Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would suggest that all our agreements are good and all meet the GNWT and I think the public interest objectives as laid out. Mr. Speaker, of course, they are different. This project is different. As I've indicated, very much a two or three-year construction window and then a tapering down into operations. With the mines, it's different. Open pit mining, obviously a number of people onsite for a continued period of time, Mr. Speaker. So they are different agreements, Mr. Speaker.

The other thing, as I've indicated, with Diavik, with BHP, with the De Beers agreement, we didn't have the federal government coming to the place with $500 million largely for socio-economic issues. So there are a number of other things going on. I think we need to see through that lens when analyzing and trying to compare the various different agreements that we have between government and industry. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Final supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I want to let the Minister know that at least initially the first

time I looked at the socio-economic agreement that certainly it looks good on paper and certainly the numbers are coming out in terms of what the benefits are for the people around the Mackenzie Valley. The key for me is really the implementation of this socio-economic agreement. Certainly, our regions will definitely benefit in terms of a project like this. We're not too sure right now if $500 million would be available to us. However, I'd like to ask the Minister again to re-emphasize the need to come into our region and explain in plain language and to our people in the language of the Dene. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Bell.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, we will certainly do that. I'll work with our regional staff, with the Mackenzie gas project office, to ensure that happens. It's important to remember in these SEAs that the commitments are made, Mr. Speaker, to hire people if they're ready. So we, as a government, have decided to focus on getting our people ready. They will make commitments to use our businesses if our businesses have the capacity and the ability. So we've chosen to focus on working with the proponent to get our businesses ready, Mr. Speaker. I think that's the most critical point in these socio-economic agreements. Lots of reasons for us not to achieve targets. We want to remove those reasons. Lots of reasons for people not to be able to get to the jobsite. We negotiated that people will have their way paid to the jobsite, Mr. Speaker. These are important aspects of this agreement. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Oral questions. The honourable Member for Great Slave, Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, to continue exploring the socio-economic agreement advisory board with the Minister for Industry, Tourism and Investment. Mr. Speaker, among the criteria outlined in the agreement for this advisory board, the members do not intend the board to maintain permanent staff or premises other than a registered office, but yet it's going to have a budget of some $200,000, half of which we are committed to fund. What are we going to be paying for, Mr. Speaker? What is the value that we're going to be getting out of this non-permanent advisory board, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. The honourable Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment, Mr. Bell.

Mr. Speaker, maybe I'm reading the question wrong, but the Member seems to be suggesting that this is too much money. We think it's an adequate amount of money to do the socio-economic monitoring. They'll be working with our government to monitor the project. We will have people on this board who will have to make site visits, who will have to go to communities to talk to community members about the impacts, about the commitments that have been made. So, Mr. Speaker, there is research to be done, there's on-the-ground site visits to be made, we do need a budget to do that kind of thing. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Mr. Speaker, the Minister is inferring that perhaps I think $100,000 of taxpayers' money is too much. You know, really on the contrary, I'm concerned that with the significance that we're attaching to this, but yet the intention that we're not going to have permanent staff, that the board is going to conduct itself in a fiscally prudent, reasonable and cost-effective manner and not spend in excess of a budget approved. How is it going to get all this important work done, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Bell.

Mr. Speaker, we think that it certainly can get the work done. We don't think that a permanent presence with an office and a bevy of staff is required. We think that this board will be resourced, obviously by our government. We will work to provide it with information. We think that this is an adequate budget. Should we determine at some point in the future as we're going through the couple of year construction period that it needs some uplift and the government makes a decision in this House that there are additional resources required, there is provision, certainly, Mr. Speaker, for this group to undertake more work and research if it deems that necessary. As a government, we'll be there to support it, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

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

It's an interesting contrast here, Mr. Speaker, because I believe that there are permanent offices established for at least the environmental monitoring aspects with our diamond mines. I stand to be corrected on that, but these are projects that are 10 times...The pipeline is a project 10 times at least the size of the diamond mines, and yet we have significant resources for that monitoring. They may not be full-time attached to the diamond mines. Why is it that this level of advisory and monitoring seems to be so diminished from those other projects, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Bell.

Mr. Speaker, I'm prepared to take a tour with the Member of the permanent offices for BHP and De Beers. I think it will be a quick tour, Mr. Speaker. I'll just say that.

---Laughter

The agreement is different because the nature of the business is different, Mr. Speaker. These mines are intense activity, potentially 1,000 people working for 20, 30 years, Mr. Speaker. We need the continuity, we need the presence, that's why you see with DCAB a slightly different arrangement than you see with this agreement. To staff up, to rent out office space and hire a vast number of people for two construction seasons, we felt, Mr. Speaker, was unnecessary. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Oral questions. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister responsible for the Northwest Territories Power Corporation. The Power Corporation is in the process now of going through a general rate application which will see power rates increase here in the Northwest Territories. I think it's very hard for the residents here in the Northwest Territories to stomach any type of increase, given the fact that last summer there was over $500,000 paid to senior staff in bonuses at the Power Corporation. In addition to that, Mr. Speaker, I represent a riding that has over 100 businesses in it: Kam Lake Industrial Park. The power goes out every second day in the summertime and it costs businesses in my riding money and no one is very happy with the Power Corporation looking at raising rates. So I'd like to ask the Minister why are they going to a general rate application to raise rates on residents here in the Northwest Territories? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Minister responsible for the Power Corporation, Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, as we all know living in the Northwest Territories, costs have gone up for the purchase of diesel fuel to purchasing materials. I think we have to realize that there is a cost. If NorthwesTel's power rates go up, it is all affected by the cost of doing business. It has been four years since the last rate application. We all know the cost of operating in the Northwest Territories has jumped drastically in the last four years.

Mr. Speaker, I would just like to point out that out of the 23 communities we represent, we are going to see an increase in roughly 17 communities from the range of roughly about .01 cent a kilowatt to 12.53 cents a kilowatt. Also, we are going to see a decrease in nine communities that range from 1.47 cents a kilowatt to 28.70 cents a kilowatt. Again, there is going to be some increase in some communities. There is going to be a decrease in other communities. In regards to the residents of Yellowknife, it is simply an increase to the wholesale rate that is being charged in the area of about 2.13 cents a kilowatt. Again, that is roughly the range of the increase that we are looking at. We haven't had a rate increase for the last four years. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the Minister for that, but the fact of the matter remains that rates are going to go up for the majority of residents here in the Northwest Territories. As I mentioned earlier, businesses are paying a hefty price every time the power goes out. Here in Yellowknife, the power goes out every second day in the summertime; sometimes twice a day. I would like to ask the Minister if the Power Corporation has any type of game plan to address that, the power outages. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Krutko.