I want to thank the Member for his comments and questions. I do acknowledge and recognize that there has been some discussion and the Member has raised it again; his disappointment around the location of the Mackenzie Valley pipeline office. The leadership in the Beaufort-Delta are also expressing that disappointment. I have certainly indicated to them, both in writing and in discussions, that we are looking to adequately resource our oil and gas response up and down the valley, and that includes the Inuvik region and we will be doing that.

As I have indicated, I have asked the department to come forward with some options that I can take to Cabinet, because we will fall down if we don't have a more adequate response throughout the entire valley. We will need additional resources to be able to cope with the magnitude of this project and obviously Inuvik is logically placed for us to have this oil and gas response.

The MGP -- Mackenzie Gas project office -- that the Member speaks off, which is headed up by Imperial on behalf of the proponents, has an office in Inuvik, Norman Wells, Hay River, and in Simpson, as well. I would agree that this could be a very valuable resource and I'm certainly glad that the Member has pointed that out.

Tourism was another issue that you raised and I am always aware -- and more aware when we go to federal/ provincial/ territorial meetings of tourism Ministers -- about what other jurisdictions are doing and it's always very clear that the Yukon spends a significant amount of money and places quite a significant amount of focus on tourism.

You are right; we have a natural beauty that is without compare and, really, there is much that we can do in tourism to ensure that this is a meaningful industry for all corners of the Northwest Territories. We have to work on that going forward. It is not a defence, but I think we are challenged because of the amount of development that we have here in the Northwest Territories; the development pressures and our need to respond and make sure people can take advantage of those opportunities.

The Yukon is starting to have some oil and gas exploration now. They don't have the amount of mining that we do have currently, but they are looking at some placer mines, going forward. I think that they will be under pressure, as well, to continue that support for tourism with some of these other things competing for investment. Certainly, they do a wonderful job in supporting tourism and there is much that we can learn as a jurisdiction from them and we will work on that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Next on the list, I have Ms. Lee. General comments.

Thank you, Madam Chairperson. I would like to spend just a few minutes discussing the issue of the Mackenzie Valley pipeline and, generally speaking, I think it is quite clear that the GNWT is in support of the pipeline project.

Of course, it is conditional on the people and this government getting our fair share of the resources. What is not clear though is what exactly the role of the GNWT is in this whole complicated picture. It certainly is a very multi-pronged project. There are various aboriginal and regional governments in support of the project who are really advocating and pushing hard for the project, as well as their share of it. Then we also have aboriginal governments who are not as much in support, and that part of the argument is in the mix as well.

What I am interested in knowing about is what sort of plan the government has and how it sees itself playing and I'm not sure if it would be entirely the responsibility of RWED, but there certainly is a vacuum out there I believe on the dialogue and discussion that needs to be had in getting ready for this. I do understand that there is a review process going on and that process is supposed to create the opportunity for the people and various organizations to come and speak on that issue, but it seems to me that we're in a situation where that process is getting lost on the people. Once again when you look at the eagle eye view or the bird's eye view of the big picture, the people up and down the valley really don't care who is facilitating this, whether it's the federal government, territorial government or whether it's the review process people. To them we are all just big structures out there who are not being responsive to some of the very real and intimate questions that they were asking. For example on The Current, I really enjoyed listening to that because it really was very direct forms of communication for the people to say what's on their mind, and it's really too bad that we can't have a 24-hour phone-in program where people all over the North could call in and really tell us what they think and talk directly to all the people that are in the position of decision-making power to consider and to know as we go forward through this project.

I know that the Status of Women Council spent quite a bit of money talking about the socioeconomic impact of this project. I know that they submitted their report to the Minister responsible for women, but what sort of resources and structures are in place for RWED or ITI or ENR, I don't know who is doing what, but not only readiness physically and not only a socioeconomic deal, but in terms of how we address the socioeconomic impact of the development, as well as getting our people ready for the development. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. At this time, before I go to the Minister, I would just like to recognize in the visitors' gallery today a constituent of mine from Hay River South, Mr. Tom Lakusta, and he is the manager of RWED forest management in Hay River.

---Applause

Thank you and welcome. Mr. Bell, please.

I thank the Member for those comments and I'll try to be as succinct as possible, however, it's a very broad question with maybe no very obvious and immediate answers in all areas. But let me start by saying that the Member is right that in terms of this project we do have conditions as a government and as a territory, and that is that adequate benefits will accrue to northerners and we start with that premise, we start with that as our highest principle. Then our role becomes very evident I think, but it flows from that. Clearly we have a responsibility for a number of mandates by departments. We have responsibility for the environment. We have responsibility to support the business efforts and aspirations of our people. We have a responsibility to mitigate potential negative social impacts and I think that the Member is very much aware of those issues as chair of that committee.

We also have a responsibility I believe to maximize all opportunities potentially available for northerners in a wide range of areas, and this involves employment, this involves training and I think it's important that we recognize that it will be a skilled workforce, by and large, that's able to take advantage of these opportunities. We do, as a government, have a mandate for training and need to work with our people to ensure that they are able to take advantage of these opportunities and those opportunities don't pass our people by.

Clearly we also have obligations that we have to meet for the environmental review and regulatory process that's now underway. We have mandates in areas like environmental protection. We have areas of responsibility in areas like wildlife and forestry. So we have a mandate. We will be intervening on behalf of people in the Northwest Territories and we will certainly make sure that

we advocate those areas of responsibility and we take that role very seriously.

I'd also like to say that our government's role involves supporting our aboriginal organizations across the territory in order to achieve their objectives in terms of this project, and I think of our funding and contribution, our ongoing support for the Aboriginal Pipeline Group. Really I think that their work in this model will be a successful model going forward. I think it speaks to a new level of aboriginal involvement in some of these mega projects. I think truly if you're going to benefit from development, you have to be involved at the ownership level and that's in fact what we have here and I think that's why so many people are optimistic about the future of this project.

We will also be completing the socioeconomic agreement. I think we've had quite a broad discussion around those issues that fall under the socioeconomic agreement, but maybe something that we didn't touch on was our desire to ensure that legacy infrastructure flows from that socioeconomic agreement and that is one of the areas that we will highlight.

I take the Member's point about communications to our constituencies. That is our government's role. I like the committee recommendation that in fact ITI develop a communications strategy to advise the public on how our government is organized and what our government's response constitutes. We are in the process of doing that due, in large part, to the direction and work and support of committee and that's underway and we look forward to coming back to committee with some discussion around that communications strategy in future. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Madam Chair. The Minister outlined a number of ways in which the government is going to be involved in this process, but I didn't hear anything about any resources being made available to public bodies or individuals who might want to get directly involved in the process. I appreciate that the GNWT is going to, for example, be intervening in the process, as well as the money that we fund to aboriginal governments for them to play a role, but there are people outside of that process who want to get involved as well. So could I ask the Minister whether in any of these infrastructures that he has in place whether they be MVPO. Actually, I want to know more directly whether or not the GNWT has any plans to provide resources who want to appear before the pipeline review process, maybe not to NGOs who might be able to find funding by their own means, but I'm talking about the individual, women's groups or other social groups in the Territories who want to be able to take part in it, but not able to because they don't have their own resources. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Bell.

Thank you, Madam Chair. This is a very common enquiry that we get and that is around intervener funding and I think the Member is probably aware of some of the funding that has already been announced. There have been a couple of phases of intervener funding announced by DIAND, and that money will flow soon and that is in order to help people prepare the work that they need to in order to participate in both the NEB...Actually I think it's the Joint Review Panel environmental assessment, not the NEB process. One of the things that we've done recently is submitted or passed around to Members a document that was created by the federal government titled the Mackenzie Gas Project - Get Involved, and in that leaflet there is some discussion around the environmental assessment and regulatory review and the participant funding program. Included are eligibility criteria so that people can see that not only individuals, but non-profits, aboriginal and public governments with an interest in the proposed project can be involved. There is a contact and contact numbers in this document at the Northern Gas Project Secretariat, also at CEAA, the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency. There are phone numbers and the funds that flow from CEAA and the Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board.

So I think that is a particularly helpful and useful document, but I know members of the public have a number of questions about how they actually access intervener funding and I think that these are the appropriate points of contact to pursue those questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Next on the list I have Mr. Ramsay. General comments.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I didn't get a chance earlier in my comments to speak about the BDIC and the amalgamation of the BCC and the Dev Corp, and I can understand and I appreciate why it's happening and I am supportive. Of course, I was supportive of Bill 16 that was here a few days ago. As we move forward, I believe the Minister knows that we have to work towards the true one-window approach or the one-stop-shopping approach that really was the crux of bringing the BCC and the Dev Corp together was to try to get to that. Not that Bill 16 absolutely gets us there. I think we've got a long way to go to get there and I wanted to just bring up a couple things on the cost-effective ways to look at program delivery and support of that and to get us toward this one-window approach or this one-stop-shopping approach.

The first thing I would like to say is on a regional basis for each region, maybe what the BDIC could do is look at getting together a one-page brochure that outlines programs and services and agencies that are available in the region. For most people in the regions it's very complicated when you've got BDF, grants to small businesses, Community Futures loans, BCC, BDC, ABC, the Dene/Metis development fund; there are a number of funding agencies that are out there and it gets very confusing to the person that wants to start a business, wants to do something and they don't know where to turn, they don't know which window to go to. So that would be, I think, the most cost-effective way of trying to let people know what's out there. I know it doesn't currently exist, but that's something that in the next little while I think the department or BDIC could put that type of work in place so that people know where to go and know where to turn.

The other thing when the rollout of the BDIC happens one of the other things that I'd like to mention to the Minister is perhaps co-locating development officers in the regions and I think that would serve a number of purposes like client access especially. I'm not talking about all the regional staff being co-located. That wouldn't be what I would be envisioning, but all the development officers. So

when you have them under one roof it's a lot easier for a potential client to come in there and get serviced and to get the response and what they need to make things work for them, because everybody is different and I think that would take away a lot of the confusion that's out there. Right now I think most people in the regions are still somewhat confused when you have a number of different avenues and venues to seek funding. I know Bill 16 was supposed to get us towards this one-stop shopping. So those are a couple of examples that I'd like the Minister to just comment on and see if they'd be supported by the BDIC. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Bell.

Thank you. I want to thank the Member for what I think are some very excellent suggestions. As the Member has pointed out, and we've discussed, not only when we undertake this program and service review going forward do we have to understand what we're currently doing and what we should be doing, we have to have a discussion around how we communicate, in fact, what we're doing. Because I think you're right and I think that this was the crux of some of the problems that we've had, and that was constituents and residents didn't understand how to adequately get service and how to adequately engage our various different programs and employees in the regions. I think that that's where the frustration has come and that's why we've been pushing for this one-window approach.

I think it's an excellent suggestion, that we should put out some communications to let people know what we're doing. I think we could even go farther and ensure that they understand what DIAND is doing and what Aboriginal Business Canada is doing and not just simply focus on our BDIC, but take a broader look at all the economic development programs available to people in regions because that's where we should be going. We should be going with closer integration. We know that we have this enabling legislation that's going to allow now, thankfully, for partnerships with other organizations. I think that's an important thing to recognize.

Also again the suggestion of co-locating development officers and I presume that the Member is talking about our EDOs and our business managers of trade and investment. Again, an excellent suggestion. We are looking to move to one-window models in the regions. We acknowledge that these things are going to happen at various stages and at various paces in regions, and it will be different in the various regions. There is no boilerplate model for this. It will change and it will evolve as regions are ready, but, again, another very good suggestion. I think we want to ensure people do have that one contact that can steer them to all of the various programs, ours and the federal governments. Good suggestions. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate that response from the Minister. The first suggestion that I had made about the one-page brochure, I know the BDIC is rolling out, but when might the BDIC be able to produce something like this so that folks in the regions know where to go and they know who to see and they know who supplies what in terms of programs and services? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Bell.

Thank you. That's something that I can ask the board to look at as soon as they are constituted. I could see something like this could certainly happen I'm sure by spring and then as we go through the program and service review, obviously it would have to be adjusted as changes are made. But in terms of our current program delivery, that's something that wouldn't be too difficult and could be rolled out fairly early in the new life of this new organization. I'll certainly have that discussion with the new board. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. General comments on Industry, Tourism and Investment. Any further general comments? Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Madam Chair. There are a couple of further aspects I'd like to pursue in terms of the go-forward objectives of this department. As stated in the business plan in goals, goal number six states that the department is to ensure that NWT residents gain control over their resources and are the primary beneficiaries of development in the Northwest Territories. This is a bid on the...(inaudible)...It's a good statement of where we'd all like to be, but I'm a bit confused about how it actually connects with this department. My information, Mr. Chair, is that the Ministry of Aboriginal Affairs, I think the Financial Management Board Secretariat and certainly the Premier's office and the Executive have responsibility for the negotiations toward devolution of resources. Now what I wanted to do is see if I could get a bit of clarification in terms of how does this goal as stated here to ensure that residents gain control. Does that mean that ITI also has a hand in the negotiation and the delivery of devolution here in the Northwest Territories? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Minister.

Thank you. I think the important point that we would make is that all departments play a role on behalf of this government's negotiations in terms of devolution and resource revenue sharing, and obviously ITI and ENR will play a critical support role to the efforts of MAA and to the efforts of the Premier's office. We are involved in devolution support. As we mentioned earlier, many of the programs that really are about control over lands and resources currently housed in DIAND will find their way into this government; many of them into the two departments we are talking about here. So we have a key support role to play in terms of providing a lot of technical backup and technical support to the negotiation team. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Braden.

Alright. That's good. One aspect that's developed a little in the business plan is in the area of energy policy and programming. It's also stated in the plan that this new department will take the lead on all energy initiatives including hydroelectric. I am wondering if what we are seeing here is a signal that there is a transfer from the office of the Premier, Mr. Handley, for the

hydroelectric file. Is that going over to this shop, Mr. Chairman? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Minister.