I appreciate the Minister’s response of not losing sight — it might be a little foggy right now — of how you get this bridge in place. but, Mr. Chairman, I am looking at it in terms of the amount of investment that could and should continue to go into the Sahtu region.
I have these bridges in place. We know the bridges are being built in the Sahtu region, because we drive by them and we see them. We certainly appreciate them. When the bridge isn’t put at Tulita to connect to Norman Wells, we know the amount of time for the local contractors, the local businesses…. Each day they lose thousands of dollars because of the weight restriction, because of the open water at the Mackenzie and the Bear rivers, and at the N’Dulee crossing there’s open water too. So we know those challenges.
In Délînê they know what it takes for a company to get across to the Bear River on the Great Bear Lake. Every day that goes by, they lose thousands of dollars because of the weight restrictions, because they’re unable to get across there. Companies are telling us they could stay an extra 30 days in our region. I asked Husky, “What does it cost to operate your rig per day?” They spend $40,000 a day operating a rig. If they can get bridges in places such as the Bear River, you’re going to hundreds of thousands of dollars in the Sahtu region. By not having these critical infrastructure bridges there, we’re not supporting the local businesses as much as we could. There are millions. People want some concrete answers.
I know the Minister is trying hard. There are challenges with the federal government in their funding. There are challenges with his own government here. You talked about Bosworth before. Bosworth is millions of dollars. Oscar Creek is probably less, but the Oscar Creek Bridge is just sitting there. When you talked about putting in the Blackwater River bridge, which I think is really good, people are going to be happy about that.
But there are really some issues that should be looked at in terms of building infrastructure in our region here. That is what my people want to know. There is nothing targeted.
There are challenges. I know the federal government has some challenges we do not quite agree with. Certainly, there have to be some dollars. There were already plans for the Great Bear River Bridge. They said there was a budget of $25 million. You know, just like our schools or hospitals, we budget something, and next year they triple and double, but still somehow we find money for projects. So I’m saying that in Transportation they can do it in increments. Probably the department does not like that very much in terms of building the approaches and getting the steel, because I understand our steel is somewhere else in the south here — Bear River Bridge steel. The steel was there.
Again I would ask the department to seriously consider the infrastructure that needs to go into our region and into the Sahtu region for the people. We have maybe two months at the most, three months in a really good season, and then we have to fly everything in. Our companies work from December to the end of March, and then there’s no activity. These young guys and young ladies that build their companies in the communities rely on the winter road. That is the only opportunity they have to make money, unless you get a contract with the territorial government or the federal government to do some work. They can’t move their equipment all around. It has to stay, and somebody has to pay the bill.
I am asking the department for the Sahtu people — not me; it’s what the Sahtu people are asking me — to have some concrete…. We’ve been given the green light — stop, suspend, defer, postpone — and we have been given hopes that it might go through. Then we looked at the book. They’re asking about the Bear River Bridge. I know the Minister talked about Bosworth, but there are other bridges also that need to have some attention. For us, in our region, this is what we are asking. It’s no different. Other regions have all weather roads and bridges already. they don’t need to really talk about this. I guess I’m asking how this government supports the Sahtu region.
Over the years million of dollars have gone in from oil companies. Husky alone spent over $100 million in the Sahtu region. Kodiak, PetroCan, Talisman spend millions in the Sahtu region, and we don’t feel we’re getting a fair shake in terms of investment. Just the safety on the highways themselves — I hope to see some really good safety programs.
Those big trucks come through with chains on their tires, and they brag how fast they can go from Wrigley to Norman Wells, how many hours. Sometimes, Mr. Chair, that road is so good that those truckers go past the speed limit of 50 kilometres an hour. What I am looking for is some improvement on the roads this summer for the people’s sake. Members talk about the road, and we certainly want to see a lot of improvement.
So, Mr. Chair, in closing — I think it’s more of a statement — I’m hoping I would see some concrete plans in terms of the Bear River Bridge, going into a solid plan to see production, going on to see what we can do.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If you want to talk about concrete plans, the man to talk to is the Minister of Transportation, Mr. Michael McLeod. I will ask him to respond.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Minister Michael McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have over the last number of years invested very significantly in the area of Sahtu. It has probably received the most investment in terms of bridge work. We put in many bridges that would see the road season extended so that people could take advantage of it, and the oil and gas industry can also utilize this piece of winter road. We also had partnerships with many of the companies that the Member has mentioned to enhance the road, to keep it safe, to keep it stable and also to extend the season.
The Bear River Bridge is a project that has had money identified through the strategic investment fund. It is a project that has tripled in cost, and we no longer have resources identified to move forward with this project. Until that changes, we are going to have some difficulty agreeing that we will invest in that project. If we wanted to bring it into the Building Canada Fund, we would probably have to take half of what our budget is for transportation investment and put it into one project. It is a project that was de-scoped, because we didn’t have the resources to do it, to bring it forward. It’s not an easy decision to make to move away from a project.
We recognize that this would allow the winter road season in the Sahtu to be extended, to open it up a little earlier. But we’ve taken the initiative to create bypass roads. We have taken the initiative to invest in building a road across the ice that would also open the winter road traffic earlier. We’ve tried to do things to accommodate and help the people in that area and also industry, but right now we are not in a position…. We don’t have the resources to build the Bear River Bridge. The money that was in that area has been reinvested in other areas, as the Member has indicated.
We can’t allow steel that was purchased to be sitting there when we were just criticized for the Oscar Creek Bridge — having infrastructure that we haven’t been able to put in place soon enough or quick enough. I’m sure we would certainly be criticized for leaving steel lying on the ground in Tulita because we didn’t have the resources to put it up.
It’s still something we’d like to do. We hope, as we move forward with discussions and options for the Mackenzie Valley road with the federal government, that this would be part of it. But until then we don’t have the resources, and we can’t comfortably say to the Member that we will be doing the Bear River Bridge within the life of this government.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Next on my list is Mr. Beaulieu.
Mahsi cho, Mr. Chair. Just a quick question for the department or the Minister. I see that there is a plan to do some energy upgrades to camps. I’m assuming that’s just to make some of the equipment storage areas more energy efficient. I’m wondering if there is a plan to do an energy upgrade on the camp at Big Buffalo River.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Mr. Neudorf.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The purpose of that funding is to implement some energy efficiency initiatives that we identified. We worked through the Arctic Energy Alliance and did audits on nine different DOT facilities in various locations across the North. They came up with a series of recommendations, and this is part of the answer as we seek to implement some of their recommendations. I do not believe that Buffalo River camp was one of the nine, so we will continue to look at that one. As well, we will work with Public Works and Services and their preferred maintenance program too, which would be doing assessments of the facilities there.
Thank you, Mr. Neudorf. Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. That is all I have.
We are on page 8-10. Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Minister’s response in terms of likely having Bear River implemented in the life of this government because of the funding source…. I’m really disheartened to hear from the government in terms of the people of Sahtu that the Bear River Bridge project is on again, off again, on again.
The government thought they could build a bridge for $25 million at the time. When they came in, they came in at over $40 million. I think $25 million was not a very accurate number. Then they looked at de-scoping the project to get it off the bridge funding agreement. They went through that, and then somehow it doesn’t make it under the Building Canada infrastructure funding requirements.
I think the Minister just told my people that there’s no bridge within the life of this government — the Bear River Bridge. I don’t think the people are going to be very happy in terms of this bridge. It’s been designed. The steel was in Hay River, I understand; the steel now is on Kakisa Bridge. The Oscar bridge has been sitting there for a couple of years. People drive by it every winter. They look at this bridge while they drive by. It goes down to the river and comes up on the other side. They say: “Why don’t they fix this bridge, put the approaches in there? What are they waiting for? Why are they doing nothing to fix the bridge?”
A couple of years ago we had open water on the Mackenzie and the Bear River. Why doesn’t the government this year look at it and say that if we’re not going to have the Bear River Bridge, put some ice sprays there for the traffic? Improve the road system. That’s what I’m looking at in terms of what other alternatives they may have. To pull the Bear River Bridge out from under the feet of the people of the Sahtu is just not fair.
Certainly they can find money; there’s money there. It’s just not a priority, I guess. That’s what you’re telling the people today in the Sahtu. You’re telling the companies that rely on working with industry — gas, exploration, drilling…. For the next three years of this government.... At least you give them some things to think about in future planning. If they put ice sprays at the N’Dulee crossing for Husky, they certainly can put ice sprays on the Bear and on the Mackenzie and on other rivers.
That’s what my people are hearing today. All those past meetings we had in Tulita about the Bear River Bridge were good words for nothing. It’s disheartening to hear that. Yet they can invest in other areas.
I hope the government has a change of heart and looks at other areas where we can to improve ice crossings in terms of spray, like we did in Inuvik. We put an ice spray up in Tsiigehtchic, because they wanted to help the people in Inuvik bring their groceries in, to bring their costs down — those companies that bring food into the small communities. Give my people some hope in the Sahtu and say we could bring in some ice sprays — spray the ice to build it up so we can have quicker access to opening it up. Do something like that.
You know, a couple of years ago a bunch of kids went to Norman Wells, and they got stuck on the ice road. How many hours were they stuck on the ice road because of a whiteout? People were pretty mad in Tulita, having the young kids on the road. They didn’t complain very much, but they were mad. If it happened anywhere else in the Northwest Territories, you’d hear an outcry. I know a mountain of investment has gone in, but it’s about time you had that mountain of investment go to the Sahtu. Look at Highway No. 1 and Highway No. 3, the amount of investment over the years: millions compared to us.
To ask for a bridge to go across, advance capacity building, invest in our companies for oil and gas…. It doesn’t look like we’re going to have a good chance of getting the bridge in place, to have plans to say: “Go ahead with it. We can spend this much and spend this much for our region.”
There’s one article in the newspaper that always talked about us being isolated. Other communities are isolated. What will it take for this government, for our people, to say yes in a year in this House and to go ahead with a bridge that means a lot to our people?
I don’t feel very confident, I guess, in terms of the project. I feel there are some good projects going on, but to hear that in the life of this government it’s not going to deal with any expansion, will not say, “Yes, you can go ahead with the Bear River Bridge….” It’s not very good to hear. I’m going to leave it at that in terms of this department.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. That sounded more like a comment. I didn’t hear a specific question. So we’ll go back to page 8-10, Transportation, Activity Summary, Highways, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $57.833 million.
Department of Transportation, Activity Summary, Highways, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $57.833 million, approved.
Moving along to page 8-13, Transportation, Activity Summary, Road Licensing and Safety, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $1.325 million.
Department of Transportation, Activity Summary, Road Licensing and Safety, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $1.325 million, approved.
Okay. We’ll return to the department summary, page 8-2. Transportation, Department Summary, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $76.906 million.
Department of Transportation, Department Summary, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $76.906 million, approved.
We’ll move along to the next department, the Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment. We’ll defer page 9-2 until after consideration of the Activity Summary. Let’s turn to page 9-4, Industry, Tourism and Investment, Activity Summary, Tourism and Parks, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $2.961 million. Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In regard to this department, what role does ITI play in our communities? One of the main roles is dealing with our economic development positions in our communities and trying to assist small businesses.
I know there’s a new program out there called SEED, but I think it’s important that…. We have to do more. We talk about tourism and whatnot. But what we’re seeing is that we have to be able to also develop the economies of our small communities. We can have healthy and vibrant people, but without having a social and economic base for these people to be able to generate business, to have people employed and to have cash flow in our communities…. This department has to do more to stimulate our local communities and economies.
One of the challenges that you face, especially in a lot of communities, is just having the capacity to take on some of these opportunities by having the resources and people to assist small businesses to get off the ground. More important than having the capacity in the community to do it…. We have economic development officers in communities, but that’s just one step. I think we also have to look at how we as communities take advantage of those opportunities and realize that we have a high cost to run a business in small communities. We have some unique challenges by way of high energy costs and high overheads in running a business in small communities.
I would just like to ask: exactly what is this government doing to stimulate the economy with big opportunities? We talk about pipelines; we talk about tourism and whatnot. I think there has to be something that deals with community capacity by way of social and economic development.
Can the Minister tell us exactly what types of investments this government is looking at? I know we have different committees established, but I think, more importantly, this government has to do something to ensure that we are able to sustain businesses in our communities and have them functional so that they can maintain and sustain themselves. A lot of companies go out of business in just a matter of a couple of years because of the high cost of operating a business in communities versus the cost of operating a business in a larger center. I would like to know exactly where we are going in regard to that aspect.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don’t see that item listed under the capital plan, so given the program content, I will refer the question to Minister Bob McLeod.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Minister Bob McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Member is correct. We have been undertaking a number of initiatives. We have mentioned the SEED policy, which has been changed to target level 2 and 3 communities. One of our objectives is to promote development in every one of our 33 communities. We will be actively working in that regard. As well, we have targeted marketing dollars to help promote the harvesting sector. We have a cadre of officers that either work for the government or work for regional and community organizations to promote development. So this is something that we have been working on to promote development in communities. Of course, we have the Business Development Investment Corporation that promotes development of businesses in the communities as well as subsidiaries.
I would like to thank the Minister for that. Also in regard to the tourism aspect, I know that there is a lot of focus put on tourism.
Right now we have an opportunity to tie into the tourism market. I know a lot of focus has been done in regard to tourism and whatnot, but there is a major market that has developed next door to the Beaufort-Delta region by way of the Dempster Highway. People are travelling from the Yukon, from Germany, and I think that we have to somehow tie into that by ensuring that we have those facilities along our road systems and also for our tourism outreach program to ensure that we are able to take them on.
I know that there are a lot of questions in regard to where capital has been expended, but more importantly, what services are available to tourists when they travel our highways by way of our different campgrounds and sites we have along the different highway systems?
I would like to ask: is there a tourism strategy in place that allows for different tourism markets — road tourists, road traffic tourism, and also river tourists — to see exactly what we are doing or if we are spending money in the right place? More importantly, what are we doing to enhance this government’s image by way of tourism?
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will refer that question to Minister Bob McLeod.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Minister Bob McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have had developed a number of strategies over the years. I think the most recent one was Tourism 2010, which identifies the vision and the strategy for going forward. With the funding that has been available generally, to date we have been trying to maintain our existing facilities. We really haven’t had funding to be able to go and construct new tourism facilities in any big way.
Under the land claim agreements they have established protected areas, and I know they established Gwich’in Territorial Park out of Inuvik. They also established the CANOL Trail in the Sahtu, which was part of the land claim agreements under protected areas.
I think it is important that there were also some obligations under those agreements to establish park committees to look at the opportunities that flow from that park development by way of employment opportunities in regard to the aboriginal culture and crafts. I would like know how much money has been expended today in regard to those areas and also the implementation of the protected areas of those land claim agreements under territorial parks.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Just a reminder to Members that we are talking about capital estimates. I will go to Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Once again, given the program content of the question, I’ll refer that question to Minister Bob McLeod.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Minister Bob McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My understanding is that we have fulfilled our commitments that were negotiated through the Gwich’in land claim with regard to the establishment of parks.
I know that under the Sahtu claim we are still trying to move forward on the Doi T’oh park. We are being held up primarily by problems with getting ownership or access to the lands set aside for the park and the CANOL Trail, and primarily it is with regard to environmental issues. So it has taken us longer than originally anticipated to get ownership of and access to the parks. It comes down to a question of: do we set up a committee ahead of time knowing that we’re not going to be able to move forward on the park and complete the park until we get the land or should we go ahead anyway?
With regard to protected areas it was a strategy that was developed in partnership with the federal government. The federal government has responsibility for establishing protected areas, and they are community driven. My understanding is that the furthest advanced are the two protected areas that have been requested at Délînê, and we have about five or six others, I believe.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Time has expired.
We are on page 9-4, Industry Tourism and Investment, Activity Summary, Tourism and Parks, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $2.961 million. Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Doi T’oh Canyon territorial park, I would like to ask the Minister his plans for infrastructure on that.
I heard the Minister of ITI talk about some of the challenges with the federal government in terms of land ownership, cleaning up that park. That proposed park certainly has some interest by the people in the Tu Nedhe district in terms of ownership through our land claims. However, we don’t want to take over a garbage dump, as the trail is being known as, because of the contaminated soil, drums. Everything needs to be cleaned up before we take over that park.
In terms of the Minister’s commitment to continue working on this park, what can the people in the Sahtu, specifically the Tulita district, do to continue to have some interest, some presence in this park in terms of having some ownership? Right now we have a management committee. That management committee has, I understand, been approved by the interested parties. Now how do we get things on the go here to have some presence so that we can open up this park under a unique management arrangement by the aboriginal groups and this government? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ll refer that question to Minister Bob McLeod.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Minister Bob McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. As I noted earlier, we can’t proceed with the transfer of lands until DIAND has completed a full contaminated sites assessment and remediation of the land to be transferred. The last time I checked, our expectation is that this assessment would be completed and scheduled to be released in 2009. As we get closer to that date, then we would look at reconvening our management committee, which has completed the work that has been required up to date.
In my understanding of the contaminated areas, releasing the lands to our government or to the aboriginal governments is going to be quite a contentious issue with DIAND because of the amount of garbage that was left on the trail by the U.S. government and the federal government when they built that road to the Yukon. That’s going to cost a lot of money for somebody to clean up, just like the Giant Mine here. Somebody’s got to take ownership and do it.
Does the territorial government want to hold the liability for the millions of dollars that’s going to clean up the CANOL Trail? The Minister’s going to be in a very tough position in terms in how do we get this land transfer, and I think it’s going to be a long time. Someone’s got to take ownership. There’s cyanide on there; there’s asbestos on that trail.
I’m asking: between now and when the transfer happens what can we see in Sahtu with regard to the total heritage trail park area in terms of some development? There have been hikers on that trail who have made some suggestions. There were telephone lines that were still standing; some were on the ground. Those are lead wires, not like the telephone wires we have today. Is that something that’s going to be cleaned up so that the caribou and the moose won’t be strangled by them and die on the trails?
We have talked about this in the Sahtu. Our elders have talked about this; people have talked about this. It’s known within this government. The issue of land transfer is going to be a tough one. It’s going to be a very tough one. We’re behind the Minister; we think the federal government and the U.S. government should be cleaning up that trail. They just dropped everything on that trail. There are a lot of stories about that trail. We’re behind the Minister in terms of the liability and who should be cleaning it up. No question there.
The question is: between now and whenever that transfer happens, what can we foresee in terms of development of some shelters, some new bridges? How do we start promoting this world class heritage trail? It is considered one of the toughest hikes in the world, may I say. My question to the Minister is in terms of developing this park with our people.
Mr. Krutko has alluded that in terms of the land claim agreements, we negotiated this park for a reason. Doi T’oh Canyon, Doi T’oh is itself very special to us. We want to see some movement in this area.
I want to ask the Minister, in terms of the finances and moving this project forward…. We know there are big issues, and we’re willing to support the Minister in terms of how he deals with those liability issues. I want to ask: what tenders can the Sahtu expect in terms of how we start developing and putting some real live people on that trail, start developing that trail amongst my people and amongst the people in Norman Wells and amongst the people in Tulita? When can we start seeing that start happening, with ENR and with ITI?
There are people who have been using that trail on the Yukon side. I’m very happy to hear that ENR has had some men stationed there to check the hunters coming from the Yukon with their four-wheelers. They’re driving all over the area, making a mess up there. My people are wondering what type of control can we have on that trail, some presence. Right now it is pretty well kept quiet. But companies come in from the Yukon to do some mining exploration. I want to ask the Minister this one question: when will we actually start seeing some physical presence in the Doi T’oh Canyon by our own people in terms of structure, training and shelters? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ll refer that question to Minister Bob McLeod.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Minister Bob McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’m glad that the Member agrees that we need to exercise due diligence so that all of the liabilities, especially with regard to the land, are identified and dealt with before we proceed with the land transfer.
Having said that, there is a considerable amount of work being done by the Sahtu Land and Water Board, the Sahtu Renewable Resources Board, the Sahtu Land Use Planning Board and our government with regard to mapping and database development of the CANOL Trail. As well, the Prince of Wales Northern Heritage Centre is completed. Their archaeological report and the management plan which is required by the land claims agreement was completed in January 2007. So I’m prepared to talk to the federal government about the Sahtu having more of a presence with regard to the CANOL Trail and so on.
Mr. Chair, just before I close, I had somewhat of a brief discussion last summer with a representative from the Department of Indian Affairs, when they were doing the assessments at mile 70. Two people from my community came with me. There was a rough estimate of what it will cost to clean up the CANOL Trail. The trick is how do you get into the CANOL Trail.
That’s what my people want — to have some involvement. We talk about having some cleanup. What are we talking about? What is it that people are involved in? Brush cutting? Cleaning up the wire? How do you pick up the old, old vehicles, old contaminated trucks? There are 45 gallon barrels that have been in our riverbeds. So how do you start cleaning that up? My people want to know. We should have some serious discussions with the Minister and review it with the federal government in terms of involving our people in the development of the Doi T’oh Canyon. I’m glad to hear the Minister talk about some other activities going on in terms of support to the CANOL Trail. I think we want to take it to another level now. So I’m looking forward to the Minister coming into my region and talking to the aboriginal governments and to the communities that need to be involved in this type of discussion. I think it’s a good move. Thank you.
Thank you Mr. Yakeleya. More of a comment. I didn’t hear a specific question.
We’re on page 9-4 Industry, Tourism and Investment, Activity Summary, Tourism and Parks, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $2.961 million.
Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment, Activity Summary, Tourism and Parks, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $2.961 million approved.
We’ll return to the department summary on page 9-2. Industry, Tourism and Investment, Department Summary, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $2.961million.
Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment, Department Summary, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $2.961million.
Does the committee agree that the Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment is concluded?
Agreed.
We’ll move along to the next department, Environment and Natural Resources. Page 10-2, we’ll defer until after consideration of activity summaries, so let’s turn to page 10-4, Environment and Natural Resources, Activity Summary, Corporate Management, Infrastructure Investment Summary, Total Infrastructure Investment Summary: $336,000. Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A lot of regions get capital from different departments, and we deal with a lot of government infrastructure, but what we’re starting to see is a trend in this department to move items out of communities and into regions. I’ll use an example.
In regard to Aklavik, because it’s sort of isolated, when it’s wintertime, they take the vehicle out of the community, and they take it to Inuvik for the summer. The individual resource officer has to drive around in a four-wheeler all summer, because that’s all he has. Yet he still has to move goods and services to the river and go out on the land and whatnot. In regard to the Dempster Highway, a similar thing happens where they take the vehicles to Inuvik, and they leave vehicles that don’t even have radios, and they expect them to patrol the Dempster Highway.
I think that as a government we have a responsibility to protect our employees, especially when they’re in the field, and to make sure the equipment that we pass in this House by way of capital items is basically used where it’s approved for that capital expenditure.
I’d just like to ask the Minister: why is it that this continues to happen, especially in regard to community capital and also to maintain and operate our resource operations in communities? They need that equipment to do their job, yet it seems that everything’s been taken out and moved into the regional centres. I’d like to ask the Minister: exactly what is the policy in regard to ensuring that the people working in the field are equipped, have vehicles with radios in them and also that the equipment that they’re using is up to specific standards to ensure that they can do their jobs without being given hand-me-downs from the regional operations?
