Michael McLeod

Deh Cho

Statements in Debates

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 44)

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is important, I think, to point out that initially Diamond Jenness was targeted for a midlife retrofit. Our department, the Department of Public Works and Services, did a midlife review and a technical evaluation on the project. We provided a report that indicated it would cost around $21 million to retrofit the building completely. We were prepared to move ahead. However, the midlife retrofit would not accommodate any new program areas or new changes in design. It would be renovated to the specs and design that it is currently in, and we would not allow for any...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 44)

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have over the last number of years invested very significantly in the area of Sahtu. It has probably received the most investment in terms of bridge work. We put in many bridges that would see the road season extended so that people could take advantage of it, and the oil and gas industry can also utilize this piece of winter road. We also had partnerships with many of the companies that the Member has mentioned to enhance the road, to keep it safe, to keep it stable and also to extend the season.

The Bear River Bridge is a project that has had money identified...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 44)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think all the Members recognize that the dollars allocated in this program are a far cry from what is actually needed to be able to accommodate all the different projects that are territorial in nature that are happening in the larger centres and in the small communities. We will consider all projects as best as we can. We’d like to be able to follow some of the earlier strategic initiatives that were put forward in terms of submissions to the federal government. We’d like to hear what the Regular Members have to offer in terms of recommendations. We’re open to...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 44)

Mr. Chair, as the Members are aware, we had a very busy year this year working on the Building Canada Fund, first of all to sit down and negotiate with our federal counterparts the framework agreement that spells out the different areas that would be considered for investment and the different issues that we’d have to negotiate. Following that, we did come to a successful conclusion on the dollar amount and the criteria areas that would be considered for investment. We also put together the listing of projects that would be brought forward for consideration and negotiation with the federal...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 44)

Mr. Chairman, the process would be that once this budget is passed in this House, we would move forward to signing an agreement with the general contractor, and he would also sign agreements with subcontractors. That information would then be solidified, and we could speak with confidence as to who the actual subcontractors are going to be. As of yet there is no agreement with these subcontractors, and there won’t be until there is a contract in place.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 44)

Mr. Speaker, I rise today to update Members on the status of our efforts at the national level to improve housing conditions and also to engage the federal government to partner with provinces and territories.

Provincial and territorial housing ministers met with representatives of national housing organizations and aboriginal leaders in Ottawa on October 8, 2008, to make the case for long term federal engagement in housing. It is our hope that our efforts will encourage the federal government to commit to work with provinces and territories on long term pan-Canadian housing solutions.

Despite a...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 44)

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’d have to ask the Member to repeat the question since I didn’t hear what it was.

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 44)

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think it’s relatively easy to decide if there’s a market disruption. There is, first of all, no current space available in Inuvik, and for the second reason, we are planning to accommodate people who we are currently housing in our own facilities that are not up to the standards that are spelled out. Most of our buildings, including the Perry Building, which we need to be out of, do not have barrier free access, do not meet GNWT office space standards. They are not energy efficient; they do not promote environmental sustainability; they have air problems. We can’t...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 44)

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a real significant issue for us, and it has been for some time. We need proper office accommodations for the employees in Inuvik. We don’t have very many government facilities in the community; 93 per cent of our portfolio is leased.

It’s starting to be a challenge now that we can’t identify any new facilities to move to. We have certainly a large number of issues with the Perry Building. There’s a possibility we may be evicted. MACA is housed in an old federal government warehouse. It’s 45 years old. We have air quality concerns. We have security issues with...

Debates of , 16th Assembly, 2nd Session (day 44)

Mr. Chairman, I’m not the Minister of Finance, but I’d like to think that anything’s possible.

The Member is quite correct that the Department of Public Works has identified this project as a priority for renovation to address major deferred maintenance issues. The problem is the project has not proceeded through the planning study phase that the ECE is currently undertaking. They’re doing the functional program review, and I’m sure they’ll be coming back with a certain number of program enhancements for this project.

Given that that work is not expected to be completed until sometime this fall...