Floyd Roland

Mr. Speaker, the Western Premiers’ Conference, as I was saying earlier, is one that I felt went very well for the Northwest Territories. To have our issues part of the communications package that went out from that meeting across Canada does a number of things. It raises our level of interest. It sends a message to the federal government. The next steps for us from the Western Premiers’ Conference would be on issues that we feel would be encouraged by further bringing them to the Council of the Federation — that is, all the Premiers across the country — and then coming up with a specific plan...

Mr. Speaker, I’m not aware of — maybe I don’t understand the question — a rule or practice that stops Ministers in Committee of the Whole from having a discussion on issues that may affect their constituencies. In the formal House, as we are now, we’re unable to, for example, question government direction or where it’s going. But in Committee of the Whole we have from time to time had Ministers and Members as well question what is occurring at that time, whether it’s a motion in the House or an item under debate.

Mr. Speaker, as we conduct ourselves in this Assembly, we would review any particular incidents that occur. We know, for example, there’s a process of being ready and available for Members during question period as well as Committee of the Whole, and overall conduct of Ministers. Yes, if there were an issue that came up, we would sit down and have a discussion and see where we could correct things, if that were the case.

Past numbers have been put out there; for example, dollar figures in the area of $224 million a year that flow to Ottawa in the form of royalties. Now the federal government says the Norman Wells situation has to be excluded from that. We look at the last public accounts that were filed with the federal government, and the most recent figure that we’ve seen from the other mining industries has shown that it’s been in the neighbourhood of $34 million. You take a look at the equalization program that has formulated along with the territorial formula financing, and the inclusion and exclusion —...

We’ve had a number of discussions, both with the federal government as well as with the regional aboriginal leadership, around the issue of devolution and resource revenue sharing. I’ve had an opportunity to speak with the Prime Minister on this issue, as well as with Minister Strahl, regarding devolution and resource revenue sharing. We continue to have some discussions and try to see where we may be able to move this file.

Under the existing scenario it would fluctuate year to year, depending on what the industry in the North pays to the federal government. It did at one point — I believe it was 2003–2004 numbers — and then we combined it with the mining, oil and gas development in the North, along with Norman Wells, and we came up with a figure of approximately $224 million.

Estimates have been made. For example, if the Mackenzie gas pipeline falls in place, that could almost double or even go larger, depending on the royalty rate that’s put in place. But we know, for example, that royalties aren’t paid until...

The first position we came forward with was one to see where we were as the Government of the Northwest Territories, have an initial meeting with the regional aboriginal leadership and see if there was continued support from the groups on moving forward with this file. In the last government there was a proposal sent forward to the government. We had that discussion. We know the same groups continue to be on side. Others say they’ve got other initiatives to proceed with before they want to see this file moved along. So we’ve had that discussion.

From our perspective, as Members know, we’re...

Mr. Speaker, it gives me pleasure to recognize somebody who’s travelled down from Inuvik, Mr. Norm Snowshoe, as well as my executive assistant, Bobby-Jo Greenland.

Mr. Speaker, the end cash position of the government is one consideration of moving forward. It gives us a starting point for the upcoming budget planning cycle. What we have in this situation is that we also recognize some of those bump-ups that end up making our surplus position look a little healthier. It’s a one-time fund. They are not ongoing funds, and that’s the problem we’re going to have to tackle as we go forward.

Much like we did during the Market Housing strategy, the two-year pilot program that started bringing modular units into communities for the professionals, that was done on a cost-mutual basis in the sense that full recovery of having that unit there, utilities and so on, had to be a part of the package. That actually worked out fairly well for the most part. Some of those units came in at a lower cost than what we were having paid to rent for those in our communities living in standard public housing units. So that was an initiative. It’s something we can look at again.

The Housing Corporation...