Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 93(4) and have Committee Report 3-13(3) of the Standing Committee on Resource Management and Development moved into Committee of the Whole for today.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is my pleasure to present the report of the Standing Committee on Resource Management and Development on its review of the 1996-97 main estimates and departmental business plans. I would like to begin with an overview of the process.

Since being elected in mid-October of 1995, Members of the Legislative Assembly have been developing a new and more effective way of conducting business. This new process started with revising the standing committee system that allows Members to review department business plans and budgets. The Standing Committee on Resource Management and Development was charged with the following mandate: review legislation and policy proposals, multi-year business plans and budgets, bills, boards and agencies, public accounts and division issues;review departmental performance; and, considering any other matters referred by the House for the departments of Economic Development and Tourism; Renewable Resources; Transportation; Safety and Public Services; and, Energy, Mines and Petroleum Resources.

Given the difficult financial problems facing the government, the first order of business was to review departmental three year business plans. As a result of the initial review in January 1996, and subsequent reviews in February and April 1996, a number of cost-saving measures were recommended by the standing committee and incorporated into the 1996-97 main estimates. The committee also approved a number of reductions proposed by the departments. This approach facilitated total reductions to this envelope's budget of more than $17 million and 51 person years.

Normally, the budget process would begin in the fall and be finalized during the spring months. Given the fall election, however, Members and government departments were forced to review both multi-year plans and budgets at the same time. This constraining factor did not allow Members to review, in detail, every element within each department.

Members do, however, look forward to the fall of 1996 when the review of the 1997-98 budget begins. Members hope, at that time, a more detailed review of departmental budgets can be accomplished. A true consensus government system demands that all partners are involved in the decision-making process. As a result, a recurring theme of committee involvement is evident throughout this report. Members of the Standing Committee on Resource Management and Development are encouraged by the initial steps taken by the government, and hope this trend continues in the future.

Motion To Receive Committee Report 3-13(3) And Move To Committee Of The Whole, Carried

Mr. Speaker, that concludes the report of the Standing Committee on Resource Management and Development. Therefore, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, that the report of the Standing Committee on Resource Management and Development of the review of the 1996-97 main estimates be received by the Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole.

Will the Minister bring anything that does come out in the way of a final decision back to this House?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With regard to having input, I do not believe that, as a Member of this House, I have seen my role as having input into the process. I would like the Minister to now state if he will bring any final decision before it's made, back to this House so we can have input into that decision.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Honourable Kelvin Ng with regard to the cutbacks that are presently under way at Stanton Regional Hospital. As you know, the Stanton Hospital doesn't only serve Yellowknife, it is a territorial hospital that serves a lot of the outlying communities. My concern is in relation to the areas where there are individuals who are suffering from mental illness or in the long-term care unit who can't speak for

themselves because of the state they may be in. The areas hardest hit in cutbacks at the hospital seem to be in the area of care. We have to seriously look at that area because it does affect the outlying communities where we do have problems with suicides, at cetera, and the day-to-day stress that comes with living in these communities. We have to find a mechanism that allows the individual communities or regional hospital authorities to have input into that decision. It can't be done at the senior level only.

Also, as Members of this House, we have an obligation to those people who can't speak for themselves. Will the Minister allow the House and people in the outlying regions to be involved in any cutbacks that happen at that hospital, especially in the areas of mental health, the physio department and also the long-term care ward?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In this day and age, when we are talking about working together and when it comes to aboriginal issues, of being able to work along with the other aboriginal groups for delivery of programs and services, it sort of feels like we're going back in time where we're isolating aboriginal groups based on identity. I feel that this government should do away with that practice, especially when it comes to cost savings. It will be a lot cheaper for government to put someone into a program

which is 20 miles south of a community, than sending them to Hay River which is almost 1,000 miles away.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If that is the case, why are Metis people, especially in my community of Fort McPherson, not allowed to partake in the Tl'oondih Healing Camp, which is 20 miles south of the community. They are sent elsewhere. Why is that?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Health and Social Services, Mr. Ng. I would like to know what the practice of this

government is when it comes to delivering programs -- such as alcohol and drug programs -- to non-status, status, Metis and non-native people.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Supplementary with regard to the individual who is going in there. Could I be informed of any reports that do come out on the status of it and also the possibility of looking at an alternative way of resolving this so it does not happen again?