Sergeant-at-Arms, if you could please escort the witnesses in.
Minister Miltenberger, if you’d be kind enough to introduce your witnesses to the House, please.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have with me the deputy minister, Mr. Ernie Campbell; and Ms. Susan Craig, the director of finance and admin.
Thank you, Minister. Ms. Craig, Mr. Campbell, welcome back to the House.
Committee, we are on Environment and Natural Resources. We’ll just open up with general comments. Is committee prepared to go into detail?
Agreed.
Committee, we’re going to defer page 19 until after we have dealt with consideration of the activity. If I can turn your attention to pages 20 and 21, conservation, assessment and monitoring, infrastructure investments, $100,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Pages 22 and 23, Environment and Natural Resources, environment, infrastructure investments, $100,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Pages 24 and 25, forest management, infrastructure investments, $21.571 million. Does committee agree? Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just with a couple of questions on the air tanker fleet, we started the purchase of these last year, I believe. When do we expect delivery of these aircraft, and if that’s spread over time, when are we getting the first one and when are we getting the last one?
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. We’ll go to Mr. Campbell.
The schedule, as Mr. Bromley points out, started ’15-16, and it was over to ’16-17. We expect the delivery for the eight aircraft in the spring of 2017.
Will that be all of them arriving at the same time? I guess while I’m asking that, what is the plan? Does it take particular qualifications for these aircraft or can those positions be filled with existing aircraft expertise in the NWT?
That would be for all of the aircraft, all eight of the aircraft. We have now started the process for the operations and maintenance contracts for these aircraft, and that will call for the proponent to supply the qualified personnel for these aircraft as well.
Thanks for that response. I’m wondering: it sounds like those will be workers coming here from somewhere else, or will they be people who are hired locally? I’ll get another part in here. I assume we would need some sort of hangar facility as part of this. Maybe I could just get what the plan is for that, as well, and when we might see that, if that’s something we would be constructing in the capital budgets.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We anticipate that this would be a request for proposals, that there are, we believe, eminently qualified and capable northern businesses that would be very, very interested in a contract like this, and we would anticipate, and we would make sure it’s in the contract that, of course, northern pilots be checked out on these planes that are there. There are existing airline companies up here clearly that have the size and ability, could look and manage the hangar space or provide for that. So we anticipate that there is every reason to believe that there would be a northern proponent that would be successful in managing this fleet on a go-forward basis.
I will leave it at that. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Committee, we are on pages 24 and 25. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I might be on the wrong page. Next page, thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Again, we are on pages 24 and 25. Forest management, infrastructure investments, $21.571 million. Committee agree?
Agreed.
Pages 26 and 27, water resources, infrastructure investments, $790,000. Ms. Bisaro.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I have a question here with regard to the type of lab equipment. I seem to recall that we spent some money on the Taiga Lab last year. Because of devolution, we took over the lab, took over the federal responsibility.
Could I get an explanation, if my recollection is correct? If it is, what equipment are we upgrading and replacing when we spent money just last year on the lab? Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Ms. Craig.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Taiga Lab will be replacing some of its testing equipment within the lab. I believe the piece of equipment they will be replacing in 2016-17 is an ion analyzer. They have their equipment that they replace on a lifecycle basis. So, every year we’ll probably see money in our capital plan for some equipment that they will be replacing.
As to the land and the building, that would be under Public Works’ capital projects.
Thank you, Ms. Craig. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a quick supplement, if I may. The Taiga Lab was part of the devolution package and the federal government knew, for some time, that they were going to be transferring assets, so they didn’t renovate and rehabilitate every asset they had to peak condition before they turned it over to us, that’s one thing.
What was brought before the House last time, if my memory serves me correctly, was the bringing on, of course, the staff as employees and not contract individuals where they, under the federal system, paid their way by doing all the scientific work that they do and getting reimbursed from industry that offset their wages. We brought them on board permanently. We do recognize, as well, that the Taiga Lab is well past its best before date and is going to be on the list to be renewed or replaced. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks for those explanations. Just a follow-up question. If it’s likely that we are going to see expenditures for lab equipment in each year, the background information that we got did not show expenditures in following years. It simply shows the expenditure for this particular year.
Could I maybe get an explanation as to why, if we are going to spend $70,000 or $100,000 every year, we know that for the next foreseeable 10 years, why it’s not projected in the documents that we were given? Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Ms. Craig.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. With the transfer of the Taiga Lab, we are working their lifecycle replacements into our long-term capital plan. We are taking inventory of their assets and assessing their needs on a priority basis and filling them into our plans. Each piece of equipment is a separate asset, so they will be brought forward as a separate project. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Craig. Committee, we are on pages 26 and 27, water resources, infrastructure investments, $790,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you. Pages 28 and 29, wildlife, infrastructure investments, $5.378 million. Does committee agree? Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I see an upgrade to the washhouse at the Tundra Ecosystem Research Station, which I’m pleased to see. There is a lot of leading edge research based at that research station.
What is the long-term thinking of this research station? I know there was some discussion of that with change in personnel over the past few years. Could I get the latest thinking on that facility? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. We’ll turn it over to Mr. Campbell.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. A long-term plan for this research station is to continue to build the project as we go forward, knowing, through the science agenda, we are building partners for research in the North. We are well aware of the Canadian High Arctic Research Station and that development. We want to continue to forge ahead with partnerships with academic institutions and build this research station. This is the first time that we are investing with infrastructure into this station. Most infrastructure in the past had been through partnerships and in-kind resources with other agencies, particularly the federal government. As we go forward now with our science agenda, we want to build this infrastructure going forward, knowing some of the large issues we face in the science area going forward. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Campbell. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to express my support for that decision and that plan. It’s particularly become more critical that governments such as ours step into the major gaps left by the federal government pulling out of science and with our recent devolution, I think this is a totally logical step. In my view, it will only become more important. The mid-tundra is quite different than the High Arctic research situation, and as the world starts to express the change that’s coming upon us, this could be an important facility to help us understand that with these partners that the deputy minister mentioned, I certainly appreciate that. That’s all I have, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. I will consider that more of a comment. Committee, we are on pages 28-29, wildlife, infrastructure investments, $5.378 million. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. Turn back to page 19, Environment and Natural Resources, total infrastructure investments, $27.939 million. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. Does committee agree that we’ve concluded consideration for Environment and Natural Resources?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. At this time I’d like to thank the Minister and our guests, Mr. Campbell and Ms. Craig, for joining us. If I could please ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to escort our witnesses out of the Chamber. Thank you.
Continuing on with our agenda today, we have next on our list Industry, Tourism and Investment. With that, I will turn it over to the Minister responsible to see if he has any witnesses he wants to bring in. Minister Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do have witnesses.
Thank you, Minister Ramsay. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
