Wendy Bisaro

Okay, so if we’re out money, is it money that is recoverable? If we are paying interest on it, who are we doing the favour to and can we get the money back from them? Thank you.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I wanted to ask a question here under the health services programs. The funding for projected increased costs for the provision of health care services to non-NWT residents, I just want to totally understand this. This is a lot of money; it’s $4.7 million. This cost is for the provision of health care services to people who don’t live in the NWT. I gather that it is recoverable from the jurisdiction where these people live. I’m struggling to understand how we could underestimate such a large number. Maybe I can get an explanation from the department. Thank you.

So just one last question. I know that my experience has been that we regularly encounter extra costs for people in care, particularly people in care down south but also physician services that we access from down south. The Minister mentioned changing the base budgets in a number of places. Is services for people in care and physician services and so on, hospitals out of the territory, are those the areas where we’re increasing base funding, or maybe can the Minister tell me what departments we are increasing base funding for?

If the Minister could advise how much over that we are. Thank you. What is the total right now of our reserve? We are minus how much? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that consideration of Tabled Document 44-17(4), Supplementary Estimates (Operations Expenditures), No. 4, 2011-2012, be now concluded and that Tabled Document 44-17(4) be reported and recommended as ready for further consideration in formal session through the form of an appropriation bill. Thank you.

---Carried

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to ask a question here. The description indicates that this is a department over-expenditure, but then it also says it doesn’t represent an additional outlay of cash. Could I just get a bit of an explanation as to why we have an over-expenditure that doesn’t actually affect our bottom line, from the sounds of things? Thank you.

Mr. Menicoche, what is the wish of committee?

Thank you, committee. Does committee agree that we have concluded consideration of Tabled Document 50-17(4), Supplementary Estimates (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 1, 2013-14?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to provide a bit of an explanation of where I’m coming from with my questions and concerns. I didn’t really go into that fully when I asked questions earlier.

First of all, I’d like to thank Mr. Bromley for bringing up the point that there really is a glacier as part of that road, the Wisconsin Glacier. It is noted in the risk matrix, which the department has recently provided for us. I’d like to also note that the Minister of Finance earlier stated, when he was making some remarks, words to the effect that Members from the south who have everything in the...

Thanks to the Minister. So, I mean, we’re working on a best guess, and I guess that with any project we’re working on a best guess, but it doesn’t give me much comfort at this point, unfortunately. It’s been mentioned several times already that we have been given, so to speak, $200 million from the federal government, and that’s a huge amount of money. I certainly appreciate the commitment of the federal government to the project. However, it’s my belief, and I believe it’s practiced elsewhere, that new roads are 100 percent paid for by the federal government and we are now getting 67 percent...