Mr. Speaker, I want to ask some questions today to the Premier in regard to the Deh Cho Bridge project again. I listened with interest to the comments he made previously with Mrs. Groenewegen. Yes, he is right: the last government could have looked at rescinding the Deh Cho Bridge Act. But I disagree with him on his take on the information being free flowing between the last government and Regular Members. If it was so free flowing, why would Regular Members have to pass not one but two motions calling on the government to disclose an updated cost-benefit analysis, and also to let us know what was contained in the concession agreement? So I just wanted to get that out there.
I also want to ask the Premier today if he would look at striking a peer review of the financing of the Deh Cho Bridge project.
Mr. Speaker, once again in this debate, those are actions of the 15th Legislative Assembly in terms of those motions that were passed. But in the life of this government, the 16th Assembly, the information has flowed. We’ve showed that information. We know where the dollars are. Those dollar marks haven’t changed since the last update to Members.
With the request for a peer review, this project…. The lenders have been involved with our lawyers and looking at all documentation; the process has undergone quite a review in the sense of where it is required to go.
Yes, the Member quoted the cost-benefit analysis, but let me say that as the Government of the Northwest Territories, if we used that business case for all of our communities, many of our communities would have shut down, because we would not have afforded to build in our communities. The Mackenzie Valley highway is something that at least a number of us were talking about in the 16th Assembly. It would never get built. Highway expansion in the Northwest Territories would never happen. So we are going to have to look at other ways of doing business as the Government of the Northwest Territories, and look at other options available to us.
I don’t know what it would require to do an active peer review on the financing of this, but we have had some of the largest lending agents in Canada, the Ontario teachers’ association, as well as the Sun Life Group. They are the largest lenders. They’re doing due diligence along with us. So do you want a peer review of what they’ve decided, if they decided to proceed or not.
The Members of the 15th Legislative Assembly put a lot of faith in what the government was telling them at the time. The former Premier said he would come forward with information that was going to be contained in that concession agreement before it was signed off. That never happened. The concession agreement was signed on September 28, 72 hours before the election, Mr. Speaker.
I want to ask the Premier if he is aware of whether or not the former Premier and cabinet had access to the cost-benefit analysis when Regular Members first found out any information — a little bit of information — on November 17 of last year.
Mr. Speaker, all the Member has to do is look at the date when that report was published, and he can answer his own question.
Mr. Speaker, I believe the date stamped on that thing was December of 2007, which would lead me to believe that the government — the 15th Legislative Assembly — signed a $160 million deal on behalf of the people of the Northwest Territories without that cost-benefit analysis, which says that we’re going to go from a positive $38 million impact to a negative $50 million impact. Is that true?
Mr. Speaker, once again the Member wants to debate what the previous government did, what the previous Premier did; I’m talking about the 16th Assembly and what we’ve done. We’ve provided all the information Members have asked for. They may not like it, but they’ve got the information. We’ve committed to and honoured the delivery of what they’ve asked for, and I say let’s now get on with business.
Mr. Speaker, given the fact that the previous government was signing on to a $160 million infrastructure deal, I’m wondering what role the Finance Minister would play in that. The impact that’s going to have for 35 years to come is $242 million. The former Finance Minister is still the Finance Minister, and I think he has some explaining to do, Mr. Speaker.
I don’t know if that question is in order or not. I will allow the Premier to answer, if he would like.
Mr. Speaker, as Finance Minister for the 16th Legislative Assembly, the requirements that have been made upon myself to provide information have been provided. Thank you.
