Thank you, Madam Chair. It really was within a fairly close period. If I am not mistaken, May of 2018 would have been the cut-off for including in the previous fiscal year's business planning process, and the contract here was signed not until quite some time later, in June of this year, so it did not make the cut-off in terms of being included. It has been included going forward, so it is part of the main estimates that are now before the House for 2021, and there will not be another supplementary appropriation, obviously, for the pharmacy systems going forward. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So, if I understand correctly, the cut-off for items for the main estimates is in May for the following March. Is that correct? Thank you.

Thank you, Member for Yellowknife Centre. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Minister. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Sorry, each time, I get a little more confused. You said the cut-off was May of 2018 for the 2019 budget, so I don't understand how the election has anything to do with that. Could you clarify that, please?

Thank you, Member for Yellowknife Centre. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Sorry, I realize I am not being clear. The O and M costs that were for 2019-2020 would have had to be included in May of 2018 for the 2019-2020 business planning, and, in this case, the contract was not until June of 2019, so it would not have made its way into the 2019 business planning. I think the point with the election is that any flexibility that there might have been in terms of a supplementary would have interrupted. It would not have made its way into the business planning process, as far as I can understand, under how that system would have been working at the time or given the timing that it was under at the time. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Yes. I will just make a comment based on what I understand here, and that is that we need to have almost a year's lead time to get something into the budgets. My comment is that I realize the government works slowly. I have been here long enough now to understand that, but I would really encourage the Finance Minister to look for ways to make budgeting more responsive to events as they unfold. I mean, okay, so this could not have reasonably been foreseen, but then later on we are going to talk about all of the utilities for the hospital. There seems to be a different threshold between what is urgent and what is not, and there seems to be a lot of leeway in what has to come through the regular business cycle and what just gets put in at the last minute because it's considered urgent. If she can rationalize this system so that we can better understand it, I think that would be very helpful. That is everything. Thank you.

Thank you, Member for Yellowknife Centre. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. First of all, I am sorry. I was getting the dates wrong in my head initially. I appreciate that the Member had me clarify that. I am sympathetic to the challenges in terms of the length that it takes to prepare the full year's estimates. It is a full-year process, and I certainly have been making an effort in just the last couple of months to explain that full-year process as much as possible to the House and in the public. I'll continue to make that effort because, to a certain degree, in order to go through a business planning process, it is going to be starting this spring for the 2021-2022 year. It does happen several months in advance, six or more months in advance. It doesn't make it necessarily very responsive, but there are ways throughout that process, before they're finalized, to impact on what is actually in the business plans and impact what is ultimately in the main estimates, certainly, at least until the end of the calendar year. A better understanding of that by the public, and better understanding of it by all of the Members, will hopefully be helpful, and as far as making it more expensive more generally, the ability to see the business planning over four years should also, hopefully, make it more responsive to things that are on the horizon in the near future, even if not necessarily in the few months. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister of Finance. Member for Frame Lake.

Thanks, Madam Chair. I didn't know I had my hand up, but I'm happy to get in the queue. A couple of questions, if I can. I want to go back to the pharmacy information system at Stanton. If Stanton goes ahead and the changes are not made in Hay River and Inuvik, how compatible are all those systems going to be, and will patients still be able to get properly prescribed medications, if they are moving back and forth between these different hospitals? Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. Minister of finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. There are still the online record-keeping systems within Health, so I would suggest that there is no doubt that patient care will still be maintained overall. Patient care is going to be a priority. Again, records of the patients are still kept electronically. The ability of the pharmacy systems to speak to one another, I'm not sure that that is necessarily the intent of the changeover in the system, the technical system. It's really a matter of managing it at least within those various entities. The Department of Health is actively working to develop a proposal, I believe, within the next fiscal year. I may be incorrect, but I think that it's within the next fiscal year that there is a proposal coming forward to the business planning process to see that the other two hospitals are also on the same system.

Thank you, Minister. Member for Frame Lake.

Thanks, Madam Chair. Okay, I can accept most of what the Minister has said. I am still worried, if you have two different or three different pharmacy systems at three different hospitals, that's probably going to lead to some problems at one point.

I want to go down the page, though, to the $350,000 to provide funding for costs associated with maintaining temporary operations at the old hospital in Hay River. Can somebody explain what that's all about? Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Sorry, Madam Chair, the Member indicated $350,000. Is it $338,000? Is this the item, Madam Chair? My apologies. I had my binder covering the line item, but I see it now at $350,000. Yes, so Madam Chair, this is to support the fact that there needs to be work done to house the non-health services; social services, public health, environmental health, community counselling, those services are not within the new health centre. They were in the old facility, and there is some work that needs to be done in terms of maintaining that facility. There is currently the $350,000 there to support some positions for housekeeping, ongoing engineering, and work to be done in terms of roof leaks at that old facility where those particular services are being housed. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister. Member for Frame Lake.

Thanks, Madam Chair. Can someone tell me when the old hospital is scheduled for demolition? Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. Minister of Finance.