Michael Miltenberger

Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the Member’s concern. One of the impacts on our current circumstance was the $10 million we put into this project a number of months ago. The money we spent that we didn’t anticipate was extra money on the bridge, we spent extra money on a number of different areas. But we appreciate the Member’s concern. We are still going to hit our fiscal targets, as we laid out in our fiscal plan to the Members. Thank you.

As we approach this project, the decisions made to ask for the funds in increments so that we would be reporting back to the Legislature and justifying the expenses because of the interest and concern about the project, as opposed to asking for a large amount of money and then at some point in the future coming back. We chose to come forward on an as-required basis so that we would always be before the House as a check and balance to make sure Members were fully engaged. When we conclude this final $2 million worth of work, we will have the information we need to put a package before this...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The reality is we have to and we are doing both. Yet, as we laid out for the people and for the Members that there is a rate cliff because there’s been no increase in power rates for the last five years, the fuel prices have continued to escalate and rather than put the burden fully on the ratepayers that buy power, we put that subsidy in. At the same time, we are making significant, and have made significant, investments: $50 million or so in the last Assembly towards solar, biomass, wind, improving our energy standards, rebates for people to help them convert to more...

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Wednesday, October 31, 2012, I will move that Bill 14, Appropriation Act (Infrastructure Expenditures), 2013-2014, be read for the first time.

The solar strategy that’s going to be coming out is going to have ambitious targets in there to try to displace up to 20 percent of the diesel in communities that are currently being used for generation of electricity. We are looking very closely at the work that’s been done by Diavik as they have invested about $30 million into wind turbines, which we think has great applicability to helping deal with the energy circumstances and challenges that are currently facing the community of Inuvik. In fact, the community of Tuk could also benefit from that type of installation, for example. The...

Thank you. Just concluding, in fact we’ll be having operational the rebuilt Bluefish site, which is about a $37 million investment in hydro. There is a tremendous amount of work that’s been done on the Taltson expansion, for example, and now we just have to have the debate on the transmission line and how do we proceed to link those two systems so that in fact we can become more energy efficient.

Everything we do as a government is looking towards the long-term of minimizing our costs and reliance on fossil fuels. Our Greenhouse Gas Strategy is predicated on trying to limit emissions and that’s...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wish to table the following two documents, entitled Supplementary Estimates (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 2, 2012-13, and Supplementary Estimates (Operations Expenditures), No. 2, 2012-2013.

As well, I wish to table the following two documents, entitled the Conference Management Authorities Species at Risk Annual Report 2011-2012, and the Northwest Territories Species at Risk Committee Annual Report 2011-2012.

Thank you. I agree with the Member that the whole area of wood gasification is of great potential and of great interest to us. Combined heat and power as it now exists, as far as I understand it, is for every megawatt of power electricity that you generate, you have to be prepared to somehow capture and put to use four megawatts of heat, four to five megawatts of heat. So it is an area with challenges. We are looking to the day when, as we watch the technology expand, of something that would be applicable in the communities that are in the Boreal Forest and maybe those outside where we could...

I would point out that while we are an active participant in this, this is a major federal site. It will continue to be a federal site in perpetuity going forward. We are involved. The issue is I would have to have the Member show me or prove to me in this area where there is a multitude of opinions, while we may disagree how what it is being done does not protect those interests. They may not agree. They may not like them. They may prefer another approach. Decisions had to be made and were made and we’re doing the best job possible. I would be happy to have that discussion with the Member...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It was not an issue that came before Cabinet for any type of approval or review.