Mr. Speaker, I am very familiar with the Workers' Compensation Board; I sat on it for eight years and the staff were more interested in going to Calgary than they were in going to Rankin Inlet. I am sure the Minister recalls that last week this House endorsed a recommendation to the standing committee on agencies, boards and commissions to freeze all board appointments until after March 31. Mr. Speaker, will the Minister responsible for the Workers' Compensation Board ensure that no further appointments are made, including the reappointment of the chairman of the board, until the issue of regional representation on the board can be adequately addressed?

Clearly the Workers' Compensation Board is one of the most highly centralized Yellowknife-based agencies in the NWT. The composition of this board provides indisputable evidence of such. Is the Minister willing to undertake the preparation of a decentralization plan for the administration of and the delivery of services by the Workers' Compensation Board?

---Applause

Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister responsible for the Workers' Compensation Board. I was dismayed yesterday to see the response the government provided to the question posed by my honourable colleague for Deh Cho regarding the composition of the Workers' Compensation Board. There are five members of the Workers' Compensation Board all from Yellowknife. Would the Minister advise the House whether this government favours the continuation of a Yellowknife-only Workers' Compensation Board?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a few brief comments to make on behalf of the committee with regard to the Borrowing Authorization Act.

The committee has concerns about the manner in which this bill was presented to the committee. The committee received a letter from the Minister of Finance on December 4, 1991, stating his intention of bringing this bill to the committee for consideration prior to this session. The committee reviewed this letter during its meeting on December 5th. Although we were concerned with the very short notice, the committee had several concerns about the intention of this legislation as set out in the letter. In essence, it would have given the government authority to borrow up to the limit the federal government has set for us pursuant to the Northwest Territories Act. This limit increases annually; $310 million for the current year; $350 million for 1992-93; $375 million for 1993-94; and $400 million for 1994-95. The government has already borrowed $200 million towards this limit.

The committee has strong objections to granting this authority without further legislative review, so the Minister agreed to withdraw this provision of the bill.

The committee received the bill itself on December 10th. The committee was pleased to see that the Minister sent the bill that would allow the government to borrow a specific amount -- some $65 million. The Minister informed the committee that this is the amount needed to cover the expected working capital shortfall that the government will have this year. The committee is concerned about this shortfall; however, we recognize that this is a fiscal situation that the current cabinet and finance Minister inherited and must now deal with.

It is the committee's opinion that borrowing money to pay our way is a frightening trend and is far from ideal. If we continue on this course, we will be in much the same position as governments in the South in the very near future.

Bills requesting further increases to the government's borrowing authority will not be received with much enthusiasm by the committee in the future. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

For the record, Mr. Chairman, could I ask if this partial offset recovery from the federal government is also under dispute?

I just want, Mr. Chairman, to reinforce what Mr. Zoe said. While on paper, for the benefit of all Members, it indicates an offset estimate of $2,448,000, in fact some of that money could end up being a contingent liability and adding to the already $40 million situation, should the decision come down on the wrong side of the ledger. Am I correct, Mr. Pollard?

Mr. Speaker, in accordance with the terms of reference, the standing committee on finance has met several times during this session. We are pleased to provide the House with a summary of our discussions. The committee agreed to allow the chairperson and deputy chairperson to review the staffing needs of the committee over the next four years and provide recommendations on whom the committee should hire.

Preliminary discussions were held on the priorities and directions of the committee. The committee has agreed to hold a workshop in the new year to set definitive priorities and objectives and to identify areas of concern that the committee will focus on over the next four years. After we have had this workshop, we will report at the appropriate time.

The committee was informed that a request had been forwarded to the Government Leader asking that ordinary Members be consulted in the capital planning process. The committee fully supports the wishes of ordinary Members to have meaningful input into the formulation of the capital budget and recommends that the Executive Council consult with all ordinary Members during the capital planning process to ensure that the needs of all regions are fairly represented.

The committee also met with the Minister of Finance and his staff on several occasions to discuss a variety of matters. The Minister provided the committee with informative briefings on the fiscal framework of the GNWT and the "Strength at Two Levels" report. New Members were provided with a briefing on the budget process and it is hoped that a further briefing on the formula financing agreement will be provided in the near future.

The committee and the Minister of Finance also discussed the timing of the 1992-93 budget in some detail. The traditional time for the standing committee's review of the budget documents is November and December. This timetable has already been pre-empted because it is an election year and there were changes in government. Given the difficult economic times we face, the Minister requested this review be delayed even further to allow sufficient time to develop a new budget.

The committee recognizes the problems facing the Minister and the new Executive Council in developing and introducing a new budget. The committee wished to balance the Executive Council's need for time to do a proper job in the development of the budget and the need to ensure that the budget be brought before the committee and the House in time for full and comprehensive review.

The committee has tentatively agreed to review the 1992-93 capital budget at the end of January and the 1992-93 operations and maintenance budget in early June, subject to approval of the House.

The committee reviewed the Supplementary Appropriation Act, No. 2, 1991-92 and the Borrowing Authorization Act during its meetings. The committee was particularly concerned about the lack of time it had to review these bills. They were received by the committee only two days prior to its meetings. In future the committee will expect these bills to be received in ample time to conduct a full and comprehensive review. It is hoped that the new legislative process will ensure that this occurs.

Mr. Speaker, the committee appreciates the patience that our colleagues have displayed in the recent weeks, in particular myself. All but two of our Members are new to this House and we are only beginning to understand the full extent of our responsibilities. We look forward to meeting the challenges of our responsibilities to ensure the sound financial management of this government.

Motion To Adopt Committee Report 4-12(1): Report Of The Standing Committee On Finance, Carried

I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Brian Lewis, that the report of the standing committee on finance be received and adopted. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

My question is to the Minister of Finance. Would the Minister consider providing the standing committee on finance with a full financial briefing on the savings from the 90-day restraint measure prior to the opening of the House on February 12th?

Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Government Leader. Given the need to delegate and streamline greater decision making at the regional level, which I assume also means at the departmental level, and given that during the territorial leadership selection process when Ms. Cournoyea was a candidate seeking our support for the position of Government Leader, my colleague for Baffin Central, Ms. Mike, asked her to restructure the government organization so that regional superintendents and directors would have more spending authority at the regional level, my question to the

Government Leader is, would the Government Leader give consideration to increasing the current levels of spending to the regional administration at the regional level? If the answer is yes, when? Is that two questions?