Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a few more questions for the Minister of Transportation pertaining to the Deh Cho Bridge. I listened to the Minister when I was talking about the design earlier. The government has always said that the design was essentially completed. It has been essentially complete for six years now. According to the Minister, most of the components of the redesign and the design work are concluded but not all of the components are concluded. I am wondering if the Minister could elaborate a little bit more. Are we setting ourselves up for more cost overruns on this project because we do not have all the components on that design work concluded? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Minister of Transportation, Mr. Michael McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That is a question I asked our own staff and our project management team. We believe all the components are concluded sufficiently that we can make the next steps in terms of entering into a contract and start the construction process. Thank you.
The next question I have for the Minister, and we’ve talked about March 1st being an important date, I want to get back to some of the earlier questions I had on why the superstructure didn’t go to tender. People I’ve talked to in the industry and other companies that are out there in western Canada that could have bid on this work tell me that they could have had numbers into this government inside of 30 days.
I’d like to ask the Minister again, how come the project, the superstructure, the second half of this project did not go to a tender?
I’m not sure if the Member expects me to change my answer, but I just responded to that very same question a few minutes ago. It’s a result of timing. When we had information on the change of design concluded far enough, we did have engagement with our previous contractor. Those didn’t result. We recognized that we were not going to be able to conclude those discussions and, therefore, terminated our relationship and entered into discussions with a company that was familiar with the project and that was willing to move forward with this whole project and provide budgets and figures that we would be able to explore. We felt comfortable and confident that we’d be able to conclude it with this company.
I apologize if it sounds the same. March 1st is the key date that I wanted to put out there. If the government and the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation knew the problems before March 1st, like I said, it would take 30 days to go to the marketplace, get some pricing for the superstructure. That didn’t happen and now our backs are against the wall. We’re going to negotiate a contract that we obviously won’t be able to get out of. We won’t have any latitude. There’s nobody else bidding on this work. It’s one company. Again, I think given what’s happened with this project and the history of it, at the very least we should have gone out to the marketplace and tried to get the best price we could have. That obviously didn’t happen. Considering we’ve done a wholesale changeup on the project management team, it would only make sense that we would go to the marketplace. I want to ask the Minister, if we changed out the project management team, how come the decision wasn’t made to go to tender, which would have got us within that March 1st timeline?
The pieces that the Member is referring to in terms of deciding to move forward with the actual negotiations with a different firm was decided upon prior to having the decision made to remove the project management team and have a new team put in place. The project management team change was as a result of this cost overrun, that triggered the discussion. It was decided at that point that we had to make changes. There are a lot of other things that have to be factored into this decision. We have a company that’s been able to identify the steel production, the places and slots that we’ve had to reserve in terms of guaranteeing that we’re going to hit the November 2011 time frame that’s been set out to avoid further cost to this. There are a number of things that have to be taken into consideration. Of course there are a lot of other companies that are out there. We did go out to, I’d like to remind the Member as he goes back and relives history here, that we did go to a public tender at one point. We had one company come forward and they had prices that were not acceptable to us. We have a company that’s experienced, we have a company that’s familiar with the community and the project, they have identified the ability to do all the different pieces and parts that need to be accomplished to make this move forward, and we’re quite satisfied that they’ll be able to do it.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Final supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That company is also familiar with the fact that the Government of the Northwest Territories today is up against the wall. They know we’re in trouble with this project. We’re negotiating from a bad, bad position. Again, I’ve talked to people. This is unprecedented for a government in Canada to go to a sole-sourced contract on a bridge like this. Unprecedented. I’d like to ask the Minister who exactly makes up this new project management team. I’d like to know that.
I’m not able to provide that publicly at this juncture. There is a company that we have decided to use. I’m not sure if all the agreements have been signed. I’d like to confirm that prior to providing that information. I can provide that to him today in confidence, if he’d like. Along with this company we will be utilizing at least one person from our own sources that has already been working for us for some time and is quite familiar with the project. I can provide the information, I’m just reluctant to give out information that hasn’t been finalized and put out in the public yet.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.
