David Krutko

Again, that is exactly my point. They are already coming from existing space, and that space will be vacated. There’s so much extra space out there, and we’re being told that this won’t have any implications to existing space that’s already there. There will be an implication in regard to this decision.

Now, this is a major megaproject, and I think that in order to get the maximum benefit out of this project, everyone should at least have an opportunity to bid on some of these items in this contract and ensure that the BIP is being followed. We do have a negotiating policy in regard to everyone having a fair process on bidding on these types of items, regardless if it’s site development, pilings or working in regard to roofing or siding or drywalling or whatever. This is a major project.

I’d like to ask the Minister again: can they ensure that they are following their guidelines? Would the...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In regard to my Member’s statement I made reference to different land claim agreements and, more importantly, the investment those land claim organizations make by way of capital investment. They buy properties from the private sector with regard to retail properties. They’ve made a lot of investment in purchasing these facilities in Inuvik. They’ve gone out of their way to retrofit those buildings, bring them up to standard codes and whatnot. Yet it seems like the whole investments that were made could be a loss because of a government project. Nowhere has this...

Mr. Chairman, this is a negotiated contract. Negotiated contracts are a little more stringent than the tendering process. In most cases negotiated contracts ensure that there is local involvement, there is local hire, and there is local preference. In regard to those negotiated contracts, before the negotiated contract is approved by Cabinet, those aspects have to be part of a negotiated contract. So for this government to say, “Well, sorry; we don’t have that” or “We don’t know...” In order for Cabinet to approve a negotiated contract, there are certain obligations that the contractor has to...

I seek unanimous consent to go back to item 5, recognition of visitors in the gallery.

Unanimous consent granted.

Mr. Chair, I know for a fact that in the past there have been situations where the government found themselves caught in the middle, where they allocated a specific contractor who listed their subcontractors on that contract and neglected to give their subcontractors work, where the individual subcontractors countersued, saying: I had a contractual obligation under your contract to be your sub in this contract; I was listed, but you didn’t use me. I’d like to know: do you have a list of who the subcontractors are for this particular project, and does that include the Gwich’in Development...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just following up on the lines with regard to the letters of support for projects. I know that the letters of support, in most cases, are subject to certain wording. Especially when looking at the socio-economic possibilities of jobs, employment opportunities and contracts, that support is subject to those types of arrangements being concluded before these contracts are entered into.

I’d like to ask the Minister: exactly how much weight do these support letters have by way of businesses ensuring there are employment opportunities for affected communities and also ensuring...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’d like to thank my colleagues who support the motion. Again, the motion is to ensure that we do invest our dollars where it’s most urgently needed. No offence to my colleague in Fort Smith, but there is still $1.4 million that’s going to be expended on the chipseal project this year. I think it’s clear that this government has to ensure that public safety is paramount for whatever we do here.

With that, Mr. Chair, I would request a recorded vote on this motion.

Well, the project that comes to mind, just offhand, is the Tulita project. The Tulita community corporation has a hotel. It wasn’t used. They brought in a camp. Same thing in regard to Fort Good Hope. There’s a hotel there that’s owned locally. In Fort McPherson they’ve been building a municipal facility; again, there’s a hotel there that wasn’t used. There are also individuals who have B & Bs established in those communities, and they’re not being used either. So just on that knowledge that’s out there right now, if you’re telling me that that’s not being allowed, well, it’s pretty obvious...

Mr. Chair, I move that $1.4 million be deleted from the activity Highways under Department of Transportation, Capital Estimates 2009–2010, on pages 8-10 and 8-11, for the Highway 5 Km 0–266 Chipseal Project.