Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Abraham Francis Ferry that operates on the Peel River is able to safely accommodate all the highway traffic that moves up the Dempster Highway at the present time. It is authorized by Transport Canada, which sets the regulations for all of our ferries.
We have also been discussing the use of the Dempster Highway and the use of the ferries there with the pipeline proponents. They have indicated to date that they expect only minor impact on the ferries. We’ll continue to follow up on those discussions with the pipeline proponents as their logistical plans get further developed to see if, in fact, that’s the case and to ensure that our infrastructure, be it ferries or highways or airports, will meet their requirements.
The final point is that some of the regulations on vessel stability are changing. We’ve been informed that this is coming, so we are making the necessary changes to our vessels. The Abraham Francis Ferry is one of those vessels that will need a change at some time in the future, and that’s why the one project is here.
Can the Minister elaborate on how far into the future he is talking about replacing this vessel?
We are not currently considering replacing the vessel. We are looking at and are in the process, actually, of upgrading the vessel.
I know there was a major overhaul in regard to the ferry on the Mackenzie crossing at Tsiigehtchic. There were four engines replaced on the vessel. I know that this summer they had problems with one of the engines, which went down. They were operating with only three engines.
I’d like to know if there was any warranty in regard to that particular project. Why is it that with brand new engines we’re already seeing these problems by way of new replacements? Not even a year into the project we’re already having problems with it. What types of warranties do we cover on these types of replacements, and exactly why are we already seeing these types of problems?
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Just as a reminder, it’s getting a little bit noisy in here. If Members wish to carry on sidebars, they could take them outside of the Chamber. Minister Miltenberger.
I’d refer that to Mr. Neudorf, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Mr. Neudorf.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Member is correct that we did have a project last year to replace the four engines on the Louis Cardinal Ferry at Tsiigehtchic. That project was successfully concluded, and the ferry has been operating all this summer.
He is also correct that there was a minor issue with one of the engines on the ferry, and that was corrected through some of the warranty work and the contract we had in place.
Thank you, Mr. Neudorf. Mr. Krutko.
Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. We’re on page 8-7, Transportation, Activity Summary, Marine, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $645,000.
Department of Transportation, Activity Summary, Marine, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $645,000, approved.
Moving on to page 8-10, Transportation, Activity Summary, Highways, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $59.233 million. Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have seen, especially this summer and last year, that there have been some major challenges we’re facing on our highways. We had a major highway closure on Highway No. 7, and a culvert collapsed on Highway No. 8. The road condition of Highway No. 6, and also….
You know, we’re starting to close highways down, and we’re finding that it is a question of public safety. Yet we continue to spend major capital dollars on highways that have already been developed with chipseal and major overhauls. We are now in a situation where roads are actually being closed because of the substandard construction of those highways in the past. Now it’s coming to an age where we’re actually seeing collapses. We’re seeing the roads being eroded by permafrost.
I think it’s more important, Mr. Chair, that we as government do a better job to put the money where it’s urgently needed in regard to what highways are crumbling, where we’re having to close highways because of public safety. More importantly, we have to ensure that the travelling public feels safe on these highways.
We have a major summer cottage industry by way of tourism, but when our highways are being closed and the condition of the roads is so bad that tourists are being told in other jurisdictions not to come to the Northwest Territories, that sends a bad message to the tourism sector.
I think as a government we have to do a better job. I’d like to ask the Minister exactly what we are doing to ensure that those capital investments we’re making are made where there’s emergency need and where the biggest risk is.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The other example that was missed, of course, was the major sinkhole on Highway No. 5. I’ll ask Mr. Neudorf to speak to the details.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Mr. Neudorf.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. As the Member has indicated, safety and integrity of our infrastructure is very important to us and to the Department of Transportation as we operate our highway system.
As the Member has mentioned, though, that operation is presented with quite a few challenges at times. We do have a number of different ways and things we’re doing just to ensure the integrity and safety of that infrastructure and the safety.
There is a process in place when there is an emergency situation. For example, when the culvert collapsed on Highway No. 7, we were able to get the highway reopened within 24 hours, and within about six months we had a new structure in place to deal with that problem. Our government was able to respond to that.
At the same time, we’ve recognized for a couple of years now that infrastructure, particularly bridges and culverts, are aging and that we need to be more diligent and more deliberate in our inspections. There is some additional money that’s been given in the last couple of years to establish more formally some bridge inspection programs to ensure we are fully aware of the condition of our assets and the infrastructure out there.
Highway No. 7 I guess presents another unique challenge in that when we’d gone back and tried to assess what exactly happened, it was a whole chain of events that seemed to lead to the situation we had this past summer, an unfortunate situation. Trying to, you know, plan ahead when it does take time to see the capital dollars and time to get the capital dollars through the process does create some challenges for us, but there is money in our capital plan for Highway No. 7 and to continue to address some of the additional needs that are on the highway. We were able to get the highway back open after some considerable effort this summer.
The final point. There is $59 million here. We have a highway system that stretches from north to south. It’s a very extensive highway system, and $59 million allows us to address the needs on all our different highways and not just focus on one or two problem areas.
Mr. Chair, I’d like to move a motion.
Go ahead, Mr. Krutko.
Mr. Chair, I move that $1.4 million be deleted from the activity Highways under Department of Transportation, Capital Estimates 2009–2010, on pages 8-10 and 8-11, for the Highway 5 Km 0–266 Chipseal Project.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. A motion is on the floor and is being distributed now. The motion has been distributed. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. As we can see with the challenges we’re facing, we do have to do a better job of allocating capital to ensure we do focus on those urgent parts of our highways that are collapsing, which are basically public safety risks, by reinvesting in those highways that are in substandard condition. I drove Highway No. 5 this summer, and I was totally amazed at the amount of chipseal there and the condition of the road and trying to find a speed bump, of which there aren’t any.
I think it’s important to realize that we have some really unique challenges in regard to Highway No. 6 and Highway No. 7, especially when we start seeing culverts collapsing on our highway systems. It’s a good thing no one is driving the highways when these collapses are taking place, or we would have fatalities on our highway systems.
The intent of the motion is for this government to refocus and direct its capital investment where it’s needed. I think it’s important to realize that we have highways that are in very dangerous condition and have to be remediated as more of a priority than highways that have already received chipseal, and also that capital investment will continue into the future in regard to maintenance.
I would like to note that there is still money remaining for Highway No. 5 to do the chipseal project. We didn’t completely eliminate all the capital. We still have half the capital to do the work this year, and we have capital for next year, but I think this money should be urgently put into Highway No. 6 and Highway No. 7.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. To the motion, Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I will be supporting this motion, the main reason being that there’s a message that’s got to be sent: there are other priorities out there, especially, as Mr. Krutko mentioned, Highway No. 7. That is part of our national highway system.
I’ve done many Member’s statements and questions in the House regarding the events that occurred this spring and this summer. Constituents are consistently requesting a permanent remedy and permanent solutions so that we don’t have another closure of Highway No. 7. I’ve got many written documentations from the department, as well, in response to this concern from the region.
But on the books, Mr. Chair, there’s no obvious increment to address the need for Highway No. 7. In fact, they have to take away from other pressing needs of Highway No. 7 in order to address that highway section that closed as well. For me, it’s a message to government that says: look, when you’re distributing our capital dollars and it comes to safety and maintenance of our national highway systems, you’ve got to take into serious consideration all the different regions.
As Mr. Krutko indicated, it’s a reduction in the chipsealing budget, but it doesn’t mean it’s not going to get done, Mr. Chair; it’s just not going to get all done today. That’s the same thing we are faced with in other regions, you know. All we ask is that we take care of our needs. It doesn’t have to be all done today. Do it over time, but at least as government say that you’re addressing it and you’re working towards it.
I just want to reiterate that for me it’s a message that when government is sitting there allocating the much needed capital dollars, you’ve really got to take into consideration the seriousness, particularly in Transportation, of highways being shut down. I commend the government and Transportation for every effort they’ve made on Highway No. 7, but I’m just afraid that if it happens again next year, then what have we really done? Giving them the additional resources they need in order to have a good strategy and a good plan for maintaining and reconstructing our highways is critical to my decision on this motion, Mr. Chair. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. To the motion, Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Basically, I have the same opinion. I think there needs to be more spending on Highway No. 6, Highway No. 7 and Highway No. 8. I think that all those three highways definitely….
As the Member for Nahendeh said, Highway No. 7 was shut down last year. I think the highway was shut down this summer, actually. Highway No. 6 has not been shut down, but it’s a very, very bad highway. When it rains, you cannot exceed 70 to 80 kilometres on the highway without putting yourself in some sort of danger. So it would be good to see something happen to Highway No. 6 as soon as possible.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. To the motion, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The motion here speaks to allocate some needs. I certainly have driven the Dempster Highway. I went there a couple of years, and I know how dusty it is. I said to several Members that I can’t believe that in this day and age driving the highway was so dusty. It’s dangerous — very, very dangerous. I’ve also driven Highway No. 6, a very rough road also. I have had the opportunity to drive Highway No. 7. Highway No. 7 is pretty good. You know, there are a couple of spots that need improvement. I’ve certainly driven the highway to Fort Smith, a good highway. I know there is a need for the highways here.
I’m somewhat bewildered, because the honourable Members here are talking about highways, and our highway in the Sahtu shuts down on March 31 and opens up in January.
So we will certainly look at these and other communities that do not have highways. It is something we continue pressing for in our region and other regions that do not have roads into the communities on a seasonal basis. I know it, because I’ve been on those highways. I think that some of them, especially for the Inuvik region…. I’ve been on the Dempster, and I would say that road really needs to be looked at in terms of the quality. As the deputy minister says, also look at the integrity of the highway to improve it.
Mr. Chair, my understanding is that the roads were given to us by the federal government with certain conditions and that we have to abide by certain standards in Canada to bring them up. In this day and age the funding that we get as a territorial government is very little, even to put bridges in my region. It’s very hard to get bridges in my region, let alone put them in there and get them in on time. The people in my region talk about the goat trail into my region.
This issue is a long one in my region, but I will be supporting the Member’s motion in terms of allocating some of the dollars here. I’d like to also remind you that there are communities that do not live on the highway system, that have to live on the winter road system and fly in their food.
I know what this discussion’s about. I certainly keep pressing this government about other needs in the regions that do not have highways, that are looking forward to one day having a highway into their region. I’ll be speaking more on that as we go forward through the budget. I know it’s a challenge for this government; it’s also challenging our community on transportation issues. Some of the other areas need to be looked at more closely in terms of safety for the people in their regions.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. To the motion, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m going to speak today in favour of the motion. First of all, I think it speaks to the fact that the government…. I can appreciate the fact that they do have $59 million that needs to be spent in, obviously, different areas across the territory. I do appreciate that. But the government has to listen to Members and the concerns that have been raised in this House and from the travelling public. I think we get concerned when money is being spent.
This isn’t deleting every bit of money from Highway No. 5. We’re spending money on a highway that is passable — it is a good highway, and I’ve driven that highway — when we have other highways that are impassable and a danger to public safety. We need to be focusing our efforts on ensuring that the public can safely travel on all of our highways. If the Liard Highway has to close again in the spring and people get stuck out there and the weather turns and somebody gets killed or injured on that road, that’s a big problem.
More than anything this motion is just to send a message. I’m not sure why we’re looking at chipsealing roads or redoing roads that are good, that are passable, when we do have roads that obviously need some more attention.
Again, it’s not deleting everything. There’s more money coming down the road, I should say, in the next few years for Highway No. 5. The thing for me is the message that this sends. I do support the mover of the motion and the motion that’s before us today.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. To the motion. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to say first off that I’m surprised, because I know my colleague also drove the Dettah Road. I’m surprised that Mr. Yakeleya didn’t mention how rough, how very rough, the Dettah Road is. It’s short; it should be easy to fix.
Fundamentally, Mr. Chair, I do want to support this motion. I’ve also driven Highway No. 5. The Highway No. 7 closure really highlighted the critical nature of that situation, especially at the peak of the tourist and resupply season. Of course, we know Highway No. 6 is also in need of attention.
I just want to speak very briefly to say that there are lots of priorities out there, but clearly here’s one I think we can all agree on. Highway No. 5 has a section that needs some attention, but not the degree of attention that we’ve proposed here. We’re attempting to correct that, and I’ll be supporting the motion.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. To the motion, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be supporting the motion. I just want to note for the record that I do support the completion of the work that does need to be done on the road to Fort Smith, but it’s the priority of public safety that I’m supporting. That should not, in my view, ever be a question. If people are at risk in any way, we should absolutely be making sure our dollars are spent in that regard. Public safety over public pride of the road…. It should never be a question of whose road is the prettiest or the smoothest. If people are being put at risk and we have to close roads because of safety reasons, that alone should motivate us to support this. That’s why I’ll be voting in favour of it.
Again, I want to underscore that I’ve had the pleasure, in a safe way, to drive that road to Fort Smith, and I agree that it does need completion and chipsealing. I suspect that it will go a long way to help tourism and other factors to help the region.
Again, the reason I’m voting this way, at this time, is the principle of public safety, which I have to put first in this particular case. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. To the motion, the Minister of Transportation, Mr. Michael McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. First of all, I should point out that the description used by the Members of this House to describe our roads is a little unfair. Our roads are all considered to be safe. We may have a few potholes and not open year round, but we have different categories of roads. We have winter roads, gravel roads, roads that have chipseal. They all require investment.
I think everybody in this House recognizes that most of our transportation infrastructure and highway system is at the point where it needs to be reconstructed. They need to have investment and investment dollars that we really don’t have except to allow maintenance and ensure that we have the travelling public’s safety in mind.
We also, at the same time, have many bridges and many culverts that need to be replaced. They’re at that point in the cycle where they need replacing and investment. The Member has mentioned the investment made in the Sahtu. By the end of this government we hope to have at least 39 bridges all constructed and finished in those areas in that region. It really requires a lot of investment.
The rationale behind doing all these projects is to provide transportation for as many months of the year as possible. There is, of course, direction that comes from this House. In the previous government there was, I think, very clear direction by the Members that we needed to invest in roads that connect communities. Up to now the majority of our funding went to roads that had been impacted by resource development, projects and resource development in the area. The bulk of our money went into Highway No. 3, Highway No. 1 and the Sahtu.
We’re trying to spread it around. We recognize that we need to invest more money and reconstruct Highway No. 8. We recognize that we need to reconstruct and pick up where we left off on Highway No. 7, and it has to be reconstructed.
A lot of these projects, including the work that needs to be done on Highway No. 1, are a result of deferred investment. Now we’re seeing some direction that we thought we had from the previous government to invest in Highway No. 5 and Highway No. 6 to ensure that there are safe roads there and also to try to keep it to a standard that would allow the traffic to travel back and forth. We have plans to reconstruct portions of that road, of highways No. 5 and No. 6. We also have plans to chipseal a good part of those roads. We’d like to see more investment in there, of course, but at this point we have to identify other sources.
This highway provides a real essential link for two communities, and that’s Fort Resolution and Fort Smith. So those two communities are dependent on this road for access to the southern part of Canada and Hay River and also into the North Slave. You know, we need to find additional dollars to upgrade it. We need to do more, of course, to reconstruct it, and there are two sources of funding that we’ve been pursuing. One is through negotiations with Wood Buffalo Park that would allow us to match dollars or have a partnership arrangement to invest in this highway. The other one is to try to earmark some of the dollars that we have negotiated through the Building Canada Fund to be allocated to these two community links.
There is other investment, of course, that is required to some of the smaller communities: the access roads, Nahanni Butte, Jean Marie, Hay River reserve. They all need investment, and those have to be considered. But in this case this is an issue where we wanted to maintain the upkeep of the road. Somebody’s mentioned that the road is in pretty good shape. I am very happy to hear that. We consider it to be a very safe and reliable link; however, we’d like to keep it that way. Investing these dollars to reconstruct portions of it — upgrade it so that we can chipseal it — would maintain that standard. So that’s the rationale behind this, and it was also included as part of our business planning that was carried over from the last government.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. To the motion, Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to note that while the Members have indicated they want to make a point about how money is allocated, we’ve spent in my life in this Assembly probably over $100 million on highways No. 3, No. 4 and No. 2, and we’ve waited patiently for 12, 13 years to try to get a piece of road upgraded. It is interesting to hear Members tell one of the smaller communities — the ones that already have the best roads in the country — to suck it up and donate some of the money back. There are tens of millions of dollars in there for highways No. 3 and No. 4 but no suggestion that maybe it should be those that have the most that contribute this small amount of money. You folks have decided to reach very specifically into one of the smaller constituencies to make your case and raise the issue of noble sentiment about the message. That will be the will of the House, but it rings somewhat hollow to me, and I can assure you it will ring completely hollow to my constituents.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. To the motion. Question?
Question.
Question has been called. I’ll call upon Mr. Krutko to conclude the debate on the motion.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’d like to thank my colleagues who support the motion. Again, the motion is to ensure that we do invest our dollars where it’s most urgently needed. No offence to my colleague in Fort Smith, but there is still $1.4 million that’s going to be expended on the chipseal project this year. I think it’s clear that this government has to ensure that public safety is paramount for whatever we do here.
With that, Mr. Chair, I would request a recorded vote on this motion.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The Member has requested a recorded vote. All those in favour, please stand.
Mr. Krutko, Mr. Bromley, Mr. Menicoche, Mr. Ramsay, Mrs. Groenewegen, Mr. Beaulieu, Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Jacobson, Ms. Bisaro, Mr. Yakeleya.
All those opposed.
Mr. Lafferty, Ms. Lee, Mr. Miltenberger, Mr. Roland, Mr. Michael McLeod, Mr. Robert McLeod, Mr. Bob McLeod.
Any abstentions? The results of the recorded vote on the motion are ten in favour, seven opposed, zero abstentions. The motion is carried.
Committee motion carried.
We’re on page 8-10. Mrs. Groenewegen.
Mr. Chairman, I move that we report progress.
Motion carried.
