Michael McLeod

Mr. Speaker, I don’t believe the Member has seen any contract from any projects we have across the government. It is not a practice that we provide the information to Regular Members on. We would need the consent of the contractors and, in most situations, the contractors would not agree to it, so that is why we haven’t provided it. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to thank the Member for thanking me. I think this is the first time he’s ever thanked me for anything I’ve done on this project.

Mr. Speaker, we’ve had a guarantee on this project all along on the work that was to be done. I think we have better than what would be in the bond at this point. We have cash in the bank. We have done an analysis. We have had our contractors look at what needs to be rectified. In most cases, Mr. Speaker, it’s a matter of going in and doing the actual testing, as we haven’t had all the documentation that we require. But to go in and do...

We certainly agree with the Member’s description of what’s happening on the harbour. The silt buildup is of concern, of course, but the low waters are compounding the problem. We’ve had several users identify some programs that could potentially be resourced. I believe the municipality was provided with that information and followed up. My understanding is that it wasn’t successful.

We have talked to our federal counterparts. We have been talking to the Coast Guard and we’re hoping that they’ll be able to identify some dollars to at least provide some relief to the situation that’s growing in...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The responsibility of maintaining navigable waterways is with the federal government.

Mr. Speaker, the Member has raised concerns by the Auditor General that have been responded to. That information is public. That can be drawn down by the Member if he so wishes. I’m not really sure what the Member is concerned about. If it’s optics, well, I don’t know what we would do to change that besides not allowing anybody that works for us, that helps us prepare a document or works for us a resource, to bid on these contracts. That’s really going to lock out a lot of good quality companies and that would be a concern. That would certainly increase our costs. I’d need to see more of the...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have to assume that the Member is referring only to the contracts that fall under Public Works and Services and not the other departments. Mr. Speaker, it’s common practice across the government to confer and hire different companies that specialize in different sectors, different areas, different industries, to provide advice to help with the scoping and drafting of the project. The information shared is restricted to that process, especially if it’s a specific type of need, and there are really pretty rigid rules around how we do that. I don’t think that’s something...

I’m not going to respond to a document that he’s holding right in his hand and reading from and asks me to clarify what he’s reading. Mr. Speaker, the simple answer is we have not engaged in a process to review the system. If there are concerns, if there is a desire by a Member of this House for us to do that, we’ll certainly take that as recommendation. Up to now, it’s been an issue raised by the Member and we can continue that discussion if he so wishes. Thank you.

Maybe the Member can’t tell his right side of the brain to talk to the left side of the brain, Mr. Speaker. There is a fairly sensitive process that we follow to ensure that the information that is shared with a company that is hired by us to help us draft the contract specifications is only relevant to what we need from them. We don’t ask them to provide dollar amounts. We don’t ask them for a lot of different things. There is an appeal mechanism. If there are concerns, I would like to hear from industry. The Member is raising a concern and I’d certainly like to hear more of what he’s hearing...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Further to the Premier’s Return to Written Question 16-16(5), I wish to table the following document entitled Cost of Devolution Negotiations, Actual Expenditures.

Also, I would like to table the following document entitled Reports Respecting Benefits Paid to Ministers under the Ministerial Benefits Policy for the Fiscal Year Ending March 31, 2010. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Member is correct; the consideration for realignment was introduced, I think, in 2007 and we’ve been working towards moving that forward. Of course, we can only move as fast as the process will allow us. Our plans now are to move forward over these next couple of months to do further consultation. We still plan to have the construction of realignment commencing the fall of 2011. We’d like to see the traffic starting to flow sometime in 2012. There is still some discussion that needs to take place and the timing and opportunity has to be worked out with the Giant...