Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Today my Member's statement is about fiscal responsibility and how it relates to the repayment of corporate income tax overpayment.

As all Members of this House know, we are well aware of how this Assembly has the unfortunate task or, I should say, the burden ahead of us in the next year to repay the federal government close to $300 million for its corporate overpayment tax that dates back to 2002.

This can no longer be pushed back or ignored by this government. When the last government realized -- that is the 14th Assembly -- over four years ago that it received an overpayment of corporate income tax of over $300 million, they had some tough choices ahead of them. But they decided to spend it, Mr. Speaker. They knew that spending it wouldn't fall on their government. It would fall on the government that followed them to pay it back.

Mr. Speaker, decisions like that, treating it like an interest-free loan, was not responsible. Mr. Speaker, the government of that day, the 14th Assembly, spent like it was footloose and fancy free, spending with no regard to who has to cover the payment. I am not sure that they were hoping that; either they were thinking or hedging their bets on the fact that they would get a resource revenue agreement or whatnot, but, unfortunately, it is time to pay. If they were hoping that pennies would fall from heaven, and their bacon would be covered, well, unfortunately, it is our bacon that has to pay the piper.

Mr. Speaker, that is not fair of the last Assembly to put that burden on this government. We now have to be smart and a lot wiser with our fiscal policies. I compliment Minister Roland on his fiscal work that he has done, but we need to go one step further. Waiting for a grant from Canada, as they often talk about our resource revenue sharing agreement, is like having them dangle a carrot in front of us. It is there, but it just seems to always be out of reach.

Frankly, Mr. Speaker, I am tired of waiting for that resource revenue agreement, but we have this burden in front of us. Mr. Speaker, we need a sound fiscal policy that says when we realize we have an overpayment of some sort, we clearly set it aside and not put that burden on the next government to figure out how they should pay for it. The government of the day with the overpayment looks like the heroes, and the government that has to pay looks like zeros.

So, Mr. Speaker, in closing, I will have awe-inspiring questions for the Finance Minister. I know he will be really receptive to the points I make. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Would the Minister agree to meet me outside of this House and we can talk about the details of the areas of my concern, so we can specifically deal with this problem and maybe understand it better? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the answer from the Minister, but my concern is, people will want to raise the purchase price of their vehicle, so it falls on the capital side. I think it is the number that we address. If it needs to be $30,000 or $40,000, I am not sure what the appropriate number is, but it falls under the capital budget, and that's the problem. I can understand the planning side. Would the Minister look at updating this, so we can reflect the needs of the Minister but we don't motivate people to buy more expensive vehicles? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my Member's statement and my first set of questions were focused around vehicle purchases and our policy. I have concerns still on how we purchase vehicles. It relates directly to the tangible capital asset policy where, if you purchase a vehicle under $50,000, you don't have to report it, and that money comes out of O and M. But if the vehicle costs more than $50,000, you have to report it, and it comes out of the capital budget. My concern, specifically, is that this policy needs to be updated, because people are encouraged to buy more expensive vehicles because they can put it under the capital budget and not the regular O and M budget. Would the Minister look at updating this policy, so we can encourage smaller, reasonable vehicles for the appropriate use they are purchased for? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my last question would be, has the Minister had the chance to go to Fort Simpson to speak to the people and the ferry operators to ensure that we can come to a happy ending? Has the Premier considered that option to help satisfy everyone, so we can work toward some type of reasonable settlement to move forward in a safe way? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I certainly would like to hear further on these numbers of options. I can tell you that the people in Fort Simpson are probably sitting there asking, "What are the number of options?" If the Minister, today, could tell people those, so that they don't have to worry, that would be appreciated. People are sending us faxes, citing the horrible things that could happen. I don't even want to think about what could happen. Could the Minister clearly say today what the options are? Are we going to run that ferry tomorrow morning at 6:00 a.m. if the contractor does not run it? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the answer from the good Transportation Minister. Mr. Speaker, all those answers are well and good, but I am still looking for clear-cut leadership on this situation. Has the Premier taken a moment to go to Fort Simpson to help calm and ease the nerves of those families that are put into this position? Does the Minister have an answer as to whether we have the right to seize the ferry tomorrow morning at 6:00 a.m. if it does not start up? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I certainly hope that the Minister of Transportation isn't hoping for a quick freeze-up so we can solve this solution in the short term, because it is not going to come soon. This ferry is a needed asset in this community, so, again, on the moral obligation: The community of Fort Simpson is supposedly running out of propane; Wrigley's ferry, as I understand it, doesn't have diesel or it's running out of diesel, so we have a moral responsibility to make sure that our peoples' homes are warm and we have reasonable transportation. What are we going to do about food shortages that these companies didn't have notice of, to make sure that they could get food in?

Who is going to be responsible for those additional costs that will be incurred because of the situation? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have made no secret that I grew up in Fort Simpson, and what a pleasure it was having that experience, and I wish more Members could have experienced what it was like to grow up in that community. I can tell you, from my personal experience, how important that ferry is to that community. We could speak at length, but we don't have the time today.

My question would be for the Premier, after I make this point. We don't have a technical reason to step in at this time, but, in my mind, we have a moral reason and moral obligation to ensure safety is upheld. If the ferry doesn't run as is prescribed in the contract, either tomorrow or in the days to come, what is this government going to do? Thank you.