Thank you and I apologize to the Member in not giving her a time in response to her previous question, but when the approvals come in and we get the nod from the federal government, things will move quickly. We’re hopeful that even by perhaps Friday we could be in front of standing committee. If we are going to make something happen in the Beaufort-Delta, things are going to have to progress quickly in order to make that happen. So it could be as early as this week, in response to the Member’s previous question.
On the Mackenzie Valley winter road, and again that’s capital, but I’ll touch on this for the Member. We did have some difficulties early on in the season. There’s been a tremendous amount of heavy truck traffic in the Mackenzie Valley, given the economic activity that’s taken place there. Not just in the Sahtu in and around Norman Wells and Tulita, but also further south we noticed quite a bit of activity in and around Wrigley and Fort Simpson as well. You couldn’t get a hotel room in Fort Simpson. Very much a busy, busy place. Ledcor is doing a lot of work on the Enbridge line north of Simpson and there are lots of jobs and opportunities for people, but that has brought some problems for the winter road and that is the heavy truck traffic.
I had the opportunity on the weekend to drive from Fort Good Hope to Fort Simpson. So I saw firsthand some of the concerns that are out there. The ruts in the road, there’s some holes, there’s some approaches that needed some work. As soon as I got back on Monday, the first guy I phoned was my deputy minister and we were assured that the contractors that are in place addressed the areas of concern that Norman and I saw on the ride down from Fort Good Hope.
So there are issues, but it is a winter road, the speed limit is 50 kilometres an hour. Really, if you talk to the people in the Mackenzie Valley, I mean, that winter road is a real lifeline for them getting goods in and travelling around the communities and the regions. So they depend heavily on that winter road.
But again, the bottom line, and it impressed upon me and anybody I talked to on that trip, was the need for an all-weather road down the Mackenzie Valley, and judging by the truck traffic that we saw coming south from Norman Wells, we need an all-weather road there sooner rather than later. Thank you.
Thanks for both the Chair and the Minister indulging me with a capital question.
I do have a question with regard to the number under details of other expenses. In this year’s budget we have other, $6,000 and previously it was more than $8 million. So I’m wondering if that is the interest expense on the bridge or if it’s something else. Can I get clarification? Thank you.
Thank you. The Member is correct; that was for the Deh Cho Bridge, the remains there are $6,000 and that’s chargeback expenses. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Ramsay. Next on the list I have Mr. Bouchard.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I’ll start my questions with the Deh Cho Bridge and the process of operation there. I’m just wondering how the department is handling the maintenance of the Deh Cho Bridge this winter and has that cost been exactly what we expected. I’ve heard that we have staff on 24-hour call to salt and gravel the bridge. Have there been any additional costs than what we expected on the Deh Cho Bridge?
Thank you, Mr. Bouchard. Minister Ramsay.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The maintenance on the Deh Cho Bridge is own forces and we’ve had to adjust the maintenance in the Fort Providence area to account for the Deh Cho Bridge. In terms of additional costs, you’ll see in the budget there’s $259,000 in additional costs to maintain and operate the Deh Cho Bridge. Thank you.
Along the lines of the bridge as well, can the Minister maybe provide me some of the analysis of the toll collection, collecting the tolls? Has that been what we expected and also the other side to it, the expenses? Has the toll system been working effectively and have there been any additional costs to tracking of this or any additional expenses to doing the toll collections?
Thank you. It still is relatively new, but things are on track. We continue to collect tolls. On an annual basis it will be somewhere over $4 million. We have an annual admin cost on the tolls of about $300,000. It is an automated thing. There are pictures of the licence plates that are taken of the trucks that are crossing northbound on the Deh Cho Bridge. So the good news is that the bridge is in service, that tolls are being collected and there haven't been hiccups thus far. Thank you.
My next question on the bridge is we have agreements in place with the utility, I know there are a couple of utility companies, the telephones and maybe potentially the power company that are looking to use the bridge. Is there typically a chargeback to that or is it something we provide for those utility companies?
Thank you. Yes, with NorthwesTel and we’ve also had discussions with the NWT Power Corporation for using the bridge and the conduit in the bridge, and that would be done on a chargeback basis. Thank you.
My next area, obviously, would be the interest in the Tuk to Inuvik highway, but my question would be what does it currently cost us to build the winter road, operate the winter road from Tuk to Inuvik.
Thank you. The Inuvik-Tuk ice road and the road to Aklavik, together they’re about $2 million. So we’re going to save about $800,000 in putting that ice road in between Inuvik and Tuk. It’s about $800,000. Thank you.
Thank you. I’m just wondering also along those lines of any kind of other business case that we’ve looked into the government of the benefits of the Tuk-Inuvik highway. Is there an operational cost that the department has been working with, maybe, the Department of Health or Department of Justice for transportation costs that we would be saving in the creation or the building of this road? Has a business case been completed for this?
Thank you. Yes, there definitely are benefits to building the Inuvik-Tuk highway. As far as a business case goes, all roads built here in the Northwest Territories, I mean, we wouldn’t have the Deh Cho Bridge if we went strictly of a cost-benefit analysis. So we have to build infrastructure and in this case it’s the Inuvik-Tuk highway that we’re looking at constructing. Thank you.
Thank you. Yes, I’m just looking for a little more detail on that business case. I’m wondering if the department would be… Obviously this is a capital project, I understand, but I’m just wondering if the department would be investigating some of the additional business case savings that the territorial government would have. Obviously, it’s easier if we’re saving similar to the toll system, it would be an easier case if we could say that we were saving $2 million a year in transportation costs because we don’t have to fly in and out of the community, items like that. Is the department looking at doing any of that type of stuff for us when we’re considering the capital side of this project?
Thank you, Madam Chair. We have done a benefit analysis. We could look at getting that for the Member and other Members as well. The Member is correct; there are a number of those benefits and they have to be quantified. We’d certainly like to help get that information to the Members.
I just want to go back to the bridge topic. I missed one of my notes here. I’m just wondering about the corporation, the corporate companies and registration of the tolls. Have we registered most of the northern companies as far as for the toll system? Are we still in the middle of that system? How much flack are we talking with the tolls of collecting and getting operators up to speed on the registration of the tolls?
It is still a relatively new system. It’s somewhere around 80 percent in terms of registered users of that toll system. We still have some to capture, but compliance has been good where we continue to move forward with toll collection.
My next line of questioning would be toward the Sahtu winter road. Obviously, some of the other Members had talked about the closures and some of the difficulties there. I’m just wondering what kind of feedback the department has gotten with some of the corporate companies. I know some of the corporations have provided us money for the winter road to get that up and operational as soon as possible. Have we seen much flack from that when the closure was going on, and do we expect that corporate sponsorship to continue?
Along with the heavy usage of the road, weather was also a big factor early on when the road did first open. This operating system, we got $1.2 million from industry and they have been very supportive in helping us construct and maintain the winter road in the valley. All indications are that next season we may have even more industry buy-in to supporting the government’s efforts on constructing and maintaining that winter road down the Mackenzie Valley. Discussions have been good thus far, but whenever you talk to industry, they want to support getting the winter road to be the best that it possibly can be, but they also talk about the all-weather road and the fact that things would be so much easier if we had a road down the Mackenzie Valley. They’re going to be partners, it looks like, with us for the foreseeable future, which is very encouraging.
Obviously, we wouldn’t be representing all of our fellow Members here if we didn’t mention Highway No. 7 during highway discussions. Mr. Menicoche is travelling this week. My question for Highway No. 7, obviously Hay River being part of the Deh Cho loop and promoting that, I’m just wondering if the department is expecting to continue their upgrade and early maintenance of Highway No. 7 so we have a fabulous year like we did last year. Does the department have any additional funds expected to be worked on Highway No. 7 and will they continue to make sure this maintenance happens earlier in the season?
With Highway No. 7, that is a capital question but I’m more than happy to respond to it. We’ve got $1 million in this year’s capital budget. Going forward we’ve used the number of $250 million would be required for the complete reconstruction of Highway No. 7, which is necessary, but we don’t have $250 million to put towards the complete reconstruction of that highway. What we do have is a plan to come forward with $3 million in capital every year for 10 years, I believe is the length of time, to put a dent in the requirements that are needed on Highway No. 7. With the advance of Prairie Creek and the more usage on that highway, it’s going to become even more imperative that we find the dollars to put into Highway No. 7.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Bouchard, your time is up. I will put you back on the list if need be. Next is Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just want to find out from the department and the Minister here, if one was to look at or wanting to get information with respect to any type of infrastructure such as the Inuvik-Tuk highway, would they be able to go to the department website to get that type of information, updated information?
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Minister Ramsay.
Yes, there are reports there. In fact, I believe the benefit analysis is on the website, as well, so Members could go to the Department of Transportation website and avail themselves of the information that’s there.
Actually, I have the luxury of being in the House here today and I actually have the Department of Transportation website in front of me here in real time. I’m looking at all files related to the Inuvik-Tuk highway and I see here that the last entry of any type of document was in May 2011. Can the Minister indicate to me if there is another site that the general public can go to to find current information, recent information that is not 22 months old?
It may be contained on the EIRB website. If the Member’s got access to the Internet, he could try that website. I’ve taken his notice of lack of information on our website. We will get as much information up there as soon as possible.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Maybe you could clarify which website you were referencing.
It was the Environmental Impact Review Board.
I will take the Minister up on doing some more Google searching for what I consider a pretty large project.
Just on an aside, with respect to the Department of Transportation website, which I believe is a new website here that’s up and running this fiscal year, when I look at any of the highways or highway information, October 2011 was the last time on the Mackenzie Valley Highway that we’ve seen any type of report. I indicated May 2011 with Inuvik-Tuk. Highway traffic reports, 2011. I’m seeing very little with respect to highway information, information that I know, if I was a member of the public who wanted to know information about highways, and linking Department of Transportation with highways, it is very clear that we are lacking current information available to the public. Can the Minister explain why?
The road conditions and travelling conditions would be updated daily, but I certainly take the Member’s point and we’ll try to populate the website with much more information.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. You’re done, Mr. Dolynny? Mr. Bouchard.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just had one more follow-up question. My question was about Highway No. 7. Again, Mr. Menicoche is probably happy I’m asking this question. About the maintenance – and we talked about spring maintenance and getting maintenance done early – I know that was a large issue and I think that was probably one of the successes of last year’s roadway, was to get the maintenance done earlier. I’m just wondering if the department has the same commitment to get that maintenance on Highway No. 7 done early in the springtime.
Thank you, Mr. Bouchard. Minister Ramsay.
Yes, we have the same commitment as last year on Highway No. 7. The money will be used for priority areas.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Page 11-21, Transportation, activity summary, highways, operations expenditure summary, $64.766 million.
Agreed.
Page 11-22, Transportation, activity summary, highways, grants and contributions, grants, $200,000.
Agreed.
Page 11-23, Transportation, information item, highways, active positions.
Agreed.
Page 11-25, Transportation, activity summary, marine, operations expenditure summary, $5.717 million. Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to lead into what was mentioned earlier today. I believe the deputy minister here indicated that with federal Bill C-45 that there tends to be, and I don’t remember the exact wording, making things easier. Can I get maybe the Minister or deputy minister to elaborate on what effects it will have on our marine programs with imminent changes to federal regulations?
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Mr. Neudorf.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The changes to 38 and 45 would affect us mostly on the capital side of things and as we seek approvals for our capital projects, it will make the process a little clearer, in some cases a little simpler, and it will also put in specific timelines that must be met for the regulatory process and whatever other environmental assessment-type approvals we have to go through.
I will be looking forward to maybe asking that question when we get into the capital side in a few months, so I appreciate that. I remember some time ago we talked about, I believe in committee format, it was referred to as the On Course Marine Strategy. Can the department give us a bit of an update as to where we’re at with that strategy and maybe some of the goals or strategies that could be affecting this budget for this year?
The strategy On Course was for five ferries that we had at the time. It is still sitting in draft in the department. We have not rolled it out publicly but we are taking the results of it and using it in our O and M and capital refit work for the vessels. It’s helping us to prioritize that work. The plan is that we want to come forward with a full multi-modal transportation strategy and one of the chapters or sections of that would include marine as well. In terms of the other specific things that we’re working on marine, of course, the Merv Hardie is coming out of service so we are just working on the plan of what will happen with that vessel.
I believe my notes indicate that we are anticipating to see the completion of that On Course Marine Strategy in the 2012-2013 budget. It’s interesting to see that it is still not completed, yet we do have a lot of changes in our marine vessels, especially with the Merv Hardie. With that said, we service, currently, four river crossings with ferries, and with the changes that we’re seeing with the Deh Cho Bridge finally in active services and the Merv Hardie possibly being re-allocated to a future port of call, is there any cost recovery with any of our fleet that may be coming off the books in this fiscal year?
