I am really glad that I didn’t say the last sentence that was at the end of my questions about the Deh Cho Bridge project, because we have a few minutes, here.
The Premier raises the issue of liability. This issue did come up before. I wanted to get a sense of what kind of opinion had been sought on liability. I think we got to the point that no real legal opinion had been obtained. I reread Hansard, and it sounded like what the Premier was saying was that in his opinion, we would have extensive liability. And you know, although I really respect his opinion, I don’t respect it in regard to legal matters, maybe, in quite the same way.
I would ask the Premier: does the G.N.W.T. have in their possession any legal opinion which would speculate on this government’s liability if we did anything which could cause the Deh Cho Bridge project not to proceed?”
Mr. Speaker, we have not asked for an opinion in that area. I would again, looking at the file and seeing where we are at…. We made an assumption. Looking at the contract, a concession agreement has been agreed to and the builder has been offered a guaranteed price. If we were to back out now, in my opinion — I shouldn’t offer that, I guess, as I am not a lawyer, thankfully; stick to the business I do know — we would be challenged. We’d have to look at that.
The Premier refers to a contract that has been signed with a contractor to build the Deh Cho Bridge. That contract is not with the Government of the Northwest Territories, to my knowledge. That contract is with the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation. It seems like we use the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation and our government interchangeably when it is convenient. If we want information, it is the Deh Cho Bridge project that we hide behind. But when we talk about liability, it is the government. Who is the contract with? Is it with the Government of the Northwest Territories or the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation? Who would incur the liability?
The fact is the liability issue for us isn't directly tied to the contract. The contract was a guaranteed price. That work has been done through the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation, with the builder of the bridge.
Our piece, our liability, is tied to the concession agreement, and if we were to affect that with our own decisions outside of their process or what work they were doing, that's the reference I would be making to it.
When we talk about significant dates, obviously September 28 is a significant date, because somebody signed a concession agreement on behalf of this government on September 28. October 1 was a significant date. That was Election Day.
January 31 was another significant date. What happened on January 31? That was only a week and a half ago. We passed another date of some sort. I'd like the Premier to explain: What was the significance of January 31?
The January 31 date is a date where it would have been a go–no go on the concession agreement if the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation hadn't met the requirements. They informed us by letters, and showing letters from the bank that holds the…. We would, for example, have to initiate the loan guarantee on our part. They have provided letters from their lenders that the money will flow after the lawyers dot the i’s and cross the t’s.
For our piece, the January 31 date was for meeting the requirements in the concession agreement — that is, their equity portion — and having the lenders signed on, on this.
It doesn't sound like January 31 was the go–no go date, simply because, in fact, there was another three-week extension after that to clarify the legal documents around that date.
It’s curious to me that that was such a go–no go, as the Premier described it. That was a go–no go date, January 31, but “take another three weeks.”
Who’s got the liability here? We have the liability here. If it’s a no go, our $9 million loan guarantee gets called, and the government steps up for $9 million. I don't see any liability on the other side.
I want the Premier to describe to us that February 22 date, prior to that. If this government… That's an “if” question. I have to think of a question that's not hypothetical. Thank you.
