Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the constructive use for that facility is on the government agenda. As I have discussed with the Member, if there is a clear understanding in the Sahtu region, for example, that there would be political support for one regional care centre, then that would go a long way to assist in making it clear for the government on what the wishes of the people in the Sahtu are. If every community in the Sahtu is going to be wishing or demanding or asking for a long-term care facility, then it will be a very difficult circumstance. Those are the circumstances at present. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Item 6, oral questions. The honourable Member for Great Slave, Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions this afternoon are to the Premier, and they relate to the amazing deal that was signed earlier today with two of the Maritime provinces on their resource sharing deals. I wanted to ask, Mr. Speaker, just what parallels are there between the deals that Newfoundland and Labrador and Prince Edward Island have and the deal that we are seeking with Ottawa for our resources? Where are the similarities? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. The honourable Premier, Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The deal as signed today is actually with Newfoundland, Labrador and Nova Scotia, not P.E.I. P.E.I. is not involved in this. As the Member may remember or recall, several years ago, Premier Hamm in Nova Scotia was touring across Canada raising this issue of the unfair distribution of the off-shore tax royalties. This is an arrangement that was negotiated for several years, and it came to a head last June during the federal election. So it is a long-standing one. It did not go on, I don't believe, as long as our discussions on resource revenue and royalties sharing have, but it has gone on a long time.

In our case, we have, in this government, worked out an agreement with the Prime Minister to come to an agreement-in-principle this spring and a final agreement in 2006. As I have said before in the House, I intend to keep the Prime Minister to his word on that. If we begin to slip and start to see time passing, if we have no agreement-in-principle and that we can see that the federal government, for some reason, is dragging its feet on it, then, yes, there may be very close parallels to what the people in this territory would want to do and what happened in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland/Labrador. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the Premier's correction. Indeed, it was not Prince Edward Island, but Nova Scotia that kind of also claimed that it has a brand new day. Mr. Speaker, I would like to continue following through with this. What we know to date, does this deal with these two provinces help the NWT's case or could it, in fact, hurt us? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. The honourable Premier, Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On the face of it, it helps us because it sets a precedent that we can follow. But as the Member again may have noticed in the papers in the last few days, that Ontario are now raising some concern because they feel that the Prime Minister has done a one-off deal with two provinces that is unfair to Ontario, and that they're going to end up having to pay more than their share in equalization as a result of this. So on that front, there clearly has to be some discussion among the Premiers and with the Prime Minister to figure out how all of this is going to work.

There are other provinces that share the same kinds of concerns as we do. Saskatchewan, for example, has made it clear that they intend to try to work out a similar deal for themselves. So it helps us, but on the other hand it does create the possible imbalances that could work against us. But as far as I'm concerned, we have a deal with the Prime Minister -- a deal on devolution and resource revenue sharing -- and I intend that we will stick to that deal. We will honour it and we will trust him until he shows us, for some reason, that he's not going to live up to it. If that happens, then we're ready to take more drastic action. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Mr. Speaker, thank you very much. I do know -- and it's Valentine's Day so my heart is with the Premier and with the Prime Minister, too -- their promise is to see a deal that is going to mean net fiscal benefit. I've heard this from the Premier, I've heard this personally from the Prime Minister, that is where I want to go. But, Mr. Speaker, with suddenly these new demands coming from the provinces, there are many more provinces and they're a lot bigger than we are. While we have this understanding with the Prime Minister, do we also have this understanding with the provinces and are they going to keep us on their radar screen, as well? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. The honourable Premier, Mr. Handley.

Mr. Speaker, we intend to stay on the radar screen. I can tell the Member that I am very much aware of what's happening. I spoke with Premier McGuinty on Saturday regarding Ontario's concerns, and I have his assurance that he's not trying to do anything that's going to undo our deal, nor is he trying to do anything that's going to somehow compromise what we're asking for. So I have registered our concerns with him and assured him that I'll be watching very closely what happens, and the arguments that Ontario is putting forward. If they are in any way seeming to interfere in our agreement, then I'll certainly let him know further. But I will be in contact and continue to be in contact with Premier McGuinty and other Premiers as these various scenarios unfold. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Your final supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Mr. Speaker, I applaud the Premier for taking the initiative to phone Premier McGuinty. That tells me that he's doing his job.

Where I wanted to follow through now is in the answer to a previous question. Mr. Speaker, the Premier said that we may need to take more drastic action. I wanted to ask what actions are available to us, or what courses of action are available to us to really ensure that we will stay on the radar screen and we will achieve a fair resource revenue sharing deal? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. The honourable Premier, Mr. Handley.

Mr. Speaker, we have agreed to a process with the Prime Minister, we agreed to achieving an AIP this spring and a final deal in 2006. When that begins to fall apart, then we will look at what the alternatives might be.

At this point, Mr. Speaker, I don't want to start laying out possible scenarios; they're going to be seen as threats and I don't think our counterparts in this deal are going to view that very well. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Item 6, oral questions. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, last week I questioned the Finance Minister at length in terms of the Sirius deal that has gone off the tracks, and the potential loss to the Government of the Northwest Territories in that regard. Today I wanted to concentrate on the Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development angle in this fiasco. I know the Minister was listening intently last week when I was questioning the Finance Minister, so I would like to ask him some specific questions. I guess the first one is what his department knew and specifically what the diamond projects division's involvement was with the proposal with the Leviev Group, with the receiver, any involvement that they might have had in this and why they didn't step in to try to help things out. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Minister of Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development, Mr. Bell.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Let me first state that I share the Member's concern and disappointment that we weren't able to see a deal between the Leviev Group of Companies and BHP Billiton, Rio Tinto Diamonds. I was very enthusiastic when I learned of Leviev's interest. It is obviously a very credible world player. I think we are looking for stability in this local industry. I believe somebody of Leviev's calibre would be able to deliver that stability. Let me say that we have been involved in every stage of this process from soliciting interest in bids. We saw a number of those come forward. The department did put together some discussions with various groups who had eventual interest in the assets for sale and the sale of the factory as a going concern. Then the receiver handled the valuation of the proposal stage and came back to Cabinet with a discussion around what the best proposals were. Obviously, Leviev came to the top.

From that stage, we were involved on a weekly basis in discussions. My division was with both Rio Tinto and BHP and the Leviev Group of Companies. We were very disappointed when the eventual deal was not to be made. I would like to remind Members that although we have the socioeconomic agreements, and although the producers have expressed their support for the industry, we cannot force the marriage of any two companies. This is, and will be, a commercial deal, when it is finally done. Our ability to influence the exact partnership is limited. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister of Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development why there is a six percent mark-up over what the producers charge here in Yellowknife, as opposed to sales of comparable goods in Antwerp. I would like to know why that six percent mark-up exists. Thank you.