Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Moses.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This last question deals with the tenants that have not gone into a repayment plan. Do we have a number of tenants across the Northwest Territories who will possibly become evicted April 1st that will result in some of our other programs being accessed such as income support? Does he have a number of tenants that are possibly going to be evicted come April 1st? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, right now we stand at about 20. The number was at 36. We are at 20 right now. There could possibly be more. We are encouraged by the fact that there were many people that were non-payers, as far as rent goes, before this moratorium came into place. A lot of them are actually stepping up to the plate and entering into repayment plans or working with their LHOs. There has been some positive news come out of this. Those that have always paid their rent are continuing to pay their rent. There has been some positive come out of this, but again we are hoping we are not facing mass evictions come April 1st because we have given people every opportunity to come in and enter into a repayment plan. Unfortunately, it is not working out the way we would have liked. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I just wanted to follow up on my Member’s statement wherein I spoke about Fisherman Lake just across from Fort Liard and the contamination that is present. I would like to ask the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources, it has been on the agenda for some time for Fort Liard and the residents. It is almost 30 years there. During my recent visit to Fort Liard, the concern of the families there is that it has been contaminated. What type of mitigation efforts, what type of ongoing monitoring is happening in Fisherman Lake?
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. The honourable Minister of Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is a project that is on federal land and regulated by the federal government. We have a marginal role, as the Member pointed out, due to the fact that that responsibility is a federal responsibility, and should the day come with devolution, we would be able to have a much more fulsome and thorough discussion. We review their plans if the remediation plans are available on their website doing their testing. There has been testing done in 2011. The Member’s point is well taken. It is a long existing project and there are concerns as he indicated. The steps that are being taken fall within the requirements under their land use plan. Thank you.
When it comes to the water and the fish that is in that lake, there is potential contamination of that as well. What can this government do to work to get the water also tested and monitored? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We monitor and track what is being done. We work with federal agencies and officials to ensure that they take the right steps. There are the concerns that the Member has stated. We have, as well, our own officials, as I indicated, that will work with the federal government keeping in mind still that they have the lead role to play here. Thank you.
All this contamination will affect about seven families, not to mention all the users from Fort Liard. I would like to highlight this as a grave concern for the community. I would like to ask the Minister how can the community act on highlighting this with the federal government to ensure that it is a priority on the federal agenda. What steps can we take to heighten the awareness of this contaminated area? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, having the Member stand up in the House to voice their concerns is a good way to do it, but in the long term the Member himself has observed the key way to get control of these matters and these issues is to sign the Devolution Agreement and take over that authority or responsibility. There is a separate chapter under remediated sites that would allow us to make sure that work is done. It would be a federal responsibility, but once we have the authority, we can make sure of the legal ability to go after the federal government to ensure that they honour their responsibility. If the Member stands up and says that devolution is going to help us sort this out, the leadership in the Deh Cho say we have to take over control over land, water and resource planning because looking to the future, we want to avoid these various situations. That is the surest, most imminent way to make those significant changes. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am well aware of the government’s intent to have devolution for our northern territory, but I think the most important thing for the residents of Fort Liard is to address their serious environmental concerns that are affecting their people. I would like to ask the Minister once again how can we raise and heighten the awareness of the environmental concern of Fisherman Lake for the residents of Fort Liard. It could be up to and including a public inquiry. Thank you.
We will be following up based on this discussion in this House. There are officials from all levels of government that listen closely to the debate here. I am completely and fully serious when I talk about the benefit and the ability for us to do this job properly being greatly enhanced within the next very few years and within the life of this Assembly, as a matter of fact, to be able to have that transfer over to the Government of the Northwest Territories so that we don’t have to have the discussion about a third order of government that has their headquarters in Ottawa. It’s very real, it’s very imminent and it’s very doable. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you. In my Member’s statement today I talked about medevacs and I need not remind anyone in this House how important those services are. A lot of Northerners depend on them and it’s more than just lip service when I say that in a lot of cases it is life or death on those medevac services. So of course time is very important.
Yesterday I was speaking to someone which has caused the reason why I need to make today’s statement to talk about medevacs. I found out that Deputy Premier Doug Horner of Alberta is moving towards the Edmonton Garrison solution for the medevac problem on the pending closure of the Muni Airport.
My question to the Minister of Health and Social Services is: Is his department willing to get behind this particular initiative, work with the Province of Alberta, work with the City of Edmonton and lobby the federal government so that Edmonton Garrison can be turned over to the Alberta government as a viable solution for medevacs? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The Minister of Health and Social Services, Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Although the department and the Government of the Northwest Territories has no official role with the Alberta government in these deliberations, we do understand preliminary discussions have occurred between the government and the Department of National Defence on the possibility of using the Namao strip, which is the Garrison strip. Thank you.
Thank you. Last term our government did mention or at least talked about their somewhat willingness and participation in the Health Quality Council in Alberta in their dialogue and overview of services, and the Alberta province itself says until we have a solution we won’t be closing the Muni. This is a solution, but part of that relationship would be that the Health Council of Alberta is the Northwest Territories government through the Minister of Health’s office was formulating some relationship on this particular subject and it may have been weak, but at the same time they were still involved. That said, I’d like to ask the Minister of Health and Social Services if he will take an active role on this particular file to make sure that the northern voices are heard and protected when it comes to medevac services.
Thank you. The discussions that I was referring to were discussions about the Garrison Airport. As far as the airport and the Edmonton City Centre Airport, one runway is shut down, but medevacs are continuing to use that airport. The only time the medevacs are diverted to the International Airport at this time is because of weather. Thank you.
Thank you. The fact is we have a missed opportunity. We’re going to have to go wherever they present us. Well, let’s be part of the solution when I say where they present us. That means if they’re going to tell us what airport we can send our medevacs to, we should be on the front of this problem rather than just being told at the very end of the equation and that’s kind of what I’m getting at with the Minister of Health and Social Services here. We need to get involved in the solution to ensure that northern needs are taken care of; otherwise we’re going to have to put up with whatever they give us.
That said, I once again ask the Minister of Health and Social Services will he be willing to take an active role in finding out what’s going on and perhaps even join the deputy premier of Alberta on lobbying DND, that’s the Department of National Defence, so they’ll turn over the Edmonton Garrison for Capital Health of Alberta to ensure that our medevacs arrive safe and in a timely way in Edmonton. Thank you.
Thank you. The Department of Health in the Northwest Territories is involved with this and had been involved, but this is a relatively new development and we know that that airport could be a viable alternative to the International, but we know that it also requires upgrades and we do believe that it warrants full consideration. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Is the Minister saying to this House that they’re now involved in this particular observation and discussion and evaluation of the Edmonton Garrison solution? I think it is a viable solution and I just want to make sure our government is involved in the final decision. Even if it’s a small voice on there, it needs to be a voice at that table. Thank you.
Thank you. As I indicated earlier, we play no official role but we are aware of the discussions. We’re staying in the loop, but we haven’t engaged officially either with the National Defence or any involvement with the City of Edmonton at this time. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. The Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are addressed to the Minister for Municipal and Community Affairs and I’d like to follow up on my Member’s statement. Since Volunteer NWT folded, I think most non-profit and non-government organizations in the NWT have found it much more difficult to do their job. They have volunteer boards and they have less volunteers to work with. I think it’s been a loss to all of the NWT in the fact that they can’t provide the same services to the effectiveness that they could before when Volunteer NWT was alive and well.
I’d like to ask the Minister, I noted on MACA’s website that the Volunteer Support Initiative Action Plan is listed there. It’s dated Action Plan 2005-2008. The last Volunteer Support Initiative status report was dated 2006-2007. I’d like to know from the Minister whether or not there is any document that exists other than what’s posted on the website with regards to the Volunteer Support Initiative that is more up to date. Has there been any activity on the part of MACA to do updates and to do work on the Volunteer Support Initiative? Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs, Mr. McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The final report on the Volunteer Support Initiative is expected in the fall of 2012. So we’re hoping to get that out by the fall and it will be an update to the past work that’s been done. Thank you.
Thank you. That didn’t really go very far to answering my question about what kind of activities have been in the works, but I’ll wait anxiously for the updated report.
From my information, MACA’s volunteer budget this year is some $263,000, and that, I understand, goes to staffing and management of the two programs that I mentioned, but only $70,000 of that $263,000 goes to the actual programs. It would seem to me that it would be possible for the department to re-profile $50,000 out of that $263,000 so that we could have a Volunteer NWT back in business. I’d like to ask the Minister whether or not he would be able to see his way through that. Thank you.
Thank you. Volunteer has a budget of $150,000 in the past year and that goes out to help support a lot of the volunteer groups under that particular umbrella organization. As well, the volunteer organization development contribution increased from $20,000 to $70,000. Again, our preference would be to put money right into the volunteer groups themselves and not in an umbrella organization. However, we’re coming up to a business planning process and it’s an issue, obviously, that the Member will raise and it’s something that we’d be more than willing to listen to. Thank you.
Thanks to the Minister. I’m hoping that he’s listening now as I raise this issue. I agree that certainly, and I was very pleased to see that the department has increased the contributions to volunteer organizations from $20,000 to $70,000, but without a coordinator, without a centralized person to assist organizations, they lack the ability to do the training that is needed for volunteers that allows our NGOs to do the business that they need to do for us. So if the Minister at this point, as he seems to have indicated that $50,000 is not available to reinstitute Volunteer NWT, what can the Minister suggest he could to do to get Volunteer NWT back up and running? Thank you.
I can assure the Member that the Minister is listening, and the Minister is listening also to other voices from across the NWT. I’ve heard nothing, really, on Volunteer NWT. They’re pleased with some of the volunteer support that they’re given; however, Volunteer NWT provided a service that was required by some organizations. We’d not be willing to commit money at this point; however, as I mentioned to the Member, we are going through a business planning process where it would be an opportunity for the Member or Members to raise any monies that they would like to see put towards Volunteer NWT again. As I said before, we’re listening and we’d be more willing to listen further.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Final supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thanks to the Minister. I’m really pleased to hear his assurance that he’s listening and I can assure the Minister that, yes, I will raise this issue when we review business plans.
If the department doesn’t feel that half a PY or some kind of human resource is necessary for Volunteer NWT, is there any hope that the Minister may see his way to increase the $70,000 going to the various organizations could be increased so that it could go to more than the 17 organizations – or, sorry, 16 I guess it was last year who were able to access it. I’m sure there’s a lot more organizations who would access it if they could.
Obviously it is something that we would have to look at. If we’re getting more requirements or needs for the money that we have, or more demands, then it’s something that I think as an organization, as a department that we would have to have a look at and see how we can best support those groups that are actually out there delivering these programs to their communities. We understand the importance of volunteerism and every one of us in here has volunteered at one time or another. We need to ensure that we do our part in assisting volunteers as much as possible.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Member for Range Lake, Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I alluded to in my Member’s statement today, I will be asking the Minister of Transportation questions today on sole sourcing and the methodologies or process management policies he and his department will be using for projects such as the Giant Mine bypass and projects for the coming years.
Bottom line, I have a bit of trouble understanding the rationale when the government decides in its best interest of public funds to sole source contracts and when not to. My first question to the Minister today is: Under what circumstances can the Department of Transportation, deputy minister, Minister and Cabinet award contracts without some sort of competitive process?
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. The honourable Minister responsible for Transportation, Mr. David Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think we have an obligation to ensure that all the information is on the table, that we maximize the opportunities for local involvement in projects, and I want to assure the Member that no decision has been made on how this realignment project will be delivered. It isn’t being fast-tracked. I think I heard the Member say it was being fast-tracked during his Member’s statement. This project has been in the works for several years. It isn’t being fast-tracked, nor will the procurement delivery model that will ultimately be decided upon by Cabinet be quickly or fast-tracked to arrive at.
So in the case of Highway No. 4 Giant Mine Bypass Road Project, I won’t use the word fast-tracked but I’ll say perceived rush to have started on the pathway of a negotiated contract and then later removed for consideration by Cabinet Ministers. Can the Minister explain that process?
Again, I don’t believe we are in a rush. I think we are getting a little bit behind schedule when it comes time to make a decision on procurement on the realignment of Highway No. 4.
Again, this project has been in the mix now for several years. Construction was to begin in the winter/spring of this year to be completed by this fall. We’re moving now to look at a construction start date sometime in April.
We need to find out the best way to maximize the benefits to the economy of the Northwest Territories. We’re interested, as your colleague Mrs. Groenewegen stated in her questions to me, in trying to ensure that the money that is spent stays in the North as much as possible, and the jobs and opportunities and training are going to local people. All those things will be put on the table and ultimately Cabinet will have to make a decision on the best way to proceed with the procurement of the realignment of Highway No. 4 and that will happen in due course.
I appreciate the Minister’s response on that. To dig a little further here, Mr. Speaker, and to the Minister, did the proponents in this case approach the GNWT, or did the GNWT approach the proponents for this project?
I believe it was the former, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Final supplementary, Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thanks for clarifying that, Mr. Minister. My fear on the subject is now that we’re waiting for the Cabinet and Minister to rule on whether to have what’s in everyone’s mind an open and transparent process, and because the House will not reconvene until May 23rd of this year, which is well into the spring construction season, can we expect to have the Department of Transportation or the Minister confirm their decision to open this public project to public tendering before the end of this next week’s sitting?
