Mr. Speaker, I believe that this may be as a result of an initiative that was taken, I think, back in November of 1990, to offer to sell certain units to employees who had responded to a survey, and that this is moving toward finalizing the initiative that was taken up at that time. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, as I indicated at the time of the announcement the offer was made just to the three specific communities. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to advise the House of some recent developments on the National Constitutional Reform. As Members know, the Joint Parliamentary Committee on a Renewed Canada tabled its report in Parliament on February 28th. It was made public on March 1st. This report was the culmination of many months of public hearings and constitutional conferences that had examined 28 proposals put forward by the federal government in a discussion paper in September 1991. The joint parliamentary committee report contained over 40 recommendations, and the federal government had initially announced that it would attempt to refine these recommendations into a constitutional resolution or some other form of federal response by April 15th.

Under pressure from several provinces, Minister Clark called a meeting on March 12th to discuss a process by which multilateral discussions could lead to a consensus package of reforms that could be considered by Quebec and other provinces. I attended this meeting, and I am pleased to report today that one of the conclusions was that aboriginal and territorial delegates will be included in all public and private meetings on constitutional negotiations over the next few months. This was a significant change of policy for the federal government and for some of the provincial governments.

A second outcome of that meeting was an agreement to conduct an intensive series of officials' and Ministers' meetings over the next 10 weeks in an attempt to work out the details of a final constitutional package that would be acceptable to provinces, territorial and aboriginal organizations as well as to the federal government. The deadline for completion has been set at May 31st. It was felt that a package of reforms had to be available for Quebec to consider in advance of that province's setting its question for an October referendum on sovereignty.

Last Thursday, March 19th, the first officials' meeting was held to organize the work for the next few weeks. Four working groups of officials have been established to examine various issues. The intention is to have these officials identify and clarify issues to assist Ministers and First Ministers in developing the final consensus package. The working groups started work yesterday in Toronto and will carry on meetings over the next few days. As I said, Mr Speaker, the significant part of these working groups is that they include federal, provincial, territorial and aboriginal delegations. At this stage

of the process, officials have not received any mandate to negotiate agreements of any sort. Mr. Speaker, your special committee on constitutional reform will be preparing its interim report on the national reform process over the next few weeks, with the intention of making recommendations to the Assembly on these issues. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask for unanimous consent to go back to Item 2, Ministers' Statements.

Mr. Speaker, I wish to table Tabled Document 21-12(2), Commission for Constitutional Development, Interim Report, February 1992.

Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to announce that the bargaining committees for this government and the Northwest Territories Teachers' Association have signed a memorandum of agreement. Before a new collective agreement is signed, the memorandum must be accepted by the Financial Management Board and the membership of the Northwest Territories Teachers' Association.

Over the past few weeks, in this House, we have talked about the challenges facing us. I believe there are three main themes: 1) We need to reshape northern government; 2) we need to improve our financial situation as there are serious financial problems. The Minister of Finance said in his Budget Address that we could have an accumulated deficit of close to $100 million by the end of the next fiscal year; and 3) we need to maintain a stable and professional public service. This is essential. As I stated to this House on February 19, 1992, our staff's abilities, contributions, and ideas are needed.

The memorandum of agreement that was signed this morning will help us achieve each of the three goals. The teachers' association must be congratulated for the leadership role it is taking. The agreement is for two years. This will provide stability and certainty.

The economic increase is zero per cent in September 1992, and 1.8 per cent in September 1993. I believe this is fair and fiscally responsible. The agreement provides a mechanism for rewriting the collective agreement to clean up outdated and unclear language.

In conclusion, Mr. Speaker, I do not think we have ever been confronted with more serious problems in collective bargaining. I am pleased with the memorandum that was signed. It shows a balance between our commitment to fiscal responsibility and our commitment to our employees. It provides a valuable mechanism for teachers to participate in the reshaping of our education system. Again, I would like to congratulate the teachers' association on the leadership role it has taken. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, as a Minister and as a government I do not think we can give any assurance at all in the area that the Member is questioning. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, the claim of the Inuit of the Eastern Arctic is guided by the TFN, is based on the premise that the question of division has been settled in 1982. The claim of the Tungavik Federation of Nunavut goes on the assumption that division is going to happen and that Nunavut is going to be created. The plebiscite on May 4th is simply a plebiscite that asks people of the NWT if they would support the boundary that would be attached to the plebiscite question, as the boundary that is acceptable to divide the NWT.

As a government we have not done any studies about what may happen if the plebiscite question results in a resounding no, because we also go on the assumption that the question, which is reflected in the plebiscite question, is seeking whether or not people would accept that boundary as a boundary to divide, not whether they support division or not.

Mr. Speaker, this is in response to a question asked by Mr. Pudlat on February 26, following another question he asked earlier, O114-12(2), on February 26. If I understand the Member's question correctly, he is asking if there was any additional information he could be provided with as to why there were no new staff houses being built in the coming year.

Mr. Speaker, as we have indicated many times, there is only limited capital funding available for the coming year. There are many demands for capital projects, and as a government we have had to balance all the needs to make sure that the most critical ones are met. For 1992-93, no additional person years will be proposed as part of the government's budget. Therefore, in spite of the fact that we do not have the number of houses we need in each community, it was not possible to allocate money for new staff housing units. Thank you.