Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions as well will be about the Deh Cho Bridge, similar to my colleague. They will be directed to the Minister of Transportation. Has Ruskin ever failed to comply with directions from our engineers to comply with a particular schedule? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The honourable Minister of Transportation, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the Member for the question, but that’s more of an operational question. It would be something that I would be more than happy to go back to the department with and provide the Member with the answer. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, that’s a pretty big question. You would think the Minister would know if he was certainly asking for up to $10 million as he pointed out in his Minister’s statement, so maybe I’ll try it again.
Is the department aware in any manner that our engineers - and I believe they are called associated engineers watching the project - have they ever instructed Ruskin to complete this project on schedule? Has there been any pushback or refusal from Ruskin to do so? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to provide this answer. Back in March it became apparent the contractor wasn’t going to be able to complete the project on time. We had a number of options, three of them. The option that we chose was to work with the contractor to figure out a way that we can negotiate the claims that are out there and complete the project on time in November. That was the schedule that we wanted to maintain. That’s how we negotiated an end to the claims and also put ourselves in a position where we could say that everything is included in that deal. We’re going to have the bridge project completed in November.
Again, if the Member wants further detailed information, we can get that for him. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, maybe can I get some understanding of why they would refuse to comply with our direction provided by our engineer at the particular time? I think it is cited in March. Is he saying if our associated engineers instructed Ruskin to comply with a schedule, why would they refuse to comply with the schedule? What grounds would they have with the ability to refuse a contractual schedule? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, it’s in our best interests as a government to work with the contractor to move forward and not look back. I believe the negotiated settlement in completing the project and working with Ruskin is a much better approach than going back and dealing with the long list of claims and being stuck in court for a number of years. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m still missing the answer of why they would refuse to follow instructions provided by our particular engineers. It almost sounds like, if I’m understanding this correctly, that it’s costing us more money because we are complying with the will of Ruskin. Is this approach costing us more money, as mentioned in the press release, up to $10 million? Why aren’t we enforcing our legally obligated contract which we negotiated with them earlier? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, it’s not going to cost us any more money. That is the message that we have to get out there. If the bridge wasn’t going to open this fall, we would be faced with a minimum of $9 million for various costs associated with the delay. We would also have hanging over our heads a number of claims, a myriad of claims that exist for the last couple of years with Ruskin.
What we have done is get some budget certainty and, again, that budget certainty, we have $13.7 million left in the construction budget. We are looking for another between $7.2 million and $9.5 million to add to that $13.7 million to complete the bridge by this coming November. That’s something that we are intent on doing. We need to find a way forward. We need to get this project completed. That is our full intention to do just that. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Member for Hay River North, Mr. Bouchard.
