Thank you, Madam Chair. I agree. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I guess when it comes to employment in small communities, that's something I guess I want to see. I want to see opportunities there for the people who are living there. When we look at that, it's more than just saying that we're going to create jobs. We have to look at the programs that we currently have in place and the institutions. We have the BIP. We have to use that properly. We have ITI programs, SEED, et cetera. We have the BDIC. We have community futures. We have the NWT Metis Development Corporation, which isn't part of the government. There are federal programs. There's Education, Culture and Employment with respect to training. We have Infrastructure, which does have projects and supplies available work.

In the small communities, though, I see arts and crafts is a big thing. For years, they've been talking about a tanning facility in Fort Providence; never seen anything happen with it. We have tourism. In small communities, there may be opportunities for private housing maintainers and that type of thing. We have requirement for trades, and in Fort McPherson, we have Tent and Canvas, and whether it makes money or not, I don't know. It would be nice if it made money. It may not make money, but it provides jobs. It helps maybe with education. It gives people, I guess, some hope, and it allows them to, you know, show their kids and that that there are opportunities out there, no matter where you are.

I think, when we look at this, it's a bigger picture than just creating jobs. We have to look at everything else that we have in place, and it's housing. You know, people have to have a place to live as well. I think, when we look at this, I think that it's really important that we tie all this in together, but I don't want to be looking at it for four years either. Timelines are good. Try and get something done. It's just easy to go out there and do a few little things and get them going. I am optimistic that something is going to happen, and again, when it comes to business and employment, that's going to be my area where I want to push, and you'll hear lots from me about that. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I agree. The communities have to do something themselves. We have been doing the same thing, the same way, for years. We have to reinvent ourselves somehow. I guess I think about Hay River, and I look at the bylaws, and I look at all that. People are looking for tiny homes, yet we say you have to build a house a certain size on the lot. Well, times are changing, and we have to make those changes. If we can do that, sometimes if you can maybe reduce the cost a bit, if that brings more people into the North, that's another $30-some-thousand for us. Those are the types of things that we have to do, but those are conversations that this government has to have with the communities as well and let them know that, you know, there has to be some active change here. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I am not sure throwing $5 million at it is going to do anything if we just keep it, try to stop it from growing, because the problem is that our communities have aging infrastructure that we have to deal with and that is what we have to throw money at. I think that we are looking at trying to reduce the debt. I think what we should be doing is trying to just maintain it so it doesn't get any bigger and then try and grow the economy, try and deal with some of the other issues. And it gives us a little time to kind of regroup and really think about the issue. Just a comment. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I will just be brief here on this. In the regions, we do have some regional authority there right now. Some of it is good, but the problem is that it depends on who the person is who has that authority. A lot of times, it lacks fairness. We see that. I see it in my community, and I suspect others see it in their communities, as well. I think that, when we look at devolving some of this, we should come up with something and put something in place so that we can monitor that. One way to monitor is that people come to us as MLAs and complain, but there has got to be something, some training and some ownership, by the people making decisions. There has got to be a process that can be followed and that just provides fairness, is the big thing. Thank you.

Thank you. I guess it's part of the government's mandate, it's part of our priorities, so I see it's something that we have to initiate, whether it's, you know, writing letters or contacting the Indigenous groups and saying, "Okay, we have to sit down and talk about this, and come up with something to move ahead." Because I guess, in the territories, throughout the years, I suspect at one point in time it was mostly Aboriginal First Nations people here, Indigenous peoples, and as time went on more people, non-Aboriginal people, came in, came from the South to provide us with programs and services, and eventually it's going to flip where it's going to be more non-Indigenous or non-Aboriginal people here. So we have to make sure that the Indigenous groups are involved in this, and, you know, we've got the Constitution to think about. We've got the Indian Act. We have land claim agreements. We have self-government agreements. I think all of that has a bearing on what this is. We have to start somewhere, and, just like everything else, like the Constitution and the act and all that, there is case law related to all that. I suspect, at one point, when this is implemented, when we implement this, we're going to see some case law with that, as well. There are going to be challenges. You know, some of it might be straightforward; other parts, some Indigenous groups are going to use that to their benefit, but we have to do something, just like everything else out there. Something was done at one point, and this is just something else to strengthen Indigenous rights in Canada. It's up to us. It's part of our priorities. It's part of the mandate. We have to take the initiative and go out there and meet with the First Nations and the Indigenous groups, and establish a plan of action so we can do something with it, sooner than later. Thank you, Madam Chair.

This one, you can just say yes or no. Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm kind of confused here, now. We're talking about 100 units. Is that 100 units based on developing and receiving funds through Indigenous groups, as well, or is that just 100 units based on GNWT dollars; just on GNWT dollars, yes or no?

Thank you, Madam Chair. It's hard to believe that she's that excited about it. When we talk about 100 units, is there a dollar value to those units? Like, I look at it and I think, well, 100 units, but is it 100 houses that have 10 bedrooms to them, or is it just a dollar value? I expect that we could have more than 100 units. With the way people's lives are changing nowadays, we don't need bigger units anymore, and so I'm expecting that the Housing Corporation will look at that.

The other thing, too, is we talk about the 100 units, but there is also the opportunity for developers in the communities to develop properties and house some of the people who require it, as well. So I guess, when I think of 100, I think that, you know, we could hit 200. It just depends how we do it, and it depends on how much money we have to play with. The partnerships are great. We have to do that; and, with Indigenous groups, that's a no-brainer; we have to have them on-side, but there are other avenues, as well. I'm not sure if there's a question there or not, but anyway, thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. With respect to if we decide to, I guess, sell off houses in a community, will there be a house there to replace that one? Will it stay in that community? Thank you.