Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In short, we are seeking clarity and consistency. With a government that has priorities all over the map, I want to say at the end of my term, I was part of a government that listened, then acted and achieved results on an issue that is of real importance to all northerners. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Recognizing the time I will drop my fourth question and just ask a yes or no question to the Premier. Mr. Speaker, would the Premier be able to answer yes or no, clearly and for everyone's benefit? Would he be willing to consider stopping this project and re-tendering it in a way that it would include the BIP and making that decision this week?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Premier. Mr. Speaker, a constituent called me this morning and talked about the laws of economic opportunity that his business will lose; the fact that he may be bidding on this project just to keep his employees employed by waiving his potential of profit. Does the Premier recognize that this potential exists by northern companies trying to aggressively bid on this project at any cost to keep their employees employed?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I'm going to question the Premier in regard to my concern about waiving of the BIP. Mr. Speaker, the other day I quoted from the policy, therefore, I will not start with that. With the steps being presented and some of the concerns of other Members and in recognition that the policy can be waived and it's not law, what steps has the Premier taken to ensure that the waiving of the business incentive policy will not become a frequent practice of this Cabinet? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise on our last day of this session to talk to you about one of the important issues. I was going to talk to you earlier about issues such as tourism and the fact that this government treats tourism almost like an ugly cousin who is twice removed. But, today, I want to finish this session with the way I started it, to talk to you about legal aid.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that this government could be doing better. Mr. Speaker, I believe that we have good people working out there who make legal aid happen. I believe we have dedicated people who are not being compensated fairly for what they do, but they do it because they take pride in the service that they do and the fact that they know people out there need help. The Minister has recognized this. The Minister has even pointed out that we are only funded at 50 percent. The fact is that he is not exactly sure how long it has been since there has been growth on the government's side of contribution, and he has committed to get back to this House on that measure.

Mr. Speaker, it has also been brought to the attention of this House the fact that annual reports have finally made it to the light of day in this Assembly. We are still absent of one that is only a year late. If we can wait for one that was seven years late, I guess I can wait for one that is only one year late. Mr. Speaker, I cannot tell you enough that this is a frustrating issue. At this rate, I am going to have to wait until something freezes over before we obviously get some serious action knocking at our door.

Mr. Speaker, I have brought to the attention of the House earlier in this Assembly that it is now seven months since this person consulted with legal aid to get their application started, but yet they are still waiting to get a maintenance order, custody order, or divorce in place. There are many issues as well as safety that are always mentioned as a concern for that family. I called for action, yet I have heard none.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I am going to say that I have brought this to the attention of the House, yet very little action has been seen. Therefore, I will be grabbing the reins and whipping these horses. I am going to start calling my own consultations with our community because, if this government doesn't act, somebody needs to take responsibility on this issue. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

----Applause

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, in this particular case I'm going to state that I will be supporting this adjustment. Although very unusual probably for me to be enthusiastic about a tax increase, $7.54, under the $68,000 taxable income bracket, basically could represent a box of Tim Horton's doughnuts. So I don't think that's going to have a significant impact on that tax bracket.

The other side of the taxable income of $110,000 plus, the increase being $227 per year, we are really only talking about $15 a month so I don't think that will have a significant impact on that bracket either. Therefore, I will be supporting this. Although I stress it's highly unusual for me to be enthusiastic about a tax increase, I feel that this will have a very minimal impact on those in the sense that they will never even notice. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight conducted public reviews of Bill 3, An Act to Amend the Income Tax Act, No. 2, on March 25 and 26, 2004. The committee would like to thank all the witnesses for their submissions, which were made on very short notice. The committee also thanks the Minister and his staff for presenting the bill.

As I indicated in my comments on Bill 2, the committee was very concerned about the short amount of time allowed for the public to review and respond to these tax increases.

Bill 3 proposed to raise the personal income tax rates on the two highest brackets effective July 1, 2004. The committee heard concerns about Bill 3 from both Mr. Mike Vaydik of the NWT and Nunavut Chamber of Mines, and Mr. David Tucker of the NWT Construction Association, who told committee the increase could affect their ability to recruit and retain skilled trades workers who are a highly mobile section of the labour force and in high demand across Canada.

Mr. Connelly of the Yellowknife Chamber of Commerce indicated to committee he did not have a concern with Bill 3.

The committee heard support for Bill 3 from Ms. Suzette Montrieul of Alternatives North. Similar to its position on Bill 2, Alternatives North does not believe the proposed tax increase is unreasonable and considers maintaining the GNWT's social programs to be more important than maintaining low tax rates.

The majority of committee members find this tax increase regrettable but necessary in order to maintain the GNWT's social programs.

This concludes the committee's opening comments on Bill 3. Individual Members may have additional questions or comments as we proceed. Following the committee's review a motion was carried to report Bill 3, An Act to Amend the Income Tax Act, No. 2, to the Assembly as ready for Committee of the Whole. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be supporting this motion. I think it is a good step, and I think it is a recognition that we still have to work a little harder to sharpen our pencils. As it has been said, I don't really think that this burden is necessarily fair to be taken solely on the 15th Assembly's shoulders, but unfortunately we have to make corrective actions. The Minister has quite clearly said that if we don't take some steps we are going to be penalized by Canada. I think it is a good saw if we are taking corrective steps, and I think we need to go back to the drawing board and make a few more creative solutions. The last point I want to hammer out, and I may have to repeat this later, but the point is if this side of the Assembly makes any comments in regard to the budget, we have to recognize that it is a position of weakness because our comments are only treated as creative suggestions, and any comments we make, they don't even vote on them for goodness sakes. It is kind of pathetic, because we may vote unanimously on a suggestion and then we just watch it go through. So it seems almost embarrassing that we provide creative suggestions, the majority of this House provides good feedback on what we want to see in this budget yet we get no reaction, it is at their discretion. So at the end of the day it seems quite sad. I will finish by saying I will support this at this time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Madam Chair. This budget, or I should say deficit, has been compared to an inheritance problem. I guess we could blame the 14th Assembly until we are blue in the face, but unfortunately we can't give back this deficit issue. I would love to say thanks but no thanks, but I am having a difficult time exactly which way I am going to go. I mean I look at the struggle wherein if we don't raise it we are going to lose more money. So I think of the struggle as Canada has got a noose around our neck, and the more we struggle by trying to be competitive, the tighter it gets, and it hurts. So being competitive actually kills us I guess at the end of the day. That doesn't help any of us. Our real fight is with Ottawa and not with each other on this initiative. I am still

struggling because in my methodology of life I really believe that we have to look at ourselves first because we are here to manage the public purse, and the question to myself is have we managed ourselves to the best job that we could? To some degree I see that people are taking a healthy look at ourselves, but the one thing I will say with the 14th Legislative Assembly is the fact that they knew this was coming a lot sooner than I knew that this was coming. That being said, I only got elected a few months ago, but they saw this horizon long before I did. What bothers me most is I think necessary steps could have been put in place, actions could have moved forward at that rate and at least helped us set up for the 15th Assembly. So back to my inheritance problem, I think the people who have endowed us with this legacy, I think we were very unlucky, they weren't really our friends. At the end of the day I am still not impressed. I have yet to decide what I am going to do, and I will make my final decision by the end of the sitting today. Thank you, Madam Chair.