Debates of August 21, 2007 (day 14)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in my Member’s statement today, I talked about the deep sea port and military exercise facility that was announced by the Prime Minister to be located in Nunavut. We all appreciate that our community rangers do a lot of exercises with the military in the wintertime. But at the same time, I think it is important that the West be considered for one of these facilities, either a deep sea port or a military exercise facility. The Premier has been talking with the Prime Minister on occasion with regard to Canadian sovereignty. I would like to ask the Premier, in his discussions with the Prime Minister, on whether he raised the issue about a deep sea port in the West? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Pokiak. The honourable Premier, Mr. Handley.

Return To Question 168-15(6): Deep Sea Port And Military Training Facility In Western Arctic

Mr. Speaker, I have raised the merits of that port on the western end of the Northwest Passage and promoted Tuktoyaktuk as both a port for Arctic sovereignty reasons as well as economic reasons since it is in the centre of the offshore oil and gas. I raised it with the Prime Minister, with Minister Prentice at various venues that I have spoken at over the past months. I continue to believe it is a good proposal, one that we, as a territory, should continue to promote. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Supplementary, Mr. Pokiak.

Supplementary To Question 168-15(6): Deep Sea Port And Military Training Facility In Western Arctic

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to ask the Premier with regard to the Prime Minister’s recent announcement. I am sure that the Prime Minister, with his colleagues in Ottawa, probably talked about a deep sea port and military facility over the past few months or so. They probably decided at that time that Nunavut would be an ideal place. Given the recent announcement by the Prime Minister that Nanisivik and Resolute Bay would be identified for these two applications, I would like to ask the Premier if he will continue to work with the Prime Minister and his Cabinet to lobby for the West. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Pokiak. Mr. Handley.

Further Return To Question 168-15(6): Deep Sea Port And Military Training Facility In Western Arctic

Mr. Speaker, without taking anything away from Nunavut or seeming to take things away from that territory, I will certainly lobby for the development of our capacity in the Western Arctic. I believe that any shipping that is going to happen through the Northwest Passage is going to have to be between Banks Island and the mainland. That is a relatively narrow body of water and it is an area that would be quite simple, in my view, to monitor.

Mr. Speaker, the other reason I continue to lobby for the West is because of the oil and gas and the interest by both United States, through Alaska, and our government on who owns what water in the Beaufort. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, too, would like to probe a bit more on the Deh Cho Bridge. My question would be directed to the Premier. I, too, would like to thank him for the invitation to attend his celebration on Friday, but it came as quite late notice. I am afraid I have some other engagements that day. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier for some detail on exactly what it is that will be signed on Friday. Can he outline the particulars and the extent of the commitments that will be made on Friday by this government, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. The honourable Premier, Mr. Handley.

Return To Question 169-15(6): Deh Cho Bridge Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am sorry the Member can’t attend the celebration, but if he wishes to send a message, then I would be happy to deliver that on his behalf.

---Laughter

I say that most sincerely, because I think the people in Fort Providence that combine the community alliance would appreciate that from Members.

Mr. Speaker, the GNWT is not signing anything at the celebration, but there is a conditional contractual agreement. That is the term they use. It is being signed between the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation and the contractor at that ceremony. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Supplementary To Question 169-15(6): Deh Cho Bridge Project

Conditional contractual. Mr. Speaker, the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation, to the best of my knowledge, has an extremely limited equity that they have been able to put forward for this project. It is all on the basis of collecting tolls and of the additional investment that we are going to make through the costs we are otherwise putting into the ferry, the ice road and the additional $2 million.

I have to continue asking. Just what are the commitments, then, that the GNWT is either directly or indirectly put on the line here when this agreement will be signed by the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation, who, in effect, are agents of the GNWT in constructing this bridge, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Handley.

Further Return To Question 169-15(6): Deh Cho Bridge Project

I am not sure I understand what is meant by who is our agent. We don’t have an agent as such. The bridge is being built and is going to be owned by the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation for a period of 35 years. During that time, they will, as the Member has said, collect tolls and do the maintenance and so on.

During the construction, they are the ones who will sign a contract with the construction firm, Adcon, who is doing the building of the bridge. Mr. Speaker, when they sign the agreement this week, then it is for the beginning. The contractor wants to begin the construction this fall in order to complete it by November 2010. If he doesn’t start this fall, then it pushes everything back next summer. So we have, as a government, given an additional $5 million advance to the Bridge Corporation to enable them to be able to sign on and start some of the work this fall. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Supplementary To Question 169-15(6): Deh Cho Bridge Project

Thank you for the information. Now we know that $5 million is what we have on the table for the initial start of the construction. Mr. Speaker, looking back at some files from the previous debate on the Bridge Corporation from 2003, in March of 2003, the NWT Association of Communities passed a resolution. It is in support of the construction of a bridge. It resolved that the NWT Association of Communities supports the proposal so long as the benefits to users can be shown to significantly exceed the costs. Can the Premier produce information that would support and endorse the Association of Communities’ support for this as long as there are significant benefits? Where are those benefits, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Handley.

Further Return To Question 169-15(6): Deh Cho Bridge Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I said earlier, the cost to the users of the bridge is $6 a tonne in 2002 dollars, or roughly $6.75 today and some other figure in 2010 when it is completed. Nothing has changed that. Mr. Speaker, I expect that, because nothing has changed, the Association of Communities will still take the same position they had before, because their costs have not increased relative to everything else that is going up, of course, in life and the cost of living in the North.

Mr. Speaker, let’s go beyond communities. The additional benefit is to the mining communities. Mr. Speaker, that is essential. Now, Mr. Speaker, I have to say that even this fall, we are under pressure to operate the ferry 24 hours a day starting this fall in order to keep up with what industry needs coming across with the ferry. They are concerned. There is going to be a backlog of vehicles starting in October on the ferry. The ferry is not going to be able to keep up. So this is important to industry. It is important now. They need it not just for costing but also to be able to run their increased number of mines on this side of the river. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Final supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Supplementary To Question 169-15(6): Deh Cho Bridge Project

Mr. Speaker, those are all very valid arguments and discussions. It is precisely the kind of thing that I and other Members of this Assembly are pleading for. Get this information out here so that we have some sense. I can’t believe that the Premier is saying to us that nothing has changed. Mr. Speaker, this thing has gone from $60 million to $150 million. That is still just an estimate. That has changed. He has suggested that the toll fee isn’t going up from that originally projected. Arguably he is right. But we are going to be paying the same fee for twice as long. Twice as much money is going to go into the same thing. That is what has changed. It is astonishing that the Premier does not at least recognize that and give us some of the information to back up why this is a good project.

In 2003, Mr. Speaker, a significant study, well over 50 pages, was produced on the cost-benefit analysis of the Deh Cho Bridge. Why doesn’t the Premier give us the same thing updated five years later with a project that has doubled the cost to show us that this is still a good one? That is what we are asking for. Prove it.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Handley.

Further Return To Question 169-15(6): Deh Cho Bridge Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The cost of the bridge has gone up; there is no doubt about that. The cost to the public has not gone up. It is still $6, or $6.75. I don’t know how many times I can repeat that. That has not changed. Mr. Speaker, why has the bridge gone up? How is it being managed? How are we dealing with all of this? We did a presentation to the committee on July 12th. I don’t want to go through all of those pages, but I will give the Member a copy of it. That can help him to understand why it has gone up and how it is being handled.

Mr. Speaker, while the costs have gone up on the bridge, the costs of everything else has gone up too. Mr. Speaker, the number of tonnes going over that bridge has gone up and will continue to go up as there are more mines and other economic activity. Mr. Speaker, there are more people living on this side of the river. All of that is changing, but that doesn’t mean that we have to change from $6 or $6.75 a tonne. That amount to the public is still the same as it was in 2002. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. I just have a request from the Minister responsible for the NWT Housing Corporation. This is just with regards to the new senior six-plex that is currently being constructed in Fort Resolution. The seniors' society is grateful for the NWT Housing Corporation moving forward expeditiously on this project and getting it done really quickly in the last few months. It has been moving forward really quickly. This is just a request from some seniors that are looking to move into this new seniors' unit. A lot of these seniors currently live in their own housing units right now, but they require home care services just for the fact that some of them just can’t get in and out of their bathtubs, Mr. Speaker, no matter how many rails and hand bars they have. These fairly cheap bathtubs that the Housing Corporation does provide in these government housing units are slippery and small. Seniors have a hard time getting in and out. I just want to request if the Minister can make a recommendation to his department to look at maybe replacing the standard bathtub and tub surround with the handle bars and everything in these units to putting in these walk-in bathtubs that you see on television? One of the seniors did bring this up to me. He said, if I had one of those Ed McMahon bathtubs, I wouldn’t need home care services and the government wouldn’t have to provide me with money.

---Laughter

I just want to see if the NWT Housing Corporation would consider looking at maybe some cost-benefit analysis of eliminating home care and providing some Ed McMahon bathtubs in all of these units. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. The honourable Premier, Mr. Handley.

Return To Question 170-15(6): Construction Of Seniors' Housing Unit In Fort Resolution

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Member is obviously watching the same television channel I am. I have seen those premier bathtubs advertised for ever and ever. Ed McMahon calls them premier. They look very comfortable. They look very nice for people to step into. Mr. Speaker, I can say that the Housing Corporation is doing a review of those tubs to see whether or not they are what Ed McMahon says they are.

---Laughter

Are they really that good a product? If they are, then definitely we would consider them. I don’t think they will eliminate the need for home care, but they will certainly help some seniors who have difficulty stepping into a regular tub. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Supplementary, Mr. Villeneuve.

Supplementary To Question 170-15(6): Construction Of Seniors' Housing Unit In Fort Resolution

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am glad that the Housing Corporation is reviewing that. When can we expect this? I don’t see any real rocket science in this review, Mr. Speaker. There is a 1-800 number there. It is on the Internet. I have looked at it myself. It is not very expensive. Can the Minister seriously direct his department before they start installing these tub surrounds in those seniors’ units? Would they consider those premier bathtubs to be installed in all seniors’ units in the NWT? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. Mr. Handley.

Further Return To Question 170-15(6): Construction Of Seniors' Housing Unit In Fort Resolution

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Some Members are suggesting that the Premier should test one, but I am not interested right now. Mr. Speaker, we are looking at them. I will have to get back to the Member on when we can have a review done, but, all joking aside, seriously, we are looking at them. They look like tubs that would be much more convenient for some seniors. I will let the Member know as soon as I can how soon we can get a definite answer. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Supplementary, Mr. Villeneuve.

Supplementary To Question 170-15(6): Construction Of Seniors' Housing Unit In Fort Resolution

Thank you. I just want to make a point that a lot of these seniors that do live in their own houses do require home care visits just for the very fact that they need a bath, Mr. Speaker, nothing more and nothing less. A bathtub like that for a lot of seniors that have mentioned it, say I wouldn’t need the home care to come over for three hours a day just to give me a bath because if I had one of these walk through ones, I could do it myself. I just want to make sure that the Housing Corporation really takes a serious look at it. It is not very much more than what the money we would save in home care visits and the old bathtubs and the health risks associated with the seniors stepping in and out of these small, slippery, cheaper tubs, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Transportation. Can the Minister tell me in the House to the people in the Sahtu when will the Great Bear River Bridge be built?

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Minister responsible for Transportation, Mr. Menicoche.

Return To Question 171-15(6): Great Bear River Bridge Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Bear River Bridge project had to be delayed as of last year. We are assessing right now the new federal infrastructure money, how to invest it in our plans in the near future, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.

Supplementary To Question 171-15(6): Great Bear River Bridge Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister tell me that the plans that are going forward to the federal government for whatever plans they are making, why doesn’t it include the Sahtu people in terms of looking at some real solutions in terms of building this bridge? Can the Minister commit to this House here, this day here, that the Bear River Bridge is a high priority as he said it is -- it is on the shelves -- to take it off the shelves to be constructed just like the Deh Cho Bridge project?

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Menicoche.

Further Return To Question 171-15(6): Great Bear River Bridge Project

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. As such, it’s a priority in the CSIF strategy document for our government to build that bridge and it still is a priority for us to construct the Bear River Bridge. However, financing right now due to increasing inflationary pressures have put it out of reach of our current budget and that’s what we’re looking at right now, Mr. Speaker. Thanks.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.

Supplementary To Question 171-15(6): Great Bear River Bridge Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I get some different stories here, but, Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Minister, because of the financial constraints, why did this government not come to the Sahtu and say we have an issue here, we’re short $15 million, let’s look at a solution to build this bridge? Why hasn’t this government come to the Sahtu to say can you help us? We’re willing to help. Why haven’t they come? When will they come to the Sahtu and demand that this bridge here…We’ll demand this bridge here gets built. Where is the money?

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Menicoche.

Further Return To Question 171-15(6): Great Bear River Bridge Project

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I’d just like to say to the Member that it was my pleasure to accompany him to travel to the Sahtu region in July. It was great to be there and see the country and meet with the communities there, especially in Tulita. They were very concerned about the Bear River Bridge project and I indicated to them at that time it was once again due to inflationary pressures. So I had to red flag the project, we had to put it aside and we have to assess our current budget and the current federal announcements of new funding of how we’re going to best move this project forward. And he’s right; we are short $15 million. We had originally been approved and budgeted at $25 million to build the bridge, we went and bought the steel, were just about to build a bridge and then, for whatever reason, in this part of our world there, Mr. Speaker, and this segment, the bridge costs almost doubled. They went from $25 million to $40 million. In a government of our size, we just cannot find that kind of money to do a bridge. We had to put it aside and we’re looking at current ways of financing and constructing that bridge, but it is a priority, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Time for question period has expired. I’ll allow the Member a short supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.

Supplementary To Question 171-15(6): Great Bear River Bridge Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think we’re going to change the name of the Bear River Bridge to the Red Flag Bridge. You got red flagging going on on that side of the government here, Mr. Speaker. On this specific issue on the Bear River Bridge, the Deh Cho Bridge is going ahead. Why not the Sahtu? Certainly someone has taken our money from the Bear River Bridge and put it somewhere else.

Ooh.

We want to know when that bridge is going over the Bear River. So can the Minister, again, look at plans to start phasing in parts of the work of the Bear River Bridge? I appreciate the Minister and Mr. Roland coming into my region and looking and we had to go across by boat because we had no bridge across. So I wanted to ask the Minister, can he look at his department to phase in parts of this and that we see a bridge in a couple of years? Thank you.