Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Four years ago, it was reported in the Globe and Mail newspaper, the Federation of Municipalities of Canada reported that we needed at least $123 billion to repair or replace municipal infrastructure in Canada. It’s beyond our wildest imagination as to where or how Canada will ever find those resources in today’s economy let alone the Northwest Territories communities. We have gas tax initiatives, community planning and infrastructure funding, and in some places, the Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund. However, this is not enough and will never be enough if we really want to begin doing all that we need to do for the municipal infrastructure.
Some time back, Fort Good Hope and other smaller communities benefited from the GNWT main street chipseal program, which to some people was a great thing. It cut down on the dust and gave people a sense of what a community can expect with government helping with this problem. However, this program was cut and now the community has to take over the program along with other projects. Because of competing priorities, the chipseal has deteriorated and there are giant potholes in the roads of Fort Good Hope. It is in need of much repair.
Mr. Speaker, even four by fours have a difficult time getting out of these giant potholes, let alone a regular pickup. My point, Mr. Speaker, we need to begin to reprofile some of the dollars that will eliminate the dust once and for all and consider advancing discussions with companies like Easy Street to help Fort Good Hope and other communities with potholes. MACA has moved a long way to empower communities with decision-making abilities and it is the right thing to do. However, we all know municipalities are our government, and our government must find the solutions to settle the dust once and for all, or at least get out of the potholes. I think so, my community leaders think so, and this government should also help us in this solution. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Member for Great Slave, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. On January 26th of this year the Premier of the Northwest Territories signed an agreement-in-principle on devolution of public lands and resources to the Government of the Northwest Territories from the federal government.
On February 2, 2011, I held my regular constituency meeting for residents of the Great Slave riding. I hold one prior to every session. One of the issues which was discussed at length during that meeting was the recent AIP on devolution in the Northwest Territories. Clearly, there are many varied opinions out there on this topic. To that end, during the meeting I agreed with a request from one of my constituents to poll my constituents to get a sense of where they stand on this important issue.
As such, immediately after the winter session I set up a poll on my website asking a few devolution-related questions. I notified all of my constituents by way of my regular newsletters and included references on my website and did a public news release, as well. Although my focus for the poll was on my constituents’ input, I did open the poll to all residents of the Northwest Territories so I could include their thoughts and their input. Here are the questions and the results:
Question one was: Do you support the transfer of management of Crown lands and a share of resource revenue from the federal government to the GNWT and Aboriginal government?
Out of 67 individual responses, 82 percent, or 55, said yes; 18 percent, or 12 people, said no.
The second question was: Do you support the GNWT in moving forward with the negotiations of a final devolution agreement?
Out of 66 individual responses, 42 percent, or 28 individuals, said yes, but make every reasonable effort to include all Aboriginal governments and organizations in the negotiations; 35 percent, or 23 individuals, said yes, commencing with negotiations with the existing signatories; and 23 percent, or 15 individuals, said no.
The third question was: Do you support the GNWT signing a final agreement on devolution?
Out of 71 individual responses, 30 percent, or 21 people, said yes, with the existing signatories; 27 percent, or 19, said yes, with a signed bilateral agreement between the GNWT and the federal government; 17 percent, or 12, said yes, only if at least 50 percent of recognized Aboriginal governments and organizations will also sign; 14 percent, or 10, said yes, only if all recognized Aboriginal governments and organizations agreed to sign on as well; 12 percent, or 9 people, said no.
Mr. Speaker, during the winter session, in response to questions from Members, the Premier agreed to meet with interested parties throughout the Northwest Territories to provide information and clarity on what devolution of public…
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
---Unanimous consent granted
Mr. Speaker, during the winter session, in response to questions from Members, the Premier agreed to meet with interested parties throughout the Northwest Territories to provide both information and clarity on what devolution of public lands and resources means to the Northwest Territories.
To that end, this evening the Yellowknife MLAs will be holding a public information session for all residents of Yellowknife with the Premier of the Northwest Territories. This will be an opportunity for all Yellowknife residents to ask the Premier their questions about devolution, and an opportunity for all Yellowknife MLAs to hear what Yellowknifers think about this important topic.
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to seeing many Yellowknife residents in the Great Hall of the Legislative Assembly this evening starting at 7 p.m. for this meeting. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Member for Nunakput, Mr. Jacobson.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The current way the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation manages their tenants’ arrears is obviously not working. I think these procedures have been unrealistic for far too long.
My colleagues and I representing small and remote communities are sitting in this Assembly year after year telling the honourable Minister that the government’s current system is broken.
The Housing Corporation is not getting what they need; the tenants in small communities are not getting what they need; and meanwhile, the less privileged residents are suffering. Our single mothers with no employment, our elders with no support, and people who are finding it tougher and tougher just to get by are all affected, and that’s a shame, Mr. Speaker.
We need to get realistic about the problem. We know the economic and social situation of these affected communities, so we need to develop a plan to address them rather than just evicting them. Evicting our residents who have no way to pay, no short-term opportunities, is just changing one problem to another. If this government continues to deal with the arrears in the way they have been in the past, the results are going to get more serious. We already have serious overcrowding conditions resulting in health and social problems. Some of our residents live in shacks because they have nowhere to go, and that’s a shame from this government, Mr. Speaker.
The respective Minister of this government needs to help these people to get back some dignity in their lives. When someone loses a job and then they lose their home, they lose hope and this results in serious social problems. We can no longer have this situation left to the market conditions to fix itself. This is unrealistic. In the wintertime the temperatures in Nunakput communities can easily range from minus 30 to minus 50, and that’s not including the wind. For the families being evicted, the conditions are inhumane and wrong.
Every community in Nunakput is having major problems in the way housing is being evaluated and administered. I wonder if this government and the Housing Corporation recognize the impact that they’re making in the region. The small and remote communities have nowhere to go. There are no shelters like here in Yellowknife, Mr. Speaker, the service programs.
Mr. Speaker, I wonder if these evictions are being directed by the central office to local housing authorities that are forced to do their dirty work on behalf of the NWT Housing Corporation. Just saying that, the Housing Corporation’s problem with the rules followed is wrong. People deserve more. They deserve our respect and compassion.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
---Unanimous consent granted
As I stated previously, overcrowding in housing units is a symptom of a much larger systemic problem and causes many problems in the communities. Mr. Speaker, this government must see firsthand how their policies in the NWT Housing Corporation headquarters are affecting small and remote communities. They must get in touch with the concerns of the communities. Until that happens, Mr. Speaker, the policies will never truly recognize the housing challenges in the small and remote communities.
Mr. Speaker, I will have questions for the honourable Minister at the appropriate time. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Jacobson. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The federal government is proposing to amend the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, the most fundamental and key environmental review legislation we have. And just in case you missed it, Mr. Speaker, the federal government is proposing to amend the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act.
I was surprised to learn from outside sources that this government is consulting with INAC on these amendments. Once again, the GNWT response is being compiled by GNWT deputy ministers or Cabinet without any plan for seeking input of Regular Members through committee. Despite requests, I have still not received the list of amendments being considered.
Last week I learned from another outside source that INAC is also consulting with stakeholders on creation of an NWT surface rights board act. Again, I have yet to receive this information through committee. My research indicates that the board will “provide a single process for dispute resolution between surface rights and subsurface rights holders who have been unable to reach a negotiated access agreement.” My source, the industry journal Pipeline News, also says MVRMA amendments will “clarify terms, enact timelines and may include board restructuring while NWT Waters Act amendments will define the jurisdiction of the board.”
These are huge changes, Mr. Speaker. Obviously the readers of Pipeline News and the public groups being asked for their input have a better pipeline to information than our standing committees.
Mr. Speaker, I’ve strongly stated my views previously, that without all our Aboriginal governments at the devolution table, we cannot develop a respectful and successful regulatory regime. I’ve also called repeatedly for this government to ask our citizens what resource regime we want for our future. Rather than spending more than a half a million dollars on the blue sky Creating Our Future Together process we could have been, and still could be, asking our citizens real questions towards made-in-the-NWT law to manage our birthright.
When devolution goes ahead we need to be ready, not to bring down the same old made-in-Ottawa law and mismanagement, Mr. Speaker. We need to prepare now with our Aboriginal partners at the table to map our future cooperatively.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
---Unanimous consent granted
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, colleagues. Is keeping the committees of this consensus government in the dark when critical changes are in the works a strategy of this government? Is refusing to go to all residents of our territory to hear their vision of a responsible land and resource management regime part of this strategy? What’s the significance of not having our Aboriginal partners at the devolution table while all this transpires?
I’ll be asking these questions later today, Mr. Speaker. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In follow-up to some of the statements that have been made regarding young people at risk in that 14 to 16 age group, I’d like to add my observations and comments, and question if our government could do more to support parents that are going through a difficult time with their teenagers.
Mr. Ramsay shared a story of a mother’s frustration. It seems that she can only sit by helplessly while observing her daughter making choices that may change the course of her life permanently, and not for the good.
First of all, let’s get the myth off the table that this only happens in someone else’s family, or to children of parents who must have failed in some way along the parenthood path. Young people from homes of all socio and economic and even religious backgrounds can go through a phase that can put their well-being in jeopardy. They are of an age where the parents have very few discipline tools at their disposal to counter this quest for control and seeming disregard for boundaries. I’m sure if we surveyed even the leaders sitting in this room today, some would admit that they put their parents through more than a few sleepless nights of worry, and to some extent this may be some rite of passage and no irreparable harm results. But for too many, these risky choices made in these tender years set a young person on a path of destructive behaviour and unhealthy choices.
As Minister Miltenberger expressed earlier in the week, there seems little that parents or authorities can do to intervene due to the rights and autonomy of a young person, the right to choose for themselves where they go, who they associate with and what they do. So what can we do as a government to support parents who fear for the well-being of their children and look to the social workers, police, teachers and other parents and this government to help support them help their child make it through these years intact?
Here’s how I’ve heard so many of these stories unfold. Little Johnny is a good student, an accomplished athlete, an all around good kid. Then comes the high school years, the peer pressure, the temptations and the next thing we know Johnny is out behind the school smoking dope with a bunch of his friends. Some may say innocent enough, but it is illegal and it can be the start of much worse things.
Some parents tune into it right away and it’s off to a strict private school, and for those who can impose this and afford it, maybe it’s a solution, but what about everyone else? Now the stakes are raised and there’s experimentation with harder drugs and excessive alcohol and the rebellion is in full swing. Now the problem becomes each and every decision being made in this downward spiral is made under the influence of impaired judgment and a sense of being invincible.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
---Unanimous consent granted
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, colleagues. Some kids will come to their senses and pull back. They find an appeal of such choices worn off and turn their attention to wholesome pursuits. But what about the ones who don’t, the ones entangled in a life of struggle with addictions? What can we as a government do to support the parents and caregivers through these years? I don’t think we can throw up our hands and say hey, you’re on your own. They are people with a right to their own choices, even if these choices are unquestionably bad choices.
I believe that we need to do more to support parents, maybe counselling, coping skills, the understanding of other parents who have been there, social workers specially trained in the management of these types of behaviours, training for educators who can detect early on and liaise with parents of children who are showing the signs of destructive behaviour, maybe even placement options, not necessarily foster care, but alternative care with programming to teach and help young people to set better boundaries for themselves.
Mr. Speaker, in question period today I’ll have further questions on this matter for the Minister of Health and Social Services. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Last November I spoke about the proposed realignment of Highway No. 4, the Ingraham Trail. The highway needs to be realigned to accommodate the remediation process at the former Giant Mine property. The realignment has been on the drawing board for four years now. Three options were put out in the public realm by the Department of Transportation. Seeing as the majority of the capital costs of the realignment will be funded by the federal government, we must use this as an opportunity to maximize benefits to our residents.
Last November the Minister of Transportation told me to have some patience, Mr. Speaker, even though the process had been dragging on for three years at the time. Mr. Speaker, I do have patience, but when seven more months go by and we still have no idea of what is going to happen with the realignment, then I have to ask some more questions about where this issue currently is at.
The Minister also stated that construction of the road realignment would start in the fall of 2011. That’s only three or four months from now. So again, where are the committee and the department on this issue?
Mr. Speaker, if the option is chosen to bypass most of the mine infrastructure -- the option that I fully support, by the way -- then it will bring many opportunities for both businesses, residents and tourists.
Prior to being elected in 2003, I worked as a tourism development officer in the North Slave region, and it was apparent then that Yellowknife was in desperate need of an RV park. That was eight years ago. The issue has just seemed to disappear while demand continues to skyrocket. The realignment of Highway No. 4 could be the much needed catalyst for finally expanding the campground at Fred Henne Territorial Park to include more RV sites. This will not only be good for local residents who frequent Fred Henne Park but also for the tourists who oftentimes show up and are told that the park and the campground are full.
The bottom line, Mr. Speaker, is we need a decision to be made and I hope that we as a government can make the case that we want to maximize opportunities where we can. I look forward to asking the Minister of Transportation again today how it is that we are making a case for taking the option to bypass all of the mine’s infrastructure, thus opening up a whole new world of possibilities for new development. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In regards to the previous election that took place, one of the predominant issues at hand was the whole devolution process in the Northwest Territories and where a particular candidate stood on the issue. Mr. Speaker, not only in the campaign but also full-page ads, which were paid by this government, to combat certain opponents of the Devolution Agreement, especially the Gwich’in leadership and the Gwich’in people that I represent, which I took offense to the article I read in the paper.
Mr. Speaker, the question that’s being asked out there is how can the Premier explain the lack of any participation on the Devolution Agreement-in-Principle to the federal government and to the federal opposition leader in light of what is happening, where we have two Aboriginal groups at the table, where six are not presently partaking.
Mr. Speaker, the question also has to be asked, exactly what is this Premier doing to advance the talks on devolution with the Gwich’in and other Aboriginal and Dene leaders throughout the Northwest Territories and ensure there is a current outstanding process that they can be involved in. Land claim agreements allow for arbitration. There also are appeal mechanisms in regards to how you can appeal certain mechanisms in those agreements.
---Proceedings interrupted due to power outage
Mr. Krutko, you may continue.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There are mechanisms we can use to entice people to the table, but more importantly, mechanisms, if we can’t work with them, let’s find a person who can through arbitration. Bring someone in who can bring the parties to the table, bring the parties with their issues, and at the end of the day, have a deal for all Northerners and have the best deal we can for the Northwest Territories and the people that we serve.
Mr. Speaker, there has to be questions out there and resolutions to these outstanding problems. Mr. Speaker, Dene issues and Dene concerns are valid. They have concerns about what’s happening with Norman Wells and why it isn’t on the table. They have concerns on exactly how management of lands and resources are going to be handled in their regions, regardless of whether it’s the Gwich’in or Inuvialuit or Sahtu or Tlicho or the Deh Cho, so they know that any activities or decisions that are going to be made will be done in consolidation with the people that are going to be affected by those decisions.
Mr. Speaker, we, as government and as a Legislature, have to be attuned to what’s being said out there about the lack of Dene participation in a process of that magnitude in regards to where we are going in the future.
Mr. Speaker, the leadership in the Northwest Territories have made it blatantly clear to the Premier and other northern leaders that if we can’t agree to devolution, why are we even talking about a northern vision if we expect to move forward on this matter.
Mr. Speaker, it’s critical that this Premier ensures that there are going to be meetings held with those groups who are basically outside the tent and are not presently fully participating and willing to sign, but we have to find a mechanism for them to be heard, regardless if it’s the obligations we have in land claim agreements, which clearly stipulated that they shall be involved in these negotiations, in which they are not. Also, the ongoing negotiations of devolution, including a package that will be beneficial to all Northerners, all residents and, more importantly, the Aboriginal people who are the ones who are ultimately going to be affected by what happens on their lands. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There has been a longstanding need for transition housing in Yellowknife for women, and through the leadership of the Yellowknife Homelessness Coalition, we are now getting closer to achieving that goal by addressing some of that need.
The Betty House is short for Better Environment to Transition in Yellowknife. This transition house will help northern women in addressing the homelessness issue and helping those at risk of becoming homeless, giving them a place to go.
Mr. Speaker, Betty House will provide a stable atmosphere for women who have no place to go and are trying to get through and get out of challenging situations. It will provide a safe place for them to begin their lives and put their lives in order.
Mr. Speaker, I want to recognize the hard work of the YWCA for championing this project, and more specifically, I’d like to recognize the City of Yellowknife and their homelessness coordinator, Dale Hernblad, for her leadership on this particular project.
Recently, the Betty House received very welcome news from BHP Billiton. They contributed $700,000 towards the estimated $6 million cost of building the Betty House. Mr. Speaker, that is a significant contribution towards this project and their generosity is certainly greatly appreciated by all.
The Yellowknife Community Foundation, a very well-known NGO in our city here, is contributing money. The City of Yellowknife is moving forward on this initiative by contributing efforts, resources and money, and private sector partners are all wanting to contribute in some way or form. The question really then that comes to mind is: where is the Government of the Northwest Territories?
Mr. Speaker, later today I will have questions for the Minister responsible for homelessness as to what partnership role our government is providing in this important initiative providing much needed transition housing for women in the city and in the North. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.
Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. [English translation not provided.]
Summer is on our doorstep, Mr. Speaker, and students have come back from colleges and universities ready to work. I have received four inquiries from Nahendeh students looking for opportunities within the territorial government. The GNWT needs to hire summer students not just in Yellowknife but in all our communities and regions.
Many government employees take holidays, leaving positions vacant for weeks at a time; a summer student could fill those positions with little impact on our overall budget. The passive restraint this government is exercising does not need to impact our future or the ability for students to earn much needed income for the fall time when they return to school.
A summer job is a great opportunity for a young person to experience the work world and acquire skills. Many students recall summer jobs during university as a valid learning experience that helped them make decisions about their future career. Taking on the responsibility of a full-time job helped build maturity and leadership.
The NWT is lucky to have young people who are willing to work. We often talk about supporting our youth, but when it comes to job opportunities, this year the support seems weak. Students that spoke with me were upset last year when there were opportunities now that our commitment for summer employment is obviously declined or even absent. I don’t believe passive restraint should be used for these valuable summer work opportunities. Reduction in government should not be on our youth and students. Let’s turn our intentions into actions, Mr. Speaker, and get these students employed. Mahsi cho.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is with regret that I have to, again, bring up the subject of how we fund one of our most valuable resources, the non-government partner organizations who deliver GNWT programs and services for us.
There is a need to better fund our NGOs, one that is not acknowledged by this government. In February I suggested to the House that the GNWT should not only provide multi-year funding, but multi-year core funding for our NGO partners. In my mind, multi-year contracts are a no-brainer, but the NGOs I hear from cannot convince the GNWT to enter into multi-year contracts.
Yet, Mr. Speaker, I recently learned that the government does provide five-year funding agreements to some organizations that we make contributions to. The time that our NGOs have to spend negotiating and developing contracts with the government is huge. Many receive funding from more than one government department and our obstructionist policies require them to have a contract with each one. The imposition that that requirement places on an organization which usually has little administration capacity to begin with is large.
Core funding would provide an NGO with financial stability and some freedom from the excessive administrative burden we place on them. For one, it would reduce the number of contracts they have to negotiate and sign, saving time and money for both the NGO and the GNWT.
Core funding would enable those multiple contracts to be reduced to one. As well, many NGOs are funded for programs which they deliver year after year. The NWT Seniors’ Society, for instance, has successfully delivered the 1-800 Seniors Information Line since 1995. Yet, now some 16 years later, they must still apply every year for funding to run this program. The government knows that the program is needed every year, they know the society does a good job delivering it, they know the Seniors’ Society is the best NGO for the job. Why, then, do we not provide them with a base funding amount to cover the services and programs that we know we want them to deliver for us?
On another note, we need to provide NGOs with regular increases in their funding; increases geared to the cost of living. Currently, no provision exists which takes into account increases in the operational costs for an NGO: salary increases, increased costs for equipment and supplies, the rise in cost of infrastructure and so on. The government must provide our NGO partners with adequate funds to cover two things: the cost of running the organization and the cost of programs and services that they do on an ongoing basis. Other projects which are beyond their normal activities would then be funded on an application basis.
The work, the services...
Ms. Bisaro, your time for your Member’s statement is expired.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
---Unanimous consent granted
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, colleagues. The work, the services and the programs the NGOs do on behalf of the GNWT is invaluable. It’s time to rethink how we fund our NGO partners before it’s too late and we lose them. I will have questions for the Premier and the Minister of the Executive at the appropriate time. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to acknowledge the recent passing of Matthew (Matt) Benyk. Mr. Benyk lived a very long and full life, most of it in northern Manitoba and northern Alberta. Several years ago he moved to Yellowknife to live with his daughter Pearl, a long-time Northerner and a resident of Northland in Frame Lake.
Condolences go out to Pearl and the rest of her family from the Members of the Assembly. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for the Premier and they are in follow-up from my Member’s statement earlier today. Could the Premier please give us an update on the status of the devolution negotiations between the GNWT and the other signatories of the AIP and the federal government? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Premier, Mr. Roland.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The status at this point, although delayed by the federal election, there has been no formal negotiations. We have been working with the parties, northern parties that have signed the AIP, on a work plan. So that is where we are at this point. We expect that over the summer, negotiations may begin on initial pieces being put on the table, but we’ll have to wait to see with the appointment of a federal Minister how they will re-engage on this file. Thank you.
During the winter session the Premier made a commitment to Regular Members to meet with residents of the Northwest Territories throughout the Northwest Territories to provide some clarity and information on the devolution process and what devolution means to the residents of the Northwest Territories. Could the Premier tell us what steps he has taken to meet with the residents of the Northwest Territories to provide this information and clarity? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Since the signing of the agreement-in-principle, we’ve taken a number of initiatives to get as much of the facts out to the public as we could. We did a householder, radio ads, as well as had meetings; for example, at the request of the Sahtu, travelled up there and had a meeting with a number of the communities on the agreement-in-principle. We went again into the Sahtu more with a Chamber event and spoke to them about the agreement-in-principle. We took the opportunity to raise the issue in Hay River with the Chamber there as well as in Inuvik. As well, as the Member stated, we’ve taken advantage of all opportunities when Members or leadership make requests to travel into their communities. We will be looking to add to that as we begin negotiations and use, for example, this evening’s town hall with Members of Yellowknife and the public to further discuss the AIP.
In my poll, one of the questions was: Do you support the GNWT moving forward with negotiations on a final devolution agreement? The most popular response, with 42 percent of the vote, was yes, but make every reasonable effort to include all Aboriginal governments and organizations in the negotiations. Could the Premier please let me know what steps his office is taking to include Aboriginal governments and organizations in the negotiations of a final Devolution Agreement? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The process that we’ve engaged in, and will continue to engage in, in bringing partners to the table is one where we’ve communicated prior to the signing of the AIP of a process. We looked at establishing a protocol; unfortunately, that wasn’t successful.
Since the signing of the AIP, we’ve informed and keep all groups informed of the work we are about to do. Hopefully in the near future we’ll send another letter to all of the leadership explaining the work we’ve done setting up a work plan, and continue to urge them to come back to the table for more discussions and signing of the agreement-in-principle to look at how we could continue. The door remains open going forward on the basis of moving forward on an agreement-in-principle and we hope again that they would take the opportunity to come forward, whether it’s days or weeks coming up towards negotiations.
