Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I firmly believe that the federal government should carry the lead on this. To my mind, they have the biggest liability and therefore should be paying the biggest cost. Since I know the Government of the Northwest Territories is at the table and working on this work plan with them, I hope there will be some advice given to our people at the table to ensure that they work with the federal government to make sure that the public is involved and feel as if they have been consulted in a meaningful way. Otherwise, we could wind up with the whole project stalled as people challenge the process and whether or not it is safe or whether or not it is acceptable. I really think that it is essential to get the public involved early on.

Perhaps I could ask if we could get a bit of an update on what is happening with the clean-up at Colomac this year?

Mr. McLeod.

Mr. Minister.

Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to add the Colomac clean-up is completely the federal government's responsibility. We have no responsibility. Our interest in that is just monitoring it in terms of environmental protection. We have no direct liability on that one.

Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to make a comment about some of the energy issues that I see in this activity, when we get into the program detail. I notice there has been a reduction in the amount we are spending on energy conservation, energy management, the contribution to the Arctic Energy Alliance, while it is not significant... I just wanted to raise the issue that given the rise in the cost of oil lately, this may be not the best way to go. We should be looking at increasing our expenditures in the area of environmental protection, in order to ensure that we are getting some good plans for how to save energy that this government can then find a way to spend more economically in using its energy. This is more of a comment then anything else, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, the adjustments are small and there is not any major reason for the change other then putting the business plans together and balancing the budget for the department. The Member's advice is appreciated. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to follow up on the questioning by Mr. Dent on the Royal Oak issue. Specifically on the concern that seems to be raised by some of the recent media coverage, that there is a bit of a stall or hang up on some of the work. Especially, Mr. Chairman, in relation to design and research going into the cleaning up of the arsenic problem at the mine.

I think there is a tendency in these big snarling issues to look after the easy and the quickly done parts of a project. We have seen some of that in the way of highway reconstruction that has gone on in the Northwest Territories. We heard about it this afternoon with land claim negotiations. The tough ones are left to the last, and they then become the most difficult issues to handle, Mr. Chairman, and often the ones that do not have the resources left to adequately do a good job.

Could the Minister give us any assurance that the biggest and the worst problem with the Royal Oak clean-up, namely the arsenic problem, is continuing to receive priority attention? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Handley.

Our department continues to participate on the working committees that are dealing with this issue. The underground clean-up of the arsenic is clearly DIAND's responsibility. We continue to press them not to delay on this. We have had a fair bit of concern about the recent reluctance on their part to allocate a budget and get on with things. The fact is that they are falling behind in some of the work from last year.

Recently, the deputy minister has sent a letter to DIAND encouraging them to allocate the money and get on with the assessment and the surface clean-up and keep this on schedule. I think we are as concerned as many people are in the territories that this thing might start to slide. We do not want to see that happen either. Thank you.

Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Handley, for that answer. Of course, the Royal Oak, or the impact of Giant Mine on the Yellowknife area is not the only impact of mining. We have 65 years of accumulated impact on the region, and there is already a substantial body of work regarding the impact of mining and the pollution on other areas around the city, specifically Rat Lake and Kam Lake.

What kind of activity can the Minster tell us about in terms of resolving the extent of that pollution and at what point and in what areas can remediation or management be looked at? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Handley.

Mr. Chairman, the hazardous stuff that has been buried around the city or near the mines is of concern to all of us. I have been at a meeting with the city to discuss the issue, with regard to some tailings and so on, more related to Con Mine. I know the department has and continues to meet with the city and with DIAND on it.

Again, it is one of those things that are not our direct responsibility, but we are at the table and urging that there not be a delay in the clean-up of all of those sites around the city, and there are a number of them. Some of them are quite old, but the laws were different then, and we are living with it now. Thank you.

Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would also like to look at, as my colleague Mr. Dent did, the energy side of the portfolio. As we continue to look in some surprise, if not shock and horror, at the rising cost of petroleum products and how it is going to impact our lifestyle, or the stability and security of the way we want and hope to continue to do business, what can the Minister tell us about the government's priority for an overall energy strategy for the Northwest Territories? I would like to see if we can encompass not only the Government of the NWT and where it impacts us, but industry, communities and all sectors of the Northwest Territories. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Handley.

Mr. Chairman, the department does place a high priority on energy management and energy conservation measures. We have, up until now, been focusing on the Greenhouse Gas Strategy as being a key one that will fit in with a national strategy, for a couple of reasons.

One is that there is funding that may become available to us to help do some more specific things in terms of our own strategy to come through the national office on climate change. So we are very involved with that. We realize that we need a more comprehensive energy strategy as well, and I think it is only workload that is preventing us from moving ahead more rapidly on it.

Instead of being involved in that one directly, we have continued to support the Energy Alliance. We were involved in starting it. We continue to support it with $190,000 a year, and we participate on the steering committee for it. So we are using that as the main vehicle for trying out some innovative ideas.

In addition, I have asked the department to look into the viability of things like the installation of solar panels or solar walls on buildings. We need to look at the viability of running programs for private individuals or having solar walls on institutions. So there are a number of individual things we are doing.

Putting it all together into one energy strategy is important and it is only workload that is preventing that from happening. We have so many things on the go right now. Thank you.

Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to press the Minister on the idea, the initiative, of a comprehensive energy strategy. I, as much as anybody around the Assembly, appreciate the workload and the number of agendas that we already have on our plate. However, Mr. Chairman, I do not see that as a reason to avoid or defer making some planning. Even if it is an initiative that we cannot engage in right away, or perhaps see results within the next few months, I believe it is something that we should attach a strong profile to, a strong priority to.

I would ask the Minister if he might consider putting together a framework that would suggest how this could be put together, and a reasonable timeframe in accordance with all the other things that are going on, that says when this could be started? How long it could take to happen? We are here for another three years in this Assembly, and of course there will be another government after us. These kind of things I think can and should be engaged in, with a lot of time to make sure a good job is done.

Can the Minister take a look at that kind of an approach?