Thank you, Madam Chair. I think I would have to reserve that until I have an opportunity to meet with the new Finance Minister to see where he would come from on this initiative of ours. Thank you

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Is the Minister in a position today to tell us when he's meeting with the new Finance Minister on this matter?

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Madam Chair. We don't have a date set out as of yet. I've had a brief discussion with Mr. Flaherty regarding what we hope to get together on, sent in correspondence with the key initiatives that we feel we need to deal with in the discussion, knowing that he's got to bring a budget forward here for the federal government. The indication is he'd like to get together with Finance Ministers prior to that happening, but we have not had a date set as of yet. Thank you

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll just be quickly wrapping it up, assuming on the course of the next answer, but where do we sit in perspective in the shadow of that $300 million debt wall? Where do we sit? What is our number today in respect to the $300 million debt wall? Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Are we expected to cross that $300 million debt wall as such? If so, when? I'd like a rough timeline on that. Obviously it's not tomorrow, from the sounds of our cash position in the debt the Minister has outlined, but is it expected in the next while that we'll be crossing that? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Right now with the numbers we have to work with, we're targeting in the 2007-08 year where we would cross that threshold. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you. Probably just more of a comment. Then if the Finance Minister has said that there's an anticipation to meet with the new federal Finance Minister in the next little while, I wouldn't want to say we don't have to worry about it this week, but we obviously have to worry about it for the next budget year. So I guess I'll give the Finance Minister the respect and fairness to have a meeting and we'll see where we sit after that. Thank you, Madam Chair, no questions.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Madam Chair. As I'd stated before in this regard, after we pass this budget for 2006-07 and giving the information out that we will cross the threshold in 2007-08, we have about a year to operate and get some decisions made hopefully in our favour from the federal government. So we are going to have a tight time frame to work around. Thank you.

Thank you. Next I have Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I want to get back to the issue that I raised during my general comments and the issue I have raised before. I have a number of questions for the Finance Minister in regard to the macroeconomic policy division that the Department of Finance seems intent on filling the void left by the departure of the Bureau of Statistics. I just can't seem to get that concept out of my head. You lose something so you have to replace it with something. Somebody in the government woke up and realized that, geez, we might need a macroeconomic policy division. Who conducted the work in this area before somebody dreamt up this new division? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I guess if it is a dreamt up item, the dream started back in 1999. That is when work was initially done from within Finance and Executive to look at the fact that we needed to start addressing this side of the equation. As stated, and as the Member stated as well in his discussions with the Minister of ITI, other departments do have some areas, but that would be in the micro policy side or economic policy side where they're sector specific. But as a government and as laid out and when we look at other jurisdictions across the country, the macroeconomic policy is usually defined as one as a use of government spending, taxing, borrowing, regulatory and trade policies, as well as the monetary policy to influence economic variables such as employment, production and economic growth and prices. That is why it would fit in here.

Back in 1999, the Department of Finance had worked and commissioned a study to look at the macroeconomic framework in the NWT. As well, in 1999, there was work along with the then Department of Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development, commissioned a Canada West Foundation to conduct a workshop on development strategies in the NWT. So that work has been done in this area. It has been looked at. It was felt at this time, when we looked at all the things that are happening around and it was approved, we then put this in place. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I thank the Finance Minister for that, but somebody had to have been doing the work from 1999 until today. Like I mentioned, it seems so much like a coincidence that the Bureau of Statistics leaves the Department of Finance and then immediately, to replace it, comes this macroeconomic research and policy division. It really does seem to me to be a coincidence. I have been around politics for almost 10 years now. When somebody loses something, they always want to get something in return, or get something back, staff up. I can't discount the importance of something like this. I think it is important, but, to me, in a government of our size with 4,600 employees, somebody somewhere had to have been doing some work on macroeconomic policy. If they weren't, then something is definitely wrong, Madam Chair. Between the years 1999 and 2006, who was doing the work on macroeconomic policy for the Government of the Northwest Territories? Where were you getting the information from? You had to be getting it somewhere. You weren't pulling it out of thin air, so where was it coming from? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Roland.