Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I want the House to note that Jack Bird, was the first and only native to be nationally certified in Canada. Incidentally, the only other native was from the NWT, Fred Lepine, from Hay River. In 1989, Jack Bird moved a step ahead in his career and was able to achieve the assistant manager of air operations until Wednesday, where his

responsibilities, including supervision of the air attack officers, had been questionable.

In addition, Mr. Speaker, another air attack officer, Mr. Jeff Austin, who is a certified air attack officer with 16 seasons of active fire suppression, who also lives in Hay River also has been given notice. I will be seeking clarification from the Minister responsible for the Financial Management Board with regard to these two lay-off notices, particularly with respect to what the Premier had announced in this House yesterday. I will also be requesting further clarification from the Minister of Public Works and Safety. I did invite Mr. Jack Bird, Jeff Austin to this House today. I will be pleased, at a later point in time, to recognize them, along with their regional vice-president, Mr. Keith Dowling. Thank you.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As the Member for Thebacha, my constituents are very concerned about the way we address fires, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, many northern residents at times, I believe, don't fully understand the responsibility of an air attack officer, better known as Bird Dog officers. I'm going to attempt to explain some of the working conditions they have to work under.

When the Bird Dog aircraft flies ahead of DC-4s or CL-215s, they assist the pilots in fire attacks. For example, when the Bird Dog is five minutes back from the fire, the air attack officer will contact the fire boss and any aircraft in the area to notify them that the Bird Dogs are now controlling the fire space and to start making arrangements to clear the area for the tanker group. The air attack officer is responsible for the safe operation of the air tanker group and, as such, may remove crews from the fire if he deems it hazardous to life or property, either people on the ground or in aircraft.

Mr. Speaker, the air attack officer works under very difficult conditions. Remember, smoke could be very dense from a fire; and, there could be very hot conditions which create hot air pockets so planes could lose altitude very quickly. There are, at times, turbulence, prevailing winds, down drafts and lack of visibility, no doubt from the amount of smoke.

Mr. Speaker, I was saddened to hear that there were lay-off notices given to two air attack officers, including the assistant air operator, Jack Bird. Jack Bird was raised in Hay River and also Yellowknife. I recall, quite vividly, going to school with Jack here in Yellowknife. Jack Bird started in Inuvik in 1974 as a firefighter. He completed training in resource management in February 1975. He was based in Yellowknife until 1980 as an assistant resource management officer, where he was responsible for the supervision of ground crews. He also has worked as an air attack officer since 1980. He has been on loan to most agencies in Canada, the United States and in Mexico.

Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to continue with my statement.

Mr. Chairman, I support the motion, taking into account the clarification by the mover. I will indicate to the Minister that I do have a problem with his attempt to amend section 126, under the role of the Minister, because it's my understanding that this authority will be delegated to the

DEA and not as the responsibility of the Minister. They will determine the hours. What we're doing, I believe, is setting a framework for the number of instructional days which should be conducted. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I think one of the problems the committee had and why they developed this motion -- and I agree with it, I just find the clarity is not there about whether it includes professional development days or not -- is that if you're looking at instructional hours, then who is going to determine how many hours there will be per school day? Whose responsibility is that, and how is a register developed to reflect that? Is it the responsibility of the CEC? Is it the responsibility of the director of education through the divisional boards? Who determines how many hours? I think they wanted some assurance that we can give comfort to parents when they send their children to school that the number of instructional days is this amount: 190 days, in addition to five professional days. So that's the purpose of this clause. I agree with the intent of the clause, but I think the idea of just indicating so many hours is not giving comfort to the parents of the Northwest Territories, in sending their children to school, because it does not determine who is going to be responsible for monitoring those hours. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, the concern I have about this minimum of 190 days is it doesn't explicitly state whether that includes the professional development days or not. It could be interpreted as possibly 185. Professional days could be interpreted as instructional days, and I would feel more comfortable if they could indicate whether this includes or does not include professional development days.

I believe now, Mr. Chairman, the requirement is 195 days which includes five professional development days. I find that clarity is of importance with respect to this clause. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to table two documents. I wish to table Tabled Document 142-12(7), a letter addressed to Mr. Keith Dowling, who's the regional vice-president of the Union of Northern Workers, from Alex Carson, who's the Alberta district manager with respect to the labour program.

I also wish to table Tabled Document 143-12(7), a letter addressed to myself on Minister of Renewable Resources letterhead, signed for Mr. Morin. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, would the Minister be willing to table a map of the current town boundary which his department has indicated with regard to the April 1994 decision, with respect to indicating the area of the town boundary? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Just for further clarification, if I could ask the Minister; the current town boundary that was reduced in April 1994, goes up to Bell Rock. It would be the east side of Highway 5, including the nuisance grounds and the Bell Rock area. I believe the 1994 boundary excluded the quarry, and also excluded the highway section which is not considered to be the town boundary. Am I correct? Can I asked the Minister whether it's correct to state that the town boundary would only be up to Bell Rock, taking in the nuisance grounds, and not to go beyond the Bell Rock area, which now the boundary does go beyond? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the Minister for that financial support to the community. I'm sure they will appreciate it.

Mr. Speaker, can I ask the Minister to confirm that the town boundary would include the Bell Rock area, and that the boundary will not go to the pre-1982 boundary line? Is the town boundary now to the Bell Rock area and not to its current line?