Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I think the issue was brought up, particularly for Fort Liard, because as soon as we operate in a jurisdiction like B.C., they are forcing our operators to convert their plates and buy into their registration system right away. So they are saying if they are doing that to us, why aren't we doing that to them? I don't know if it's tit for tat. I don't know if it's intended to be a tit-for-tat rule, but it's only right, as well. If they are going to be operating in our North for extended periods, they have to convert and buy and be registered in our northern territory. On a private lease, I can see that they don't have to register in the North if they are going to keep that equipment on a private lease. But when they are driving out nine months later, or a year later, I don't know if they are getting out free, but they had been in the North. I wonder if the Minister would care to comment on his view on any regulation that would require extended stays to convert their licensing over to the GNWT. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Our legislation is pretty well parallel to what other jurisdictions have. There is a requirement for any operators that go into B.C. and work there for a period longer than a set time frame of three months, and we have the same requirements. If we can prove that an operator has been in the Territories, whether it's a commercial company or a private individual, we will have charges laid. It's fairly difficult, of course, to prove in the case of a private individual unless there is some type of paper trail where we could follow-up in terms of rents. I don't know what the case may be, but in terms of the trucking industry, there are log books that our people are allowed to inspect on a routine basis, so we can prove that fairly easily.

Those rules are there. We have them in place. Our highway patrol officers inspect them. The RCMP inspect them and they are pretty well the same as other jurisdictions use such as Yukon and B.C.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Something interesting that happens to our businesses and equipment that operate in B.C., Madam Chair, I don't know if it's applicable under Transportation or not, but it's something similar. If we do work in B.C., our equipment and our businesses are taxed right away. Even though we have our own form of protection, they do that in B.C., as well. I think they charge the company the sales tax on equipment that runs in B.C. So a piece of equipment like a water truck that goes from Fort Liard to B.C., not only are they trying to gain revenue from work over there, but on top of that, the B.C. government sends that company a bill for eight or 10 percent for that piece of equipment's value. So they are taxing our equipment to work in B.C. Is that something we should be doing as well, Madam Chair, for increased revenues? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I am not sure if I am the right person to answer that. We do have certain charges in terms of taxes that we apply. We require that the companies pay a fuel tax for fuel consumed in the Northwest Territories. We also charge fees for permits for wide loads, long loads, other things of that nature. If the Member is asking for anything more than that, we would have to reference that to the Finance Minister because I am not aware of the specifics on the taxes that he's inquiring about as to working in another jurisdiction.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I don't want to get into too many specifics with that. Also, I see on that particular line item for registrations alone, there is an increase of $120,000. Perhaps the Minister can explain that, as well.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Mr. McLeod.

Madam Chair, can we ask the Member to be a little more specific as to which line item he's referring to?

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, I believe we are on page 10-10. It's the line item road licensing and registrations. There is an increase of $120,000 over last year. Does that mean more trucks running in the North? Just with that, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Mr. McLeod.

Madam Chair, the answer is yes. In part, that's what that means. It's also based on an adjustment from 2004 and an actual revenue increase projection.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Next on the list I have Mr. Braden and then Mr. Lee. Before I do that, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize in the visitor's gallery a constituent of mine and, of course, the brother of our Minister of Health and Social Services, Jean Marc Miltenberger. He's a businessman in Hay River.

---Applause

Welcome. Next I have Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Madam Chair. On a similar area to what Mr. Menicoche was asking about in terms of fees and revenues, I wanted to ask specifically about airports and some information on this page, Madam Chair, that indicates we are going from an anticipated $1.8 million in airport landing and other fees this current year, to a forecast $2.4 million; about a 30 percent hike. I am wondering if the Minister could provide some explanation of where that increase is coming from. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Madam Chair. This is part of the airport expansion project. To provide for the cost recovery, what we are doing is increasing the landing fee and the general terminal fee starting this year to recover the $6.6 million investment in the Yellowknife Airport.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Madam Chair. This was not unanticipated. It was something that I was disappointed in when this first came up. I was compelled to make some investments to meet standards that the Canadian Air Transport Safety Association was imposing, but I guess where my disappointment was where we decided to collect 100 percent of these additional fees, and that's a $6.6 million investment entirely from increased fees at the airport.

So I wanted to ask, has the department looked at all other ways and means of absorbing some of this cost, Madam Chair, so that it is not entirely borne by the travelling public? Of course, it is the public, the people who fly and the people who use the airport for freight and other services that will have to pay for this. Is there no other avenue that we could use to absorb some of this cost, Madam Chair?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. McLeod.

Madam Chair, the total project was $11.2 million. That included all the baggage screening mechanisms, and conveyor belts, and all that's required for the security portion that CATSA's required us to put in the airport. There was also, as part of this project, an expansion of the actual airport and parking lot on the other side, and we put an annex on the airport and we've also increased, generally, the space at the airport. Of that cost, it totalled up to $6.6 million. FMB had directed us to do it on a cost recovery basis. This is the only portion that we are targeting to recover. The rest is being covered off by CATSA. So $6.6 million is the portion that we are in the process of recovering. We're planning to do it over a 10-year period and, yes, we have looked at every avenue we could think of to try to get other ways to finance it. It doesn't qualify on a number of programs that we tried to target it at, and this was, we felt, one of the better options and, more than likely, the only option of recovering this money.