My questions today are for the Premier.
We elect people to our cabinet to serve and protect the public interest. The Premier, as the former and current Finance Minister, must be fully aware of the demands on our limited resources. Today, as I speak, our high school in Hay River is closed because we have not had the capital required to do a mid-life retrofit on it, as one example. And there are so many more.
Our financial exposure on the Deh Cho Bridge could impact the financial capacity of our government for many years to come and our available capital dollars. Although it would cost us money to get out of this agreement for the Deh Cho Bridge, would the Premier please commit to seeking a way to determine that cost for us?
Cost overruns on a project — on any project in the Northwest Territories — are a real factor that we have to look at, in terms of the potential impact it may have on us as the Government of the Northwest Territories and our future ability. That's why, as part of the agreement signed during the previous government, a guaranteed maximum price was put in place, as were a pre-funded contingency, insurance, bonding, an independent engineer auditing the construction, and a project management board made up of the Government of the Northwest Territories, the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation and the lending agency that's involved in this. So those factors have been put in place.
As for the request to look at what that impact may be — if I understood the question correctly — of us withdrawing from the process, we shall endeavour to get that information.
I appreciate that response from the Premier because in order for us to really have an effective discussion and dialogue with the people of the North about this, that is a very key piece of information that we need.
The Premier outlined some of the precautions and undertakings the government has put in place with respect to this contract. But we've been told — and I need to understand this — that there is a fixed price on the construction of the bridge. I'd like to know what measures have been put in place in the agreement to protect this government in terms of cost overruns.
In terms of potential cost overruns, I've gone over some of those areas where, as we've been at the table, we have been looking at the potential impact around that guaranteed price, the fixed-price contract. The pre-funded contingency is in place. The bonding, the independent engineer auditing the construction, and the project management board are also going to be put in place as this project proceeds.
Those are the general areas that are being looked at. As we deal with those, as well there are the eligible and ineligible costs that could affect the different firms involved in this. And that has also been put in place.
I am obviously worried about the eligible cost overruns because those are the ones that could very much affect the total price of this project.
To the total price…. We understand we have a business plan in place through a toll charge to recover much of the capital cost of this project. But to the integrity of that business plan and the business case and the projected volumes of traffic that are contained in the business plan, I’d like to know how our government has protected our interests by contemplating the effect of a private operator setting up a ferry on the Mackenzie River to haul traffic and also the possibility of a private contractor actually constructing an ice bridge over the Mackenzie to haul freight over.
What has been put in place in the agreement to protect us from seriously impacting our business case by that happening? I don’t know why they couldn’t do it. It seems cheap enough to build an ice bridge.
We have to look at those scenarios. They have been brought up from time to time in discussions. But anybody accessing those areas would have to get proper permits to proceed with, for example, building an ice road or a ferry for construction. They’d need to work on landings and so on. We’d have to look at that piece to see what could be put in place, if anything.
Final supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.
It seems, in other words, there has been no contemplation of such a thing happening. There’s probably nothing stopping it from happening. The government’s been able to do it for years and years. I don’t see what would stop a private operator from doing that.
Mr. Speaker, we were promised many, many times during briefings that we would get a chance to have a look at the concession agreement that was signed in the last government. This concession agreement has been now made available.
But I would like the Premier today to remind me why that was not available previously, and why now it’s only available to Members on a confidential basis?
I can’t speak for what the previous government had decided on. I know the discussions at times were a negotiation back and forth, and the agreements had to be concluded. From our point, as I requested to sit before committee and deal with the issue of Deh Cho Bridge, requests were made. I made commitments, and I followed up on them.
