Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The honourable Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs, Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I don't know if all the Members have the luxury of the document that the Member is referring to. Mr. Speaker, it is our practice at Municipal and Community Affairs to try to share the information as far in advance as possible with the communities. Historically, we have been providing the information to the communities at first opportunity, which is the NWT Association AGM. Then, usually, we provide it again in the fall through an update or

through community consultations. The Member is referring to a document that is titled Projected Revenues for Communities. In it, it projects the operation and maintenance budget. It also projects the capital and the water and sewer and also the gas tax and federal funding. Mr. Speaker, it also has a disclaimer in it that states these programs are under review. If the Member looks at the document, it is correct. The number is not what ended up being received by the Town of Hay River. The number on this document states that the community would get $3.6 million. In fact, they ended up getting $4.2 million. Mr. Speaker, we were off by what we projected. However, the dollars that were projected there were only projections. We came forward again in the fall through community visits to present to all communities. That included Hay River. Thank you.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, it is very difficult for a municipality to budget for their water/sewer subsidy program on the basis of a projection. However, the point is that the Minister has stated in this House that Hay River had adequate notice. Now, it wasn't at the May 2006, meeting that we had adequate notice. That isn't the correct information. There is a disclaimer there. Agreed. So then we were notified of a number in the fall. Is the number that we were notified of in the fall for the water/sewer subsidy what Hay River is going to be getting? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the money that will be going to Hay River is what was just passed in the budget. Thank you.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, what I wanted the Minister to tell us, in the MACA update, the number for Hay River for water/sewer subsidy is not the amount that Hay River is going to get. In fact, it has been reduced by a further $50,000 since the MACA update. So it went from the projected, to be amended in May 2006, to the fall number of $414,000, to the number which just came out in February of only $366,000. So it's been changed three times and I just don't know how the Minister can say that that's adequate notice. I don't think Hay River to this day has been formally notified of what the actual amount is. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you. I don't know if I heard a question there, actually. Supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen; do you want to clarify your...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, has Hay River been notified of the amount they're going to receive for the water/sewer subsidy program in Hay River? Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have to remember this year we did a review of three different pots of money; we've changed our process of how we allocate dollars. The communities were very well aware that these were estimates, these were working numbers, and numbers in fact could possibly change. Mr. Speaker, we've shared that information with the Town of Hay River. I'm assuming that the Member has been made aware of that, but I think it's a matter of the community not willing to accept that these new dollars are in place and are based on a new formula that allows them flexibility. There's a lot more money in there this time around that they can really deal with some of the issues that are being brought forward. Other communities are receiving far less and they're able to reduce their water fees and other things of that nature, and I don't see why the community can't do the same. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Time for question period has expired. I'll allow the Member a final supplementary.

Mr. Speaker, my point is that the Minister says that Hay River had enough advance notice. It goes to my question of should the community been given more warning, or could the Minister agree that a phase in would have been more palatable or easier for the community to absorb such a reduction? In my correspondence received from MACA officials on February 22nd, correspondence they say is on its way for another $50,000 reduction under the water/sewer subsidy program. So I think that the Minister, in saying that we received ample notice, is incorrect. Does the Minister concede that to this day Hay River has not been notified of the final number under this program? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The practice of informing communities of our estimates is something that was accepted by the community, the Association of Communities. They all recognized that their estimates, if we were not able to provide them in a form of draft estimates, then we would not be able to share that information. This is a year that things have changed from the normal practice because this is the year we reviewed our water and sewer program, we reviewed

our operations and maintenance. We, for the first time, have provided capital to the tax-based communities, there's now ample funding, there's gas tax. All these things change and there's no way we can provide a solid number a year in advance, Mr. Speaker. Either we do it through this practice of providing estimates, or we don't do it at all and communities would have to wait until the actual budget has passed. The communities have all voiced over the years that they need working numbers and this is the best process we have. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod.

Speaker's RulingBefore I proceed to written questions, colleagues, I want to provide a ruling on Written Question 54-15(5) asked by Mr. Hawkins to the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment last Friday regarding funding for Yellowknife schools. This written question was in fact a series of 33 questions.

Rule 39(1) reads as follows: A question which would be likely to require a detailed or complex answer, or which would not reasonably be assumed to be within the present knowledge of the Minister, should be posed as a written question.

Members will know that this rule has been loosely applied by the Chair in the past. This was done for the benefit of Members and in the interest of full and open debate in this House. Like many things, however, when practices or privileges are misused, the intervention of the Chair is often required to set matters right. Previous Speakers have also cautioned Members about the proper use of written questions.

Written questions are intended to provide Members with an opportunity to seek complex, detailed and lengthy information from a Minister that they would not likely have at their disposal, or that would more appropriately be provided in written form due to the nature of the information being sought.

Written questions are not intended to be an indirect way of extending oral question period. They are not intended to be an opportunity for Members to make statements, engage in debate or grandstand, nor should they be unreasonably long.

In my view, none of Mr. Hawkin's questions met the criteria for a written question.

He is not the first Member to use written questions in a manner that does not exactly fit their true purpose. However, the volume of questions asked clearly constitutes a misuse of the spirit and intent of rules and, frankly, was a waste of the valuable time of this House and its Members. I, therefore, rule Written Question 54-15(5) out of order and direct that the question be removed from the orders of the day and struck from Hansard. The Minister is under no obligation to provide a response.

In the future, the Chair will apply a strict interpretation of Rule 39(1). Written questions must not be asked in lieu of properly worded oral questions and must be in writing on the prescribed forms that can be obtained from the Clerk's office. Members should clearly be reading from a written text when asking written questions. Thank you, Members.

---Applause

Written questions. The honourable Member from Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have one detailed question today not likely for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment to have typically in their purview.

Mr. Speaker, noting that in other cities in Canada, such as Calgary, Alberta, you have to be baptized into the Catholic faith in order to be a student in their Catholic school system, what information can the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment provide to me as to the details of how many children in the Yellowknife Catholic school system have identified themselves as being of the Catholic faith, and, further, how does that break down per school in their district?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Written questions. Returns to written questions. Mr. Clerk.

Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Returns to written questions. Petitions. Reports of standing and special committees. Reports of committees on the review of bills. Tabling of documents. Honourable Minister responsible for Finance, Mr. Roland.