Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Just some general comments from me, as well. I spoke about it yesterday to the Minister of Finance; however, it was more appropriate under the Financial Management Board, just with respect to our capital planning process.

I'm not entirely convinced that the capital planning process is working for us. It's outside of us now and we don't really see it. The only feedback that I can get is from the communities, hamlets and settlements that tell me that people are flying into the communities, asking them their needs and then flying out again. I am not too sure that is proper consultation of the capital planning process, and that kind of concerns me. How do they actually get their say, and how do I as a Regular MLA get my say into the capital planning process?

Being elected last year for the first time, I saw it was in the business plans and I was made aware of a few things only because there was something absent in the capital plan. I said how do I get that back in there? Our process of how we have our say, how we advance things, is still not clear to me.

There are certain needs that have to be addressed. In particular, I like to use the Nahanni Butte gymnasium as an example, only because it's a very good example and a very clear example. Here is a community that doesn't have this base facility. Is that not a need identified by our government? That is how I see it. All communities should have their base needs met before we move on to others or, indeed, give other communities two gymnasiums, such as in the capital plan for Yellowknife, Mr. Chairman. I'm not to clear on how that works, if the Minister can address that for me, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I guess as being a Member of the Legislative Assembly for as long as I have, the capital planning process has always drawn attention from Members of the Assembly about the selection process; what gets approved, what gets deferred, what project seems to move up on the order paper in a sense.

It has been recognized and there have been a couple of attempts to try to address those concerns. The real difficulty we have found around capital programs began in the mid-1990s when the government was faced with a huge deficit situation. Large reductions were made, a majority of those happened in the capital planning area and it was recognized at that time that making these reductions in the capital infrastructure side of the equation was not going to be a sustainable process, that we would have to re-evaluate our position and look at what needs to be done in those communities. Unfortunately, as that time has occurred, many projects have been put on hold, have been put further down the capital plan list. As the nature of the projects that were on the list were becoming more and more critical, it became very difficult.

That is why we, as the Financial Management Board, have accepted the work that has been done by Municipal and Community Affairs and the Association of Communities in the area of a new deal for community governments. That is a significant change from how we do business. In fact, as I stated in the budget address, we are looking to go down this and looking to support the communities in taking on more of this responsibility of what projects get identified, what projects should move ahead. We are working with Municipal and Community Affairs to go through that phase. It won't be this year, but this is the year that Municipal and Community Affairs now has the authority to begin implementation of the new deal in working with community governments to ensure that they have the ability to -- those that want it -- take on that capital planning process and become directly involved in what they see as priorities in their communities.

In fact, we are supporting that to the point of putting new dollars into the capital plan and ensuring that communities can begin to start seeing some of the long-awaited projects begin to move. I think it is, again, a very different approach, a more positive one, working with the elected leaders in communities. I agree that in previous years when a committee of government people would show up in the community and say what is the wish of the community in these areas, and met with officials and identified some projects, those would get brought back.

MACA would then have to compete with every other department about the small and shrinking pool of funds to fund our infrastructure in the Northwest Territories. We are now in a position, and if we continue to operate as we

are and hold to the fiscal responsibility policy that we are going to accept as part of this budget exercise, we will be able to see community government identify the projects that they want. There will be more dollars added to that side of the equation, where they can start to see some of the fruits of the labour, in a sense, of their work from a community end and see some of these facilities begin to be built.

Of course, with working with the federal government we have been able to identify more dollars, as well. We are looking at about $25 million per year now that will be identified for community infrastructure. That is a significant amount, and through this exercise, when you look at the capital acquisition plan, be able to clearly identify that this is going to be a line item now as we go forward. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That does shed some light for me and I would like to thank the Minister for that answer. There is another thing that concerns me. As we reviewed the departments in the draft main estimates, there are still some departments that do business a little bit differently. That kind of concerns me in terms of the budgeting process. The Housing Corporation is one and MACA is another. That is one of the issues that I have been bringing up. I believe I asked the Minister at one point if we follow the generally accepted accounting principles when doing our budgets. The answer was yes. Yet in committee we are still seeing different departments doing things differently. What I meant by my question there, Mr. Chairman, even though they are following the accounting principle, I think I wanted it standardized, so that when I am in committee I am able to compare apples to apples instead of apples to oranges. That would make committee work that much easier when we are able to compare departments. It would allow us to analyze better, we would be able to see actual percentages and we can compare that between departments.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask the Minister again, when we are using our generally accepted accounting principles when deliberating the budgets, is it the same for all departments? I would like it to be the same for all departments. Is that what is being presented before us in our 2005-2006 Main Estimates, Mr. Chairman?

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, yes, the general accounting principles apply to the main estimates for the planning, and as we put this together it all fits within there. For more details, part of the process is, maybe it's a selection process. The new community deal we talked about is within Municipal and Community Affairs and their direct relationship with communities and community infrastructure. That is where we are now making a significant change in the way that is worked, and we will support communities through MACA in making that changeover and going forward on that. With other departments there are other areas where the critical infrastructure will continue to be dealt with by departments. For example, within Public Works, the PPD -- petroleum products division -- there is going to be critical infrastructure that every community has to have and that will still fit a criterion, still follow a process that we need to continue to work with.

That process is identified in the main estimates document, volume II, under Appendix B-2 is the page where we list the capital planning process and the process that is involved in how each department fits into, for example, the 20-year needs assessment, and then prioritizing the major projects. How do we allocate funding? Is it small or major? Then fits into the three-year plan, and then into this process here where you come to the budget document before us, and then approval by the House.

It also lists out the criteria that are used for the ranking of the projects so that they can be put into priority order. That is identified, there is going to be continued need to follow that process with some of our core infrastructure when it comes to the core programming services delivered on a territorial-wide basis. But the direct impact on communities and community infrastructure is the way we see a significant change and one that is quite positive in working with our partners out there in the communities.

Again, that is the one with the new deal in working with Municipal and Community Affairs. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wanted to pick up where one of the other Members had gone in terms of the human resources consolidation. As the Minister is aware, I made a statement in the House the other day with regard to the growth and the expense of the public service. That was taken roughly by the UNW, the union president and some other executives with the UNW.

What I just wanted to mention to the Minister today is that part of what I see this human resources consolidation doing, is actually getting a handle and getting an understanding of where the GNWT is going with its public service. Again, I am in support of this happening. If it's your single-based expense, you have an obligation to pay attention to that.

The other thing I wanted to mention, while I have the floor; when we go through draft main estimates, the business planning process and whatnot, I think it's our duty and our obligation as Members of this Legislative Assembly, as stewards of public funds, to hopefully identify areas of concern, maybe areas of duplication, maybe where efficiencies can be found and leave it at that. That is our job. I didn't mean any disrespect to the union when they were here the other day. I spoke of hiring freezes and attrition; words that certainly would frighten the union, I suppose. Again, I didn't mean any disrespect to the union or to the Minister who is responsible for the public service.

Certainly I think going forward we need to have a public service that is sustainable and the sustainability, Mr. Chairman, is something we must pay close attention to. There is a compounding effect at play and the further on we get and the larger we get, the more it compounds itself. I just wanted to draw the Minister's attention to that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the Member is correct in what we need to do with the government. It is our duty to ensure that the money that we are spending on behalf of the residents of the Northwest Territories is spent in an effective and efficient manner.

What we are doing here, as I see it, of the human resource service centres, is to put a more coordinated approach in. Once we have the mechanics of this done right and have the policies to make sure that we are doing the job that we need to and have to do, once we have that in place, then, yes, it would be much easier to focus on overall government employment status as well as where we are going with our employees across the board.

Right now it is very disjointed -- I guess is the word to use -- in how we deal with employees; how the hiring practices are done and when the employees leave the employment of the Government of the Northwest Territories, how it's followed through. This process is one to make sure that we can do the job right. Once we have the mechanics of that set up, we will then be able to better look at ourselves as a government and the staffing complement that we have. That is something we are going to have to do as a government.

As pointed out, a large amount of the resources we have go to paying for the staff that we have in place, but we must also consider the fact that on a daily basis we are requested to put more staff into communities to fund critical areas. That is something that we have to look at and, again, make sure that we can deliver the core programs we have as a Government of the Northwest Territories. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With the current negotiations ongoing with the UNW, I am just wondering -- I know it might be hard for the Minister to say what is going to happen in those negotiations for obvious reasons, and there is going to be some settlement, let's not kid ourselves -- where is the money going to come from, or how does the Minister propose that we pay for any type of new agreement with the union. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, as the practice has unfolded over years, departments don't have a budgeted amount for an increase until we know, in fact, that there is an agreement in place and what that might mean. In the first year of that agreement, we would have to come forward with a supplementary appropriation request to meet that first year's target levels. Beyond that, then it gets put into the business plan and again the business plan goes through the whole process to where we find ourselves today. Whatever agreement is settled upon, the first year of that we would have to come forward with a supplementary request to put the dollars in. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess just to put it into context with the last Collective Agreement -- I think it was three, three and three, over three years percentage wise -- if we were to do that based on our current calculations of what it costs the government for the public service, at $400 million, that is $36 million over three years and that is just on the three, three and three.

Whatever deal we arrive at with the union is going to have huge implications on our budgeting for the next three, four or five years, whatever term the contract is, whatever the deal is. That is what I am trying to get across to other Members of the House. I know it's a huge expense and we have to budget for it and it is going to obviously cost us more money. It is going to have a huge impact on our budgeting and our surplus. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Roland

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the Member is right; there is going to be an impact. A settlement will be reached. What that settlement means, we are not sure of yet today. Both sides have their positions initially, but, for example, a one percent increase in an agreement will equal to about $3.5 million dollars.

There is an impact and, yes, it will impact on all services and so on when we look at our fiscal picture. That is why it is important that we build a sound fiscal strategy as we go forward. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Ramsay. General comments. What is the wish of the committee?

Can the committee turn to 2-57? Activity summary, directorate. Sorry; 2-57, volume I. Thank you. Does the committee have volume I, page 2-57?