Michael McLeod

Thank you. The Member knows I’m in a difficult situation. He’s asking me to second guess the decision of the previous government, previous Cabinet and the Minister of the day. I’m not willing to do that. Mr. Speaker, the decisions were made, I can’t look through a lens of hindsight and say why, why, and this is why, give rationale. The practice was followed, no rules were broken, we’ve been audited twice now and I should point out we are audited every year for this project by the Auditor General for the financial budgets. Never has there been a concern of any rules being broken and it’s also...

Mr. Speaker, the Members of this House during the 15th Assembly and were also briefed in the 16th Assembly, were kept informed of the process leading up to the concession agreement. They also were aware that to make this project happen, additional dollars were committed to and also aware that there was a need for an indemnity. Mr. Speaker, there were a number of meetings. I think there were three over the summer and a total of 35 meetings over the life of this project, for sure, have been to provide information to the Members. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, there is always potential for cost overruns on a project of this nature. We have already experienced that. There are unforeseen circumstances that are not identified in the contract that is at no fault of the contractor. Of course, that would become our responsibility, Mr. Speaker. We have worked this contract with our current contractor. We feel it is a fair one. The date, of course, is always going to be up for discussion with the general public as we move forward. We would like to meet that date; however, we are not going to jeopardize any issues around safety or quality...

Mr. Speaker, I should point out to the Member that the Auditor General did an operational review or look at the government portion of this project. They didn’t audit anything else. It wasn’t a financial audit. They didn’t look at our contractors or talk to them, so there are a lot of things that maybe could have been clarified. The Auditor General was pretty clear that she wasn’t satisfied that the contingency was enough, as the Member had indicated. We looked at the project. We looked at the requirements of what was needed to complete this project. We had a professional team give us their...

A perfect example, by the comments made, that he doesn’t agree with anything that we’ve provided him. We have provided numerous briefings and I’ve just indicated to him that this has been signed off by three different engineers, it has been reviewed by our team, some world-class engineers that have given their approval. Mr. Speaker, we have dealt with all the risks that are involved. We’ve reviewed it. We’ve had the Levelton Report, which did a technical review. We’ve put a plan of action together to address these issues that have come forward. Some of them have also come forward through the...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Investing in infrastructure to improve access to communities is a key priority of the Government of the Northwest Territories. When the Deh Cho Bridge is complete, it will benefit NWT residents by providing a safe, reliable all-weather link from the South to the North Slave region, providing access and economic benefits to all residents.

Today I rise to respond to the mid-project performance audit of the Deh Cho Bridge construction project by the Auditor General of Canada.

The Auditor General identified concerns with the management of partnership risks in phase 1 of the...

There have been two occasions within the life of this project that the indemnity requirements have been waived. It was as per the FAA rules. All protocol was followed. The Member is insinuating it was done because there was a desire to ram this project through. It was done because there was a need to move forward, decisions needed to be made and it’s no different than any other time that these rules were waived. It’s been done at least 20 times since 1999, Mr. Speaker. So if the Member thinks or is insinuating we did something different, this is standard practice. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We followed all of the FAA rules. I believe the Finance Minister of the day also was involved in this decision, as were the Members of Cabinet. Mr. Speaker, the rules allow that the contracts that are exempted are also excused from the 14-day notice. Mr. Speaker, that’s the practice that almost every request or every decision of this nature has been following and we were no different. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to inform the Member that we have kept in line with the practice that this government has followed for quite a few years. It has been used since 1999. The government has used this practice 20 times. We made no special allowances for the bridge project. We followed protocol. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The answer is yes. Right now, the challenge that we are facing is to look at the construction methods that are going to be required to provide the final completion portion of the decking including the asphalt pour and we have come to realize that there is going to be certain challenges as the weather is going to be cold at that time of the year and how do we accommodate that and how is the contractor proposing to do that. There is some technical information that has come forward that we need to review and confirm whether it is acceptable or not. That is the information...