Mr. Speaker, as past Assemblies have, this government also stands by the fact that we as the Government of the Northwest Territories will not interfere in the sense of what they negotiate for authorities from governments, whether it’s the federal government or existing programs and services that we deliver.

We are involved in those negotiations. We will continue to honour those tables and work forward.

Quite simply, Mr. Speaker, whether it comes to the GNWT at a stage and then goes under self-government when those agreements are finally signed, those are all part of the process. I think we need to recognize the fact that we are not trying to take it over as the GNWT, to take it forever. We are trying to just bring that authority north, and then once the further self-government discussions are completed, the areas that were successfully negotiated would be passed on.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that when the Premier was Minister of Finance, he made a commitment to look into getting some of these windfall profits that are happening from oil resources of the Northwest Territories as the price of oil has soared. The federal government is now accumulating hundreds of millions of dollars, for example, from Norman Wells. Is that going to be in or has it entered into this process? Will that be profiled? Is this an opportunity to deal with that situation so we get some immediate gain here?

Mr. Speaker, the Member has hit on a very key area. I think that when we look at the royalties that are being taken out of the Northwest Territories right now in today’s existing agreements, we would say that those dollars could be flowed back through an infrastructure program to meet the needs of the Northwest Territories. That is the approach we are taking.

Now, the federal government has always stated that Norman Wells — the oil, the pipeline out of that community — is not a royalty; it is an equity. Well, we are saying it is money one way or another that flows out of the Northwest Territories. We need to work on that initiative together.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. A final short supplementary, Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you again for those comments. One last question: could the Premier outline the role he sees this side of the House playing and how he intends to involve us as representatives of the people in this process in a meaningful and timely way?

Mr. Speaker, through our whole process we have established, whether it is budgeting, finding new revenues, sitting down with committee to give ideas of where we can go…. Those options are there. In fact, as I stated earlier, I am seeking time with the committee to sit down and have more discussion about the proposal, the framework that has been forwarded. Hopefully, we will have that very soon, and we will continue with those discussions.

Now, there has been lots of discussion on the devolution package that has been on the table. It would be sort of an update of where that is, plus this idea of this new framework.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The honourable Minister of Finance, Mr. Miltenberger.

Mr. Speaker, clearly, the value of the printed word is very important as part of the way we communicate. The actual dollar figure, in terms of how much we advertise and what our printing costs are, I don’t have with me today. But I will commit to getting the best numbers we can for the Member.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank him for that. I wasn’t necessarily asking for a dollar value; I was asking for a value per dollar spent. I didn’t hear an answer to the question of whether or not there has been a cost benefit analysis done on print advertising. It is for me, I think, one of the methods of communication that is least effective. So I’d like to ask the Minister again: has there ever been a cost benefit analysis done on print advertising from the GNWT?

Mr. Speaker, over time there has been. There have been checks to see how we advertise jobs in different newspapers. There have been attempts to centralize that type of work to save costs, of course. There is great consternation at the community level among the community newspapers and regional newspapers when they get cut out of the advertising business.

Clearly, there is a pressure for us to communicate and consult with our constituents across the land. The tendency is, as we look at saving money, to say, “Let’s just try to advertise in the News/North, because everybody reads the News/North.” It leaves out things like The Hub, the Slave River Journal, the Deh Cho Drum and the Inuvik Drum. We have to balance it. This is not just a straight

dollar issue; it’s an issue of how we get our message out and what value we place on that as well.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. I have to state my belief, though, that there is some advertising the government does that I see a value to. Certainly, advertising jobs and advertising for consultation is extremely valuable.

But I do take great offence at many of the print ads that announce a particular day, that announce a particular…. For instance, there’s a full page ad in one of the papers south of the lake that welcomed students back to school — ads proclaiming “Whatever Day” by the various departments. I have a problem with those, and I’d like to know from the Minister, in terms of an analysis of the print advertising that we do…. Yes, there are benefits to some and not to others. But has there been a consideration of removing those kinds of ads that do nothing, I think, in terms of efficiency of the government but simply glorify a particular department?

We’re going to be starting the business planning process, and Members will have an opportunity to comb through the plans of each department. We are looking for efficiencies; we are looking for savings; we want to control our costs; we want value for money. At the same time, we want to be able to communicate in the best way possible using as many local resources as we can. That is a discussion we’re prepared to have across the board so that there are no sacred cows, as it were, or Ministers or departments. We’re prepared to look at all that through the business planning process.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. A final short supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the Minister for answering the question that was in my head. I’m really glad to hear that this is an area that is going to be considered.

I’d like to know, relative to the policies that he mentioned yesterday, whether or not they will be considered in light of reducing the spending on print advertising and if the policies will be evaluated for the value of full page ads advertising a particular day or welcoming kids back to school.

As I committed to in the House yesterday, we’re going to pull together the information. We do have policies as they pertain to print advertising for jobs and such. We’ll share that with the committee as we move forward into the business planning process and as we look at the upcoming business plans, which are going to contain expenditure reductions for the coming year. Then, yes, we can have that discussion. We can try to make sure that we give the clearest political direction as a Legislature as to how we think these

dollars can best be spent and at what level of expenditure.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes, Mr. McLeod.

Mr. Speaker, in my Member’s statement I spoke again about the amount of money that’s leaving the Northwest Territories through migrant workers and industry. I’d like to pose my question today to the Minister of Finance.

With $330 million just from the migrant workers alone, there are lots of people, I believe, who continue to leave the Northwest Territories. I’d like to ask the Minister: do we receive any money from workers or industries who are working in the Northwest Territories?

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Minister of Finance, Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We have a 2 per cent payroll tax, which was designed with the goal of trying to in fact be able to recoup some of the money that the fly in/fly out workers are taking with them as they head back to the other jurisdictions where they live.

Mr. Speaker, if the migrant worker is hired out of Alberta, for example, and the company’s home base is in Alberta, do we get 2 per cent payroll tax out of those workers?

Everybody who works in the North pays payroll tax, except for the self-employed. Then what we do is refund through the cost of living program to Northerners. So folks who don’t live in the North pay the 2 per cent, and that comes back to the government.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Minister for that. So if I’m to understand — and I thought I heard differently, that the migrant workers do not pay the 2 per cent…. But I believe the Minister just said that they do pay the 2 per cent tax. So that aside, do we receive any other monies from developments or industry on behalf of these migrant workers who work in the Northwest Territories?