Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh

Statements in Debates

Debates of , 17th Assembly, 5th Session (day 73)

That is one of the things that, as a division, starting on April 1st, we will be following up on very soon into the creation of that division.

Debates of , 17th Assembly, 5th Session (day 73)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. No, that is not the only safety requirement. We ensure that the contractors are able to provide a letter indicating they are in good standing with WSCC. However, that’s not the only requirement. We have construction safety on the agenda before a contract is awarded and there are several items the contractor must have in place before they are able to contract with GNWT. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Debates of , 17th Assembly, 5th Session (day 73)

Thank you, Madam Chair. We could look at the information, the science behind the production of liquefied natural gas, as a government and report back to the House on our findings.

Debates of , 17th Assembly, 5th Session (day 73)

Thank you. Certainly, we would take the lead in the initiative. Again, we would work with other departments that are involved in the industry. Thank you.

Debates of , 17th Assembly, 5th Session (day 73)

Thank you, Madam Chair. I’d like to have the deputy minister provide that information on the mandate of the new energy division.

Debates of , 17th Assembly, 5th Session (day 73)

The Member is correct. As the House knows, we had lowered the fuel costs, using our Stabilization Fund, between 8 and 9 cents recently. Now that we’re finishing our deliveries, we’re seeing more savings and fully intend on lowering the fuel costs as we’re finished deliveries into the communities. At this point, even with the lower cost of fuel – and it’s a fairly substantial drop in the cost of fuel – biomass is still feasible. Maybe the payback would be extended a couple of years perhaps, but we were getting a fairly decent quick payback on biomass, so we still consider biomass to be a...

Debates of , 17th Assembly, 5th Session (day 73)

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess the best way to answer the question is that the total cost of this bundle here is $96 million. What we’re doing is we have the bundle divided into four fiscal years. In this year, the $28 million, we will be trying to load as much of the federal money, the Building Canada funding, to the front end of this agreement as possible. But at the end of the day, it’s going to be spread out over 10 years.

I don’t have the matching number here, but I could get that information for committee.

Debates of , 17th Assembly, 5th Session (day 73)

Thank you, Madam Chair. The fuel originally comes from a refinery in Edmonton and then from there we truck it to Hay River and distribute it from… Pardon me. We rail it to Hay River and then from there we truck it to the area. Right now we are trucking it to all the communities that we’re responsible for.

Debates of , 17th Assembly, 5th Session (day 73)

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is part of the original bundle. We had started the Detah road with capital. We put capital into the first section of it, and it was an opportunity to finish off the Detah access road using Building Canada Funds where we thought we would achieve some cost sharing, so we moved it into Building Canada. We only need it for one year, then we’re finished that access road.

Debates of , 17th Assembly, 5th Session (day 73)

Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, I would.