000 per person in a small community compared to $3,000 in a large community. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Supplementary, Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I believe the Minister is speaking to the principle of economies of scale and, at some point, where there are more numbers, you could share the cost. But I believe the Minister is well aware of the crowded schools in Yellowknife. As well as the hard time the community has had in getting an extra arena, the roads that need to be fixed. So I would like to know, at what point does the need of a community like Yellowknife come into play after the economies of scale have been factored in?