I appreciate the Minister’s platitudes about trying to be heroic on a territorial level. I am sorry. Can someone give him a flag of the territory? On one hand he is interested in spending money in a prudent way, but there is no way of saying that we are. Why would we keep a facility open for one inmate? That is kind of the point, which is it doesn’t make an economic sense. There has to be a breakeven point that makes sense, and let politicians make the political decisions as to where it is. Ultimately the issue comes down to if the politicians don’t have the facts it is difficult for us to make these types of decisions.
That is kind of why I am asking what is stopping the department. If the Minister just doesn’t want to do one because he just doesn’t want to do one, maybe he is afraid of the fact that we would see quite a disparity of numbers. Perhaps that is the issue, but that is why I am asking, let’s do the numbers. Why be afraid of the information? Thank you, Madam Chair.
The Member keeps referring to the fact that we have a facility with one person in it. I just have to state again – we said it several times – we have no facilities with one person in it. All of our facilities have large numbers of people in them. We have a facility, a youth facility here in Yellowknife that houses both youth male and youth female. At this point we have one female offender in that facility, but it is still a facility and it still has a number of people in it.
I am interested in fiscal responsibility. I have sat, in the last four years, in front of this department during business planning where we are discussing exactly the types of things my colleague is suggesting, which is prudent use of money where we have seen what this department has spent and how they spent their money and how they ensure that there is money available for programming. I would suggest that when it comes time to do business planning, maybe the Member should take a look at the business plan provided and we can dig into these types of questions at that time. We are talking about capital right now, Madam Chair.
We are talking about investment in capital for further growth and we have to ask ourselves at the same time, is this good management of money. Ultimately it comes back to the question of good fiscal responsibility would look at this and ask these types of questions and allow the political types of decisions left up to the politicians. That said, it ties it all together. Then we make the decision on policy because we believe in them. Under fiscal and responsible point of view, what is to stop the Minister for asking the cost of these? If you want to invest in capital facilities, we need to understand how it benefits us over the longer haul. Thank you.
It would be very difficult for us to determine what the per day cost to different jurisdictions are with respect to their facilities, but it still comes down to the bottom line: Will we be able to ensure that our residents have northern specific programming that we, as territorial politicians, have indicated in the past that we want?
In every jurisdiction the cost is different per facility. We know that. We also know what our costs are and we are planning based on future needs, what we know or what we predict will be the number of inmates coming down the pipes in the future, including with things like Bill C-10.
Right now we don’t actually have any facilities in front of us and we are continuing to plan and making decisions based on what we believe is going to happen in the future with respect to our actual corrections facilities.
For us to support further investment in capital initiatives, we should have a context as to what the true costs are. That is why I keep coming back to it. We have to evaluate a longer term strategy with the focus on where our money is better spent.
Again, we have alternative measures that have always been called upon. Maybe they need more support, more bolstering. What money is being kept away from alternative options because maybe money isn’t being spent efficiently?
That goes back to the point of using a cost-benefit analysis. I didn’t ask to do an evaluation of other jurisdictions. I am not sure where that came up from. I suggested that, if it made sense, other jurisdictions can take inmates at a certain cost. The point being is that we should know what it costs us. That is the day-to-day business. When someone comes with a capital request, we should also have an assessment as to what it costs. Thank you.
It appears to be a bit of a contradiction. I’m not sure if I fully understand. If the Member wants us to do a cost-benefit analysis, we are going to have to know the costs that exist in the southern jurisdictions. That was where that comment came from.
When we are planning our facilities, we have to go through a number of processes to determine the costs. To do those analyses, we also have to identify what all the costs in the facility will be, including the human resources and all the other costs that are going to come down the pipes. That needs to be part of our planning process. This department, as all the other departments, do that.
Thank you, Minister Abernethy. I would like to remind Members that we are discussing the 2012-13 Capital Estimates. I have been granting quite a bit of licence here, but we are trying to talk about the capital estimates. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The Minister mentioned Bill C-10. I want to just follow up very quickly, because, obviously, according to the discussion earlier in the House today – and I know the Minister is well aware and working on this – there are costs associated with this legislation. Just for efficiency, I will ask two questions right away here. Is there any work that the Minister has done on costing of likely new infrastructure needs resulting from the impacts of Bill C-10 that he can report on today? When might be the earliest point when we would expect such needs to materialize as a result of Bill C-10? Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Abernethy.
When I became the Minister of Justice I asked the department to do a bit of an analysis and start an analysis on what we think the implications of Bill C-10 will be, and some of those implications could conceivably be increased capacity requirements in our different facilities, a new pod possibly, the adult facility here in Yellowknife, but also the facility in Fort Smith which is already designed to be a little bit larger than the facility that is there now, as well as the old female facility in Inuvik.
As far as the costs of the facilities, Mr. Bromley, anything we toss out now will be kind of a real shot in the dark. We have some Class C estimates on the Fort Smith facility which is around $35 million. The cost to expand the North Slave Correctional Facility – and I would be happy to take you out there if you haven’t already had a tour – there is actually an area on the North Slave Correctional Facility where we can add a pod. It was always designed with the ability to add a pod, should the capacity requirements ever increase at the North Slave Correctional Facility. Those plans are in the pipe. We know what we have to do to increase that, but I can’t tell you what the cost of adding that pod would be right now.
The department is doing some analysis as part of their analysis of the impacts of Bill C-10 which will hopefully have some of that information, but we haven’t been able to absolutely quantify that yet. But we know the Class C estimate for the facility in Fort Smith is around $35 million.
The second question was: When might be the earliest point where we would expect the need for such structures resulting from the impacts of Bill C-10 to materialize? That is obviously important for the planning side of the equation. I appreciate any response the Minister might be able to provide. Thank you.
This is actually one of the areas that we have been struggling with, is trying to figure out actually when we are going to start feeling the impacts of Bill C-10. I am not 100 percent sure, but we understand that parts of Bill C-10 could be implemented as early as six months from now, half a year. It is hard to say, but we are attempting to quantify it. As we get more information and we feel closer to that, I am happy to share that with committee, absolutely.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Are you done, Mr. Bromley? Mr. Moses.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I had one quick question. When it comes to building capital projects such as infrastructure like the jails that we’re going to house people in, do you ever do any consulting with other departments, such as the Department of Health, to work on treatment centres, as well, or transition phase components to that building, rather than work on putting two infrastructures in a community? It would be better money and cost effective to have the same water and sewage system put into one building where on one side would be a transition back into society or partly working with a treatment centre. So when buildings like this go up, we can actually add on to infrastructure and cut down on costs for other capital projects in years to come. Does the Department of Justice, when they do look at buildings like this, consult with other departments on how they can better serve people of the North than the spending of dollars that this government does?
Thank you, Mr. Moses. Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I’m not aware of whether or not the department has had many consultations with the Department of Health or any other buildings on how we can achieve economies of scale in our construction. We do know that we have specialized buildings, just like Health has very specialized buildings. As far as utilities, there may be options to do something like that and that might be a better question for Public Works and Services.
With respect to the building in Fort Smith, we are trying to achieve some economies of scale by tying into some of the heating and utilities systems that exist in the facility that is going to stay in Fort Smith. There are going to be two facilities in Fort Smith, a male facility and a female facility. We’re looking at finding ways to utilize some of the mechanical systems to reduce our costs, reduce our footprint when we actually get around to constructing the facility in Fort Smith.
With respect to the conversation about the economies of scale between the departments, I’m happy to talk to my colleague, the Minister responsible for Public Works and Services, to see what kind of opportunities exist in the future, absolutely.
No further questions. I just think it would be in the best interest of both departments to work together on how we can serve, especially with a lot of the discussions earlier today on mental health and addictions, how we incarcerate a lot of people into the systems. That when we do build facilities, we offer buildings that offer services that would cut down our costs that can go into other areas. Just a general comment.
Thank you, Mr. Moses. Are we done with general comments as opposed to general questions? We can move on to detail?
Agreed.
Okay. We will start with page 7-4, Justice, activity summary, services to government, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summery, zero. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Page 7-6, Justice, activity summary, legal aid services, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, zero. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Page 7-8, Justice, activity summary, court services, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, $338,000. Are we agreed?
Agreed.
Page 7-11, Justice, activity summary, community justice and corrections, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, $364,000. Are we agreed?
Agreed.
Page 7-14, Justice, activity summary, services to public, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, zero. Are we agreed?
Agreed.
Page 7-2, Justice, department summary, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, $702,000. Is committee agreed?
Agreed.
Does committee agree that we have concluded consideration of the Department of Justice?
Agreed.
Thank you, Minister. Thank you to your witnesses. I would ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to escort the witnesses from the Chamber.
The next department on our list is Municipal and Community Affairs. We have some time left on the clock. Do we want to start with opening comments? All right. Committee is agreed. Oh, we need witnesses first, don’t we? Yes. Thank you. Mr. McLeod, do you have witnesses you wish to bring into the Chamber?
Yes, I would, Madam Chair.
Sergeant-at-Arms, would you escort the witnesses into the Chamber?
Welcome, witnesses. Mr. McLeod, would you introduce your witnesses for us, please.
Thank you, Madam Chair. On my left I have Mr. Tom Williams, deputy minister. On my right is Ms. Eleanor Young. She is the assistant deputy minister of regional operations.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Is committee agreed that we will have opening comments, not opening questions, thank you, and on the capital budget, not the operations and maintenance budget?
Agreed.
We are agreed. Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. As MLA with the most communities, as I travel to the communities the leadership often ask me about capital planning transfers. They’re very grateful for it and part of the New Deal is that the communities are able to make their own decisions about when and where to buy their capital or to build buildings, et cetera. They’re often a little leery about the O and M formula. I think I raised it with the MACA Minister in the last Assembly and I think they said there was some kind of review happening in terms of the formula financing for O and M. In fact, I think, for example, the community of Jean Marie, I think all their existing building assets get transferred over to them April 1st and they’re very concerned that there may not be enough O and M money attached to it. They feel that while it was a great idea, now the communities are stuck with the buildings, especially in the smaller communities. They have extra additional costs of bringing in plumbers and carpenters to help with their repairs, or boiler mechanics, et cetera. I’d just like to know once again if that review is going to be taken for the formula financing for O and M as it’s related to the capital buildings being transferred to the communities and any new buildings that they do build.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Mr. McLeod.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The Member is correct; there is a review that’s happening right now. We’re hoping to have the work completed by April 1st. When we do the budget session in May/June, I think that’s when we’re looking at the O and M budget for next year. Some of our findings we may be able to incorporate into the May/June budget session.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Are there any further general comments on the Department of MACA? Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I need to raise again the need for building standards for our communities. Most if not all jurisdictions in Canada provide this and, somewhat mysteriously, this department or this government resists that responsibility. Yet the communities, if you read the resolutions and so on of the Northwest Territories Association of Communities, want building standards and they want support in inspection of such infrastructure and assistance in that.
My general comment is when, oh when, will we get building standards for our communities that will help them enjoy the sorts of efficiencies and operational savings that GNWT, for example, enjoys with our 25 percent better than national model Energy Building Code standards?
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. McLeod.
Thank you, Madam Chair. It’s a discussion that the Member and I have had before. I’ve said the communities do a very good job in planning for and their buildings as up to standard, if not above standard, as possible. If the Member feels that we as a department or we as a government need to come up with standards that we set that the communities have to follow, even though they’re building all their buildings according to code and according to standards, because they realize it would be beneficial on their part and some significant savings, too, if they were to design their buildings above standard, it’s a discussion that I’ll commit to the Member that we’ll have with the communities. I still believe they’re doing a very good job and I think we’ve seen examples of that before, where some of them are incorporating biomass heating into their plans and some are taking residual heat off another building. We’ve seen pretty good examples of some forward thinking by the communities. Thank you.
I appreciate the Minister’s offer to take this forward to discuss this with communities. I just want to emphasize that I’m not asking for anything exceptional; I’m asking for the norm, and am mystified by the resistance to what has obviously been proven to be useful across Canada.
Again, I appreciate the Minister’s offer and I look forward to the results of that discussion, and I urge him to take a look at the resolutions of the NWT Association of Communities on this subject. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. I think that was just a comment. Alright, committee, any further general comments on Municipal and Community Affairs? Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a couple of comments. We were talking on just the building design. One of my constituent communities had expressed a desire to see if there could be some discussions perhaps explored. I’m not familiar if those discussions have taken place. I’m talking about the Hamlet of Enterprise. They’ve indicated an interest to see if it is possible to look at maybe making an addition to their hamlet office to see if there could be at least some possibilities of maybe placing some additional rooms to the hamlet office to house a temporary school. I wonder if the Minister or the department has perhaps engaged in discussion with the community of Enterprise whether there are at least some points of consensus to see if further discussions could take place.
I understand there’s a leadership election in the community of Enterprise. However, what I’ve thus far heard consistently is that there is a need for a school in Enterprise, and if perhaps the other department, Education, could maybe coordinate that so that maybe MACA could at least engage in discussion with Enterprise. Perhaps that’s been done, but I just wanted to know if there were discussions that have taken place.
