Sandy Lee

Range Lake

Statements in Debates

Debates of , (day 23)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, over the weekend, I got thinking about this government’s negotiating tactics and strategies with the federal government. When I saw the headline going across the television screen that read something like, NWT and Newfoundland support or like the vision of the new Harper government, Mr. Speaker, I am not sure if the national viewers would appreciate the intricacies of the NWT consensus government in the North. For certainty, I don’t believe there is, or has been, such a generalized consensus on the NWT position.

Mr. Speaker, I, for one, have stated that I...

Debates of , (day 23)

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am quoting from his answers to me on Return to Written Question 19-15(4). In the last question it says here that we…I am reading here because he did not answer my question. “We estimate that Novel home delivery and conversions will begin in 2011 and be completed by 2014.” So now we are looking at a three-year turnaround. It also states that, “We estimate delivering 460 to 470 per year.” This is an entirely new figure. Prior to this, we had been talking about the Housing Corporation possibly delivering 100 units per year and I think everyone -- and I am asking a...

Debates of , (day 23)

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a couple more questions on the Novel project. Industry contribution, once again then, could I just ask the Minister if there is any money, any amount budgeted for $297 million that would come from the ATCO in any way, because I thought for some reason that they were going to make some kind of contribution? Will they make any contribution in-kind, for example? Thank you.

Debates of , (day 23)

This project was estimated at about $200 million last year, but now it is up to almost $300 million. It is a huge project that I think the Minister would be well advised to put in writing. I am not sure that, this being a future project, should preclude that. My understanding also, Mr. Chair, is that the agreement that the former Minister Fontana gave is to the effect that the federal government will fund it at the back end, meaning that they would only invest whatever their portion is once the project is up and running, which tells me that the federal government is not ready to take those...

Debates of , (day 23)

Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to offer some comments to the Minister’s opening statement, as well. It is fair to say that probably for all Ministers in this chamber, they are probably more anxious to talk to the newly minted Cabinet Ministers in Ottawa than they might be interested in talking to us at the moment. Such is the vital importance that the federal counterparts play for our government. We have never had a change in government like this in 13 years. Pardon me? I thought the Premier was trying to say something here. If I could just finish my statement, I am just going...

Debates of , (day 23)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I hope I don’t have to quote that if he doesn’t get a crystal clear documentation of the third agreement, but I will give him the benefit of the doubt. Mr. Speaker, on the question of the first one, it’s the question of pricing as a core customer, but also the ability and flexibility to have some room to manoeuvre on to the quality of diamonds. I think there might be some room for discussion as to what things work for the cutting and polishing plant here. Because there’s a lack of a precise and clear agreement, and because of the role the GNWT has played in creating a...

Debates of , (day 23)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions are also to Minister of ITI and it’s in regards to questions earlier raised about the diamond mines and its supply relationship with the secondary mining industry. Mr. Speaker, I think we, in this House, recognize the important and positive contribution that both the diamond producers and the secondary industry provide to the North, and I don’t think I’m going to use the overused phrase of choking any mule here. I think, though, there is a role for the Minister to play in this regard, and it seems to me there are some points of differences...

Debates of , (day 22)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Sahtu, that Committee Report 7-15(4) be received by the Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Debates of , (day 22)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Your Standing Committee on Social Programs is pleased also to provide its report on the 2006-2007 Pre-Budget Review Process and commends it to the House. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Debates of , (day 22)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. With respect to the infrastructure money to the communities, it’s my understanding that those are multi-year funding in partnerships with the community governments and the GNWT and federal funding, as well as the federal gas tax. The former government, during the campaign, talked about making it multi-year. We are not certain about that. Could I just ask the Minister if the section that he has on page 5 is certain for now and not subject to change with the new government? Thank you.