Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a general comment because this is my first opportunity to speak on this project publicly as, while I had a chance to review this department in the Standing Committee on Governance, I just want to put on the record the importance of this project to the people of Yellowknife and my riding. I think everyone is aware I am referring to Highway No. 3, which was widely discussed and talked about during the election campaign.
If I may, Mr. Chairman, I am sort of left speechless now that I have a chance to speak about this. I know basically what I want. I have found out since I have been elected to this position, it will cost about $60 million to re-construct Highway No. 3, which is no less than a total capital budget for the whole government which is being asked for in this interim budget. So it would be highly unrealistic for me to be sitting here and demanding that $60 million. If I was to be satisfied with having it done in a three-year period, that would require me to ask for a total of all of transportation's capital budget in this interim to go to Highway No. 3, and that would be unrealistic of me to ask as well.
Although I would love to do that. I think that with the debates we have had on this topic in the last two months, it shows differences in philosophies about what money for the road is. They are two accepted philosophies. Many jurisdictions all around the world spend money on building roads to create jobs, which is obviously the need that is out there in communities. I appreciate that.
As I look at Highway No. 3, we are looking at another philosophy of building roads, which is meeting the needs based on volume. I will not sit here and try to argue that more money should go to Highway No. 3 versus other areas, but at the same time it is very important for me as a Member for Yellowknife that I put it on record that this is a very important project.
Not only the fact that it is an eyesore. The last stretch of the road to a capital in this country is not paved. It is a major inconvenience for the tourists who are travelling to the city.
At a time when there is such a major industrial project happening in this area, it is totally frustrating to be an elected official and see there is not enough money available to put in this road to facilitate that resource development.
I have asked in the House on a number of occasions for statistics on volume. I have yet to be provided with that. I know there must be some kind of statistics on volume available in the department because the Minister talks about it, other Members talk about it and the Member for North Slave tells us about it. Then it is on the newspaper every Wednesday and Friday, warning the people who are driving the road about the volume and the delay in time. I do not think I need any other evidence to tell me that this has to be a priority.
As an elected official, it is important to argue to have money allocated for his or her own riding. But at the same time, we have to be prepared to look at the big picture. This is why I have to review all options, and work with the government, if at all possible, and work with the department to figure this out. I am absolutely committed in seeing Highway No. 3 widened and reconstructed within the next three or four years.
I would like to keep my campaign promise. I do not have a lot of specific questions, other than to add that I am afraid I am not that hopeful that we are going to be able to get a lot of money out of the federal government, under the current regime we have heard so far. I think all of the Members have already stated that $150 million is not going to get us far.
At an opportune time, I would like to pursue, argue and debate vigorously to get a separate funding from the federal government, so we could have Highway No. 3 reconstructed without having to take away from the economic development potential in communities, which is being pursued for reasons other than what I am looking at.
With that, I would like to ask a very specific question about Highway No. 3, Mr. Chairman. During the review of Highway No. 3 in the standing committee, I had asked a question about why the contract for Highway No. 3 was not being let out until the end of July. The official had explained the how's of it, and he explained in detail the steps that are required to issue that contract. It is still very unclear to me. It is as clear as mud for me. I am not interested in how. I just want to know why. Why can we not have the project ready to go on May 1, 2000, instead of July 31, 2000? I really need to know. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.