Okay, committee. We are going to deal with Bill 22, Supplementary Appropriation Act, No. 3, 2006-2007, and we are going to defer the bill and we are going to go to the detail of the bill. I would please ask you to turn to page 5. I would like to ask Minister Roland if he would like to be joined by witnesses in the Chamber. Mr. Roland.

Yes, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Does committee agree?

Thank you. Sergeant-at-Arms, could you please escort the witnesses in?

For the record, we welcome Mr. Mark Cleveland, secretary to the Financial Management Board Secretariat. We have already had our opening comments and we are now ready for any general comments from committee members. Mr. Braden.

I have a general comment and it's one that has been put on the record here on several occasions. It's worth repeating. It's in the area of our capital planning and forecasting and budgeting for construction projects or renovations for major investment in new infrastructure. This can include things like computer and information systems, Madam Chair.

There is again evidence in this supplementary appropriation that we are being asked to come up with additional monies, in some cases substantial amounts of money of a third, a half or multiples of the original opening cost that we may have voted for earlier in the year when the budget year started in 2006.

So my concern, Madam Chair, for the record, is that our forecasting and assessment and budgeting methodologies are very, very incomplete, Madam Chair, in the sense that we are seeing too many of them come back to us for additional increments. I believe that we could be doing a much better job in terms of the front-end assessment, what is needed, of what the actual costs are going to be and when we are presented with a project here in the Legislative Assembly for approval, we are not just starting an opening bid to get something going and then picking up the pieces and the additional costs later on. That's not acceptable. That is not a good way to manage millions of dollars of money, Madam Chair, and so this is another plea.

As has already been stated, our entire assessment, budgeting and approval system for capital projects is wanting. We could be doing a much better job of it. As I said, there are some instances in this supp that I believe is coming back to haunt us. I will point them out at the time. Madam Chair, I am not going to be moving to delete any projects. I am simply bringing to his attention that we could be doing a much better job, Madam Chair.

Than you, Mr. Braden. General comments. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I have a number of areas I want to make some general comments on before I ask some specific questions on the supp that is before us today.

I will start with Stanton Territorial Hospital. I am just actually speechless that the Minister and the Department of Finance could bring forward in this supp a deficit recovery program for that hospital. In my estimation, Madam Chair, that hospital is at least $7 million in deficit and this is the first that this House, the first that I, as a Regular Member of this House, have heard of this. It's either one of two things, Madam Chair. That hospital has been grossly mismanaged or it's grossly underfunded. I am almost speechless with the way this has been presented. I certainly do have questions about how the government is planning to recover some of this deficit at the hospital.

What I have seen is the Department of Health and Social Services having their hands around the neck of that hospital and choking it off. I believe it's been underfunded, continues to be underfunded and I haven't been shown any proof to the contrary, Madam Chair. That is one area in this supp that I will pay particular attention to.

Another major cause of concern for me is how the Human Resources budget in the 2005-06 revised mains, including both supps 1 and 2, goes from $19.6 million to the proposed main estimates this year, 2007-08, to $31.5 million. That's an incredible increase and one that I don't believe is justifiable. The Minister of Human Resources was in this House yesterday during Committee of the Whole defending the department's main estimates. He said there were reductions in staffing there. I think there were 17 reductions. Why, then, are we continuing to see these increases in transition costs to the tune of $2.1 million in this supp? Madam Chair, in my belief, this bears more scrutiny. I do have a number of questions certainly in that area of the supp as well. I just really do find it hard to believe that Members of this House have been misinformed about the status. It's Stanton this time, but are there other health authorities out there that are in a similar position? What are we doing about it, Madam Chair? What are we doing about it? We're coming back through this process hoping to put a band-aid on it to stop the bleeding. Well, that's not good enough, Madam Chair. It's definitely not good enough, especially when we're talking about the flagship of our health care service here in the Northwest Territories. This is the pinnacle, it's the flagship, Stanton. and we're letting it die. We're choking it.

That shouldn't be continued to be allowed to happen, Madam Chair. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Any further general comments? No? If not, then would Members please turn to page 5 of the bill. Executive, operations expenditures. Executive, executive offices not previously authorized, $409,000. Regional operations, not previously authorized, negative $71,000. Total Executive, $338,000.

Agreed. Thank you. Human Resources, operations expenditures, Human Resources, directorate, not previously authorized, $2.118 million. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Could I request a breakdown from the Minister on that money, the $2.118 million? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, the $2.1 million is made up of salary and wages for $682,000, as well as other one-time transitional costs of $220,000, computer hardware and software costs of $252,000, and as well we have employee-related benefits of medical travel assistance, $750,000, and then contracts, $214,000. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Are the contracts related to the Northstar program? We provide a service to both our employees as well as the education districts, board, YCS as well as YK 1. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Madam Chair. It is the employee program that we have in place, so it is open to all employees of the Government of the Northwest Territories. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Madam Chair. That's an increase, if I understand that correctly, and the Minister can verify that of course. Who is doing that contract at this time? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Roland.

Madam Chair, the increase here was for the existing contract and that was driven by increased utilization of employees through that program. That contract has just recently gone out through an RFP and has been awarded to a new contractor. But this cost is not for the new contract. This cost is driven up from the old contract because of increased utilization. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Is the new contractor northern or southern? Thank you.