Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to direct a question to the Minister of Finance. A while ago, I asked for an update on the progress of the NWTTA negotiations. I wonder if there is anything further on that. Could the Minister update the House?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At the end of the three months, if the communities aren't ready, what will happen then? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question will be directed to the Minister of MACA. We've heard many things about the changes that are happening, and I would just like to know what the department is doing with the water/sewer subsidy. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So this Canadian Energy Research Institute and the amount here of $25,000 is for a subscription to their information, basically.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Is there anywhere else in the details here on the area of alternative energy to do with this community energy advisor? Where does that fall within this area?

Thank you, Madam Chair. My question for the Minister is on the Canadian Energy Research Institute. Is this part of this alternative energy program?

Thank you, Madam Chair. It is interesting to see that there is going to be an increase in the mineral exploration in the NWT in 1996. We can take advantage of this without sacrificing environment or culture and traditional lifestyles. I think that is positive. It is a message we can work on getting out. I am very interested in the department and the area of energy conservation and utilization of alternative energy sources, with the position of a new energy advisor. I will be dealing with it later on in detail, but I would be very interested in seeing what the plans are here. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have been listening, with interest, over the past week, as my colleagues rise and give their ideas on the budget speech. Today I would like to share my own thoughts on the budget we will be looking at over the next two weeks.

Six months ago when we heard about the deficit as new MLAs, I was among the Members who wanted to balance the budget this year. Like others in the House, I personally try not to spend more than I have, and I would like to take the same approach with our public funds. Today I still believe we should be trying to balance the budget as soon as we can. However, balancing the budget has proven to be a huge and very difficult task. We have spent the last six months trying to find ways of living within our means. Through the standing committees, we have looked at every department, board and corporation. We have also been talking to our constituents, getting ideas and suggestions on what we can do to fix this problem.

One way to reduce your costs is to put projects off for a year or more. The government has done this, putting capital projects and new initiatives on the shelf. This will mean a few more classes with rooms designed for other uses; another year on a bad road in need of major maintenance; another season of makeshift arrangements for the barges at sealift. Some of my colleagues have suggested that we do more than this. There may be a few more areas where that could be done. If there are, I could support this. The less debt we accumulate, the more we can focus our money on programs rather than paying interest.

However, putting things off is only a temporary solution. At some point, most of the deferred projects will have to be done. In order to balance our budget, this government has to look at a whole new way of serving the people. We all came to the job with ideas from our constituents of how to do that. However, as much as we want to, we can't change things overnight. If we want those changes to be meaningful and effective, we want to make changes that will work. This means planning and knowing how we will make it happen before we go running off in different directions. This means relying on the advice of community residents and government staff who have experience with the programs and know what has been tried, what works and what doesn't work, and where there are areas for real change, not just window dressing.

Almost 60 per cent of our budget is spent on social programs. This isn't an area where we can just decide to put things off. We can't just say fine, we won't offer grade 2 next year; we're sorry, there will be no support for our elders. This is an area where we have to look at the options and be sure before we make decisions that would affect the people in a negative way. It isn't acceptable to me to do things like making hasty decisions to reduce social assistance, without knowing the impact of that change on the people who rely on the program. We can't just cut pieces out of the student support programs without considering how this will affect our students' abilities to become productive, contributing members of our society as adults.

As much as I wanted to see a balanced budget this year, I realized it would mean huge, huge cuts to social programs. As a territory, we are struggling with social issues. We need our people to be healthy, both mentally and physically, so they can take more control of their own lives. We need our people to be educated so they can be more self-reliant and help us create a strong economy. I strongly believe that investing in programs which help people feel better about themselves and which encourage people to take more responsibility for themselves and their families is crucial to reducing our social program costs in years to come. For example, I would rather pay for early intervention for a learning-disabled bled child now, knowing that the intervention will mean that the child has a better chance of making it through the school system, staying off welfare and out of the courts. Rather than just paying for the results of alcohol abuse -FAS/FAE children who need assistance for life; higher health costs for those with bodies ravaged by booze; higher correction costs from alcohol-related crimes -- I would support substance abuse programs to help people break the cycle now.

Many things in this budget focus on community empowerment. People across the North have been asking the government for years for more authority over the things that happen in their communities. The government is ready to help them do that.

The other thing people have been saying is that if money went to the communities, they could run the same programs for less money. I hope they are right. Our government resources are limited, the pie is only so big and each community will only get its own slice. As we transfer programs to communities, they will need to be creative in delivering those programs.

While there has to be lots of room for community direction in how programs are run, we also have an obligation to all residents to ensure that a consistent standard of programs and services is available, regardless of who is running the programs. It will take time to find the balance so when we make changes, there aren't a lot of cracks for people to slip through; particularly, in the social program, education, health, social services, justice and housing. We have to look at making our programs more effective in the communities. The community wellness strategy will help us do that. Through the strategy, individual communities will have the responsibility to determine approaches to dealing with those social concerns in a way that works for that community.

I am very concerned about fairness. The Minister of Finance and the Premier have talked about all northerners having to share in reductions of this budget. As we review the changes and reductions, I want to make sure there is fairness for all northerners. Salaries and benefits account for a large chunk of the government's budget. We have addressed this as part of our reductions. As MLAs, we have tried to lead the way by taking a cut in our salary and reducing our pensions by more than half. The government's senior and excluded staff have also taken wage and benefits reductions.

Mr. Speaker, as the Member for Inuvik, I've watched, with concern, the tendency to make bigger cuts in regional centres. True, there are more employees in these communities so there will be more reductions; however, these reductions should be consistent with the proportion of the population that lives in those larger communities.

Mr. Speaker, in my constituency, people are concerned about social programs. They are concerned about the lack of jobs. They want their children and grandchildren to grow up healthy and happy. When I look at the budget this government has introduced, I think it will help all northerners work towards a brighter future. That doesn't mean it will be easy. Northerners have become accustomed to a broad range of programs and services. We can't afford to keep these programs at their existing levels unless we dramatically change the way we do business. In the next few years, it will be difficult as we learn to live with what we can afford.

No, we aren't going to balance the budget this year; yes, I am disappointed. However, I also think the budget we are looking at is the best effort we could make at this time. We are making significant efforts to control our deficit without taking action which will be devastating to our constituents. Like my colleague, the Minister of Finance, I believe balancing the budget in one year would have required Draconian measures. Next year, we'll be looking back at the ways to get a balanced budget. This budget will give us the time to make sure we have a new and more effective way of doing business.

Mr. Speaker, when I put my name to paper during the election process, I said it's time to change the way government does business. Thank you.

--- Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to know what effect land reform will have on the land claims process in the western NWT.