Good morning, colleagues. Welcome back to the House.

Members, before we begin today, I would like to draw your attention to the Canadian flags that are on your desks, marking National Flag of Canada Day.

Applause.

February 15th was declared National

Flag of Canada Day in 1996. It is the day Canadians are encouraged to take the time to consider all that our flag has come to represent since it was first raised over Parliament Hill in 1965.

The red and white maple leaf flag has become a powerful and prominent symbol of Canada. It is recognized all over the world as the flag of a people who cherish the ideals of democracy, freedom, justice, diversity and equality.

It is a particularly fitting day to celebrate not only our flag but also the grand and beautiful country that we live in.

Thank you, Members. Item 2, Ministers’ statements, Ms. Lee.

Mr. Speaker, the Department of Health and Social Services, the Beaufort-Delta Health and Social Services Authority, and Capital Health Authority in Edmonton are working with the leadership and residents of Aklavik to investigate the incidence of H. pylori infection in the community.

A team of 25 health professionals and researchers from Capital Health and the University of Alberta, working together with the employees of the G.N.W.T., spent four days in Aklavik in February. They took tissue samples from 300 persons — every consenting adult in the community.

These tissue samples will be examined for evidence of the H. pylori infection. This bacteria can occur without symptoms and can lead to ulcers, indigestion and stomach cancer.

The samples were sent to a lab in Edmonton where they will be analyzed thoroughly. This extensive project is known as the Aklavik H. Pylori Project, and it will be completed by 2010.

Residents in Aklavik have long expressed their concerns about the high rates of stomach cancer in their community. One family lost five members to this disease. In the N.W.T. the rate of stomach cancer is twice that of the rest of Canada.

The project has received $220,000 in grants and contributions from a wide variety of organizations. I'd like to thank the community of Aklavik, especially nurse-in-charge Rachel Munday and all of the staff at the Susie Husky Health and Social Services Centre. I'd also like to thank the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation, Canadian North, Public Health Agency of Canada, Inuvik Regional Hospital, Beaufort-Delta Health and Social Services Authority, MLA David Krutko, Chief Charlie Furlong, Mayor Knute Hansen, and Dr. Tom Guzowski of Stanton Territorial Hospital. I also thank the Edmonton Capital Health doctors, the Olympus scoping technicians, and the University of Alberta.

Finally, I want to acknowledge the project leader, medical director Dr. Bob Bailey from Northern Health Services Network, who secured the funding, and lastly, Dr. John Morse, who had an idea more than ten years ago that turned into this important project.

Applause.

Item 3, Members’ statements, Mr. Menicoche.

Mr. Speaker, many constituents have asked me to make their concerns about the proposed cuts known to the government. They have asked me to stand up for them and prevent the government taking the simplistic approach to cost-cutting by laying off employees, as announced by the Premier to the media.

Mr. Speaker, this is a fear that’s out there in the public, a fear that is founded on previous experience with spending cuts. Until this government proves to us that their cost savings are not simply achieved by layoffs, I must speak for my constituents and urge the government to make wise decisions.

Mr. Speaker, cuts to the G.N.W.T. workforce are a short-sighted solution to a complex problem that may save money in the spur of the moment and will look good on the books, but in the long term, it will cost the government lots of money.

Employees are valuable. Corporate knowledge is valuable, not to mention that perhaps you didn’t see that when you rehire somebody, it costs $100,000 by current estimates to retrain somebody new.

Job cuts create lots of damage and achieve little. We should not put more financial pressure on families than they already have. What does a family who loses one or all of its income do to cope? They will cut out recreational programs and eat less healthy but cheaper.

There will also be a secondary economic impact to our communities. The private sector suffers, too, from less disposable income, causing a trickle effect — less employment and training opportunities and more people leaving the North. Ultimately, all these effects cause more pressure on our social system.

Here are the words of two of my constituents that bring the message across loud and clear:

“Cuts only help in the immediate. In the long run, they cause further decay to any society.”

“Employment is essential to self-pride and a healthy standard of living.”

Let’s ensure that no one loses any job, Mr. Speaker. Mahsi cho.

Mr. Speaker, it’s the IRC Cup weekend. It’s the Inuvialuit Regional Cup Hockey Tournament in the Beaufort-Delta this weekend.

I just wish all the players and the families that are driving down to have a safe, fun-filled weekend to spend time with their families and friends that they haven’t seen during this past winter.

We have eight teams in the “B” Division and five teams in the “A.” And I just wish all the best to all the players and to have a safe, fun weekend, and support just seeing them all. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, to rush into a burning building once and pull somebody out is quite an accomplishment. To do it twice is an amazing feat. To actually do it three times is unheard of. I want to use my Member’s statement today to honour a man who — three times — has gone into buildings that were burning to pull people out.

Vince Sharpe of Inuvik, 60 years old, former firefighter, back in November went into a trailer that was burning and pulled one person out. Once he got him out, he was told there was another one in there. He went back in on his stomach in a smoke-filled building and pulled a second person out.

He’s done it a couple of times before, Mr. Speaker. In 1978 he took a lady in a wheelchair out of a burning log home. In 1974 he rescued a baby from a burning building.

I think it’s important, Mr.

Speaker, that as an

Assembly we recognize the accomplishments that some of these people put forward. A lot of it just flies under the radar.

I wanted to use my Member’s statement today to bring tribute to Mr.

Sharpe and also plan on

nominating Vince Sharpe for a couple of awards, because I think acts like this unselfish bravery — going into burning buildings to rescue people — shouldn’t go unrecognized. And I will do my part.

So I would like to ask the Assembly to join me today in commending Vince Sharpe on the rescues that he has done. A few people owe their lives to him, and he should be recognized for that. Thank you.

Applause.

Mr. Speaker, I’d like to take this opportunity to thank the Senators who will be making an attempt to travel to the Northwest Territories and travel throughout the North in regard to the Yukon, Northwest Territories and Nunavut and look at the issue of poverty in the North and especially in aboriginal communities. It is important that the Northern leaders, the representatives, MLAs and our government work with them to come up with some ideas on how to deal with poverty in aboriginal communities.

The thing that appalls me the most is who is not taking part in this journey: the Conservative Senators who totally refuse to take part. They say it is a waste of money and a waste of time. I find that to be appalling. As a government and as part of our government system, the Senate plays an important role as a chamber of second thought. But yet, Mr. Speaker, that is an appalling state when the Conservative Senators refuse to travel, saying that it is a waste of time and money. So who are we — another country?

It is important to deal with the issue of poverty, especially in aboriginal communities and especially here in Canada, where statistics show that aboriginal people in Canada live in poverty, similar to Third World countries.

I would like to state for the record: next time we come to a federal election, we’ve got to remember the slogan “ABC: Anybody But Conservatives.”

I am sorry that I didn’t hear you for the loud applause.

In my short time here as MLA, we’ve talked much about energy, the environment and climate change. It is accepted that as human beings, we are hurting our house — our planet. Some say that we are destroying it.

It is also accepted that we can take actions to reduce the hurt. Members have discussed many of these actions: building codes and standards, reducing energy consumption, less hurtful energy sources, water conservation to name just a few. I sense a willingness on the part of this government to take action, but I see no indication of any comprehensive plan.

I know; I know: “It is early yet; we’re developing the budget and so on and so on.” But as this government prepares the 2008-2009 budget, it is a

necessity that energy savings and sustainability be a cornerstone of the document.

We need to take a page from the book of the city of Yellowknife, which has just been named a number one city, by the way. It has taken a few years, but the city of Yellowknife has committed to energy planning and action. Currently some $500,000 is earmarked for activities related to the energy plan.

We need to follow their excellent example, Mr. Speaker. Not only do we need a coordinated energy plan for the government of the N.W.T. that covers all aspects of energy, climate change and environmental protection, but we need an energy coordinator to implement and manage the plan.

Taking this bold step is not something we have to do on our own. There are many N.W.T. organizations and individuals out there who are willing to assist in the development of a plan.

We must establish a working committee and an energy and sustainability planning committee with public representation from industry and interested individuals and organizations. I believe the Arctic Energy Alliance is one such organization which can provide excellent advice and support for such a planning committee.

This is a long-term strategy, but we must include it in our first budget in order to reap any kind of rewards in the life of this Assembly. We can guarantee financial savings by being proactive. We can guarantee environmental savings through being proactive. The time to act is now.

Mr. Speaker, today I would like to recognize my constituent Mr. Tyler Hawkins of Hay River for his outstanding talent achievements in the music world.

Tyler Hawkins began his music lessons on multi-stringed guitar when he was just eight years old. He received a Bachelor of Fine Arts from York University with Honours in Performance in 1990. Since then he has been working as a teacher and a private guitar instructor in the Northwest Territories.

This weekend we’ll see another dream realized, as through Tyler’s leadership, we will host what I hope is just the first N.W.T. International Lute Festival.

I encourage everyone to take advantage of this amazing opportunity to see and hear such rare internationally renowned talent coming to a small northern, remote town like Hay River. This weekend’s events will include performances on Friday night at École Boréale, Saturday night at the

Pentecostal church, and a meet-the-artists workshop at the Back Eddy at 1:30 on Sunday.

We will welcome a performance by Michel Cardin and Tyler Hawkins on Friday night at École Boréale. Saturday night’s offering will include a performance by Nigel North. Nigel North was initially inspired into music at age seven by the early ’60s instrumental pop group The Shadows.

Nigel studied classical music through violin and guitar, eventually discovering his real path in life, the lute, when he was 15. Basically self-taught on the lute, he has for over 30 years developed a unique musical life which embraces activities as a teacher, accompanist, soloist, director and writer. For over 20 years he was a professor of the lute at the Guildhall School of Music & Drama in London. From ’93 to ’99 he was a professor at the Hochschule der Künste in Berlin, and since January 1999 Nigel North has been a professor of lute at the Early Music Institute at Indiana University in Bloomington in the U.S.A.

Mr. Speaker, it is truly a rare occasion to have such internationally renowned talent in our community of Hay River. I would like to thank Tyler Hawkins for all of his efforts in bringing this together. I would ask my colleagues here today to congratulate Hay River on being the host of the N.W.T. International Lute Festival. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, the people of Dettah have resided here since time immemorial. They form a community which has seen much change, and they have tolerated much deterioration of their environment: the water, the air quality, the health of their nearby food resources like fish and waterfowl. They are holders of a unique and valuable way of seeing our world. Yet despite this and despite their proximity to the capital, the 11-kilometre gravel road to their community remains as unsafe or worse as the road to Behchoko was before the recent resurfacing of that highway.

The road to Dettah was last resurfaced with chip seal that was about as thick as a poker chip. This road receives much less traffic than the adjacent Ingraham Trail, with its tens of thousands of B-trains and so on. Despite this, and not surprisingly, the chip seal of the Dettah Road had a brief lifetime, measured in months. Having had frequent experience driving the Dettah Road, I can personally attest to the road’s unsafe condition. Several times, though driving at moderate speed, I found my car wanting to crow-hop into a sideways shuffle down the road — an unsettling and certainly unsafe experience as a result of the corrugated and rutted surface.

Mr. Speaker, I am not asking for 100 kilometres of resurfacing here. I simply ask that we give the people of Dettah their due and provide these patient people with an appropriately resurfaced — and reconstructed, if need be — and safe 11-kilometre road to their community.

I will be asking the Minister of Transportation questions on this. Mahsi.

Mr. Speaker, I’d like to speak today about the budget reduction exercise currently underway by the government.

I’m very concerned over the way the government is handling the communication effort on the reduction and, eventually, the reinvestment strategy and the fear that this is causing our employees.

What I’ve heard from the public and Members of this House was that we should thoroughly examine our spending through zero-based budgeting exercises which would analyze our spending so we could take some corrective action on where we spend our dollars. Had this been done, we would have had solid information on which to make decisions.

As a Member of this House the government’s plan to reduce spending by $135 million over the next two years requires a tremendous leap of faith on behalf of myself and Members of this House. I can appreciate where the government is coming from, because I’ve been saying for the last four years that our spending is not sustainable over the long term. However, since Christmas, rumours abound on what, where, who and how much is going to fall under the government’s axe.

I just want to publicly state today for the record what I know. This week our committees finally received the targets that the government was setting for the departments: a $135 million reduction over the next two years, with $75 million being reinvested into strategic initiatives. Regular Members have not gotten any level of detail on what’s on the chopping block. There may be some panic in the public service, but the reductions still have to be vetted through our standing committees and the Regular Members of this House.

We need to ensure that as Regular Members our ideas and input for both reductions and reinvestment have to be taken seriously by this government. In our consensus style of government, Regular Members have the majority in this House, and I want the public and the public service to know that when it comes to reductions, our input, our thoughts and our ideas will be taken seriously by this government.

The reality is that so far Regular Members on this side of the House seem to be on a need-to-know basis and are being treated that way by the government. I want to let the public service know and let the public know that when the battles are to be fought, the Regular Members will be here to defend the reductions we don’t agree with, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, as always, I try to regularly make special mention that it is Red Friday.

Today I feel compelled to speak again to the issue of aftercare and follow-up for clients with addictions. I must confess that I am perplexed by the Minister’s answers to the questions earlier this week. A finer defence of the status quo I’ve never seen. As the Minister stated, individual responsibility is a major component of recovery in healing from addiction. I do not disagree with that statement. What I find puzzling is the Minister’s harsh resistance to what seems like a simple, inexpensive yet potentially very beneficial service — a mere phone call, Mr. Speaker.

The transition from a residential treatment program back to the community can be very difficult, full of pitfalls and temptations to return to addictions. Follow-up with a client lets the person know that there’s still someone who cares even though they are no longer in treatment. If the client knows in advance that someone will be checking up, this in itself can be a motivator to stay on course in his or her rehabilitation. An individual can be responsible, but for many of us, encouragement and support help bolster our resolve. I think this is what we usually call being human.

Mr. Speaker, one follow-up call could make the difference for a recovering addict who is struggling with feelings of isolation and social pressures. Success and effort are paramount in dealing with the biggest problems that are causing our social ills in this Territory. Poundmaker’s Lodge does this. Bellwood Health Services, a leading addictions-treatment program in Toronto, does this. Why can’t we do this? Why can’t we expand our ability and help the people the way we want to?

Mr. Speaker, aftercare is the key to successful recovery, and this government needs to ensure that a comprehensive aftercare program is made available to our residents. They need to be aware of it, and the lines of communication need to go two ways, not one way, as the Minister’s letter directs it to go.

In closing, I want to make a clear point. We’ve gone far beyond the question of this costing too much

money. It has now become clear: it’s strictly a position of stubbornness.

Item 4, returns to oral questions. Item 5, recognition of visitors in the gallery, Mr. Menicoche.

Mr. Speaker, I’d like to recognize three people from Fort Simpson that are in the gallery today: Mr. Sean Whelly, who acted as my official agent, his son Brendan Whelly, and Alex Scharf, who is teaching at our Thomas Simpson Secondary School. Welcome here, and see how we do our work. Mahsi cho.

I’d like to welcome everybody who’s in the gallery today to the House. I hope you’re enjoying the proceedings. It’s always nice to have an audience in here.

Item 6, acknowledgements. Item 7, oral questions, Mr. Hawkins.

Mr. Speaker, I highlighted a number of good places that treat addictions, and they do follow-up. In Minnesota my office has spoken to people at Aftercare Services Agency, and they do follow-up treatments. Bellwood highlights and red-flags people that they need to continue to follow-up through phone calls.

Mr. Speaker, has Health and Social Services in any way done any type of analysis on how much good a follow-up treatment program would do for people by a mere phone call?

Mr. Speaker, my two-page letter, which the Member tabled, was in follow-up to the questions that he asked in the first session. If you read that letter in totality, it does state that we do all the work that needs to be done between pre-treatment, the treatment issues, post-treatment, aftercare.

This government in the last five years has spent millions of dollars. We have hired over 40 community wellness workers as well as mental health and addiction coordinators, and they’re actively in the healing process of anybody who comes to their attention. I believe that the program covers all of that, so I’m a little puzzled as to why the Member feels that we’re not doing that sort of work.

Well, you know what? Maybe the problem is solved because there must be two

different letters. My two-page letter says: “It is Poundmaker’s practice to make follow-up calls directly with their clients, partly as a way to evaluate their programs and the outcomes…. Community staff” — referring to the G.N.W.T. — “do not consider this follow-up call to be part of the aftercare program.”

That is exactly the opposite of what the Minister just said.

Why is the follow-up call not considered part of the aftercare program, and would this Minister stop being stubborn and say, “We’ll look into this, and we can make this happen”?

Mr. Speaker, I state again that there are follow-up processes, that there are aftercare programs within our alcohol and drug addiction programming. I’m saying to the Member again: we do that already. That is my answer. I am not being stubborn; I am giving the answers. We do that work already, and the workers that we have in our communities do that already.

Again I cite that we’re probably reading from two different two-page letters, because this letter also says that they encourage me to advise my constituents that they call, and they have to initiate some obligation on their part. So this is a one-way letter, not a two-way letter, which I talked about. Communication. Communication works both ways. The Minister keeps reaffirming, “We do this,” but their letter proves they don’t.

Would the Minister look into this program and have a chance to maybe review this letter that she’s written to me?

Mr. Speaker, as I stated two days ago in referring to that letter, there is another paragraph in that letter which shows a very client-focused, case-management approach where any resident from the Northwest Territories who gets to go to any kind of treatment program, before they are discharged, are encouraged to work out an aftercare program. They have a say in who could help them with their aftercare and to stay in the sober-for-life program, whether they be friends, whether they be addiction workers, whether they be AA programs. They work out the package, and they work with the workers.

So in the broader terms we’re doing that. We are already doing that, and it’s very client- focused. It’s a two-way healing process. It’s a life-long process, and our government is with them all the way.

We again seem to be reading from a different letter, because the letter I have here says that they have to take individual responsibility, that it’s basically up to the individual. This one-way letter continues to cite exactly the opposite of what the

Minister says; although the letter says that if they want to call, it even provides a phone number.

Would the Minister re-evaluate her department’s position on this? I’m telling you: everything she says referencing that it’s a two-way communication process is not in this letter.

Mr. Speaker, I’m not going to help the Member read that letter. The paragraph before the paragraph that he’s quoting, which he is reading out of context, I say again, speaks about case-management approach and two-way approach. The part that the Member is quoting is about the responsibility of the client to contact, but that is only a little part of what you’ll have to do, and that is a part of a client-focused and client-driven recovery program that is very, very important for anybody who wants to combat their addiction for life.

Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. This week I spoke about the problems Lutselk’e is facing with the arena. Today I would like to ask follow-up questions to the Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs.

Mr. Speaker, this matter is very serious for the community. It seems the community is getting frustrated with each passing day. Would the Minister commit to meeting with me and the community to get an accurate update and assessment of this matter?

Mr. Speaker, the Member has raised, on a number of occasions during the session, concerns about recreation and recreation facilities in his community, and more recently raised and highlighted some concerns brought to him by the community of Lutselk’e. We’ve had people in the community over the last while and have been working with the community on putting some training programs together — ice-making and other things — to help support them.

There still seems to be some disconnect in terms of some of the funding arrangements and some of the support they think they need. I’d be glad to sit down with the Member and community members if that’s the desire, Mr. Speaker.

Would the Minister commit to making a visit to Lutselk’e with me to discuss arena operations and other related matters pertaining to the arena?

Mr. Speaker, I would be glad to visit the community with the Member. In fact, over the last year we had tried to get into the community on two different occasions, and both times we were weathered out. I feel we owe a visit

to that community. I would be glad to accompany the Member to the community and have meetings and discussions around these issues and others that the Member would like to bring forward.

Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for the Premier. It gets back to my Member’s statement, where I was talking about the reduction exercises currently underway and the information that’s flowing through to departments and not necessarily getting through to the Regular Members on this side of the House.

I’ve become aware of one department where they are doing hiring on a case-by-case basis. It’s not necessarily a hiring freeze but a case-by-case basis, and hiring has to be approved by the deputy minister. It’s a big change, Mr. Speaker.

I’d like to ask the Premier if that is a government-wide instruction on case-by-case hiring. Because there are many people out there in the public trying to get a job with the G.N.W.T. and they need to know this type of information.

Mr. Speaker, in responding to the Member’s question, he also stated in his Member’s statement about the planning and timing. For the record, let’s put it on this table the fact that in a consensus-style government, I have agreed with Members that we would make a budget happen by May–June. That reduces the amount of time we can go back and forth. So that is problematic in the way of trying to do business in a new fashion.

As to the specific area of the department the deputy minister is reviewing, it is the process we are following. Because, for example, Mr. Speaker, as a government we’re working with the goals that we’ve set as the 16th Assembly, and there are new

initiatives. We wouldn’t want departments to be hiring in an area that would not be supported in the years to come. That is why we’re doing this process, and it is government-wide.

It’s very interesting to hear the Premier say that, because — and I get back to the information sharing here — the first I heard of a case-by-case hiring policy in one department — this is the Department of Health and Social Services, and I’ll single them out — was through a constituent, Mr. Speaker. Now, I’d rather hear from the government that the government has taken that angle and they are going to go on a case-by-case basis.

I’d like to ask the Premier: has the Premier instructed deputy ministers government-wide to only go through hiring on a case-by-case basis? What are they basing their…? The jobs like

teachers and nurses: are those case-by-case as well, or is everything case-by-case, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. Speaker, the way we reviewed this is the Department of Human Resources and the Ministers brought concerns to the table. For example, we had different departments reacting in areas that were shutting down certain hiring positions. So that is not the situation. We are using a consistent approach now, and that is where departments are going out for hiring. Before an actual hiring occurs, it goes back to the deputy minister for review to ensure that it’s aligning with the work that’s starting to happen. We wouldn’t want to hire a position and then six months from now that position is not going to be part of where we’re going as the government of the Northwest Territories. That is why that direction is being used.

They’re making that determination on what’s going to be necessary six months from now or required six months from now, in isolation, because we haven’t had that level of discussion on what’s going to be a requirement six months from now. Mr. Speaker, I do get calls from constituents who are trying to apply for positions with the G.N.W.T. I want to ask the Premier: when was the Premier going to let Members of the House know that the policy has changed in terms of hiring employees for the government of the Northwest Territories? When were they going to let us know that?

Let’s be clear: we’re still hiring. But we’re doing it in a way…. The policy has not changed, but what we’re doing is, as departments go through their hiring process — through Human Resources, and the message is now to all deputies... Before a hire actually happens, we need to do that review, because departments are aware of what initiatives we’ve been working on to try to bring forward new initiatives for the government of the Northwest Territories, and departments are aware of what targets they’ve been given. They’re doing their work as to what areas may be offered up for cost-savings and cost-saving measures. So that’s where this comes into focus.

Final supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Mr. Speaker, the government seems to be taking this reduction exercise as a licence to pretty much do what they want. I mean, we haven’t known about this. And again, that gets back to my point: if you’re going to make decisions, especially like that, I mean, let us know.

My last question would be on timing, Mr. Speaker. I think there are a lot of rumours out there in the public service. I’ve heard numbers. I don’t want to throw them around; I don’t want to exacerbate the

situation. But there are rumours out there about the number of job losses. I want to ask the Premier: when can the public service and Members of this House expect some more information on the reductions — where they are at and what they’re going to be?

Mr. Speaker, again, in a consensus-style government, working with Members as to the time frame and meeting the May-June target, we’ve had to track from that point of bringing forward a budget process. The work is going to be done to compile all that information so we can present that to Members. It will be later on this winter and early spring before we will be able to present Members draft documents of where we’re going to meet our timelines and targets for the first budget to be put in place in May-June.

Mr. Speaker, the people of Dettah have waited a long, long time for an appropriate road with safe conditions — actually, since I was knee-high to a grasshopper. I remember it well.

Laughter.

It was a long, long time ago. The condition of the road is taking its toll on vehicles and people’s budgets. People are really extremely concerned about the unsafe conditions.

Will the Minister of Transportation sit down with the leaders in Dettah to plan and implement, at the earliest opportunity, something to address this situation and get the road properly resurfaced?

Mr. Speaker, I too have driven the road to Dettah, and I understand what the Member is saying. I want to thank him for bringing this issue to my attention.

Mr. Speaker, as Members are aware, there are high transportation needs right across the Northwest Territories. I’m committed to looking at all requests. I too would direct my department to continue working with the leadership in Dettah and with the Member here in terms of looking at this particular need in terms of their safety. It’s our priority in the department to provide safe and reliable roads for the travelling public. I would be happy to sit with the Member and also with the leadership of Dettah to look at this particular road.

I appreciate that offer, and I hope that’s actually a standing offer to all people of the Northwest Territories, all communities. I’m looking for a little extra attention here, Mr. Speaker. We’re only talking 11 kilometres. This is something that’s long overdue. The last piece of work, like I say, lasted weeks or months, and I’m hoping the

Minister will commit to meeting — himself with the leaders of Dettah — and getting this road a priority for this government.

I didn’t hear a question there. I must remind Members that it’s time for question period, not making statements.

Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier, and it’s in light of my statement. There is a Senate committee which is studying rural poverty in the northern territories. They are in the Yukon on Monday; they’re here in Yellowknife on Tuesday and Wednesday; then they’re going to Iqaluit on Thursday.

I think it’s important, Mr.

Speaker, that we as

government intervene and also have a say in regard to what — especially with the cost of living in the Northwest Territories for our residents, especially in rural parts of the territories, and realizing that part of our deficit situation is just that: it’s the cost of delivering programs and services and providing to communities where we don’t have an economic base for people to be able to live on. I think it’s important that this government also takes part in these hearings and also that they intervene on behalf of the residents of the Northwest Territories.

I’d like to ask the Premier: are there any scheduled departments or people from the Department of Health and Social Services, or EC&E, who will be intervening on behalf of this government during these hearings?

Mr. Speaker, we are aware that the Senate committee is doing a number of trips, or a trip, across Canada. I’m not sure exactly where they’re stopping. We have been approached on that basis about their meeting here, and Minister Bob McLeod will be attending on our behalf.

Mr.

Speaker, I do encourage all

residents of the Northwest Territories, especially here in Yellowknife…. There will be hearings at the Northern United Place on Tuesday at nine o’clock in the morning. I think it’s important, even as MLAs, that we do talk about the issue of rural poverty, because it is something that affects all our residents.

Again, I’d like to ask the Premier: will the cabinet be meeting with the Senators to also, in light of other issues that we have in the Northwest Territories such as the Northern Accord and also dealing with devolution and any other problems we may have…? Has that effort been made to meet with the Senators, when they visit the Northwest Territories, to address other issues with them?

No. We have not set up a meeting as a cabinet or other Ministers. The point of contact will be through Minister McLeod, going on our behalf of when they are sitting on this specific issue that they are travelling on.

Mr. Speaker, I think it’s very important that we do, whenever possible, have dialogue with the Upper House by way of the Senators that do come to the North, because they do have a role to play in what happens in Ottawa.

I think it’s important that we do get our message to not only the MPs or the Prime Minister but also the Senators by way of influencing them on issues that we’re trying to deal with. I think we have some big challenges, especially with the devolution file being where it’s at.

Again, I would like to ask the Premier if he has spoken to our Senator. Will he be meeting with Senator Simpson if he is also a part of this panel?

For the record, I have a lot of faith in Minister Bob McLeod and his being able to carry our message to this Senate committee.

As for the specifics with our Senator in the Northwest Territories, I haven’t yet been able to get a meeting time or made contact with his office on initiatives that we are looking at.

I do have a lot of faith in my cousin too.

Laughter.

I think it’s important to realize that as a government and as the Government Leader in this government, your voice carries a lot of weight around here. And I think it’s important that we do voice our concerns, especially in regard to the Conservative Senators who didn’t make an attempt to be here.

I think, as a government, we should write a stern letter to those Senators to make them aware that we do not appreciate being put aside because of the cost and not having the time to be here. I think, as a government, we do have a responsibility to stand up to these types of statements.

I’d like to ask the Premier: will he be writing a stern letter to the Senators who did not make an attempt to come here on the basis that they didn’t have time and the cost was too high?

It’s not my intention at this time to be writing a letter to the Senators who are not making the trip. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I’d like to follow up on Mr. Ramsay’s questions with regard to the $135 million target for reductions in government expenditures over the next two years.

Mr. Speaker, there is concern out there, and I do believe that much of it is premised on a lack of information. I’d like to ask the Premier today…. We have committees that will be looking at strategic initiatives as reinvestments. We are, as a Regular Members’ caucus, looking at strategic reductions. There are many ideas that are coming out with the help of the public service, who are submitting suggestions to us as well.

I’d like to ask the Premier: would it be possible to meet the $135 million over the next two years’ reduction without bringing layoffs to the public service of the G.N.W.T.?

Mr. Speaker, the concern is being raised out there about the government’s focus on reduction. There are rumours about the number of positions that may be taken out of the system, and they are just that — rumours.

We are working on putting the information together. We’re looking for input from Members. We’re looking for the method of how we’re going to do this.

More refocusing of government across departments’ initiatives will probably be brought forward and have an impact in ‘09-‘10. Some of the exercises we have to do is going to have an impact on our employee levels because, Mr.

Speaker,

almost 50 per cent of our expenditures across the Northwest Territories is related to compensation and benefits. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to hear something encouraging from the Premier so that we could look at effecting these cuts and reductions with the absolute least impact on employees as possible.

At any given time in the public service of the G.N.W.T., I believe there’s about a 15 per cent vacancy rate. I know that in some positions, it’s not possible to deliver the programs and services without positions being filled. But with a 15 per cent vacancy rate, isn’t there an opportunity to look at perhaps not re-staffing positions that are not absolutely essential and integral to delivering a program or service as a way of saving money in the interim?

Mr. Speaker, that is, in fact, one of the areas that we’re looking at — the basing of fees within departments, of removing those types

of dollars or identified positions that are not filled, as well as attrition.

If we set a target and we know that people are retiring, then we could look at doing that. If there are areas that are not a priority but we are reinvesting in initiatives, we can see if we can transfer employees over as well.

So there’s a whole number of tools we can do in limiting the impact on our staff. That is some of the work that we are looking at as we compare the strategic initiatives we want to put in place in the 16th Assembly and the areas that don’t fit in

priorities. Thank you.

Mr.

Speaker, I think

measures like that and communications like that are the most prudent on behalf of our government.

We’ve heard that our government is not the employer of choice anymore. We know that in all various sectors of the labour market, there’s extreme competition out there. I don’t think that we can afford to scare anybody out of our public service and out of the Northwest Territories. We need the people we have, and we work at professional development and investing in our employees.

I would like to ask the Premier if he will clearly communicate to his deputy ministers what the policies and the rules of the government are. My fear is that in the absence of very, very clear direction, deputy ministers could use this cost-reduction exercise inappropriately. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, as to the reason why we’re moving forward in this manner, instead of a main budget being this session we’re in, we’re looking to delay it so that we can do the right analysis for what we bring forward in cost savings as well as investing in the new initiatives. The message has been that we need to look at that.

The earlier question today about the deputy ministers being involved in reviewing who’s being hired is part of that overlap. The policies haven’t changed. We’re just ensuring that if we’re going to go through this exercise, we don’t unduly affect employees that are either just hired by us or have long service with us.

Mr. Speaker, I know, at least for myself, I want to make sure that we use government resources to impact our residents in the most positive way possible. Our public service is a huge piece out there.

I would love to hear the Premier today tell us and confirm with us that layoffs of employees in the public service will be a last resort in terms of reducing the expenditures of this government.

Mr. Speaker, we will be

measured, careful in the way we approach this, and I’ve laid out a number of things that are under consideration.

When we look at the options that are before us, there’s the impact of the delivery of programs and services to the people that are out there expecting the delivery that we say we will provide, our employees who deliver those programs, looking at vacancies, looking at attrition, looking at transfer assignments that can happen — all those tools that we will be incorporating as we proceed forward.

But I must say, as difficult as it is, the unfortunate reality is there will be some impacts. We’re going to minimize that as much as possible.

I’d like to ask my questions to the Premier with regard to job cuts and the wave of terror, as we read in the headlines this morning. My honourable colleague from Great Slave was quoted on that. But that’s exactly what’s going on, not only in the capital but throughout the regions as well. The people are fearing for their jobs.

What I’d like to know is…. Yes, the bottom line is important to the Finance Minister, and yes, cuts are necessary. But there’s got to be due diligence and due process when they’re assessing job cuts. I’d like to know what kind of processes are in place or what kinds of mechanisms are being used to assess these? Mahsi.

Mr.

Speaker, the biggest

things we’re working at is taking the appropriate amount of time to ensure that what is being advanced as initiatives or cost-saving areas is, in fact, going to be cost-saving areas. It is going to minimize the impact on the delivery of programs and services.

But the cold, hard reality is that if we don’t take the necessary steps today, then we are mortgaging our children’s future — and I would say mortgaging at a sub-prime level, which we don’t want to see happen.

We are taking initiatives, looking at how we do this, taking the necessary time. We will be presenting Members with our draft plans as we pull those together. The work is happening. It’s taking more time than we initially anticipated, but we will be having draft plans to Members in the near future.

With respect to the assessments that are going on out there, I know that government is doing the work. The Premier said all the departments and all their analysts are doing as much work as they can.

But I’m an MLA, and people are contacting me. They're saying this is happening, and that's happening. We are the front line to our constituents.

There appears to be a disconnect. Things are happening in the regions, and they're moving forward in terms of reductions. But the government is not letting the MLAs and our committee systems know. There seems to be a gap there.

I'd like to ask the Premier: has direction been given to departments to start initiating cuts beginning April 1st ? Mahsi.

No, we have not given

direction to begin the reductions in the front line on April 1st . In fact, our interim appropriation is one that

will keep us going at the existing levels.

In terms of all government-wide essential services such as health care, nurses, and emergency services, how will those be affected? Have assessments been done on those?

The work is ongoing, looking at what options are being developed by departments. Every department is going to be affected by this process. The decisions we make on what is acceptable to bring forward as well as incorporating what Members would bring to the table through their work is under careful review.

At this point we are unable to put out the detail, as we're putting that together so we can go to committee, have that review, and get some feedback as to what's being presented. We're not at the stage yet where we can lay out: here is where it’s going to happen, and this is how people will be affected.

The fact is, though, because so many of our dollars go through authorities such as Education, Health and Social Services, when departments are given targets, they have to work with their partners in delivery. That's probably where they're seeing information, as options are being reviewed but have not been accepted at this point.

Final supplementary, Mr. Menicoche.

Earlier in the week, in my inbox, I saw an invitation from the Union of Northern Workers to the Premier, inviting him to speak at a round-table discussion. I'd like to know what his response was to that invitation. Mahsi.

I did receive that letter. I am reviewing what we may be able to do. Our work is in this forum. I have had contact with the president of the UNW and will continue to have contact with him as we develop our plan.

At this point I haven't responded to that letter. Once we come up with a better plan and details of that

and Members have looked at that, I can sit down and provide a briefing to their executive.

My question is for the Minister of Transportation.

Recently the government of Nunavut signed a deal with the Government of Canada — the Building Canada Fund. I believe we are negotiating a similar agreement for the Northwest Territories. And it’s an opportunity to get some of these capital projects done that we've had in mind.

We've had one in mind a long time — the Dettah Road resurfacing. I’d like to ask the Minister: will the Minister commit to meeting with the leaders in Dettah to make resurfacing of the Dettah Road a high priority?

Mr. Speaker, I will instruct my department to look into our transportation plans across the Northwest Territories, and I assure the Member here that the Dettah access road is in these plans in terms of improving the access roads right across the North. I’m working very closely with my colleague the lead Minister for the funding that the Member alluded to in terms of all of the priorities that we’re being asked for. I certainly would again reassure him that I will instruct my officials in the North Slave regional operations to set up a meeting with the leadership of Dettah, and I also invite the Member to participate with me at that meeting.

I would like to ask that the Minister use his influence here to make this a priority for these people who have waited so patiently for so long. Will the Minister make it a priority? I will have one follow-up at least after that.

Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the Member for the question and also for the encouragement to use influence in terms of all of the priorities across the North here and specifically on transportation needs, as we heard from other Members in terms of their needs in terms of transportation. I will be sitting with the lead Minister on specific funding arrangements that we’re discussing today with the federal government and looking at all the needs.

Certainly, again I would, you know, take into consideration the Dettah access road as any other roads, airports or regional facilities that are being looked at in the North here to see what our best possible investments are in terms of our limited dollars. So I thank the Member, and I certainly look forward to sitting down with the leadership and the people of Dettah, either in a short time frame or

whenever you’d be able to meet, in terms of improving the safety of their roads.

Mr.

Speaker, I appreciate the

Minister’s commitment to sit down with the people of Dettah, the leaders in Dettah, to discuss this priority.

Will the Minister work to ensure that it will be a long-lasting resurfacing this time, a little bit thicker than a poker chip and something that will actually last a number of years? I know we have the technology for that.

Laughter.

Mr. Speaker, as Minister of the department I’m sure that any type of work that this department does will be quality work. It will be a long-lasting investment. It will be a good investment. The people in Dettah will be very happy with the department in terms of working on their roads.

Final supplementary, Mr. Bromley.

Mr. Speaker, that was exactly the answer I was looking for. I’m sure the people will be pleased. When can we expect this meeting to take place?

Mr. Speaker,

I’ve

indicated to my office to check on our schedules and my schedules and, of course, the Member’s. I want a schedule that we can coordinate with the leadership of Dettah so that we would arrange that meeting with the community as soon as possible. That may be within a week or so. I’ll be working with the Member on setting the time and location as to when we can meet with the good people of Dettah.

Mr. Speaker, I want to pick up where I left off with my questions to the Premier in regard to hiring. I just don’t want people out there in the public wasting their time applying to positions that we’re not deeming appropriate or where they’re not going to fit into our strategic initiatives, like I heard the Premier say earlier.

I’d like to ask the Premier: what positions currently are not deemed appropriate or fitting into our strategic initiatives, so that people aren’t applying for them?

Mr. Speaker, we’ve heard the Member in the past talk about the growth of our government and the growth of our employees. I don’t have a handle today on just what positions,

what areas of departments, are not going to fit with our initiatives. We’re undertaking that work.

The jobs are still going out there for areas that we need to fill. There hasn’t been a job-hiring freeze. The process still goes, but before a final hire happens, deputies are working on initiatives with their senior staff, bringing them back to our government and seeing how they fit with the cost-saving measures we’re making as well as the reinvestments, to see if they would align, as a preventative sort of step instead of having to deal with it after the fact.

Mr. Speaker, I guess the fact of the matter for me is that we weren’t consulted on that. I listened to the Premier state to my colleague Mr. Menicoche that no instructions had been given in terms of beginning reductions. When he was answering my questions earlier, it was obvious to me that he said that instructions had been given to department heads to begin an exercise where they would see where hiring fit in terms of the strategic plan.

So again, Mr. Speaker, it’s a bit complex. It’s a bit unsettling for me. I’d like the Premier to maybe explain exactly what instructions have been given to the departments.

Mr. Speaker, let’s not mix the words of one response with another. We know instructions have been given to departments to meet their targets. Instructions have not been given to departments — let’s separate that now; instructions have not been given to departments — to begin reductions April 1. We have not made that decision at this level. We haven’t brought those forward as part of a business plan as of yet. Until we get that level of approval, we can’t be going out and giving that direction to the public service.

What does happen as a normal course of business, for example, Mr. Speaker, is that when a program has been sunsetted already, when departments knew that their three-year funding was running out, whether it was part of a federal transfer or a program that a department may have initiated a number of years ago, then it’s normal business as we proceed. It’s not part of the reduction scenario or cost-saving measures that we’re taking as a government overall.

Mr. Speaker, I’m having a little bit of trouble understanding the logic where the government tells departments that they’re going to be okay hiring on a case-by-case basis in an effort to achieve reductions. We don’t have to wait until April 1st to figure that out; that happened last week.

That exercise is already happening. It’s at play in the government departments. The instruction was given by the government without consulting the Regular Members.

I’d like to again ask the Premier: what specific instructions have been given to the departments?

Mr. Speaker, I see the path this is going down: that as a new government, as Premier, we’ve not shared any information with Members, that we’ve been withholding information. I’ve taken a large number of steps to be as open as possible with Members, to share the direction we’re going in.

In fact, early in January I offered up the opportunity to see where we’ve looked at setting these targets. We’ve shared information. Is it complicated? Is it because the Member just disagrees with where we’re going? I’m not sure.

What we were trying to do is prevent the reverse. When we heard that departments were beginning to shut down positions and not hire, we hadn’t given a direction on a hiring freeze or anything of that nature, and that is not in place.

The policies are all still in place and being used for the jobs that are out there and being advertised. What we’ve asked for is an extra level of scrutiny, in a sense, with the deputy ministers as they’re doing their work to have a final look at that to ensure that we’re not going down a path that might six months later, when we come to our May/June budget session, end up laying off some employees that just were hired six months prior.

Mr. Speaker, that wasn’t the path I was going down, but the Premier said it himself. Whether the information is being shared or not — we could debate that for a long time. I have a differing view of things than the Premier does, obviously.

Again, I just wanted to ask the question: are we being clear and consistent with the instructions that are being given to the departments? Are all departments being treated equally on the instructions that are being given to them? Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, the result, as the Member has pointed out, of the additional process we’ve undertaken at this stage is to be clear, to be consistent with every department, and I believe that they are getting the message. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, about a year ago I raised the issue of the N.W.T. licence plate and how its tagline says, “Explore Canada’s Arctic.” My concern at the time with the Minister of the day was the fact that it’s not truly reflective of our Northwest Territories in present times. The good Minister of

the day had agreed with me, and it sounded like the department was moving forward full steam ahead on updating the licence plate with a suggestion I brought forward, “spectacular.ca.”

My question to the Minister of Transportation is: where is this project? Assuming that it’s still going forward, when can we see some work that’s been done on this project?

Mr. Speaker, the polar bear licence plate is internationally known and has played a significant role over the years in promoting the Northwest Territories. I’d like to thank the Member for being persistent on this issue and for the suggestion and working with this government in terms of changing our licence plate to “spectacular.” I’d like to advise the House and the Member that the N.W.T. Tourism group is working with the Department of ITI and the Department of Transportation in terms of promoting this licence plate, and it’s going through its process of establishing such a logo for the Northwest Territories.

I’m glad the Minister understands it clearly that I in no way am suggesting to change the shape of the licence plate; it’s only the tagline. My concern is that it’s not happening soon enough. The issue, I can clearly hear, has good buy-in, but it’s not moving fast enough.

My question really is: when can we see some results of this work? When can we expect to be able to see cars driving around the Northwest Territories that say “spectacular” on the back of them? When can we see that work?

I, too, would like to see the licence plate and the word “spectacular” on it. I will follow up on this issue with my department. I will ask the department to give me an update as to this, and I will pass it on to the Members of the House. If Mr. Hawkins would like further discussions, I’ll be happy to sit down with him. I’m also working closely with my colleague from ITI in terms of advancing this issue so that all people in the Northwest Territories can be proud to have this word on their licence plates.

Mr. Speaker, this only begs one more element to this combination. Obviously it’s nice to see a Minister working with a Member and hearing the cries from this side of the House — and hasn’t forgotten us, by the way. But I’d just like the reassurance from the Minister that he will include the N.W.T. Tourism Association in on this as well as, as he had mentioned, the Minister of ITI. Finally, would he make sure I’m included in some type of release when they do this? Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Member for the spectacular question.

Laughter.

I would ask my colleague that he and I would work on this very closely. We are working directly with N.W.T. Tourism. We’re all working on this issue here. Hopefully, we would make the fact of the announcements in terms of when we could unroll this licence plate out to the people of the Northwest Territories.

My question today is directed towards the Minister Responsible for Transportation.

The other day I talked about customer service and whatnot, and brought up an issue about driver’s licences and how they’re not accepted as ID, even though they are official ID when people want to get additional pieces of ID.

New examples have come to me since I made that statement. In one situation, a lady wanted to change her driver’s licence because she got married. She brought in a certified legal copy of her marriage certificate and was told it was not acceptable, that she needed to have her original marriage certificate. So off she went home. She got her official copy, brought it back, put it on the table. They took a photocopy, handed it back and said, “Thank you very much.” That photocopy is not worth the paper it’s printed on. The certified copy was far more legal and acceptable.

I’d like to ask the Minister Responsible for Transportation to commit to looking at their policies and procedures to ensure they aren’t creating redundancies, they aren’t creating extra barriers for people, and they’re streamlined and efficient, thereby saving money and whatnot.

Mr. Speaker, the issue the Member has raised, I will be looking into it. I will be asking the department.

I know there is lots of work that has been done by the department in terms of this issue here. I will ask the department to review its policies to look at the specific issue that Mr. Abernethy is bringing up here today. I will make a commitment that I would follow up with it as soon as possible and see where we can provide better service to our people in the North.

My questions also are for the Minister of Transportation today.

I had a constituent who had occasion to drive to Hay River the other day and reminded me when she got here when she asked about the Kakisa River Bridge and the sign there that says, “Slow down; five kilometres per hour.”

We obviously have a very serious problem with the Kakisa River Bridge. Unfortunately, we don’t have an opportunity for an ice crossing or a ferry on that particular river. It needs to be fixed. It is a piece of Territorial transportation infrastructure that is obviously in disrepair. I’m worried about big trucks slowing down in a snowstorm to get down to that five kilometres per hour and the traffic behind them. It’s danger.

I’d like to ask the Minister of Transportation: what is being done to address the problems at the Kakisa River Bridge?

Mr. Speaker, I thank the Member for raising this issue.

Mr. Speaker, the Kakisa River Bridge is in dire need of being replaced, and it is being looked at. It is an old bridge that shows some deteriorating structures to it. It is in the plans to replace that bridge.

We are asking drivers to slow down when they come to the bridge. It may be annoying to them, but they need to slow down to be safe on that bridge. I, for one, am fearful that a terrible accident may be in the waiting. I’ve asked my department. My colleagues here are all aware that this bridge is in dire need to be replaced as soon as possible.

Mr. Speaker, I’d like to ask the Minister of Transportation: what’s wrong with the bridge? Should we be worried even driving across it at five kilometres per hour? What is exactly wrong with the bridge that requires people to slow down to five kilometres per hour?

I’m just waiting for you to finish your consultation there.

What’s wrong with the bridge? Why do we have to slow down to five kilometres? Should we be worried about driving on it at even five kilometres per hour? What kind of assurance can the Minister offer to the public? What’s wrong with the bridge?

Mr.

Speaker, it’s a

precautionary measure that we ask of all public members, to slow down because of structural damages to the bridge, that they slow down when they cross the bridge at the Kakisa River.

Mr. Speaker, we ask people to slow down. If they don’t slow down and something unfortunate, an incident, took place, how serious is the bridge? This is a precautionary measure, I understand. If a big truck went over it and didn’t slow down, what could happen?

Mr. Speaker,

the

question is on all our infrastructure systems, on roads in the North here.

We’re asking as a precautionary measure for vehicles to slow down because there’s some structural damage that we need to have replaced at the Kakisa Bridge. Like any other, it’s not a fail-safe bridge, so we’re asking members of the public to slow down when they cross the bridge.

Final supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.

I’d like to ask the Minister: is he quite satisfied that the signage leading up to the bridge is adequate to communicate to people that they need to slow down? Has he seen the signage? Is it bright enough? Does it start back far enough? Is it sufficient?

Mr. Speaker, the bridge remains safe to the travelling public. The signage on the bridge is as much as we can do, and if we can, to do more. I’m satisfied that the signage that we have there, the message we have out for the public — to slow down when they cross the Kakisa Bridge — is there. We’ve been monitoring that traffic.

I myself have driven that road. I have crossed that bridge at five kilometres an hour. I myself am satisfied that all we can do now is up to the public to make wise choices, in terms of travelling all our roads in the N.W.T.

Mr.

Speaker, it has come to my

attention that there have been some tenders let in the Mackenzie Delta region. Yet some of these items haven’t even been approved by this House. In one case, it was deferred ’til the May-June session. Mr. Speaker, also part of those tendering documents called for materials to be delivered in 2009.

I’d like to ask the Premier: are we spending money in this fiscal year which hasn’t been budgeted for in this House? Also, why is it that we are allocating contracts for next year, which is April 2009, when we’re not even to April 2008 yet?

Mr.

Speaker, in our

processes, we are beginning our budgeting cycle. Normally, budgets would be brought in place and voted in this House for April 1 and beyond. We’re coming forward with an interim process, and then May-June is the main sitting, as we’ve worked out with Members.

Some departments, as stated in the House yesterday, have come forward with a larger part because of some contracting issues, and those may be incorporated. But without the specifics, I am unable to give a full response.

Mr.

Speaker, the information was

provided to the Government House Leader this morning, when I had a discussion with him on this matter.

Again, as a government we are going through a deficit-cutting process here. Yet the departments are spending money for the following year, when we are telling people we have to cut our budget and we have to cut programs and services. But the departments continue to put out contracts for services they don’t need, almost, in some cases, two years down the road.

I’d like to ask the Premier: could he look into this situation? If this is a trend of the departments, I think that we should maybe put the brakes on that in light of the deficit situation we find ourselves in.

Again, once I have the details of those specific issues that the Member has raised, I would be willing to look into that and get the proper information to see why these are happening, if they’re tied to previous monies.

Everything we put out there, there’s a caveat that if departments are going forward, it’s based on approvals of this Assembly for new dollars. But I would gladly sit down with the Member and get that detail.

The time for question period has expired; however, I will allow the Member a supplementary question.

Mr. Speaker, also in one case the project was deferred until we went through a line item with the Premier in regard to an appropriation in which certain items were withdrawn from the budget because they weren’t classified as urgent.

I’d just like to ask the Premier: if they’re not classified as urgent, why are government departments putting out contracts, and yet we’re deferring projects in our budget process?

Mr. Speaker, we’ll be — later on today, I hope, and throughout the rest of our session — dealing with specifics as we proceed and looking for approvals from this Assembly.

Again, for the specific areas, I need to get the details and actually sit down with the Member and see where things are.

Final, short supplementary, Mr. Krutko.

Mr. Speaker, the construction industry gets frustrated with government contracts when they put out tenders. They put them on the bind for one or two years where they have to hold these products, or they deliver the products a year or two in advance, yet they have to front the money.

I’d just like to ask the Premier if he can maybe look at how we’re putting out contracts and work with either the Construction Association or the private industry to see if there are ways that we can do this better by way of our tendering process.

Mr. Speaker, we are in fact looking at the whole area of our contracting practices, the timing we let out our contracts, our processes that are incorporated to date. We’ve instructed a committee led by Minister Michael McLeod to review this process and come back with recommendations on the area of contracting and existing practices. Thank you.

The time for question period has expired.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to seek unanimous consent to return to item 5, recognition of visitors in the gallery.

Unanimous consent granted.