Mr. Speaker, again, I just spoke to the president of the Aklavik Community Corporation in regards to the Aklavik proposal which went forward to the Minister and myself in which it clearly stipulated a contract that they were looking at has gone to an Inuvik company. Again, all we are going to see are headlights coming from Inuvik and driving back to Inuvik at five o’clock. Again, the companies that are benefitting from these contracts in our communities are Inuvik companies. I would like to know, is there a guarantee that those contract dollars will remain in the community and how they benefit the community where those contracts are being let. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I am not sure what the particulars of this case are. As far as I know, we do have some units that are slated for construction in the Member’s riding, one of the communities in the Member’s riding that he pointed out. We have been receiving letters requesting negotiated contracts. One of our policies says that if you get two or more requests for a negotiated contract, then we have to evaluate that. The one the Member is speaking of in particular, I am not quite sure which one that is. If it is one that we just awarded recently, I don’t know that. I have seen no requests for negotiated contract for that particular part. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Your final, short supplementary, Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just gave the Minister two letters lately from Fort McPherson and from Aklavik in regards to housing contracts and put in without local tendering or basically allow for some sort of local preferential treatment be treated for these units going into my constituents. I would like to ask the Minister, can he assure me that those contracts will have a fair airing that will go to Cabinet and the Cabinet will make the decision to go or not to go in regards to the contracts in my riding.
Mr. Speaker, we are still in the process of determining how we are going to procure those particular contracts. There has been no decision made yet. We look at all the information we get. Again I say, if we get two or more letters for a negotiated contract, one of them may have the Member’s support, one may not. How do we determine? The thing is, the contractors now all have the ability. Again, it goes back to policy. The purpose of the policy is to allow those contractors that are just starting up, trying to get their foot in the door, an opportunity to do so. If they prove that they are able to do the work and they are able to bid in a competitive market, then we have fulfilled our obligation. We are starting to see more and more local contractors that are doing that. They are competing with contractors from outside the community. They are given preferential treatment just for being situated in the community. It is a 5 percent preferential treatment, 15 percent northern, so they have proven that they are able to compete. I can assure the Member that no decision has been made on these particular ones that he is filed the letters on. We will have a look at them. It will be at ministerial discretion. I will be able to make a recommendation to Cabinet as to whether we proceed or not with the negotiated contract. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are addressed to the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources. I have some questions for the Minister in regards to the draft Wildlife Act. One of the clauses of the draft act speaks to the power of the Minister to establish conservation areas. The Minister knows from both me and from submissions made by various organizations that this is a concern and particularly for mining industries and companies. As a government, I believe the GNWT states that we want both economic development and the preservation of the environment, so I’d like to ask the Minister what percentage of land does the GNWT intend to keep open and accessible for economic development. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The honourable Minister responsible for Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That particular clause that the Member references has been amended so that any plan to make any areas conservation areas or to withdraw any land will be decided on by Cabinet. Thank you.
Thanks to the Minister. I didn’t hear the answer to the question there. I’d like to know if the GNWT has a policy or has any kind of an idea in their mind... Does GNWT, as a government or as a Cabinet, have a percentage of land that they intend to keep open and accessible for economic development? Thank you.
Thank you. That’s not really specific or germane to the Wildlife Act. It is a discussion that we’ve had when we’ve talked about land use for example with the Dehcho Land Use Plan and other areas. As we look at finalizing our land use framework, we will be dealing more precisely with that particular issue. Thank you.
Thank you. I’d like to say to the Minister that I guess we have to agree to disagree, because I think the Wildlife Act is impacted through conservation areas on economic development, and particularly mining exploration and mining operations. I have heard that organizations in discussion with this government have been advised that some 45 percent of our lands will be kept open for economic development. In my mind, that’s far too large a number and I’d like to know from the Minister if that’s accurate. Thank you.
Thank you. The Member and I will have to agree to disagree. The issue of land quantum of what’s going to be available for economic development is not part of the Wildlife Act, which is designed to look at wildlife management and wildlife issues. That issue will be dealt with and is being dealt with as we look at some of the broader discussion areas like the land use framework that we’re talking about and as we sit down on a region-by-region basis once again in areas like the Deh Cho or the Sahtu and the Gwich’in where land use plans are being worked on. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m struggling with the Minister’s evasion of my question and he’s taking it quite literally that I’m talking only about the Wildlife Act. I’m asking what percentage of lands within the total area of the NWT is liable to be open and accessible for economic development. If some 50 percent or 45 or 55 percent of our lands are being withheld for conservation or environmental protection or whatever, Protected Areas Strategy, what effect does the Minister feel this is going to have on our ability to be a growing and economically vibrant Territory?
Thank you. That’s the challenge for all of us as we look at protecting the environment, the land, the water and the animals and balancing that with the resource development and economic development. When you talk about making land available for resource development, there is a number of different levels to that. There is land that’s taken up by communities. There’s land taken up for resource development. There are lands taken up for other reasons. So we’re going to make sure that we strive for that balance, and in some of the regions like the Deh Cho, there are figures being used in terms of the land quantum.
The Member indicates she’s been talking to a number of folks who have given her numbers. Well, as a government we don’t have a territorial-wide number that we’re saying has to be kept free for resource development or a particular number of land and land quantum that has to be put aside. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Great Slave, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for the Premier. Open, transparent and meaningful public consultation is critical to the operations of a public government. It must exist. Both prior to being an MLA and since being an MLA I’m concerned about the inconsistencies in public consultation that this government is administering. There seems to be a wide variety from information sessions to real public consultation. For certainty and for ongoing public consultations, I think it would be important for this government to develop protocols on what a public consultation is and which all departments, boards and agencies would be bound to. So my question for the Premier is: will he commit to, in the life of the 16th Assembly, develop with the Department of Executive a protocol on public consultations so that people know what a public consultation is, so it’s clear, so it’s transparent and so that people have confidence that their input is heard and recognized? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Premier, Mr. Roland.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Government of the Northwest Territories does have a consultation package in place. We worked through in Intergovernmental Affairs and the intergovernmental group as well as Aboriginal Affairs and Executive and Justice to look at a number of agreements around the country to inform all departments of our consultation requirements for our policies and legislation. Thank you.
I would like to thank the Premier for that response. I would like to ask the Minister to share that with committee. Even though it exists, my question still stands around the consistency. If you look across the government, there doesn’t seem to be consistency in application of public consultations. By way of example, the Workers’ Safety and Compensation Commission is on the workplace safety standards. Clearly, that’s public consultation and people’s input is being sought. The Wildlife Act, on the other hand, there’s a lot of concern that it’s not in there. So how is the Premier going to ensure consistency in public consultation processes throughout the Northwest Territories conducted by the Government of the Northwest Territories?
If the Member is asking about the difference, different levels of consultation, we have a broad public consultation process for all the people of the Northwest Territories. If he’s drawing the difference between the Workers’ Safety and Compensation process as well as the Wildlife Act, quite clearly if you look at the Wildlife Act, that’s gone to every community in the Northwest Territories and has had broad consultation on that. On top of that, one of the other areas we have to fulfil is where there are land claim agreements and self-government agreements, that requires an additional level of consultation before we go to drafting legislation. So we match that as well. Thank you.
There is concern about consistency in public consultation. If you go out into the public, the Wildlife Act is a prime example. I’m curious how the Premier can ensure the public that their input is being heard in all forms of public consultation, in particularly something like the Wildlife Act. What are we going to do to ensure that application is consistent and people’s voices are heard? This doesn’t mean the government has to agree with everything they hear. It is a public government, there are lots of people’s opinions, but we need to ensure people are heard and acknowledged. So how does the Premier intend to ensure consistency? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We do have a policy within the Government of the Northwest Territories on consultation. All departments have that and we ensure that we work with departments in fulfilling our commitments. As well, this Assembly has a process of doing that. Once legislation is introduced, there is a whole different forum for public consultation on that and bringing the bills back to this Assembly. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final supplementary, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.
I would like to direct my questions to the Premier. Mr. Speaker, I find it kind of odd that communities I represent, the whole capital expenditures extends to about $2.5 million and half of that is the formula funding we give to our communities for infrastructure projects. Most of that is housing. Yet, Mr. Speaker, we are in the neighbourhood of the riding the Premier represents and you’re talking about $70 million of capital expenditures. We have high unemployment in our communities. Forty-five percent unemployment is unheard of in my riding. The issue I have with this government is do we realistically look at the policies and procedures we have as government that would benefit communities, build capacity and make sure the dollars we spend as government for capital dollars stay in those communities. I’d like to ask the Premier why we are not following our policies and procedures when it comes to community capacity and negotiated contracts, sole-sourced contracts or local tenders so that they’re tendered locally in those communities.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The honourable Premier, Mr. Roland.
We do follow our policies. Thank you.
I believe they had followed policies, that’s why I have 45 percent unemployment in my riding, which I never had three years ago, but under the regime of this government, it has forced companies to leave my riding and go to operate out of Yellowknife and get work in the southern region because they can’t get work in their home communities. I’d like to ask the Premier if it’s fair that all the contractors doing work in my riding are coming from Inuvik who are getting $70 million of capital expenditures in that community and yet my communities are going hungry because of unemployment rates at 45 percent.
When we put the facts on the table, for example Mackenzie Valley Construction in the region, in the Department of Transportation it accounts for almost 70 percent of the contract values both negotiated, public tenders, the whole process. So that comparison is difficult to do. On top of that, when we have large construction projects, that requires a certain level of commitment by the contractors to be able to build on that. We follow the policies there as well. I think the comparison of the Inuvik constituency versus the Aklavik or Mackenzie Delta constituency, the Member well knows that the schools in Inuvik have been on the books since 1995 and have been authorized by this Assembly to go forward in construction.
I also think we should note that a $100 million contract was let through a negotiated contract for the school in Inuvik. A hundred million dollars yet I can’t get a goddamned house built in my riding for $300,000.
The honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are directed to the Minister of Finance. I’d like to ask the Minister of Finance if there can be a financial audit done in regard to the capital housing allocations in the Inuvik region and exactly why those allocations are not being spent in the communities they’re earmarked for and they’re benefitting the community of Inuvik by way of all the contractors receiving all the contracts. Could you check into that and see if there is a possibility of investigation to how those dollars are being let?
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The honourable Minister responsible for Finance, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That’s a detailed question and I will review Hansard and, therefore, take the question as notice.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for the Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment today. I have received communication from the Minister. He advises me that he is aware of the economic downturn in Hay River and several different initiatives have been expedited. Things have been happening there. We need something that is going to have a large and long-lasting effect on the economy in Hay River.
We don’t have to think back very far to how many millions of dollars this government spent when we saw an opportunity for economy from the secondary diamond processing, when this government stepped up with loans, loan guarantees, training dollars, and it was all in the interest of putting people to work and enhancing the economy of this area for the most part.
I’d like to ask the Minister of ITI if his officials have had any communication with Tamerlane Ventures about some of the obstacles or challenges that they may be facing in getting ready to open a mine close to Hay River in the South Slave that would benefit our region greatly.
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The honourable Minister responsible for Industry, Tourism and Investment, Mr. Bob McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We’re very pleased to hear that Tamerlane has received financing to go on to the next level, but more recently we haven’t been in any discussions. All the discussions we’ve had with Tamerlane have been before the economy took a downturn. At that time we were discussing the need for power and also other opportunities. Now that they have received financing, we’ll be quite prepared to go back and have the discussions with them.
The name of the person who is on the ground in Hay River doing a lot of the presentations to the Chamber of Commerce, the Town Council and so on, is Randy Lewis. He has worked in the North for quite a number of years. I am going to ask the Minister if someone in his department, perhaps the deputy minister or someone at that level, could take the proactive move to contact Mr. Lewis and personally have ITI updated on where the Tamerlane project is at and what any of the obstacles are. We need our government not to become involved in industry, but if there’s any way we can smooth any of the barriers or facilitate seeing this mining project get off the ground, it is much needed.
I agree with the Member that projects like these are much needed in the Northwest Territories, and we’d be quite pleased to meet with Mr. Lewis and I’ll direct our senior officials to contact him immediately and set up a meeting with him.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Before I go to Mr. Yakeleya for oral questions, the Chair distinctly heard some comments from the Member for Mackenzie Delta in his last line of questioning that were clearly unparliamentary to the Chair. I will ask the Member for Mackenzie Delta if he’s prepared to withdraw the remarks from the House and apologize to the House. Mr. Krutko.
I apologize.
Could you please withdraw your remarks, Mr. Krutko?
Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my remarks and I apologize.
