Thank you. I'll go to the Member from Monfwi.
Thank you. Menzi Community School was on the book last time, and it's not listed as a project listing now. What happened to it; why it's not on this? Because it was on it the last time but it's not on there anymore, so I just wanted to know what happened for the same thing. Thank you.
Thank you. I'm going to go to the Minister.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I don't have the historical information on that project, but I'd be very happy to get that for the Member and bring it back.
Thank you. I'll go to the Member from Monfwi. That's it? Okay.
Next on my list I got is the Member from Deh Cho.
Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a question about the Deh Gah School perimeter and playground fencing. When is that to be completed? Thank you.
Thank you. I'll go to the Minister.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, we've learned from since -- as the assistant deputy minister informed the House, this process starts well in advance of us sitting here today and so there is quite a bit of lead time. And the school in Fort Providence has informed us that, in fact, they do not need the fencing that was previously identified. And so those dollars have actually -- and the Member, as well as yourself, Mr. Chair, will probably go back to your computers this evening and find an email from myself that was sent earlier today. But those dollars are looking to be reallocated to another school in the territory as those dollars have been identified as no longer being needed by the school. Thank you.
Okay, thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from Deh Cho. Does the Member from the Deh Cho have any further questions? Okay, thank you. Is there any further questions from Members? Okay, I don't see none.
The Department of Education, Culture and Employment, education, infrastructure investments, $2,330,000. Does the committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, Members. Please return now to the Department of Education, Culture and Employment summary found on page 19.
Department of Education, Culture and Employment, 2025-2026 capital investments -- or sorry, capital estimates, $2,330,000. Does the committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from Inuvik Boot Lake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I move that this committee defer further consideration of the capital estimates for the Department of Education, Culture and Employment at this time. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. The motion's in order. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried. Consideration in the Department of Education, Culture and Employment, 2025-2026 Capital Estimates, total department is deferred.
---Carried
Thank you, committee. And thank you, Minister. Sergeant-at-arms, please escort the witnesses from the chambers.
Committee, we have agreed to consider Tabled Document 193-20(1), Capital Estimates 2025-2026, Department of Infrastructure. Does the Minister of Infrastructure wish to bring in witnesses into the chamber?
Yes, please, Mr. Chair.
Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Committee, thank you. Sergeant-at-arms, please escort the witnesses into the chambers.
Would the Minister please introduce the witnesses.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, on my left I have Robert Jenkins who is an assistant deputy minister with the Department of Infrastructure. And on my right, I have Celeste MacKay who is an assistant deputy minister in the Department of Infrastructure.
Thank you. The committee has agreed to forego general comments. Is the committee agreed to proceed to the detail contained in the tabled documents? Agreed?
Agreed.
Thank you. Committee, the Department of Infrastructure beginning on page 53. We will defer the department totals and review the estimates by activity summary beginning on page 54 with assets management with information items on page 55 and 57. Are there any questions? I'm going to go to the Member from Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Can the Minister explain which kind of highway repairs would fall under capital versus which might fall under operations and maintenance? We see a number of different highway projects listed here under asset management. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. I'll go to the Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. If I could direct that to assistant deputy minister MacKay, please.
Thank you. I'm going to go to the deputy minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's really by the scale and complexity of the repairs. So small regular repairs are done under maintenance. Larger, more complex repairs are done under capital. Thank you.
Thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. And so for the public to understand better for each of our highways how much money it actually takes to keep up these highways each year, you know, and some of those repairs might be small and some might be big, do we have any document or something that we could see that would show us for each highway how much we're spending on that highway each year to -- basically for asset management, small or large repairs, or reconstruction, just to keep that highway passable. Does that information exist, or could it be produced for committee? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. I'm going to go to the Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We certainly can produce that. The information that's presented in this format wouldn't necessarily show it the way that I think the Member's looking at. So we'll produce that. And I think just better than that is I propose I'll probably table it in the House since that does seem like information that would be valuable. Thank you.
Thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from Yellowknife North.
I definitely appreciate that. So when the department is considering new highways, new capital highway projects, is the data about how much it takes to maintain and repair a highway each year -- is that taken into account in terms of predicting future O and M and capital costs for a highway; is that taken into account before embarking on a new highway capital project? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I mean, that response is probably not dissimilar for highway roadways as well as any other project that goes through the capital planning process. And so, for instance, obviously there's a ranking system that we would go through in terms of understanding what kind of issues is at heart. For instance, whether it's protection of people or protection of assets. And there's a secondary criteria that you go through. The projects all go through also whether or not there should be any MACA or economic considerations where you would get into, you know, understanding the different values of different projects, land management discussions are there, have -- are there planning needs, is it going to run into difficulties in terms of not having the right, you know, establishment in the background of having access to roadways, having access to the area that's -- that is required for a road, climate change considerations. I mean, all of these things are considerations that take place within any decision, including a highway. And as for the operations of it, again certainly that is a factor and there's a best estimate that is given. I would note that until an asset, including a highway, has been in operation, any estimate is just that, it's not -- it's an estimate, and it's only through the period of operation of the asset that you would then know with more certainty what forced growth there might be or if is to be forced growth. But if it makes it through as a necessity as a project, then it gets put into the operations bucket as well for the business planning process. Thank you.
Thank you. I'll go to the Member from Yellowknife North.
Thanks to the Minister for that. And I do look forward to us, when we are discussing new highway projects in the future, hopefully having some data at our fingertips about the full cost of repairing and maintaining our existing highways, we'll be able to take that into account fully when we consider new capital projects.
My only other question on this section has to do with the deferred maintenance part. I definitely support us allocating money to maintenance to -- of assets to protect life safety. I guess I'm wondering why such projects that often seem so urgent and so important to protect life safety don't otherwise rise to the top of our list of projects that we need to consider and have to be slotted and sort of compete for other -- with other funds under the category of deferred maintenance. Can the Minister explain why the types of projects that end up in deferred maintenance wouldn't appear otherwise at the top of the list of things that we need to fund in our capital budget? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. I'll go to the Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, again, let me direct that one over to assistant deputy minister MacKay, please.
Thank you. I'm going to go to the assistant deputy minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The deferred maintenance projects, this fund is intended for repairs that were delayed and backlogged due to budget limitations. It's used to address maintenance issues like structural repairs, building code upgrades, exterior envelope failures, those types of things that maybe have been put off for other priorities over the years but as they become more of a priority, they enter our work plan.
Okay, thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I guess my area of confusion -- and maybe the Minister can clear this up -- is that on the one hand it seems to be the place where projects that keep getting deferred end up that aren't necessarily top of the priority list but, on the other hand, we see that some of these projects are there because it's a life safety issue. And so I don't know how both of those can be true. Can the Minister explain? Thank you.
Thank you. I'm going to go to the Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, I mean, there's -- yes, I mean, I'll perhaps try one more time to direct it to the assistant deputy minister, but just to start out, I mean, there are -- projects that are coming in under the small cap fund or small -- that are under the definition of being small capital projects, so things that under the threshold of $600,000, those items would tend to be within each department which holds their own individual small capital projects. And then beyond that, at some time they do make their way in to deferred maintenance which puts them under the rubric of being an infrastructure managed project. As there's not enough space to do everything in small cap, there's obviously not enough space to do everything in deferred maintenance. I mean, determining when it's a deferred maintenance and not, as it becomes more and more serious it certainly ratchets up the scale. If there's opportunities to find funding for standalone projects, then those tend to be the larger projects that we would go out and seek independent or third-party funding or, really, you know, quite frankly, federal government funding. But the federal government pools don't necessarily align to deferred maintenance and tend to align to new projects, so this is where we get into the challenge of trying to achieve all of the goals and all of the things, you know, with the different pools and pots that are available to us. So it's a risk management assessment. Maybe I'll stop there, Mr. Chair, and if there -- if that is helpful, I'll pause, and if not, we can perhaps direct it again to our assistant deputy minister.
Thank you. I'm going to go back to the Member from Yellowknife North.
