Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to ensure the Minister and committee that it is not my intention to either advocate that we go on another huge round of consultation and research. I do, indeed, believe that we have probably just about all we need at our disposal to build a good policy, so I will be keeping in touch with my colleagues on the GED committee and look forward to this program all the way out. That is all. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Bell.

I want to thank the Member for his comments in this area and his support. I know that this is something that has been of personal interest to him both in this government and in the last government. We certainly look forward to doing a good job. We will make sure that all Regular Members are involved in this process. I think it is important that we all share in this work on behalf of all residents of the NWT. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Mr. Braden, are there any more questions? Thank you. Next I have Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I am going to bring up the topic of capacity building in the context that is being used around here, to be specific about capacity building. I am curious to hear the Minister's thoughts in this regard. When we talk about capacity building, we are talking about block dollars being given to communities, organizations and whatnot. How does the Minister define these block dollars for capacity building? The reason I ask that is, are they being crafted in such a way that they go to specific tasks or organizations?

Do we predetermine the type of outcome we are searching for in the sense that it is predetermined that we want to raise the employment in communities, the capacity dollars being directed to agencies that will say I will demonstrate that I will increase the employment in this community? Are the capacity dollars predetermined in that way?

Do we look at capacity dollars in a specific context? For example, an organization may say, well, we need capacity building to pick up three extra delivery trucks so we can actually compete on this level to help supply much needed services that will come with this.

Does it mean capital expenses such as an organization at this existing time does this particular service but they realize that they need to keep a lot of items on hand so they need to build a warehouse to compete on a capital level? What provisions are being instituted in this particular case to define capacity building?

We constantly hear about we want to give dollars to organizations and communities to help them with their capacity building, but capacity building is a big word that, honestly, at the end of the day, really means nothing. It means everything but nothing. What does capacity building mean in details? Can you give me examples of how that would sort of filter down to the little guy out there that wants to participate, make an honest buck, and improve their living conditions in their community?

I am talking about the people that really, on the ground level, keep those communities running. Can I get some defined examples or maybe hear some provisos on how capacity is structured? I guess, in essence, define capacity building according to the Webster's dictionary at the Legislative Assembly. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Bell.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess, in terms of some of the capacity money that we have talked about and the contributions that will flow from the MVPO, I can certainly give the Member some examples and take him through a bit of a breakdown of that. I think it is certainly a worthwhile question.

There are, of course, other programs that we have throughout the government and throughout this department to help small businesses build capacity in that regard -- obviously, education training money -- but, when we talk about capacity, we are not, as the Member indicated, talking about advancing funds to purchase scaffold equipment like trucks. We are talking essentially about human resource capacity.

Much of this money is application based from a community or regional group. If we look at the aboriginal capacity building money, the $360,000 proposed for this year, we know that last year there were applications made by the Inuvialuit, Gwich'in, Sahtu, and Deh Cho regions. Typically, they would put together a proposal and talk about the kinds of initiatives that they think are worthwhile and would require funding. I think, if I could generalize it, it would be in the area of probably training and education for people in their community. Sometimes there would be monies allocated for contracting technical expertise. There may be travel costs in the proposal to enable people to go to where the training is or to attend technical sessions to build this human resource capacity.

The Resource Pre-development Program I referred to earlier, our $200,000 is essentially earmarked for the tax-based municipalities. It gets them to the table to be able to negotiate with the Producers Group. It is essentially a fee-for-service arrangement. I don't believe it is enough for us to just expect that these municipalities will have the resources to sit across the table from Imperial Oil. Obviously, they require some technical capacity. They will need people who are agreement specialists, presumably lawyers as well, in order to be able to negotiate. Our money would provide for that kind of thing. When we refer to capacity, we are talking about human resource capacity. I hope that is of some assistance. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the solid answer from the Minister. I think that clarified this area very well.

Speaking about the HR capacity, so, if we could call them human resource capacity dollars, and I appreciate the emphasis. It is not entailed for purchases of trucks, but when we refer to training and technical expertise, are there any types of provisos that directly or indirectly reference it? For example, training must be northbound. Do we engage northern consultants to train our people?

Do we engage, for example, these human resource dollars that could be capacity building dollars, say, you have to use these dollars to go to Aurora College to learn how to be a carpenter to be ready for this project? Do we build capacity dollars into this by saying you're a tax-based community?

You are going to be presenting in front of Imperial Oil. We know they have a lot of muscle, but we want to give you some money. You have been approved in the application process, obviously, but we want to give you some money, and we want to see you access the legal expertise here in the Northwest Territories. I guess, really, the question out of all of this to tie it together is, how are we directing this money to be spent?

I am curious, are we focussing it in on every dollar we give you has to come with a proviso that you engage on the local level as well as the territorial level, those types of expertise? I can appreciate that not every law firm, for example, in the Northwest Territories may have the experience to deal with, for example, Imperial Oil. I can feel confident that they may have the ability to work in association. I want to make sure that we're not paying for a service that could be offered up here that they are purchasing, say, out of Calgary. With that being said, there is certain expertise that you just can't shop around locally and get. That is a fair statement that needs to be reaffirmed. How are we directing our capacity dollars in the essence of spending North as well as specific to HR and training and maybe getting legal fees or those types of consultant expertise? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Bell.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I certainly agree with the intent of the Member's suggestion, if I could say that. I think our department absolutely agrees. We would try to steer people toward northern resources wherever possible. It is important to keep in mind though that these are contribution agreements and contribution funds that flow to organizations. We would look at their proposal in the context of the overall proposal. If we believe that they were proposing to do things that could be more efficiently and effectively done in the North, I believe we would certainly make that point and have that discussion.

At the end of the day, when these contribution funds have been forwarded, there is an audit trail. So we do go back to ensure that the funds have been appropriately expended. Of course, I said that to the wrong Member here today. So we do follow up and we do work with the...We don't simply receive typically a proposal without being aware of the development of that proposal and working very closely with the proponent to develop it. I think we would certainly steer people toward northern resources where they are available. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I almost called the Minister on anticipation clause on the next audit question. I guess I hear that there is going to be some follow-up through the audit process to ensure that those types of dollars were done and they are being spent properly. I suspect that they are built into a mechanism, which is fine. He doesn't necessarily have to answer that. From the sounds of what he had just said earlier, it sounds just like that.

To end this stage for me in regard to our capacity building and feel good about this whole issue is that I want to ensure that our northern businesses, trainers and people have the best opportunity to help provide towards these things. Being in a position in government and the ones at this time with the pot of money, we are also in control of where this money can go. That being said, I think that the contribution agreements need to say a little more than steering.

I am going to be cautious here and make sure that every northern business gets tapped into, but I will say that I think that I need a little more than steer. I don't sleep good at night if the Minister just says we are looking into it. I really want to feel some warmth on this issue.

I want to hear that we are in charge of these contribution agreements and we are truly directing them to stop first in our northern Yellow Pages to say, this is the place we want the money to start off with. If you can't find the resources locally or territorially, we give you the official nod to say, do what you need to do to build capacity, but I think this Minister is in control of these contribution agreements. It speaks to the methodology of this Assembly as a whole to help support the local people on the local level. That is regardless of what community you live in. It is about that simple principle that I stand for very strongly that, where we can, we purchase local services. That could be buying your nails at the hardware store or that could be hiring your lawyer. It doesn't really matter. Can the Minister reaffirm in a strong way that I can have that type of assurance that these contribution agreements speak to that intent? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Bell.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think it is a very good point. I agree with the principles. Of course, it is a little different when we are talking about contribution programs. There is a reporting. There is auditing. As I have indicated, maybe I used the word steer. We'd like to steer people toward northern resources. We aren't absolutely prescriptive in which businesses are used. Again, it is application based, so we work with the applicant in that regard. If it were a program that we were delivering specifically and we were carrying out the training and the capacity building ourselves, then we can certainly affirm our contracting process is well understood by Members.

We could apply that strict northern preference to those contracts. Because it is a contribution, there is a slightly different task. Let me leave the Member with this. I know, from our meetings on the ground and communities, discussion with Hay River town council, public meetings in Norman Wells, that we have had a number of people say, what are you going to do to ensure that northern businesses and northerners get these opportunities first? We are very cognizant of the fact that northerners are aware that there are some real meaningful opportunities here. They want to have the level of training and expertise to take advantage of them. They want to know that our government is going to advocate on their behalf. They are not expecting that we are going to insist that certain specific companies be used and that we get involved with some of those contract negotiations. They do want to

know that we are going to try to push for northern involvement and work for northern businesses.

I would certainly say to the Member, that it would be quite hypocritical of us to on one hand push for Imperial Oil and the Producers Group to use our Northern businesses and then as a government, in our contribution funding, absolutely pay no regard to that. That is not our intention. We do take this very seriously and absolutely would like to see this money spent in the North where it possibly can be. I think that is a priority of this government. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Next, I have Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I listened to one of my colleagues raise the issue today of the producers, the two big mines we have here in the Northwest Territories, that being BHP and Diavik. I would be one of the first to champion what they have done here in the Northwest Territories, in terms of bringing jobs and boosting our economy. I know as a counsellor in the late 1990s, here in the city of Yellowknife, when we were faced with the closure of Miramar Mine and soon after the Giant Mine, or Giant Mine and then Miramar, with not too many prospects on the horizon and then diamonds came along and really bailed out the city of Yellowknife, in particular, and has had a really beneficial impact on the entire Northwest Territories.

You still get the people that you run into, that can't get a job at BHP, they can't get a job at Diavik, even though they are northern. I hear this on the street, I hear it in coffee shops, I hear it wherever I go. People get hired at BHP or at Diavik and they are deemed a northern hire. They work there for a little while and the next thing you know they are living in Saskatchewan, Alberta or British Columbia. Do the numbers still play out that they are a northern hire or they are deemed to be a northern resident, when in fact they are living in southern Canada in what is, in essence, a fly-in/fly-out operation?

The one thing that we have to try to get a grip on here is that these mines are not going to be around forever. What we have to do is maximize what is available to us to ensure that northern people are getting jobs at the mines. Today, I am not convinced that that is happening. I hear too many stories about people not being able to get jobs at BHP or Diavik that have lived in the Northwest Territories for a long period of time.

I mentioned earlier, perhaps the diamonds projects division isn't the best vehicle to try to police the socioeconomic agreements or to try to ensure that the people that are, in fact, on the ground working at Diavik and working at BHP are truly residents of the Northwest Territories.

I would like to know exactly what those numbers are. I know the numbers come out in annual reports and everything but, like I said, if the person is hired here, they are deemed to be a northern resident. I know many of my friends have gotten jobs at Diavik and BHP and they are living in B.C., in Saskatchewan, in Northern Alberta. They have left the Northwest Territories, Mr. Chairman.

I am wondering what we are looking at doing to try to ensure that the numbers that are being reported from our producing mines are in fact real indicators of what is happening. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Bell.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are a number of vehicles that are used to monitor the commitments that have been made, not all of them are used by this government specifically. The benefit and access agreements are monitored by the aboriginal groups that have negotiated those. I believe there are, although we are not privy to this, reporting mechanisms. We have spoken earlier of the annual report and the reporting that the producers do in that regard.

If somebody is hired as a northern hire and they move south permanently, they no longer qualify as a northern hire and cannot be calculated and tabulated as a northern hire. That would affect the numbers that the mines report on. We all are aware of stories of people who have chosen to move south and that is unfortunate. We need to do whatever we can to try to encourage people to stay in the North and that includes ensuring that there is adequate housing and other things like this.

I have had a chance to tour both mines a number of times now, and I don't know if the Member has had that chance. I would be amazed -- if he gets a chance to tour the mines, he certainly should do that -- if he doesn't recognize at least 100 people at these mines. You tour the mines and you go through there and it's our friends and colleagues and relatives throughout the Northwest Territories. You will recognize many, many of these people.

The question about whether or not we audit the reporting, the annual reports; we don't really have the capability to do that, that wasn't envisioned in the socioeconomic agreement. We do work with the information that the mines provide us and that forms the basis of our conclusions as to whether or not the targets are being met.

In the case of Diavik, there is the advisory board that has been set up to work with Diavik to ensure that there is monitoring in a whole range of areas, including some of the socioeconomic areas and including employment targets. That mechanism is in place and I believe there is a similar mechanism proposed for the future Snap Lake mine as well. We are working with the structures that we have and I believe we are improving as we go in each subsequent development. I think we've learned from the BHP Billiton project and we have also learned from the Diavik project and I believe we are simply improving the mechanism for monitoring going forward. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the Minister for that response. Like I mentioned earlier, I know both mining companies, BHP Billiton and Diavik, and they have done a tremendous amount locally and in the Northwest Territories to help support the local communities; whether it be sports, culture, anything, they are usually the first ones to step up to the plate to help out. What I am getting at here, is there are still jet loads of

workers that just use Yellowknife as a hopping off point to go back home to southern Canada.

I think what we have to do, as government, is try to find ways to...You can't force anybody to stay here, but there are other ways that you could encourage them to do so. I'm not sure if as a government we are doing enough to try to encourage and promote workers that are at these mines to consider living in the Northwest Territories whether it be Fort Smith, Hay River or Yellowknife. As long as they are living somewhere in the Northwest Territories and we are getting some benefit out of them working here, I think that is something that we should be paying more attention to; especially, on the verge of a third producing mine coming on stream with the Snap Lake development and perhaps the Kennedy Lake and the Gahcho Kue, a few years from now. We have to try to encourage and promote people living in the Northwest Territories as much as we can.

I am wondering if the Minister has any strategies to try to encourage that happening. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Bell.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are provisions under each of the socioeconomic agreements that speak to much of this, but I think as a government we recognize it makes more sense to focus on incentives, to help encourage people to live here, as opposed to some sort of protectionist mechanisms or protectionist regime. I think we know that if we come up with something convoluted, people will find a way around it. What we have to do is work on issues, and the Member is well aware of some of the priorities of this government, but certainly in terms of cost of living in the North, to ensure that people can afford housing and can afford the cost of electricity. We do have to focus on initiatives like our hydro development, which can make the cost of living, I believe, in smaller communities more reasonable.

There are a number of initiatives that we can embark on as a government. I think to come up with protectionist mechanisms that we can't adequately police anyway and may or may not be legal, I think probably is a mistake. We would rather focus on building incentives. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Mr. Ramsay.