Thank you, Mr. Roland. I have on the list Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Yakeleya has not spoken to this yet. Would you agree to defer to Mr. Yakeleya until he has a chance to speak to it? Thank you. Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. I want to speak about this process here. The deal is done and it's no use flogging a dead horse.

---Applause

It's something that we have to bite the bullet on. What I want to talk about is something like this in the small communities. Sometimes the small communities have these aspirations and they look at new initiatives and it's risky; it's risky going into business. Sometimes the banks are a little shaky about going into business with the community organizations. I guess the government of the day did their homework and thought it was a good deal and a good thing to work towards. Little did we know that we were going to be talking about this today and talking about the situation we're in right now.

I hope because of this, that this does not stop our government from looking at other initiatives that the people may have with regard to the diamonds or the pipeline, that this government will look at and carefully consider going into any types of deals like this that they would take due diligence in terms of working with the organizations or communities in terms of supporting them. That's what the communities look for. Sometimes the banks just will not go into a good business deal unless they have some kind of support from some larger organization such as the government. I want to ask the Minister in all of this, what type of assurance can he give the organizations or communities that they will still continue assisting some of the organizations or committees the best way they can through this process, and not use this to stop helping the committees or organizations. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, the Member has highlighted a number of areas that are critical in the sense of how we would step in to try to assist. We would use due diligence to ensure that the business deal going ahead was something that was viable in the sense of giving it an opportunity of coming into existence. Saying that, we realize that in any of these ventures where banks tend not to become involved there is risk, and we have to measure that risk that the Assembly is willing to accept. If Members are supportive of initiatives going forward and willing to accept that, we, as an Assembly, would take on certain amounts of risk, then we would go forward on that basis. It would be a

concern if we were to engage in some of these business ventures where the risk was too great and the return almost not going to happen.

So I think we have to use due diligence but, at the same time, we recognize as a government, through many of our programs, that there is a need to support the small business in the small communities and try to do what we can as a government to encourage development. It's either that or we decide as a government to become sort of a social enterprise of helping or keeping people in a certain style of doing business. I think we have to recognize there's going to be an amount of risk in some of these areas in communities, and we have to look at it case by case, ensure we use due diligence, and provide the right amount of support; to ensure that, if we do go through a process of lending or guaranteeing money, we give the right support so that a venture would be profitable and be able to prosper. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Yakeleya.

Madam Chair, I bring this up because of the potential of a resource development that's going to be happening between now and the next four or five years down the Mackenzie Valley. A lot of organizations or small businesses will be looking to this government for some leadership. I applaud the Members for the questions because we have to protect our taxpayers, and there are some questions. That's the leadership that we're looking for in this government; to question some of these ventures while also learning from them. We are going to see down the Mackenzie Valley that there are going to be ventures in the Pipeline Group in terms of organizations getting into business. Some of them are going to be pretty shaky, some of them are going to be pretty solid and some of them are going to be pretty good. I've dealt with them in the Sahtu region, and some of the banks are going to want their first born, your second born and your third born. Just give a government born to some of them. That's the way the deal is done.

I want to say that this government...At that time, this may have seemed like a real good deal; it just happened to fall this way and now we have to deal with it. This was done a couple of assemblies ago, and now it's ours and we have to take responsibility and deal with it and look after the taxpayers. So I'm saying there are some new initiatives and a new standard for how this is going to be looked upon by this government. Basically, we have a heads-up on our side in terms of how things are going to be looked at. It's a hard one to swallow, but we have to swallow it and continue on. I'm not going to harp on it so much; I just hope the regions are going to look at potential work along the Mackenzie gas pipeline, and that we have some assurance that this government will continue with the leadership and continue with providing the best kind of programs in terms of getting into ventures like this. I guess that's what I'm looking for from the Minister; assurance that he will continue looking at programs for our regions.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Our government will do what it can within our fiscal capacity to help small business along and develop and take advantage of the development that's happening in the Northwest Territories. Because I have had the experience in the Legislative Assembly in prior assemblies, I understand the phrase about the government cannot be the engine of the economy, but at the same time we do have to be of assistance to the small businesses. So we will do what we can, we will apply due diligence, and in some cases there will be those saying that we are being too stringent. But at the same time, we want to protect what we have as a government. As stated by Members here, we have to look at the taxpayers' dollars and ensure that we're doing our best; that we're making the right decisions. So we will do what we can and we will do so within our fiscal capacity. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland, and thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. I have a couple of other new names that have been added to the list now, Mr. Hawkins, so I think I will go to Mr. Delorey.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I wasn't going to say anything on this because I think, as some Members have mentioned, it's a dead horse or maybe an issue that's done and over with and we're stuck into this agreement. But the more I think about it, the more I have to put it on record by saying that the Minister talks about protecting the public interest and he mentions the banks that were leery about getting into this type of a business. I don't think that what we've done here does anything to assure the banks that this is a viable business to get into and support in the future.

One thing that I brought up in the last Assembly on a number of occasions and tried to get more clarification on from the government at that time, was the fact that when some of these deals were put together and the government gave loan guarantees, I heard that there were proponents out there that had business deals with the government that didn't require any government funding, no loan guarantees. They had all the money, public money, to put into setting up a business. But it wasn't in Yellowknife. It brings to mind the question of was it a good business deal on the government's part to support these businesses over ones that didn't need government guarantees, or was it just political favouritism? The government is not even admitting now that they made a bad deal. Even if the Minister could at least come forward and say we made a bad deal, but what does it say to the ones that put the money together without even having loan guarantees to put a business case together? This one business was put forward and supported from the government before one that didn't need any government money. So would the government at least admit that they made a bad deal? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Delorey. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I guess I could say if I was a part of the debate and took part in that, I could say then either a good, bad or unwise decision was made. But I can't accept that because the previous decision was made. All I can do is go forward on this basis and ensure that the 15th Assembly protects the revenue base we have, and that's from the taxpayers of the Northwest Territories and of Canada, because we still get 75 percent of our funding from Canadian residents. So we do have to work to do that. But as to admitting a bad decision was made, unfortunately I wasn't at the table. I don't have the details of what was discussed and what decision was made and

what caused them to do that, as well as the decision of what company to invest in and so forth. That again was made by a previous government, previous Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Delorey.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess that's an easy way out for all of us, but we're still here to represent the public and how we handle the public purse. Whether it's a decision that was made in the past doesn't mean that we haven't any say in it or that that makes it right. I know it was mentioned before that to make these loan guarantees, I think it was anything over $500,000, the Members had to be notified of that. But in making a deal that's worth $800,000 of public money, the Members didn't have to be notified of that. So how do you get around that discrepancy? Why would the Members not have been involved in that deal that forgave $800,000 of taxpayers' money? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Delorey. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I don't know what else I can say here to the fact that this decision was made, the agreement put in place to notify Members of new guarantees. At that time, there was no requirement, as there is right now, there is no requirement through those guarantees or those establishments or reporting structures to notify Members besides the normal process of the House, through the budget exercise, through supplementary appropriations or transfers of loss. I have committed myself, as Minister, when an issue of this nature arises I will meet with the committee to inform them of a potential situation. Again, I will go back to the fact that the FMB and Cabinet will have the final say, as is the process now. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. I have Mr. Hawkins and Mr. Braden but, Mrs. Groenewegen, I think we'll allow you questions on 2-51 if that's okay with Mr. Braden and Mr. Hawkins. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a very interesting debate taking place here, and I accept the fact that the government is here to perhaps invest and support businesses which are of a higher risk that wouldn't normally get off the ground. But what I'm concerned about is consistency. This was one of a number of loan guarantees that were put out there in order to encourage this secondary diamond industry. Interestingly, as my colleague from Hay River North has said, it was all concentrated in Yellowknife.

When I compare that to some of the other moves that the government has made...For example, the closure of a $3 million abattoir built with federal and territorial money in Hay River which was just on the brink of becoming self-reliant. After $3 million was invested and lots of hard work in the community, they came there and slammed the door shut on that place and sold it, I think for about $150,000 on the Hay River Reserve. When you see that kind of thing happening -- I could give examples of the sawmill in Fort Resolution and there are other risk ventures in the Northwest Territories; the government, I believe, acted in good faith and had good reasons why they embarked on these things -- it makes some of us wonder about consistency and fairness.

As my colleague from the Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya, says he hopes the government continues to recognize itself as a backer and a supporter of ventures in the North which might result in economic development which may not be particularly well-received at traditional lending institutions. So we've got quite a diversity of opinion here. But I guess I would have to say that the folks of the day who entered into these agreements did so in good faith, thinking that these were going to be ventures which produced jobs and economic activity. It's just unfortunate that they didn't have such a generous thing happening on a few other types of projects in other places.

But having said that, I think we've learned a lesson here and I have confidence in Mr. Roland's commitment to, in the future, make sure that ordinary Members are involved in these kinds of discussions. I just see it as a thing I could debate on either side. Sometimes some investment and some risk taking is necessary to get things off the ground; on the other hand, we don't want to see a cavalier kind of casual approach to these sorts of things. So we want the government to provide that kind of due diligence, because we are dealing with public funds here. There has to be some middle ground. Occasionally, I guess, things aren't going to pan out exactly the way we expected. My worst-case scenario, my worst fear is that we would ever be in a situation where decisions were made behind closed doors that would show political favouritism for the sake of favouritism, and the same kind of consideration wouldn't be extended to other types of industry, other types of activity. I guess we'll keep a close eye on things. I don't really have a question, just a comment that we will keep a close eye on things.

I do appreciate the commitment of the Minister to keep a tight rein on this sort of thing, because this is the very thing that can get a government into a lot of trouble, where it looks like one client is being treated in a different way than another client and where it looks like there is political interference. So I think this is a lesson learned for all of us to be very diligent in considering these things. Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. I guess that was a comment, Mr. Minister. Moving along, Mr. Menicoche would like to ask some questions. Mr. Hawkins and Mr. Braden, if I could go to him first. Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, colleagues. I was just listening to some of the debate and this is kind of reeks of favouritism and connotations but, like everybody else says, the deal is done. What happens if this hits the paper and I have several constituents out there who do owe some small business loans. We are using the fullest extent of our system and law to chase them for their $5,000 loans or their house and children, yet...

---Laughter

...when it comes to the hundreds of thousands and millions of dollars, you were willing to bend over. I would like to ask the Minister, how does our government treat the little guy. Why can't we give them just as much favouritism? Those are the questions I am being asked and being held accountable for. Why are you doing that

for the big guys, yet I have to lose my livelihood and business? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are definitely many examples of unfortunate incidents or occurrences that involve this government and individuals across the Northwest Territories. There will be other examples of when things don't work out, but there will be many examples where we can show the little old lady who couldn't come up with her rent and we have extended the program; we've done those things in the past. This is another thing that's been done in the past that we are having to deal with as the Legislative Assembly to honour that commitment going forward.

All I can do from this point going forward is to assure this Assembly and all the Members here that, as a government, we are taking your comments very seriously. We are going to, as we go through the process and somebody has a difficulty in how they operate, start holding the accountability factor at the same level. It might be on the other side when Members feel that accountability measure being put to somebody in their constituency, but it is going to be a requirement and we are going to hold everybody to the same level here.

Favouritism is not the name of the game. I can't speak for past assemblies, but for the 15th Legislative Assembly, I will do my part to ensure that we are treating people with the appropriate level of care and due diligence that is required of our government. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Hawkins.