Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We can provide that information to committee for Public Works and Services managed and administered contracts.
I’ll thank him for that. The next question I would have is: Do we have a policy on our projects that we implement or contract or sign on where they must pay their northern suppliers or their workforce or their subs within a certain amount of time?
I would suggest that payment schedules are negotiated between our primary and their subcontractors. We don’t have a position on that subcontract.
Is there any reason why we wouldn’t have a position noting the circumstance for an obvious dispute? That’s an easy one to say if there were disputes it may not be easy to fulfill, say within three weeks. Why wouldn’t the Government of the Northwest Territories have a policy to say that the general must pay a contractor within, say, 30 days of fulfilling their obligations met within the contract unless there is a dispute to ensure northern contractors get paid in a timely way?
Some of that would be dealt with by the bonding companies but also negotiations between the primary and the sub based on the accounting practices and operations of the primary as well as the sub. The accountability and liability in those contracts lie between the primary and the sub and not between the GNWT and the sub. So it would be a responsibility of the primary to do that.
Would it not be in our interests to flex our muscles in that regard? Because if we’re paying the general contractor their money and they’re withholding payment to the subcontractors, who could be northern contractors, would it not be in our interest to suggest that we put that type of downward pressure by good policy to demonstrate our northern subcontractors are just as much of value as whoever the general contractor is?
When situations like that arise, and if they arise, we are always happy to look at our contract to see what provisions exist with respect to payments to ensure that work is done in a timely fashion. If work is not done we are happy to hold back payment.
Would the Minister be able to describe the holdback scheme, how it’s applied to northern contractors and southern contractors, how it’s applied to projects in large communities such as Yellowknife, Inuvik, or Hay River, and furthermore, how would it be proscribed in a manner that it would be in Fort Good Hope or Wekweetì or Lutselk’e? Can you explain the dynamics of that situation?
Details of payments and holdbacks would be proscribed in the contract itself and there would be no difference necessarily between southern and northern contractors. It’s a negotiation of contract that is done between the primary and the Department of Public Works and Services. For some additional information I will go to the deputy minister.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Mr. Guy.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Minister is correct, the terms and conditions for holdback and retention of holdback and payment of holdback or release of holdback are detailed in the contract documents between the general contractor and the Government of the Northwest Territories. There is really no difference. All the bidders are aware of that information that forms part of the tender document so a southern bidder or a northern bidder are all treated the same when it comes to the contract document. For specific details we would be able to provide a typical sample contract and how we would do that calculation as part of our commitment to the earlier response.
Thank you, Mr. Guy. Mr. Hawkins, your time is up but we have no one on the list. Actually, no, sorry. I do have Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just have a couple of questions here with regard to the shared procurement services. I think from the Minister’s opening remarks this is coming yet. I’d like confirmation of when that’s happening or if it is in the works and when it will be completed. My concern goes to the fact that contracts and fees are let throughout the government through various different departments and various divisions of departments. My experience has been that we don’t get the same standard of letting of contracts across the government. With shared procurement is that likely to help that problem?
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Absolutely.
He’s only got half a memory. When will we be done?
We’ve already done a significant amount of work. We’re going to be doing a significant amount of work through 2013-2014. We hope to have a design ready for the 2014-2015 business plan so we can implement in that fiscal year.
I am teasing you, Mr. Minister, I hope you realize that. You do have a full memory. Okay. I’m glad to hear that we’re going to get there. I guess, in the meantime, I do have some concerns with sort of the lack of standards of letting of contracts and RFPs in various and sundry departments. What does the Department of Public Works and Services, what can they do, what’s in their arsenal to try and, I don’t want to say force other departments, but what is there that you can do to assist them to be better in their letting of contracts? I know the departments often say we’re doing it, leave us alone, let us do it, but that doesn’t always work out to be the best situation for the people that are applying on contracts. What is it that PWS can do? Is there anything that you can do?
The departments have been working together on trying to solve some of these issues and having some consistency across the government. The shared procurement services is obviously going to help a significant amount with the exact concerns that the Member and vendors in the public have brought forward. We do have a procurement procedures committee that has been put in place that has members from Public Works and Services, Finance, and other departments that are trying to come up with some of the challenges that are out there. There is also the comptroller general who is working on this as well. There is standardized training that is available across the government in this area. For some specifics on those types of things I will go to the deputy minister.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Mr. Guy.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Definitely we see that as one of the benefits of procurement insured services is to increase the consistency for how procurement is carried out across government, provide vendors with a uniform experience when they’re dealing with government, and get standardized response formats, submission formats. We see that as one of the benefits of the procurement insured services initiative. We have done a lot of work. We talked a little bit about, yesterday, some of the changes we made in the organization to prepare for that within Public Works and Services. We’re doing some of that background work now. As the Minister said, we intend to come forward through the business plan process with the work that we’ve been doing with the other departments across government on moving forward with procurement services.
In terms of the things we’re doing right now, we have developed a fairly strong system of courses we provide. Not just in Yellowknife, but we do travel to the regional centres and regional areas to provide training and procurement and how to go about using proper procedures, show some lessons learned where procurement has not gone as well as possible, use real life examples that we see from the work that we do in reviewing procurements. We also make ourselves available. Although our role is only to provide procurement to Public Works and Services, right now we offer that service and will provide technical support and assistance to any department that asks for help with an RFP process or guidance or even to complete the procurement on their behalf wherever possible. Obviously, we are sometimes limited by resources but we try very hard to not turn any requests away.
Thank you, Mr. Guy. Ms. Bisaro.
Thanks to the Minister and Mr. Guy. One last comment. There’s not really a question here. In the absence of shared procurement, my experience is that usually problems arise when you have people who have a lack of experience in letting of contracts and managing of contracts. My experience also suggests that most of the problems occur within not necessarily departments but arm’s-length organizations like health authorities and education authorities and so on.
I guess I do have a question. My question is whether or not PWS will be taking procurement for arm’s-length organizations like education and health authorities under their wing when you get to the end point of shared services.
At this point we’re really focused on just the government departments. We’re not looking at authorities. I understand, though, that the Department of Health and Social Services is looking at their health-specific procurement needs and they’re looking at a similar type model and we’re working closely with them on that. We also do provide our training and procurement expertise and we will assist, and also when we run these courses in the regional centres or in Yellowknife, we often have people from the authorities or boards that come in and do sit in and learn procurement process from our staff.
Thanks to Mr. Guy. I guess I would just like to suggest to the Minister that if it is at all possible to force that sort of training on people who are doing procurement, whether they happen to be in a department or an authority, if there is an authority in the government to force people to get that training and to have a certain level of expertise, that would be a good thing. That’s all.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. I will go to Mr. Abernethy for the final comment.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Force is a strong word. We certainly strongly encourage boards and agencies to partake in the training that we offer.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Pages 7-13, Public Works and Services, activity summary, directorate, operations expenditure summary, $8.988 million.
Agreed.
Page 7-14, Public Works and Services, information item, directorate, active positions. Any questions?
Agreed.
Being none. Thank you. Page 7-16 and 7-17, Public Works and Services. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a very important division. Asset management looks after all our building infrastructure and so on. It looks after maintenance. We’re currently doing some good work and making some serious gains there. It’s also where Public Works and Services focuses on helping the GNWT achieve their government-wide energy efficiencies and greenhouse gas reductions, reductions of fossil fuel consumption, et cetera. I would just like to get on that topic generally.
I believe there’s a new Model National Energy Code for buildings. Can I just get where we’re at with respect to that new code and how it relates to the most recent old one? Also, how our good building practice for northern facilities relates to that.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. There have been a number of questions brought up about this exact topic in the past. Previous to the new regulations coming in, we were meeting and exceeding, and often beating the national code. New codes have come in, and we’re still in that area, but for specifics on numbers and some of the specific details, I will go to the deputy minister.
Thank you, Minister Abernethy. Mr. Guy.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Member is correct that the Model National Energy Code was recently updated. In the previous version, our target and good building practices was 25 percent better than the Model National Energy Code. We went back and did an evaluation of the updated code and compared it to the old code and how our good building practice was performed, and now our benchmark shows that good building practices still puts us about 10 percent in front of the new Model National Energy Code. We’re very pleased to see that we’re still out in front of what is on the energy code standard that is looking to be adopted across Canada. The code committee that’s working on the National Building Code in Canada is looking across all jurisdictions…(inaudible)…it through the next round of National Building Code updates, which I believe is in 2015. At that time, should the Model National Energy Code be incorporated into the National Building Code, then it would become part of the code when it’s adopted here. We’re watching that. We participate in the working group on that through some of our technical staff. That is my understanding of where that is headed.
Thank you, Mr. Guy. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you for that information. I recognize that this division and department are really our hope for energy issues, and it’s very, very important work that they do. If I can drill down on that, so that means that, I believe we say as a government, our residents, any building has to meet the National Energy Building Code, and I believe I’m hearing from the deputy minister that right now there are no new energy standards for those buildings. We choose to go for the highest calibre within GNWT buildings, but in terms of other buildings that businesses or residents build, they don’t have that standard. Is that correct?
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Abernethy.
People building buildings, offices, houses and whatnot would still have to meet National Building Codes when they’re building their buildings. We as a government have made a choice to meet and exceed, and we’re exceeding by about 10 percent as the deputy minister indicated.
I’ll leave that for now, but I believe there is a difference between a National Building Code and a National Energy Code.
I’d like to just ask what role Public Works and Services has played in establishing a new market for wood pellet energy in thermal communities where they didn’t exist before, through the establishment of territorial infrastructure that demands wood pellet energy. Are there any cases that we can point to where we have achieved that? I know the work we do in switching here has been very important in that respect, but I’d like to know what communities that didn’t have that access now have it because of our work.
If you go back into the history of wood pellets in use by the Government of the Northwest Territories, we’ve tended to respond to where a market is already started. If you look at how we got involved in pellets in the first place, it was with the correctional facilities here in Yellowknife where a vendor came to us and made a suggestion to have them put in the boilers and be the, I guess, administrators of the heating system.
From there, once we’ve seen success and we know we have a supply, we’ve been able to expand to where supply exists. We, I wouldn’t say are leading the drive for pellets in other communities, but we are taking advantage of where a market has started to show.
I would say our most recent push is Norman Wells. A local company has started to provide pellets to the residents of Norman Wells. We see a significant opportunity to get in there and actually make some improvements to some major infrastructure in Norman Wells. We’re looking at the school, we’re looking at the airport and we’re also looking at the new health centre/long-term care facility. We have, to some degree, been encouraging industry to move in front of us slightly on that and then working with them to enhance and support.
That’s good. Obviously, I disagree with waiting for that. There are many, many examples – the Minister is familiar with them – where the GNWT plays a key role in establishing a new practice in a community in all kinds of areas, and that enables that community to enjoy and spread the benefits. I think we should be doing that here as well.
I guess I’m wondering, what has been the trend? In opening comments we heard a lot about the reductions in greenhouse gas, 25,000 tonnes I believe it was, and so on, savings in dollars and fossil fuel. Would the Minister have at hand, or could he provide what has been the annual savings in greenhouse gas emissions and fossil fuel consumption over the past five years from the work of Public Works and Services so that I can determine what the trend is and our achievements there?
I mean, I completely understand my colleague’s point about spreading the benefits and trying to be a leader. To some degree, I mean, we wait for where we know we can get supplied before we go in, because we’re not a supplier of pellets but we want to support the industry. We will go in where there is limited use of pellets, but at least some supply, and us being there, having additional demand, demonstrates that this technology works here in the Northwest Territories and that others can certainly build upon it. Example: We are putting biomass in some of the schools and some of the other places in the Northwest Territories like Fort Providence where there may not be as large a distribution, but once we get in there and demonstrate that they have real, positive attributes and that there are savings to be had, and there’s also a greater degree of actual product available for others to take advantage of, we are seeing other businesses and residents taking advantages of these opportunities.
Where we wait for at least an acknowledgement that we will be able to get supplied before we put in them, once that supply is there, we’ll jump on it, and we go in and we do as much as we can where money is available. Some of the money is coming from the Capital Asset Retrofit Fund, which we think is a fantastic program and it’s given us lots of money to roll back into some of these things. We want to hit some of the areas where we know we’re going to get larger returns so we can grow the funds, so we can get more benefits and hit more people. I think we are spreading the benefits and we are working with communities, and we’re working with anybody that’s interested. If somebody from a community were to come to us and say we can get supply into a community where there isn’t, we would love to have that conversation. We think there would be significant opportunity to do that.
Now, with my rant, I completely forget the other question you had.
The second part of the question was around actual usage and savings and bigger-picture numbers rather than just the $25,000. We have some numbers. I’m not sure it’s exactly what the Member is looking for. We can probably dig out those numbers. But I’ll go to the deputy minister right now who has some specifics. I don’t believe it’s exactly what you’re looking for, but we will work to get you some of those bigger numbers as well. For some details on what we’ve seen as success, I’ll go to the deputy.
Thank you, Minister Abernethy. Mr. Guy.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. If you look at some of the trends that we have with our Biomass Initiative, currently we have 21 facilities connected to biomass boilers and those are producing savings right now. We have another six that are essentially under construction or are funded and moving forward right now. Then we have three more that are planned.
If you look at where we were at in 2011, about 16 percent of our total heating load of our managed assets were heated by biomass. Right now, at the end of this fiscal year, and we’re just updating our numbers now, so we’ll really have something more as we get into business planning and we have our year-end numbers, but right now in ’12-13, we’re looking at about 23.5 to 24 percent of our total heating load. Then if you look at all the projects that we have underway, under construction and planned, we’ll be close to 30 percent of our total heating load of the buildings that PWS manages that are heated by biomass.
You can see the trend is increasing in biomass and consumption of fossil fuels is going down. Also, we have our CARF projects, as well, that contribute to the savings, and we’re in the process of updating those numbers as well.
We’ve had a lot of envelope upgrades. We did the electric boiler conversion in Fort Smith. We’ve had a significant number of projects this year that are going to produce some updated numbers at the end of this fiscal year.
Thank you, Mr. Guy. Mr. Bromley, your time is up. If you have any more questions, let me know here. Moving on with questions I have Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have one question here, and I think it was in the Minister’s opening remarks. He talked about settlement maintainers and apprentices that, I think, sort of continuing to use them and employ them. I hear the same thing from the NWT Housing Corporation, so I just wondered, in terms of hiring settlement maintainers and in terms of hiring apprentices, is there any kind of coordination between the Housing Corporation and PWS to make the best use of people within the communities to provide the greatest service to our buildings and to the Housing Corp buildings in a community?
