Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Braden.

Mr. Chairman, is it even appropriate, or is it even within our rules to come to the Assembly for this request? I guess it's because it's after the fact. I know from my involvement with other events, or other projects, you can't come to government after you've already staged the event and spent the money, and then ask for some help. You come in before, with a detailed plan on what it is you're going to be doing, and where government can help and get involved. Here we are, as I say, the request is coming to the Legislative Assembly now three months, almost four months afterwards. Is this according to the rule book, Mr. Chairman?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this is not a new practice. This happens almost every time a supplementary document is prepared. If the House does not believe this is an appropriate expenditure, they would vote it down and the department would have to eat that amount.

As well, Mr. Chairman, I did find, in my documents, a breakdown of the $200,000 that we provided. Seventy-five thousand dollars was used for travel by air to the Tlicho communities. The travel of the legal team was about $15,000; accommodation was $10,000; kitchen services was $70,000; security and operational fees, setup of equipment, et cetera, was $30,000. We were asked for $374,000, but we felt we could only provide $200,000. Again, ultimately, if the House does not believe this was an appropriate expenditure, then the Department of the Executive would have to eat the costs from within. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Braden.

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the additional information. The Minister is right; a supplementary appropriation is almost entirely for situations, or events, or expenses, that we accrue after the fact, but this is a contribution to an outside organization. This is not a government activity like catching up on retroactive pay for a collective agreement, for instance, or paying for forest fires that we have no way of predicting. I guess that is where I would still query whether this is an appropriate expenditure to bring to the Assembly, given that it is a contribution to an outside organization, and it has that element of prior commitment to it, which I know, for any other organization that might otherwise come to government for assistance prior commitment, is an almost automatic rejection. So on that basis, again, I would query, is this in line with normal convention, and practice, for a contribution to an outside organization, even one as honoured and esteemed by this assembly of the Tlicho? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, yes, this is appropriate to bring forward to this Assembly as an expenditure. We have, in the past, provided money to a number of aboriginal organizations: the Aboriginal Summit, and so on, for funding. So we've provided funding to aboriginal groups on a number of different initiatives. This is no different from that. Yes, when the department doesn't have the adequate resources within its budget amount, we would come forward requesting that from the House. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is where I'm going to start to question the government on the growth of the public service. As I've mentioned many times before, every time we seem to turn around, there's a new position cropping up somewhere. Again, this $136,000 does not represent the full cost of a new senior advisor position based in the Department of Executive on an ongoing basis. Mr. Chairman, I think it's important to note that even though year after year, supp after supp, I seem to be saying the same thing, nobody seems to be paying attention, and that is the fact that our public service is continuing to grow.

We just signed a new agreement with the UNW, and that agreement, in and of itself, will cost the Government of the Northwest Territories $60 million over three years. How are we going to pay for that? Well, we're going to have to try to find ways to pay for it, and then it's compounded. The three percent increase is compounded every year, Mr. Chairman. We've got 4,400 employees. It makes up about 40 percent of our annual budget, and nobody seems to be paying attention to this, Mr. Chairman. Every time we turn around, there are new positions, everywhere we look.

Again, I think the government has a tough time saying no to anybody, no to their managers, no to their directors, no to their DMs, and try to get some work done with the existing resources that we have. Every new initiative, we rush out and we try to hire more people, and, to be honest with you, Mr. Chairman, I don't know how sustainable the growth in the public service is over the long run. Ten years from now, it might just cripple this government. It's that serious, Mr. Chairman, and I don't think the government pays much attention to that at all.

This supp is littered with positions, again. We've said it time and again, why, why are we growing in this area? I don't even agree with this, because the $500 million socio-economic fund is for communities along the pipeline route. What about the other communities that aren't along the pipeline route, Mr. Chairman? They're not getting any of this $500 million. Is Yellowknife getting any? Is Hay River getting any? No, they're not getting any. So why are we looking at funding this position? I'd really like to know that. That's just an aside from the fact that I don't think we should be hiring somebody else. Don't we have somebody already that could be doing this work? I don't know how many senior advisor positions we have government-wide, but it seems to me there's a couple that are in every budget, and we just keep growing and growing, Mr. Chairman. I'd like the Minister to explain why we need this position. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the Member is being consistent since he has become a Member in this Assembly and raised the issues around the size of the bureaucracy and the hiring practices. I must give him that much. The fact is, when I first came in and started reviewing the request from departments for additional funding to help them become more involved and proactive in the pipeline work that was starting to happen, I told departments to go back to the drawing board and work together to come up with one position instead of everybody trying to deal with their initiatives on their own. So they try to be more coordinated within the government. We are starting to see that come through here.

The $500 million is federal funding, but it does still impact a large number of the communities that are directly impacted by this pipeline development. We still have a responsibility to do our part and to ensure that the initiatives that are happening out there or the potential impacts are recognized, and then we are a party at the table with discussions around how that $500 million will be implemented. I think it is, again, our responsibility to ensure that we are giving the best information possible when we are at those tables about where we think some of that funding should be spent. Recognizing we don't have the ultimate say in this, this is, again, a fund developed by the federal government and will be

implemented through a working group. An agreement has been worked out between all the groups. Ultimately, this is one of those ones that is tied to the go-ahead of a pipeline. If there is no process or no commitment to proceed with that pipeline, we would have to look at this position, then, and decide if, in fact, it was necessary to proceed depending on if it was a further delay or if the announcement was that they were not ready to proceed. This would be tied to an announcement of the pipeline proceeding. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I will tell you what the government has a responsibility to do. That is to go out and get a resource revenue deal for all the citizens of the Northwest Territories and devolution for all the citizens of the Northwest Territories and not to accept these piecemeal things from the federal government. This $500 million, I have said it before and I will say it again, is a smokescreen from the federal government to cloud the issue of resource revenue sharing. They don't want to deal with the Northwest Territories on resource revenue sharing, and this is the proof. Mr. Chairman, it doesn't cover off all the communities in the Northwest Territories. It is 21 or 22 of the communities. The other communities aren't covered off by this.

The responsibility of the territorial government is to look after everybody and to go out and get that deal. Mr. Chairman, we haven't had any proof that that is getting any closer to being accomplished.

I also wanted to question the Minister, while I have the floor here. The position of a senior advisor would probably run in the neighbourhood of $95,000 to $100,000 a year. In this, the compensation and benefits are pegged at $48,000, the breakdown that I have. Underneath the breakdown of the funds that are required, the $136,000, there is $75,000, Mr. Chairman, that is for contract services. Basically, what I see happening, Mr. Chairman, is the government going out and hiring a senior advisor to be a contract administer to go out and hire somebody to do the actual work. That is what I see. I haven't been proven otherwise. I would like the Minister to explain why we would attach $75,000 to this position just to hire another bureaucrat and get them to go out and hire somebody else to do the real work. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, there are other examples in government of funding designated for specific areas to try and help those regions cope with the impacts or development training initiatives and so on. There are examples across government of that, not to the size of this one, but the fact is, again, federal funding tied over 10 years; and the potential is, whether the Member feels it is a smoke screen or not, that it will offset impacts to the northern communities. By doing that, it would further offset what we would have to deal with if this money wasn't there and this development were to proceed.

For the contracting out portion, the Member is correct; $75,000 is for contract services. I don't have the detail of that with me as to what they are planning and what types of contracts they are planning to enter into, but even when you look at the $75,000 for a fiscal year, that might get you one person to do a number of reports. That is something else we would have to get clarity from the department on for further information. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am just wondering if the Minister could let us know exactly what the detail is on the contract services because I would really like to know. I am surprised that they don't have that information now considering that the pipeline is so important and this senior advisor position is so important and they don't have this type of information. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, as we prepare these documents and request the departments who make their submissions to us, we do ask for the background detail. Based on the estimates they provide and the discussions that are ongoing and the importance of the initiative, we have included this one in here. I will request that information and get a further breakdown and provide that to the Member. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Ramsay.

It is okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Going back to page 6, Executive, operations expenditures, executive offices, total executive offices, not previously authorized, $1.530 million.