Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, I would. Mr. Chairman, the standing committee on finance, in reviewing theMACA budget, was quite concerned that the program departments must have more input into the standard of facilities we are building, particularly where the cost of construction appears to be excessive. The departments cannot abdicate their responsibility to ensure that we get the best value for money. Clearly they must communicate to DPW what their requirements are.
It was our observation that, for example, the cost of constructing hamlet offices -- we calculated specific instances where some of these hamlet offices were coming in at $318 to $381 to $382 per square foot. This was not including the time costs of Municipal and Community Affairs, Public Works, and hamlet staff. We feel these kinds of square footage costs are unreasonably high and are perhaps due to excessive standards that are being delivered, and we think that the program departments should be more intimately involved in determining these standards. We also know that hamlets have said for years that if they were allowed to control some of the capital projects, as has been suggested to some extent with the Strength at Two Levels report, they could do a better job at perhaps a more economical cost.
Another concern was with respect to facilities larger than what a community is currently entitled to. We were told that in one particular case, the community would pick up the difference. It is the contention of the standing committee on finance that indirectly the GNWT ultimately pays, and that these oversize facilities have correspondingly higher operating costs. It is the standing committee on finance's contention that this is not consistent with government policy, and frankly unfair to other communities.
The Arviat water supply we talked about is planned for construction in 1993-94 when we know the potential health problems faced in that community, and I am not specifically talking about E-coli. We are talking about others, and we know the history of that community and its problems associated with water reservoirs and water supplies. We feel this matter is an urgent one and the department should give it its immediate attention.
With respect to MACA's budget, we are going to recommend the following, and this will be done later on in resolution form: that consideration be given to advancing the Arviat water supply improvements in 1992-93; that communities be provided with basic recreational facilities, and only the basic recreational facilities based upon MACA's own criteria and according to the policy that is currently in place. We feel that cabinet should develop a policy to bring about costs closer to those experienced by the private sector, and ensure that government standards are not unreasonably high. It is the contention of the committee that a number of these buildings, if they were in design/build or some other way of doing things, could be built at a far lesser cost, and in fact provide the department with more money to do more.
We feel there has to be a closer relationship between Municipal and Community Affairs as the client department, the local authority, hamlets and Public Works as the professional advisers, to work together to achieve better value for money spent; consider new ways in which to build some of these capital projects that will ensure the maximization of local labour and control as Mr. Morin, the Minister of Public Works, talked about earlier last week; and support, of course, the local general contractors in that particular region.
We were told by people that MACA has recommended alternative approaches for some years that have not been taken. These alternatives should be pursued vigorously. Departments like MACA should have the flexibility to use other options, other than Public Works, for capital project management. Anyway, as they say in biblical terms, "Here endeth the lesson." Thank you, Mr. Chairman.