Mr. Speaker, I’d like to thank the Member for asking that question, because I did commit in the House that my department will follow up working with the community to remedy the issue of office space in the community for three different organizations. Since then, our department has been working with the organizations that have been highlighted here, with the Open Door Society and also the community library and heritage society.
We are making some progress in that area, Mr. Speaker, and there has been contact in the community. That’s what we’ve been doing since our last session. We will continue to make that effort.
Mr. Speaker, I’d just like to advise the Minister that I’ve been getting contrary information from the people that run those organizations. There hasn’t been a meeting set up, to date. As well, in some of the back-and-forth correspondence we’ve received…. I thought the intent here, too, was to appoint a contact person, a point of entry within the government that these NGOs can work with. To date, there’s been no such person established or identified. I’d like to ask the Minister: will the Minister identify a contact person these NGOs can work with?
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. I made a commitment that my department will be working with the community of Fort Simpson, specifically with those three organizations. I will make a commitment here again today that my department, my deputy and also the Director of Education Operations and Development, as a person, will be going to the community of Fort Simpson sometime next March — probably early March — to deal with that particular issue.
So we are making progress, Mr. Speaker. Like I said, we will continue to work hard with the community to identify a solution with their help and with their input.
I’d just like to ask the Minister that I be kept in the loop as they progress forward with this issue. Let me know the times and dates they’ll be in the community — proposed meeting dates. I’d like to have that information to share with those I deal with. Hopefully, they’ll be dealing with the same people at that time. Mahsi.
Mr. Speaker, it is important to keep our Members informed of our progress, so I certainly will provide what information I have to date to the Member. Certainly, we’ll keep the Member posted on our upcoming meeting with the community next month.
Final supplementary, Mr. Menicoche.
Once again, I’d like to state the urgency of this situation, because the Deh Cho Hall will be shutting down this fall, and all non-governmental organizations will be asked to vacate the premises. So once again: will the Minister convey to his department and his officials the urgency of addressing the non-governmental organizations’ needs in Fort Simpson?
Mr. Speaker, we realize the urgency. The Deh Cho Hall will be coming down, and these three organizations are desperately seeking office space. Certainly that’s part of the plan, to have our staff visit the community and work with the Member and also work with the organizations that I’ve highlighted earlier, and also work with the community. So we’re anxious to move forward on this with potential solutions to these issues that we’re faced with. Mahsi.
My questions today are for the Premier. In order for the voluntary sector and government to work more effectively together, the responsibility of maintaining a relationship should rest with the Executive. Will the Premier commit to dedicating a Minister at an Executive or cross-government level to be the primary contact for relationship-building and strategic planning with the voluntary sector as a whole?
Mr. Speaker, the fact is that right now there is a Minister who has that responsibility and does report back to cabinet as a whole. We do have a ministerial level — that level of contact — working with the organizations.
If the Member’s asking about changing it, that’s something that in we do our planning around how we work in government. That’s something that can be taken into consideration.
Having a Minister responsible for an individual department such as MACA, even though…. I mean, they have the lead role in sports and recreation. That’s not necessarily the most effective way of reaching out across the sector as a whole. There’s art; there’s health; there’s lots of different organizations, including sports — yes, granted — and justice in this sector. We need to have a coordinated approach on dealing and working with this sector. Once again, having a Minister responsible at an Executive level, at the top, would be more effective.
Coming back at you again: would the Premier reconsider his decision and identify a Minister at the Executive level to support and work with the voluntary sector to enhance it as a whole?
Mr. Speaker, one thing we need to clarify, as a number of organizations were included, as I understand it from the Members, in the volunteer sector and NGOs. We do have a Minister responsible for the volunteer area who works with them through the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs, as the Member has pointed out.
NGOs are those that, yes, may have a voluntary board but in fact receive contracts from the Government of the Northwest Territories or the federal government or other organizations. We do have to deal with that in a couple of different ways. Although we continue to work with them through departments, if it’s a health issue, our Health Minister would deal with that organization.
Again, on the voluntary side, if the Member and this Assembly agree that we should look at repositioning that — and the Member referred to the Executive in a number of places — it would fall under the Premiership’s bailiwick, I guess is the way to put it. We would look at that, but we’d have to look at the balance of the workload as well.
Mr. Speaker, there have been serious concerns raised to me by my constituents about contracting by MACA. I’d like to, without being specific to the project or anything — although it may be, theoretically — explore the policy of the department.
Let’s see. How to put this? Taking as an example a bundled water treatment call for proposal — a very large contract, obviously — does MACA have a policy to support Northern contractors over southern contractors when the Northern contract bid is competitive or the low bid and they have a proven track record? Of course, their Northern residency would be beneficial in terms of operational and any servicing requirements.
The policy that we follow and abide by is the Business Incentive Policy. In this case it was applied.
Mr. Speaker, thank you to the Minister.
Another question along those lines: before such a call for a proposal goes out and is decided, would the Minister’s department officials, when discussing such potential work with the communities that might be interested in it, typically refrain from identifying any one company as having the solution for the work to be done?
Mr. Speaker, it’s difficult to understand what the Member is asking.
This process that was undertaken was approved by cabinet. It was also presented to the Association of Municipalities, and we got a letter of support from every community involved. I think there has been a lot of awareness and a lot of support for the process that we've embarked on to try to get these water plants in the communities.
Thank you, again, to the Minister.
Just a last question here. If the department has recently worked with a company on other contracts, even — and perhaps especially — if it’s a southern contractor, would that contractor be given preference in bidding for new work or in a competition for new work? Would the department favour that company just because they’ve been working with them recently?
Mr. Speaker, any time we work with a company or a company has been involved with some of the earlier stages, whether it’s a feasibility study or other studies, we ensure that the information that goes out is equal to all parties involved.
In this case, and in most cases, we will enlist the help of a fairness commissioner or somebody of equal stature. We also set up committees or independent bodies or hire independent evaluators to work with us. That usually gives comfort to everybody that this is a fair process.
Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for the Premier, and they are in regard to the Deh Cho Bridge project.
At least three working days ago the Premier said he was going to have FMBS pull some numbers together which might give us an idea of what it would cost our government to exit the Deh Cho Bridge agreement. He made reference to having that information “in a couple of days.” I'd like to know how close we are. How is the Premier intending to share that information with us?
Mr. Speaker, if that could work. As the Member said, Friday. No. In fact, I've been having the department try to pull all this stuff together.
There are a number of factors that come in there that are hard to quantify, and that's been some of the difficulty. For example, if we as an Assembly were to decide to shut this down, what kind of domino effect could happen? That's been the problem area of trying to put this together.
I instructed them this morning, as well as through the Executive, to review what we know is on the ground and what our position is, and then just highlight what the other issues may be that have to be considered. I would provide that to the Members through the Chair of Priorities and Planning.
Mr. Speaker, I'd be most interested in knowing when that might happen, because as the Premier knows, we will all be leaving here shortly.
Speaking of leaving here, Friday is February 22. The 22nd was the day by which the legal counsel for the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation was supposed to have “dotted the i’s and crossed the t’s,” as has been referred to a number of times. I'd like to know if the Premier has had any kind of update on the status of that review that's been ongoing. If he wouldn't mind throwing in when we can get that other piece at the same time, that would be great.
Mr. Speaker, hopefully, with the direction I’ve given this morning to clarify the problems that were out there in trying to do some of the evaluation, we can get that to Members, I hope, by tomorrow.
The other question on the timelines, as we related, about the 22nd of February. The lawyers have done their work and have gone through that and now are prepared to sign the final schedule on which they were dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s.
Mr. Speaker, is there some requirement on the part of our government to also sign off on those schedules? Who would be signing on behalf of our government? Is there any way to delay that signing-off until we have received some of this information we’re asking for?
Mr. Speaker, the process is laid out that followed through from the concession agreement, the guarantee that's in place, working with the banks and their lawyers, that they’ve had a secondary review on this.
The signing is to proceed with their final work on it. If the lenders are happy with what’s been committed, then it would be proceeded with.
The Department of Transportation representatives would have to be on a number of the file schedules — or files, I guess, is the term — and there may be a few for which we're trying to get that information that would fall under the finance side or the FMB side.
For an actual schedule or timing, a decision doesn’t have to be made. Those decisions have already been in place. It is now just confirming and following through with the requirements that are being ironed out.
Final supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I just want to be clear. Is there something yet for our government to sign off with respect to these schedules, which are the appendices to the concession agreement? Do we still have requirements to officially sign something off? If that is the case, who would be signing those off on behalf of our government?
Mr. Speaker, they are, as I stated, part of the process of finalizing the agreement with the lawyers reviewing it. Signatures would need to be accepted from all the parties involved. The lending organizations, the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Department of Transportation, as well as Finance, would be required to sign off a number of the schedules. I’m not sure of the exact amount, but this is the follow-through from what was laid out there. We’re following through the process that’s already in place.
Mr. Speaker, as MLAs, we represent all the people. I’ve made reference to subsidies a few times, and how I believe sometimes we unintentionally make people dependent on the government.
I stress that to illustrate my point that there are a lot of people out there who are trying to make a go of it. As a government we should do what we can to help them along. I appreciate the government trying to give out subsidies to help people along, but it has to be something that’s fair for everybody.
I’d like to direct my questions today to the Minister of EC&E in regard to my Member’s statement on the Childcare Subsidy Program. I’d like to ask the Minister if there’s a certain amount of dollars that are allocated to each community or each region each year.
Mahsi. Mr. Speaker, yes, the Member is referencing subsidies for the communities. We do serve 33 communities on the subsidy of the child care services, early childhood programs and services.
Each community has an opportunity to apply for certain program dollars. They’re also entitled to our program dollars. There are federal dollars and Territorial dollars. The communities can apply on top of what we offer as a Territorial government. Mahsi.
I’d like to ask the Minister: if there’s no uptake on the child care subsidy in the communities, what happens to that money? Is it lapsed, or does it move on to another community?
Some of the money is based on the enrolment at the centres and facilities. Also, the Member is referring to…. If the money is held back or if there is a surplus, then we have to extend the money to different programs as well, where it is needed in the community. As I said, we serve 33 communities. We open up for communities that are in need of funding to offset their costs.
I speak specifically to individuals who are out there trying to work, get a job or go to school; or a combination of both, one working and one going to school. A lot of people who try to work have mortgage payments, and they have all of these other payments — federal tax, Territorial tax. I’d like to ask the Minister if there is a cap on the subsidy program, and if that cap is based on the gross or net pay.
Mr. Speaker, we assist individuals in the communities, whether it be the two parents or single parents, based on their needs and their income.
I will have to get back to the Member on the net versus gross. I don’t have that information in front of me, but certainly, I can work with the Member on the specific area.
We do try to assist all individuals who are in desperate need of funding to cover their programs in the communities — the child care programs. Mahsi.
Final supplementary, Mr. McLeod.
I appreciate the Minister committing to get back to me on the gross or net.
I think “desperate” is the wrong word to be using right now, because there are a lot of people out there who are working; they are not desperate. They would like a subsidy that would help them along so they can see some money at the end of the day.
I notice the applications that they have to fill out to get these programs. There is so much here that by the time that they are all filled out, the child has already graduated from high school and the subsidy isn't needed anymore. I’d like to ask the Minister if there are any plans in the works to review the child care subsidy and make changes to it that are fair to everyone, especially those who are trying to work and contribute.
Mr. Speaker, there have been some changes to our program. We have increased 30 per cent in the child care program area. We are listening to our Members who raise an issue. Certainly, we will take that into consideration.
With various programs there is always room for improvement, so certainly, we will work with that and how we can expedite the application process.
We have our resource department staff who are more than willing to assist with the clients and parents as well. We will do our part as well. Mahsi.
Before I go on to the next question, colleagues, I would like to draw your attention to your rules of the House concerning food, which I determine to mean gum, candies, whatever. I would ask Members to please abide by your own rules. Thank you, Members.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to continue questions directed to the Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs. I am very disappointed with his answers, because they were very lacking, to say the least.
Although I can’t quote from a letter that hasn’t been tabled in the House — as of yet, I stress — when you write a letter and say, “I regret to inform you your proposal wasn’t the highest, and by the way, the other proponent was the highest,” that then leads one to realize that the project is going to the other group.
Could the Minister explain to me the involvement that this Abbotsford, B.C., company, this southern company…? Can he enlighten this House as to what their involvement was with MACA over these water treatment facilities on these two proposals of “Water Treatment Facility Proposal” — who knows what that means? — and “Community Water System Efficiencies,” and why did they do their presentation?
Mr. Speaker, I’ll have to inform the Member again that he’s not correct in assuming that the water plant contract has been awarded. Negotiations are still ongoing. There has been a company that has responded to our request for proposals that has contracted with us prior to this and along the same lines as what we have through our requests for proposals in dealing with water plants.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister keeps pretending that a contract isn’t being awarded — or isn’t in the process of being awarded — to this Abbotsford company. The fact is, it’s in the process of being done.
Let’s put semantics away and say, “Look, just because the t’s haven’t been crossed and the i’s haven’t been dotted, the fact is, it is going to this,” because it’s not going to the Northern firm, which could do this project.
Could the Minister explain to this House, or assure this House — and, certainly, demonstrate to this House — how this Abbotsford, B.C., company didn’t play a special role to make sure that when the RFP came out in August of last year, they didn’t already have everything all set up so they were the only obvious choice? Could he demonstrate that to this House?
Mr. Speaker, the only person pretending here is the Member. He’s pretending not to hear my answers.
Laughter.
Mr. Speaker, the contract hasn’t been awarded. There is a fairness process that was put in place as part of this request for proposals, and we have an independent evaluation team, along with an independent evaluator, that is ensuring a fair process is there. We have provided all the information to all the proponents who took part. We have the Department of Justice, and we have three other departments that are working with us. The process is fair, Mr. Speaker.
However, the contract hasn’t been awarded, and it is difficult to speak to this issue.
I guess if the Minister can give hypothetical answers, you know…. And it kind of puts me in an unfair position, because I can’t ask hypothetical questions to get the facts.
If we’re going to live in this sort of hypothetical world, are they in negotiations with this Northern company, or are they in negotiations with this Abbotsford, B.C., company for these water treatment plants?
Mr. Speaker, the question, of course, is hypothetical. The Member is asking me for information that may influence the outcome of our negotiations, and I can’t respond to that.
Final supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.
