Merci, Monsieur le President. I have been asking for some time now about the transition plan for the opening of the new Stanton hospital, the old Stanton hospital renovations, and what happens with the services operating during those renovations. I checked the Stanton renewal website, and there is a lot of helpful information there, but no real timelines for the transition of services or renovations.
As I understand it, May 26th is the day when patients will be transferred from the old Stanton to the new Stanton hospital. I am sure that this must involve a monumental amount of planning and coordination. It is great that, according to the Stanton renewal website, the old Stanton is going to be renovated to allow extended care; transcription services; primary clinics; food and laundry service for extended care and long-term care; outpatient rehab programs, which includes occupational therapy, physiotherapy, speech-language pathology, and audiology; and long-term care; but where is the schedule?
All I am asking for is clear communications showing when and where services will be located during that transition. It could easily be done by a dated Gantt chart, of course, subject to change. I haven't seen anything like that, even though Stanton is in my riding. I think that's the least we should be doing for our residents, who rely on Stanton, and even for the staff who work there. As we move closer to transition day, we need to ramp up our public information efforts, so answers are there for people and they will know where the services are available, and when.
I will have questions for the Minister of Health and Social Services later today. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Earlier today I spoke about speech and language pathologist and occupational therapist positions in the riding, and the need for them. Can the Minister please tell us: how many service days does the department provide for the communities of Fort Simpson and Fort Liard in respect to speech and language pathologist and occupational therapist caseloads? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Minister of Health and Social Services.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There are 19 days allocated for speech-language pathology and OTs for the Deh Cho, and that's broken down as 10 for Simpson, and six for Providence and Fort Liard. That's site visits, daytime face-to-face meetings. This does not include weekly telehealth sessions with clients or intensive rehab sessions held at Stanton, where a client has to come in. These are also separate, just so we're all clear, these are separate from the numbers available for adults. These are for paeds. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
That's good information to hear. Can the Minister please tell us how many rehabilitation speech and language pathologist and occupational therapist caseloads people are on the waiting list for in the 2018-2019 fiscal year?
There is a wait list for the zero- to 18-year-olds for 2018-2019. There are 23 for OT and five for speech-language therapy. Of those, nine OTs are for children under five, and five speech-language therapy are for children under five.
I think I missed how many cases are out there, not the waiting lists, but I'll go on to my next question. It is my understanding that the department is not looking at placing a speech and language pathologist and occupational therapist position in the Deh Cho. Can the Minister explain how we are going to improve services in this area?
My apologies. I forgot to give the number for the caseload for rehabilitation services. For OT, it's 57 in the Deh Cho, and for speech, it's 85 in the Deh Cho. With respect to the follow-up question, we are working hard to support the demand for rehab services across the Northwest Territories. We are focusing on improving services delivered by the existing rehabilitation teams that exist. Additional resources have been allocated to the Beaufort-Delta in 2018-2019, and while we are proposing some additional investment into the Stanton team for 2019-2020, there have been significant new investments put in place. Over the past two years, we have increased the budget for rehab services by $2.02 million, and we've increased it by 13 positions. This is an increase of 33 percent in the budget in this area, taking us from $6.2 million to $8.6 million, and an increase of 21 percent in positions.
Currently, before the rollout in the Beaufort-Delta, the travel teams all worked out of the Yellowknife office, or the Yellowknife Stanton. Those travel days that were previously allocated to the Beaufort-Delta will now be reallocated to the South Slave, which includes Fort Smith, Hay River, and the entire Deh Cho region. With those reallocations and the creation of the positions at Stanton, we are actually anticipating an increase in the number of travel days, but also actual employment time, which can be done by telehealth to the Deh Cho, which will greatly increase the services in the Deh Cho. To that end, we're also looking at having the travel teams travel beyond just the locations they've been travelling to, which are Fort Providence, Fort Liard, and Fort Simpson, and actually including some of the smaller communities where the caseload demands it.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Nahendeh.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'd like to thank the Minister for answering those three questions with good information, and I appreciate that. My last question: does Stanton have therapists who can provide specialized services for children with complex needs, and how does the region access these resources? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We do have speech-language pathologists and we do have OT for paeds. We also have the FASD and the ADS coordinator positions. All these positions can be accessed through referrals through their health providers in the communities. Obviously, we were out there trying to get the referrals done so that we can get these kids the supports and services they need. Regardless of where you are in the Northwest Territories, it still takes a referral to access any of our rehab services, regardless of where you live. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Nunakput.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Earlier I spoke about the cost of living in Nunakput, and my questions are for the Minister of Infrastructure. My question is: how does the Minister justify the recent increase of fuel prices in Nunakput, given the mandate priority of reducing the cost of living, reducing poverty, and investing in traditional harvesting and consumption of traditional foods? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Minister of Infrastructure.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The simple answer is the cost of the product went up, therefore triggering a rate increase. The cost of fuel is driven by factors outside the control of the Government of the Northwest Territories. The Government of the Northwest Territories does not make the market, nor set the cost of fuel. Fuel prices reflect the cost of supply and delivery of petroleum products. The fuel prices are adjusted periodically to reflect the recovery of full fuel costs, including the product cost, transportation cost, sale commission, operations, maintenance expense, and operation losses and taxes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I appreciate the response. The cost of delivery is high in our region, with the current structure that we have. I'm sure there are other competitors that can deliver fuel at a lower rate. However, we rely on the system that we have right now. Based on the average annual consumption, how much would it cost the government to leave the prices of fuel in Ulukhaktok, Sachs Harbour, and Paulatuk where they were before the latest price increase?
The total cost to the government to leave the fuel prices unchanged in all three communities in the Member's riding would have cost us $607,000. To do this, though, to inform this House, would be outside FMB policy. The Financial Management Board sets the direction and policy, and fuel prices are adjusted accordingly. To exempt certain communities from increases would not be consistent or equitable with how all the other communities are treated and would not be affordable to the Petroleum Resources Revolving Fund or the Government of the Northwest Territories.
I understand that sometimes the cost of delivering goods is out of our control and we must comply. Just to come back, the cost of living is high in the northern part of the territory. I appreciate the Minister's response, because I know they're always looking out for the best interests of our residents. My final question is: will the Minister commit to working with his colleagues and myself to revise the process for setting fuel prices in remote communities to ensure that they reduce the cost of living and do not result in hardship for people?
As I said, the Petroleum Products Revolving Fund Act requires the Department of Infrastructure to recover all operating costs from the sale of our fuel. The proposed changes would be contrary to the petroleum resource program, which is self-funded and would have to be debated and voted on in the Legislative Assembly if we were to do something like that, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for the Premier. Earlier today, in my statement, I talked about the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act and the need to bring it home to the North. In 2014, we devolved the land, water, and resources to the Northwest Territories, but we didn't devolve the regulatory controls. I would like to ask the Premier: what are the biggest potential benefits of a review of the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act from our government's point of view? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. The Honourable Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Essentially, the elements of the MVRMA within the devolution agreement are being reviewed. The potential benefits are all related to increased local decision-making, for example, items listed in 3.17 of the devolution agreement, including approval of issuance of Type A water licences, which a Member referred to in his Minister's statement, designation of inspectors and board-appointment decisions. For example, Aboriginal governments, such as the Tlicho, can appoint their own members, and our government cannot. This is an oversight that we intend to address, as well. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you to the Premier for that reply. I would also like to ask the Premier what sort of research or let's call it preparation has our government done to get ready for the review of the federal MVRMA?
The Government of the Northwest Territories has been working within this regulatory system since the 1990s with both the federal government and Aboriginal governments. That was when the MVRMA first came into effect. We have continued to work within the system post-devolution. The federal review will ideally lead to further delegation of province-like authorities, and our system is ready to take on those authorities.
I think that is welcome commentary from the Premier. I would also like to ask what communication, in fact, has there been between our government and Canada with regards to the subject of reviewing the MVRMA?
I and the government have regularly communicated to federal leaders the importance of fulfilling these commitments set out in the devolution agreement. As a matter of fact, with the change in government four years ago, we made the suggestion that we should get rid of the five-year requirement and start the review right away, but there was some unfinished business with regards to some of the changes that were being proposed. We have waited until those were addressed satisfactorily.
The devolution agreement commits to the development of the terms of reference of the review after April 1, 2019. I am pleased to advise the Member that the Minister responsible for Northern Affairs has readily agreed to commence this review even earlier than what was provided for in the devolution agreement.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It seems as though there is more good news, and we are slowly making our way to full devolution, including having regulatory control here in the North. Mr. Speaker, what communication has there been between our government and Indigenous governments and industry in the NWT about potential review of the MVRMA? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
We are in regular communications with Indigenous governments through the Intergovernmental Council. Obviously, they play an integral part in any of these decisions. The concerns that they had addressed when they went to court four years ago, I think that those are being addressed. I think I will be in a good position to move forward. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife Centre.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for the Minister of Finance. Two years ago, his colleague, the Minister of Infrastructure, told the Member for Yellowknife North that the all-in cost of the road to Whati was estimated at $175 million. The cost of building the road announced this month is 20 percent higher than that figure. Why are construction costs so much higher now than two years ago? Mahsi.
Masi. Minister of Finance.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The direct construction cost, I think the Member made it in her statement before, $185 million. The total capital cost of $214 million, that would include the crude interest, predevelopment costs, and also GNWT costs for geotechnical studies, the EA process, project management, and provide funding for the measures resulting from the EA process Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I appreciate the Minister's response, but I didn't hear an answer. In two years, the two figures have differed by 20 percent. Can he tell us why that is?
The initial $175 million from the cost two years ago, since then obviously, the price to direct construction cost went up to $185 million. That is a $10 million difference. Maybe the prices of material and things have changed. I am not sure exactly what that $10 million is made up of, but I can get that information and provide that information to the Member.
I appreciate that commitment from the Minister. I don't recall any discussion of the potential costs of operations and maintenance prior to the announcement earlier this month. I note that the Minister of Infrastructure didn't repeat the all-in cost of $411 million in his statement last week. My question is: what efforts did the government make to inform the public of the actual all-in costs of this road, given that it was more than double any estimate that had been voiced publicly?
The direct construction costs are $185 million, as was noted previously. The total capital cost was $214 million, as was noted previously as well as some of the reasons the cost was that high. The $400 million through the P3 partnership, that would represent the total value of the 28-year contract with NorthStar Infrastructure, who are the proponents of the Whati road, of which 25 years of operations and maintenance payments are included.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife Centre.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. I didn't hear an answer in that, but I am going to push on. The Minister has said that this P3 project will save over 15 percent compared to a traditional model. Can the Minister provide an explanation or why this would be the case? Thank you.
I believe there was an answer to the Member's previous question in the response that I provided. They wanted to know why it was $411 million, and I explained that was through the 28-year contract with NorthStar Infrastructure. I think that was self-explanatory.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Kam Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Earlier in the sitting, the honourable Minister of Finance was asked questions around the consultations related to the proposed sugar tax. Looking now, I see that the engagement is closed. I am wondering if the Minister can update the House as to when the results of the consultation will be made publicly available. Thank you.
Minister of Finance.
