Finally, Mr. Speaker, a reply to Mr. Arvaluk's question asked on December 11th. Mr. Arvaluk asked about the use of simultaneous translation in court proceedings.

In court proceedings, where the court does not understand or speak the language of the accused, it is the accused's right to have the assistance of an interpreter. If the accused is the only one in the courtroom who requires an interpreter, she or he is usually provided with simultaneous interpretation, often by an interpreter whispering to him or her. The Official Languages Act was amended in 1990 to allow for simultaneous interpretation for the audience as well, so now portable interpreting equipment is used in many court sittings so the public and other parties can listen to the proceedings in their own language.

As for the interpretation of testimony of witnesses and of any information aimed at jurors, this must be done using consecutive interpretation since the interpreter must have control of the flow of information. The interpreter must be able to stop the speaker to ask for clarification of legal terms, ask for repetition of things that are not heard properly, and must have time to completely and accurately interpret. In simultaneous translation some details may be missed and the order of words may come out of proper sequence since the word order is so different between aboriginal languages and English. All of these considerations make simultaneous interpretation unsuitable for testimony and information aimed at the jury where accuracy and very careful interpretation is critical. It is my understanding that consecutive interpretation is almost always used in courts in Canada for these same reasons.

It is the decision of the judge whether or not interpretation will be provided, and the type of interpretation which will be provided, but they are aware of the issues and I think are in agreement with the emphasis on accuracy rather than on speeding up the trial where accuracy could be sacrificed. Simultaneous interpretation of testimony has only been tried in a few places in the South where there are interpreters who have a long history of experience in legal interpreting and in very specific areas of the law. The Department of Justice has this year funded the first specialized legal interpreter position. Perhaps in the future, when there are interpreters who specialize in law for a long period of time, simultaneous interpretation of testimony will be tried in the Northwest Territories. Qujannamiik.

This is a response to a question asked by Mr. Koe on December 12th. To respond to the Member's question in brief, the answer is no, no other communities are affected by the proposed rate increase.

Unlike most municipal water/sewage services in the NWT, the Inuvik utilidor system is operated by the NWT Power Corporation on behalf of the GNWT, the federal government and the town. So under the present operating arrangement the Minister of MACA approves water/sewer rates for Inuvik.

Just prior to leaving office, my predecessor, the Hon. Tom Butters, approved a rate increase for private users from 20 cents to 22 cents per litre. This generally equates to an increase from $50 to $55 for private residences. This rate is significantly less than the current economic rate of 52 cents per litre. The object is to bring the rates paid by private residential users in Inuvik into line with the subsidized rates charged in hamlets and the subsidized rates charged in the tax based municipalities of Iqaluit and Norman Wells.

While the proposed rate increase was discussed at a recent meeting of the Inuvik Town Council, the NWT Power Corporation has not yet officially notified residents. Corporation officials have advised the department that the rate increase will come into effect April 1, 1992, and will be advising their consumers accordingly.

We are trying to make sure Mr. Gargan is going to be coming to those games, Mr. Speaker.

This is in response to a question Mr. Gargan asked on December 11th. I undertook to provide the Member with more detail for selecting the host community for the Arctic Winter Games and particular details of the hosting of the 1994 Arctic Winter Games by Slave Lake in northern Alberta.

As I mentioned in my initial reply to the Member's question, the selection of host sites for the Arctic Winter Games is the responsibility of the Arctic Winter Games Corporation. The corporation is legally registered under the laws of Canada and the United States and has been given the authority by the Government of the NWT, Government of Yukon and the State of Alaska, to direct and guide the development of the games.

The Arctic Winter Games are hosted on cycle, with each participating jurisdiction invited to host the games once in the cycle. The long standing cycle involved the three original participating jurisdictions: Northwest Territories, Yukon and Alaska.

Northern Alberta became a participating member of the Arctic Winter Games in 1986 and in this fact I was in error the other day in stating Alberta first participated in 1990. With their continued participation, Alberta then became eligible to host a future Arctic Winter Games.

In 1988 the Arctic Winter Games Corporation convened a meeting of Ministers responsible for the Arctic Winter Games and Alaskan senators in Dawson City, Yukon to discuss the future of the games. The political direction given included asking northern Alberta to move to full team size and a request that they host the event in 1996. The 1996 games were offered to northern Alberta to host as it came at the end of the cycle of the three original jurisdictions; NWT 1990, Yukon 1992 and Alaska 1994.

Subsequently northern Alberta agreed to host the Arctic Winter Games in 1994 when Alaska notified the Arctic Winter Games Corporation it would not be able to host the 1994 games and requested a change in the cycle to be able to host in 1996.

The actual process to select a host community from a particular jurisdiction is quite formal. Some members may recall the friendly bidding competition between Yellowknife and Hay River for the 1990 Arctic Winter Games.

Three years in advance of a set of games the corporation, working with the government of the host jurisdiction, solicits applications from communities interested in hosting the games. The applications are examined by the board members and if necessary community visits are arranged to review facilities and discuss, with the interested communities, their bids. Approximately two and one-half years before a set of games, the corporation makes the decision as to which community has won the bid and a public announcement is made.

Early in 1991 the Alberta government, on behalf of the Arctic Winter Games Corporation, asked all municipal jurisdictions north of the 55th parallel, the agreed area from which Alberta would draw athletes, if they were interested in hosting the 1994 games. Interest was received from Peace River, Fort McMurray and Slave Lake. Detailed bid packages were submitted to the corporation in August 1991. The corporation board members visited each community in early September and made a decision to award the games to Slave Lake on September 23, 1991. A contract has been signed with the community and the Alberta government has committed one million dollars over three years to assist with the event.

Although all bids received were of high quality, the community of Slave Lake was by far the most impressive in their understanding of the intent and philosophy of the event, the organization and the financing involved and their desire to host the best games yet. Organization is well under way with preparations for the 1994 games. Thank you.

Thank you. I have a return to an oral question asked by Mrs. Marie-Jewell on December 9, 1991, on the status of the family law review committee. Mr. Speaker, Mrs. Marie-Jewell asked about the status of the family law review committee work. To give a brief background, the family law review began in 1989 based on a proposal from a combination of community groups. A working group was appointed with representation from the major aboriginal organizations, the legal profession, the Advisory Council on the Status of Women and the Departments of Social Services and Justice.

A legal consultant was retained on contract to do research and to write the report on the advice and direction of the members of the working group. When the contractor did not finish the work as expected, the working group met last March and decided to complete it by having individual working group members assume responsibility for writing portions of the report. It was hoped that their work would be finished by now, but this has not proved possible.

The chairperson, who was an employee with the Department of Justice, is now working with the Department of Social Services. She has continued as chairperson and will see the project through to the reporting stage.

It has been the policy of the government to avoid interference with the work of the committee, but to encourage and facilitate its progress. The task they have undertaken is enormous and we are confident that a valuable report will be received.

I understand that the bulk of the work is near completion. When the chairperson receives all the reports she will edit the work and compile it in a recommendation format. It will then have to be distributed to all the working group members. When their comments have been received some revision of the report may be necessary. After that it will be presented to the Minister of Social Services and myself. This will take place over the next few weeks and will be complete before the end of the fiscal year.

Mr. Speaker, today I will be providing further information on the contracts involved in this project in a response to the written question which was asked by Mrs. Marie-Jewell on December 9th.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a few, if I may.

I wonder if I could seek the indulgence of the House to go back to tabling of documents.

Point of order.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker and honourable Members. I would therefore then move, seconded by the honourable Member for Yellowknife South, that Bill 3, An Act to Amend the Adoption of the French Version of Statutes and Statutory Instruments Act, be read for the third time. Thank you.