Mr. Chairman, we are still not at the point where we can indicate how those programs will be delivered in the Northwest Territories and neither have we heard how Nunavut is going to get their money. There have been some communities identified in Nunavut. We will continue to follow up on what’s available and to whom. Our understanding is that right now the dollars are earmarked for fisheries and fishing communities. That includes some of the dredging programs that are being put in place for supporting the fisheries in the communities.
Well, can the Minister argue for the people that fish the big fish, the whales, such as communities of Aklavik, Tuk and so if they do harvest whales from those communities, I think it’s no different than fishing. If it’s anything, it’s the big fish we are after, it’s not the little stuff. So I would just like to…Maybe you can use that as your argument when you go forward to the feds for the community of Aklavik.
Mr. Chairman, we will try to convince the government to invest as much as they can in the Northwest Territories. We have a lot of needs in the area of marine facilities. Certainly if we can convince the government to go further than just the communities that deal with commercial fishermen, that would really help us in a lot of different ways and address some of the issues that are being raised by the Member here today. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Page 11-30, activity summary, community marine infrastructure, grants and contributions, contributions.
Agreed.
Page 11-33, activity summary, local community access roads, operations expenditure summary, $323,000. Agreed?
Agreed.
Page 11-34, activity summary, local community access roads, grants and contributions, contributions, $313,000. Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, can we get a breakdown on where these $313,000 are being expended, which communities?
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Minister McLeod.
Mr. Chairman, we would be pleased to provide that information to the Members.
Thank you. I was just asking if Aklavik is on that list where they are getting $50,000 a year. I am wondering if they are still on that list.
Mr. Chairman, not all the applications are in yet. We have Aklavik identified as a community that we expect to apply, but we have not received an application from them.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. We are on page 11-34, activity summary, local community access roads, grants and contributions, contributions $313,000.
Agreed.
Agreed. Moving along to page 11-37, activity summary, road licensing and safety, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just note that this section of the department ensures protection of public safety and the environment. They also are interested in future opportunities for partnerships to ensure regulatory harmonization and implementation of new ideas. These are things that always intrigue me with the possibilities. So following up on my Member’s statement here earlier today, I would just like to see if the Minister may have thought more about what the possibilities are for dealing with greenhouse gas emission from vehicles and starting to take responsibility for some of the emissions that other jurisdictions are increasingly taking more responsibly throughout North America. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister McLeod.
Mr. Chairman, I tried to answer that question earlier today. I will ask the deputy to see if he can provide a more detailed response to the Member.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Neudorf.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We do have a very limited number of staff in this division who are hard at work making sure that vehicle registrations are proceeding, commercial vehicle operations are safe, drivers’ licences and various other activities are proceeding like they should. One of the things we do get involved with, and this happens more at the national level when we talk to our federal/provincial/territorial counterparts, is to see what other jurisdictions are doing. On the issue of fuel efficiency for vehicles, it is high on the federal government agenda and we are monitoring/watching what the federal government is doing to improve mandates and fuel efficiency standards for new vehicles coming out. We don’t have the staff or the resources to undertake that ourselves, but we certainly provide input at the federal level.
I would note that several months ago there was a motion to look at tiered registration for vehicles and if that provided an opportunity to promote fuel efficiency. We are in the process of finalizing that paper and we will be returning to committee shortly with a discussion paper for some options on that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I appreciate that. There are some jurisdictions, at least three provinces that we know of, that are going forward without waiting for the federal government. So there is the opportunity to also learn from our fellow jurisdictions. I am wondering what our input has been -- perhaps this is the Minister’s question -- at the federal level as referenced by Mr. Neudorf on fuel efficiency of vehicles. Thank you.
Thank you. We’ve been part of a couple of discussions at the national level. The Council of Deputy Ministers gets together two or three times a year to talk about these types of issues. So we’ve been part of those discussions. Thank you.
Once again, Mr. Chair, I am wondering if the Minister feels that his would be a good stance to take, that our input should be to encourage the federal government to adopt progressive fuel emission standards, such as three of the jurisdictions in Canada, in line with the California standards that I suspect is working its way through the North American system fairly rapidly now with Mr. Obama at the helm. But we could be ahead of the game by considering that now. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I haven’t been in this position long enough to attend the national conference with any of my federal colleagues. I would certainly be looking at the situation as the Member has raised to see what our position would be. Right now, we intend to work with the federal government on establishing some of the guidelines and be more focussed as we move forward towards the next conference. Thank you.
That was in the old idea category, of course. That’s an old idea that’s slow to be implemented. Moving onto the new ideas referenced here on page 36, I am wondering, is there a capacity and perhaps a mechanism in the department for looking to what the new future might hold in terms of these sorts of things. This is an area that is going to be moving very quickly now as we come up against the reality of global climate change and what it really means to everybody and with this Department of Transportation, what it really means to transportation and the possible substantive move to electric vehicles and so on. Is there a mechanism within the department that is a bit forward looking, if you will, out on a limb in terms of the ideas that might fairly quickly help us with a bit of a head’s up with implementation of those sorts of things? Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, this has been a challenge as we deal with the resources that we have to work with and try to move forward on a number of these fronts dealing with all the challenges and responsibility that this department has. We do have some staff that are looking and are talking to the CCMTA and having some of the discussions. They are fairly early in nature. I have not, as a Cabinet Minister, had the opportunity to have discussion with any organization. However, I would like to certainly take the opportunity as soon as I can to engage with my colleagues across Canada. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Next on my list is Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have a couple of questions related to this section. The first one relates to cell phone use by drivers operating vehicles. We discussed it a bit when we reviewed business plans in November and I just wondered whether or not the department has given any consideration to legislation that would prohibit the use of cell phones while the vehicle is in operation. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister McLeod.
Mr. Minister, this issue of distracted driving has been brought forward by a number of people and we have looked at the situation and certainly still have been considering what would all be involved if we were to move forward. Does that include eating? Does that include other things along with cell phones? And we haven’t been able to completely be convinced that we are in a position where we would be able to have charges made. That is something that we need to consider and at this point we are just going to be in a holding position to wait until we have more information to move forward.
Thanks for that answer. I appreciate that. It’s a reasonably complex issue. At one point when we were into this discussion and I believe there was a press release that occurred at some point in time between November and now...There is an awareness campaign I think that the department is running. I just wondered if I could get a little bit of an explanation or an elaboration on what sort of an awareness campaign is being run in relation to distracted drivers. Thank you.
There is already current legislation in place where a person using a cell phone can be charged. That’s driving without due care and attention. We are looking at what’s happening in other jurisdictions. Newfoundland, Nova Scotia and Quebec are the three jurisdictions that have banned cell phones. We have the smart driving program, Drive Alive, I’m sorry, that encourages people to not drive while they are distracted and that program is ongoing. Thank you.
BISARO: Thank you for that. I do have a question with regard to the work that is being done or that I believe is going to be done relative to our licence plates. I wonder when the Minister might advise when that might come back to committee for discussion again. Thank you.
We had responded to an earlier question by stating that the new licence plate would be ready for review or for committee to look at probably in a month or two. Thank you.
Thank for the answer. My apologies for not having heard the answer previously. That’s all. Thanks.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. I’ve got nobody else on my list. We are on page 11-37, activity summary, road licensing and safety, operations expenditure summary, $3.509 million. Agreed?
Agreed.
Moving along to page 11-38, activity summary, road licensing and safety, active positions. Agreed?
Agreed.
Moving along to the next page, which his 11-40, which is an information item, work performed on behalf of others. Any questions?
Agreed.
Agreed. Page 11-41, information item, work performed on behalf of others, continued, $1.605 million. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am wondering about the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation expenditure. The amount under revised estimate for ’08-09, I assume that means given the adjacent blank column that that wasn’t a planned expenditure or revenue, whatever the case may be here, and that there is some dollars budgeted. I wonder if the Minister could explain this item to me and what is going on here. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe the amounts in the budget for ’08-09 are posted that way because of the timing and the approvals. Thank you.
That explains why it’s in that column. I appreciate that. My other question is what is going on with these dollars. Do we have some sort of agreement where the Deh Cho Corporation will provide us the resources so that we can critique their engineering work? Is that essentially what is happening here?
Mr. Chairman, both the $600,000 and $200,000 are in the budgets for design checks.
Was the word “design checks”? Oh, yes, okay. And they are funding us to do that work, if that’s correct. Thanks.
