Debates of March 29, 2004 (day 10)

Thank you, Mr. Delorey. The motion is being passed out. We will just give it a few seconds here. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I can’t speak in favour of this motion. I guess where I am coming from on this is if we, as a government, and then through our various departments and agencies, have a reasonably good policy on travel, and if we go about passing our business plans and giving these people instruction and direction to go do a job on our behalf, then I think along with that comes sort of a degree of trust and integrity in their ability to make prudent decisions about where we are going to travel, and follow the policies that have been set under which they will do that. I think this kind of scrutiny might play well out there once in a while when there might be some high profile delegation or perceived junket somewhere, but I don’t see the value of passing this kind of a reporting mechanism. It basically says to me that we don’t have good policies in place and we don’t have trustworthy people in place. So I don’t support it. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. To the motion. Mr. Menicoche.

My thoughts on this are that I think the Premier committed some kind of quarterly reporting to us as well. The public will kind of look at this, and it may raise more questions in the public than we care to. Those are my comments on that.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Ms. Lee.

Thank you. I want to speak in favour of this motion. There are valid opinions and expectations out there on the part of the people that the government is careful at all times about the money that it spends. Mr. Braden is right in saying that good policies should result in good results, but it doesn’t go far enough. We do know that government isn’t always careful about the money that it spends, and it would not always pass the scrutiny test of how we spend our dollars I am sure. If I had my way, I would add to this motion reporting of all the charter flights that we travel with within the Territories. I think the point of this motion is that we have to watch what we spend, and I support that. I think in the future I will be looking at a more detailed analysis of other expenses on all of the figures that I have been gathering in this budget, and I am sure I am going to be looking to see some action there to make sure there are the right checks and balances, and that everyone understands that every government dollar should be spent with justification and good information, and spend it in ways that would show tangible results as to what it is that we are doing. So in the general spirit and intent of this motion, I do support it. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am going to go on the faith that our Premier has committed to us as a Legislative Assembly on quarterly reporting. I don’t feel comfortable doing all reporting, because I think what we are going to do is create a bureaucracy alone on this travel. When we are talking about making government work a little smoother, a little simpler, I would rather start with his comments, and then we can put that on the check. If we just said international travel, I would be comfortable with that, but all southern travel and international travel is a little too much for me right now. Like I said, if someone wants to make an amendment that says international travel, we can try that and see how much work that creates. I want to see the Premier living up to his commitment, I want to give him the chance to honour his commitment. So before I go too far and support a motion like this that creates a lot of bureaucracy, no. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, to this motion I don't think I can support this motion, but I think it speaks to an issue of concern. To me, to report southern and international travel isn't nearly as interesting as reporting to me what they were doing when they were there, in terms of whether it was productive, whether it was something that we really needed to do. How many people went in the entourage is another question. Did they stay in a $200 a night hotel room, or a $500? Those are the kinds of things that I would find interesting, to know whether the government is being frugal and very prudent with the taxpayers' dollars. I just think this question doesn't really tell me that much, and it would be very burdensome from an administrative point of view. But somehow there must be another mechanism to get the message out there. I always use the diamond secretariat; like, how many more times do you have to go to Antwerp, you know? I always use that as an example, because you look down that travel budget for some of those various sectors, it's just incredible the millions of dollars that are spent on travel. I think we need to have a discussion about what's the purpose of the travel. So just this in itself is a bit shallow, so I don't think I'm going to support it. Thanks.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. To the motion. The motion is in order.

Question.

Question has been called. All those in favour? Those opposed? I have four/four, and I guess I will vote in favour of the motion. That's my vote. The motion is carried.

---Carried

Does the committee agree that we now consider the bill clause by clause?

Agreed.

Pull out your grey binders, please, committee. Thank you, committee. I draw your attention to page 1, Bill 1, Appropriation Act, 2004-2005. We will stand down the clauses and proceed first with the schedule on page 3. Schedule, part I, vote I, operations expenditures, total appropriations for operations expenditures, $950.161 million.

Agreed.

Part II, vote II, capital investment expenditures, total appropriation for capital investment expenditures, $81.259 million.

Agreed.

Total appropriation, $1,031,420.

Agreed.

We'll go back to clause by clause. Clause 1.

Agreed.

Clause 2.

Agreed.

Clause 3.

Agreed.

Clause 4.

Agreed.

Clause 5.

Agreed.

Clause 6.

Agreed.

Clause 7.

Agreed.

To the preamble.

Agreed.

Bill as a whole.

Agreed.

Does the committee agree that Bill 1 is ready for third reading?

Agreed.

Bill 1 is now ready for third reading.

----Applause

Does committee agree that committee reports 1-15(3), 2-15(3) and 3-15(3) have been concluded?

Agreed.

Thank you. What is the wish of the committee? Mr. Allen.

I want to report progress.

Thank you, Mr. Allen. The motion is in order. It is not debatable. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

Thank you. I will now rise and report progress.

----Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Your committee has been considering Bill 1, Appropriation Act, 2004-2005, and committee reports 1-15(3), 2-15(3) and 3-15(3), and would like to report progress with five motions being adopted, that committee reports 1-15(3), 2-15(3) and 3-15(3) are concluded, that Bill 1 is ready for third reading, and, Mr. Speaker, I move that the report of Committee of the Whole be concurred with.

Do I have a seconder for that? Member for Boot Lake, Mr. Roland.

----Applause

Question.

All those in favour of the motion? Opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried