Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will listen to this and wait for your ruling. But even comments and some of the discussion here continue to talk about obvious facts.
Mr. Speaker, the motion was referring to…. If we look at the document that was being referred to on the capital infrastructure piece, or acquisition plan of the Government of the Northwest Territories for 2008–2009, under ITI, page 9-7, the specific area refers to Parks Renewal — Territorial.
Mr. Speaker, the fact that the Member raised an issue and spoke on behalf…. There are no obvious facts. When you look at Hansard, there is no record in Hansard of both the Member for Sahtu and the Member for Deh Cho speaking to this.
Now, we’ve heard some Members say there was obviously a concern or an upset view from some of us over here, and I would have to accept that as Premier and Finance Minister. The budget was being cut. There’s obviously going to be some reaction to that from me. But the fact is that in this House we all reserve the right to speak for ourselves and our constituencies. None of the Members on the other side would take very lightly the fact if I were to stand up and start speaking on behalf of the Member for Mackenzie Delta, or Nunakput or Kam Lake, and say, “They are doing this, or they're feeling this,” when they’ve never expressed that in this Assembly.
Now, in heated debate things can happen; agreed. But I think that is why, more importantly, we need clear guidelines as to what is acceptable and not acceptable. If Members enter into the fray, then I guess in this circle we would call it fair game. But for those who have not expressed an opinion on the particular debate, I don’t think it would be appropriate for them to put on record — on permanent record — what was being said, because a lot of people in the Northwest Territories only have Hansard to look at.
So, Members, when you raise an obvious fact, we know the fact because we’ve done our work in this Assembly. But for the people in the Northwest Territories, when they hear the debate — if they catch a bit of it or they just catch Hansard — they’re not getting all those pieces. In fact, when they go back and they link up to this document, they would see us talking about territorial assets and facilities.
So I don't think it’s appropriate for any Member of this House, whether it be a Minister or a Regular Member, to try to state what another Member is feeling when they haven’t been part of the debate on any motion at that point.
I look forward to your ruling, Mr. Speaker, in that area. But we definitely need clear guidelines as to how we proceed from this point, and a better understanding. It is in time of heated debate that things can go sideways on us, as they would say.