Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, we have asked the departments to take a look at this and it doesn't matter which department is affected. Take a look at it and see what the impact is and whether there's ways of us doing business a little differently or helping out. But, Mr. Speaker, at the same time let me say that we can't just jump in whenever the federal government decides to opt out, because it just gets very expensive for us. So we want to be creative, we want to work with the NGOs and the others who are impacted by these programs. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Mr. Speaker, I couldn't agree more with the Premier that now is not the time for us to jump in and accept this ghoulish, Mr. Speaker, this absolutely frightening surprise. And this was a surprise. Like a ghost in the dark, the feds came along and zap, they hit us. So I couldn't agree more that now is not the time for us to jump in and automatically fill the gap. So, Mr. Speaker, what has the Premier done to convey our disappointment and our dismay at the loss of these programs, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Handley.

Mr. Speaker, I have written a letter to the Prime Minister on this and explained our concern to him and appealed that he reconsider this. Mr. Speaker, as well, each of the Ministers whose mandate the various programs that have been cut fall within have also written letters. I have talked to other Premiers as well and in fact the chair of the Council of the Federation of all the Premiers across the country had a discussion, had a teleconference this morning and we have agreed to do a letter on behalf of all the Premiers saying this is something that impacts every jurisdiction, not just the Northwest Territories but all of us, and we're concerned about it. We're asking him to look at this again. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Final supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Where we've really got to go with this one is not only seeing what we can do about the cuts that we know of, but I believe the Conservative government also signalled that there may be even more so-called smart spending initiatives. What can the Premier tell us about any potential future additional cuts which might be in store for us, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We haven't received confirmation that there is an intention to do another round of cuts, although that was indicated. I can tell you that all of the jurisdictions, all the Premiers across the country are very concerned about that and all of us have expressed our concern with this round of cuts as well as anything else that they may be considering in the future and are letting the Prime Minister know that we're not happy about this, the way it was done or the expectation that we're somehow going to be able to afford to jump in there and fill in where they pulled back. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Oral questions. The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I'd like to ask the questions to the Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment, the Honourable Brendan Bell. It has to do with the business incentive policy and the Minister knows that I have some concerns about one aspect of the business incentive policy and that is the five percent local preference that is applied to contracts when the contract is put out to tender and the bid comes back from a specific community. There's no issue with that particularly, but when the goods or services that are procured are actually for territorial consumption, does the Premier, or, pardon me, does the Minister agree that to give one company the advantage of a five percent local preference when the goods are going to be distributed territorially is a fair practice? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The honourable Minister responsible for Industry, Tourism and Investment, Mr. Bell.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. No, I believe the intention for the local preference for BIP is to give an advantage to a local company. An example of where goods would be purchased, we'll use Yellowknife for an example, in Yellowknife for the use by a government department in Yellowknife. If in fact that's not the intent and the government department then intends to then turn around and ship the goods out to regions, I would suggest that that wouldn't qualify for local preference for Yellowknife businesses. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Well, thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. That is exactly the answer that I wanted to hear, because there are agencies that are funded by the government in Yellowknife that go out to tender for goods which are to be redistributed through a standing offer agreement with, well, I might as well say what it is. It's the health authorities where they have the opportunity to kind of piggyback on the pricing that was obtained by Stanton Hospital. Then each of the regions has the opportunity to take advantage of that, but since the tender originates here it doesn't really give a fair playing field to companies that may want to bid on that. So let me understand clearly then, Mr. Speaker. The Minister is saying that where such a situation occurs as I have just described, that in fact the five percent local preference would not be applied. Is that correct? Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Bell.

I believe, Mr. Speaker, I understand the Member's question. If the goods are it's an arrangement where Yellowknife business is given a local preference, it would make sense for local preference to be applied where those goods are going to be used in Yellowknife. If those goods are going to be used in Norman Wells, it wouldn't make sense for a Yellowknife business to get a local preference on the percentage of the goods that are going outside of Yellowknife. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister, then, if he considers it kind of administratively possible that not knowing exactly where the uptake is going to be sometimes on these standing offer agreements, is it administratively realistic to be able to prorate that particular tender? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Bell.

Mr. Speaker, that's a very good question. It's probably a procurement question and I'm not sure I know what administrative mechanisms we have at our disposal that are in place, but I would suggest that, yes, it must be difficult to understand what future demand will be and where the goods will eventually end up. I can certainly agree to get back to the Member with our methodology in trying to make this determination. But,

really, the intent of the policy in the local preference is to advantage local businesses. If those goods are being purchased with every intention of sending them out to other regions of the Northwest Territories, then you have to question the application of local preference in that regard. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Final supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, then what opportunity does the Minister have to affect a situation like that? What is the mechanism for him to ensure that this is not occurring, that there are not local businesses getting local preference for things which are purchased for territorial distribution? What ability and what assurance can he offer, then, that he has the ability to actually delve into the system to that level of detail that would ensure that does not happen? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.