Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the discussion here and the acknowledgement or confirmation that this is not something that seems to be happening; it is something quite tangible. The Minister has told committee that it's a growing problem and one we are going to have to deal with. Would the Minister advise or commit to coming back to perhaps standing committees with some outline of what the status of this growing problem is, and perhaps come back to committees with some options on how we can help address it, Madam Chair? Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I have already had a number of discussions with my colleagues. More importantly, I have had a discussion within one of the departments that deals with client departments, that being the Department of Public Works, and reviewing why we've had such poor responses from some of our projects that we put out there for tender or RFP and having to look at how we can try to increase the competition level or deal with our capital program. One of the issues we have to look at is how our capital program is put together. For example, when a department comes forward for an estimate on a school, that initial estimate is done three to four years prior to actually being established in the capital plan and approved by this Assembly. When that number is first estimated, that is quite a time shift to look at. When it finally gets approved here and the department goes out for a tender or RFP and it comes back quite off the mark, that's one of the reasons, especially since the last few years we've had quite an impact on labour forces and also materials available to us. That's something we are going to have to look at, is how we do some of these cost estimates as they come forward to this Assembly for approval in giving more accurate figures, so we don't have projects that go out and the bids come in high and the departments have to go back to the drawing board and either drop some of what their requirement is or request more funding. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Next on the list for general comments is Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I am concerned, too, with the amount of projects that have lapsed and having to come back in an appropriation. I want to ask the Minister if one of the reasons a lot of these projects are lapsing is because I see the word consultant a lot and I have seen that delay a few projects. I am also wondering if the fact that the government enters into negotiations for contracts with some groups, if that has bearing on the amount of programs that have lapsed because they couldn't come to agreement. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, there are quite a number of reasons why there is a large carryover. As I stated earlier, we've increased the amount of dollars available to communities for Municipal and Community Affairs, as well as the funding through the northern trust that was established. That is a lot of money now available to communities that some communities were not prepared for. If you look at a lot of this, whether it's a pool remediation or a community office upgrade, water treatment plant upgrade, there are a lot of projects that aren't high in value but they still require some planning as we proceed. It's equipment, as well. Communities have had to have some discussions in that area or could not procure the equipment in time. One of the other areas is when we enter into discussions on projects with organizations or a bidder even, for example, if it's a public tender and we get three tenders and they are all over the price we have established, we would have to request more funding or change the scope of their program. If they think they can come up with the money, then they can enter into discussions with the potentially lowest bidder. Sometimes those discussions are not fruitful at the end of the day and they end up going back to the drawing board.

Is there an increase, for example, in negotiated contracts? That's another avenue. Whenever you enter into the negotiated contract process, you still have a dollar value attached that the department cannot go over on a specific project. That can have an impact, because usually that discussion can go back and forth for a way to come up with agreement on that.

As well, if a community is not satisfied with what is being proposed, the community itself, in trying to work with a community on a location for a facility, for example, a tank farm or another community facility, that can have an impact on moving forward. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks to the Minister for that. Again, I am not a big fan of negotiated contracts. I think that does delay a lot of projects, but I can understand the government making a commitment and trying to accommodate organizations and aboriginal groups and negotiate contracts and, to me, not being able to agree on a price will delay projects. Has this always been a problem historically and was there this much of a problem when most contracts were publicly tendered? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Madam Chair. We haven't done a review specifically if it's negotiated contract process or a public tender. As I stated, one of the reasons this is larger than normal is because of the amount of money that was put into the capital plan increased significantly in prior years. Previously our capital plan was targeted at $50 million. We are now targeted at $75 million. So just the volume of capital projects approved has increased significantly as well as the dollars that came through the Northern Strategy trust fund. That is added to that, as well as the federal gas tax contributions. That has increased the amount of money that's available and a lot of communities were not prepared to deal with that type of a volume initially. As we go through this process in future years, that will start to take care of itself.

One of the other concerns, a bigger one we will have to deal with, is how do we ensure there is competition amongst some of the contracts. A lot of our larger construction companies that dealt with the multi-million dollar contracts we have in place are no longer in the North, or are not dealing with the North, or think, for one reason or another, that there is less risk in other jurisdictions rather than the Northwest Territories and have moved out of the Northwest Territories to focus on their work. So that is one of the areas we are having to have a look at.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. General comments. Any further general comments?

Could I please then direct Members' attention to page 5 of Bill 2? Legislative Assembly, operations expenditures, not previously authorized, office of the Clerk, $6,000; total department $6,000.

Thank you. Executive, operations expenditures, executive offices, not previously authorized, executive offices, $19,000; total executive offices, $19,000.

Thank you. Executive, continued, operations expenditures, Financial Management Board, directorate, not previously authorized, $3,000; directorate, $11,000; government accounting, $3,000.

We are on page 7, let's start this again. Directorate, $3,000; government accounting, $11,000; budgeting and evaluation, $3,000; Audit Bureau, $2,000; total Financial Management Board Secretariat, $19,000.

Thank you. Executive, continued, operations expenditures, Human

Resources, not previously authorized, directorate, $61,000; total Human Resources, $61,000.

Thank you. Executive, continued, operations expenditures, Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, not previously authorized, Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, $8,000; total Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, $8,000; total department, $107,000.