Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank the mover and the seconder for providing an opportunity to debate this important point. With that said, Members of Cabinet will be voting against this motion and we take this position for a number of quite practical reasons.

First of all, Mr. Speaker, keeping with the spirit of intent of settled land claims and self-government agreements, as well as ongoing negotiations, the GNWT has chosen to work in partnership with aboriginal leaders to pursue expanded jurisdiction over land, water and resources in the Northwest Territories through devolution negotiations. We've worked hard to achieve consensus with our partners at the table and the recent signing of the devolution framework agreement is a signal of some significant progress being made in our negotiations. We believe that the current devolution negotiations provide the best opportunity for gaining greater control over land and resources in the Northwest Territories.

Mr. Speaker, historical precedence demonstrates that attaining provincehood does not guarantee control over land resources or resource revenues. Manitoba became a province in 1870 and they didn't get control over their land resources until the 1930s. Saskatchewan and Manitoba were created in 1905. They didn't get control over land and resources until the 1930s, well after they were established. So going to provincehood doesn't automatically give you control over land resources and resource revenue.

Second, there is significant fiscal uncertainty in pursuing the provincehood option. As a province, we would be subject to existing equalization payments. Equalization payments are based not on population, but on revenue-raising capacity and do not take into account the cost of providing government services and programs. The

formula financing arrangements, as much as we don't like it and find weakness with it, does consider the higher cost of providing programs and services in the Northwest Territories and it provides an expenditure base that gives us more money on a per capita basis than we would likely receive through equalization. It gives us considerably more, probably three times as much as we would get if we were to become a province that would be on equalization.

Then, Mr. Speaker, as well, attaining provincial status for the Northwest Territories would require an amendment to the Canadian Constitution. Under the amending formula set out in the Constitution Act of 1982, this would require the consent of Parliament and Senate, as well as two-thirds of the provinces that together have at least 50 percent of the population of all of the provinces. Securing the consent that would likely be necessary to create a new province of the Northwest Territories would probably prove to be impossible.

Mr. Speaker, for these reasons, Cabinet doesn't feel that this is the time to change courses and give up our working partnership with aboriginal governments and go on our own and start lobbying for provincehood. It doesn't give us what some people may think it would give us and, secondly, and most important in my view, is that we have set a course with the aboriginal governments and we want to continue to work that way until it's proven that seeking devolution and resource revenue sharing as a territory just is not getting us where we want to be. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.