Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I have been advised that there was never a situation like that.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One of the concerns I have, especially realizing that this government has some 3,620 kilometres of road to maintain, we are only talking here of Highway No. 3, which is 330 kilometres of road. Yet the majority of the money that is in this budget, is concentrated on that particular road.

So I would like to know exactly, what happens to the other 3,300 kilometres of road that we have? Is there money there to ensure that those will continue to be maintained and brought up to the certain standards that Highway No. 3 and the people from Yellowknife have been asking for? People have to realize that the Northwest Territories is unique and we have population spread out in over half a million square miles of land. It seems like there is some greed here with regard to the amount of money that is being requested for one particular highway, some 300 kilometres, yet we do not hear anything in regard to who is taking care of the other 3,300 kilometres of road.

So we are just concentrating on less than ten percent of the major road systems in the Northwest Territories. I think, for myself, that I feel that this government is overextending itself on the amount of money being put into one particular highway system. Sooner or later, we are going to pay for the upgrades that are going to be needed to improve the other 3,300 kilometres of winter roads and we are talking about the problems we are seeing with contractors going into the different communities because of the seasonal conditions, the crossings at river crossings, in regards to ice roads. We have the community access road program that is 273 kilometres of road there that we are also maintaining and then, on top of that, we have the all-weather roads of some 20,000 kilometres.

For myself, I feel that if you figure out in the budget how much money is spent on the paving project on Highway No. 3, and the highway construction, you are talking about almost $9 million out of the department's budget.

I feel that we have to be fair to all other highways in the Northwest Territories. We hear about concerns, especially in the requests from the oil and gas industry and the problems they have run into trying to improve that industry in the Sahtu. For them to get a rig in to drill in the Sahtu, with the seasonal conditions of the road, it costs them about $1 million to drill a well in the Northwest Territories compared to $60,000 in Alberta.

A lot of that cost is transportation. We are trying to entice the industry, but we have to realize there are developments happening in the Liard area, in the Beaufort Sea. There will be wear and tear on all of these other highway systems. I for one, feel very offended that there are no real increases in that area. If anything, there have been major decreases in the area of dust control on Highway No. 8, which has dropped almost $80,000 from what it was last year. That was an initiative that was taken to try and improve the roads, yet we are cutting money where we could be making improvements.

Sure, $80,000 may not sound like much when you are talking about $8 million for 100 kilometres of road to be upgraded. The other concern that I have is because of this highway money from the federal government, it could jeopardize the revenue that we can put into increasing the federal government dollar allocation, especially if it is utilized with the old process where it was dollar for dollar. For every dollar we put in, the federal government put in a dollar. We are already maxed out at $8 million for Highway No. 3. Where is the additional money going to come from to offset the money we are going to get from the federal government?

That is a concern I have raised in committee and one I continue to raise because what I see is that we have put too many resources into one particular highway system which could jeopardize our ability to access federal dollars. We do not have the ability within the Department of Transportation to find the extra revenues in the system that have already been allocated for other road systems.

So, can the Minister tell me if the department has looked at that and what are they doing to ensure there are more dollars fairly allocated between the eight highway systems as opposed to just concentrating on one?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the Member is correct in that we have a lot more highway than solely the kilometres of Highway No. 3. We have 2,200 kilometres of highway that we have to maintain. I think, as the committee goes through the budget, you will see where we are addressing our dollars to try and spread them out over all the 2,200 kilometres of highway, plus our winter roads.

You are going to see where we have addressed money for Highway No. 3, Highway No. 1, Highway No. 7, and Highway No. 8. Now, you will also see in there where we have addressed dollars towards a winter road bridge at Ochre River in an attempt to extend the winter road season.

I think it is important, Mr. Chairman, that I point out that we do not believe we are cutting ourselves short on maintenance dollars. We believe we have allowed each region to have sufficient funds to carry out their maintenance. Where we are short of money is for reconstruction, bringing highways up to standards and for hard topping or chip-sealing.

As a department, we have been attempting to do between 15 and 20 kilometres of reconstruction per year. This includes some reconstruction on Highway No. 8. Even this year, even though we had to cut back our capital, we still kept $2 million for Highway No. 8 reconstruction programs. That includes the bridge. Those are the things I mentioned in my opening comments.

In reference to whether or not the department will be able to find the dollars to meet the National Infrastructure Program funds, we suggested that the $33 million the federal government could fund towards the Highway No. 3 reconstruction program would in fact be spread over five or six years. That would allow us to use our existing funding to do twice as much. You could say that we have cut reconstruction from ten years down to five years.

We did not suggest that would be any shorter of a period than now, although there is pressure to have it reduced to three years. At this point in time, we were only suggesting a five year reconstruction program. I hope that answers the Member's comments, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Another area that I had concerns with was the Aklavik air terminal building that has been identified in the budget. The concern I have is we are just renovating an old building. Other communities with similar structures have had the majority of them replaced, the latest being up in Holman Island where they replaced it at a cost of almost $600,000. In the case of Aklavik, the building was built the same year as the one in Holman Island, back in 1973 or 1977. It is almost 30 years old.

In the Delta, where we have problems with permafrost, this building is on pilings that now have to be replaced and is not part of this discussion. Because of the cost of renovations, does the Minister have an idea of what the cost will be in the future to have to replace the pilings on this building or do another upgrade? Would it not be cheaper to just build a new facility now rather than having to do these retrofits to improve this structure?

I know for a fact, I have seen reports, where there are problems with the electrical systems, the structure, and in the report they do call for a replacement of the building. The decision of the department in this budget is to just do a retrofit. I would like to ask the Minister if he will consider reevaluating this facility and possibly go for a complete replacement instead of retrofitting it? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, if the committee does not mind, perhaps the Member could pose that question when we reach that activity and I could have Mr. Howard respond to that particular question under airport activity.

Agreed.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to take a few minutes to make a comment about issues that are important to us. I want to talk about how to get the money from the federal government. Not that I have the answer, but I wanted to focus on that issue.

I listened with a great deal of interest when the Member for Frame Lake described past conduct of the Minister in the House. I am hoping that he will show as much dogged determination to keep going after the federal government for money. I hope that the Minister does not mind when I try to emulate his behaviour and act like a dog with a bone with meat on it.

Mr. Chairman, I think that the need for more money on our highway system, not just Highway No. 3 but all of the North, is very important. I do not think I need to go any further on that. I also believe that there is a real issue of safety on Highway No. 3 just because of the sheer volume of traffic that is on the road, especially during the winter road season, when there are hundreds of trucks going there, trying to meet their operations deadlines. I would not want to be responsible if there were ever major casualties on that road.

Mr. Chairman, I know that the Minister and a lot of Ministers in this government are relying heavily on assistance that we may be getting from the federal government. Given what has been said in this House in the last two weeks by various Ministers, I am not sure if we should be relying so much on that source.

I am beginning to think, for example, about the lack of money coming forward for the clean-up of the Giant Mine site and the reneging of the commitment that the federal government had on the Protected Areas Strategy. Also, Minister Collenette's speech which had all of the municipal officials up in arms, his philosophy about funding infrastructure, and so on. Those are only three of the latest things that cause me to be concerned.

I am not entirely comfortable or optimistic that we are going to be able to get any money. Also, given the fact that the federal government has announced a major economic development strategy for the Atlantic provinces they are going to be pumping a lot of money into that region, and yet in this part of the world, we have a lot of private companies investing upwards of a billion dollars and the federal government will not give us one penny to build the roads or train the people to take advantage of the industry.

My frustration at the lack of action by the federal government is endless. Mr. Chairman, I have to ask the Minister if in fact he has been aggressive in pursuing this option. I have not heard it or seen it in this House. I have not seen him saying anything publicly. I would like to ask the Minister for a diary of what he has done as the Minister of Transportation to get money from the federal government in the last six months.

The Minister responsible for Transportation, Mr. Steen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, as I indicated before, both now and in the past, the department has been fairly aggressive in trying to encourage the federal government to come forward with a plan that would address the needs that we have to bring our portion of the national highway system up to standards.

We have met with our federal counterparts and we have met with Mr. Collenette on more than one occasion. My department officials have been in touch with federal officials on the same issue. We have met with them trying to work out a formula. Now that we have convinced the federal government to put money towards the national highway system, we are working on how that money is going to be distributed and feel that we have a very strong point in that we have a portion of the national highway system that is not up to standards. We do use the fact that it is subject to closure due to freeze up and breakup. We are using all the avenues that we can. I set my limits at parking at Mr. Collenette's door. I do not think that is going to be that effective. I suppose you could say there are certain limits to what the federal Minister can do to respond because he does have an area that is bigger than the Northwest Territories. He does have political pressure that is larger than just us. I am not disappointed with the responses I have received from Mr. Collenette.

On the other hand, like the Member, I do not want to put all my eggs in a basket that I am going to get money from the federal government. We are operating right now on our existing funds. We are trying to address the needs of Highway No. 3 over a ten-year period because we do not have any other capital. I cannot reduce my capital in the other areas in order to meet Highway No. 3. There are needs territorial wide. I have the support of the committee, I believe, in that there should not be any more reductions of capital in the department. I am very encouraged with that and I am hoping that the rest of the government departments will be able to function without having to cut any more of our capital in order to address the social programs. It is not a decision made just by this department. It is made with Cabinet. It is made with committee's involvement and made in the Legislature. We do try to meet the needs that are identified. We are trying the best we can with the money we have. I do not know what the Member could expect out of the department over what we are doing. We are trying our best. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think that it should be made very clear that I appreciate every single dollar that the department spends on Highway No. 3. I have not for one second asked that money be taken from elsewhere. I would caution the Minister to be very careful for not blaming and making up partisanship here where it is not necessary. I think it is really the reason why I am encouraging the Minister to go elsewhere. I have not for one second suggested that we take it from somewhere else. I understand that we have a lot more needs than the resources we have. I know that Highway No. 3 gets the bulk of that. The thing is, Mr. Chairman, I am also concerned about the ten percent cut on capital spending for the government. It affects many departments. It affects the job creation capabilities in the Territories. That is not what I am saying.

This is why I want to support and push the Minister to look for money elsewhere. There are compelling arguments to be made. Mr. Chairman, the Minister suggested in a very matter-of-fact way that next year we may be facing a possibility of closing down the highway just because it may be too dangerous. On top of that, we have no bridge there. We have a ferry system that shuts down this capital. It is a capital city, where at least 50 percent of the population lives. It may be necessary for all 19 of us to park ourselves outside of Minister Collenette's door or the Prime Minister's door. We cannot matter-of-factly, nonchalantly say if the road becomes too dangerous we reduce the speed and give all sorts of speed limits for different size trucks, and do the best we can. I understand that we have to make the best of what we have, but at the same time we have to look at other options.

My next question, Mr. Chairman, I know for a fact that the Minister and the department have been advised of many other possibilities. For example, when the DIAND Minister was up here he suggested to us that he may be able to do something if we were to get a proposal. Members have suggested to him other possibilities, like the Department of Industry, in training money with HRDC. They give away $1 billion in grants and aboriginal funding mechanisms with the federal government.

We have no benefit with any of the industry and economic development money available to every other single place in Canada. There is a compelling case to make. I just think that if I was the Minister of Transportation, not that I am trying to be, but what options do you have? You get asked questions all day long about it, so I would have to look at all possibilities. Mr. Chairman, I would like to know, has he considered any other funding options and what came of it? I did not get his diary for the last six months, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Minister, Mr. Steen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the department has considered options for funding and it is not just on the short-term or through programs that we have going right now. I feel there is a good possibility and I am still optimistic that we could get a favourable response on, and that is the Non-Renewable Resource Strategy, Mr. Chairman. In there is funding identified by the department for the highway needs all the way down the Dempster, down the Mackenzie Valley, and also Highways No. 1, No. 2, and No. 7.

We have good potential there if we can encourage the federal government to adopt that program and fund it. I am optimistic that there is going to be a favourable response. Until the response comes I am going to keep hoping that it is going to work. The Member is correct in that there are pockets of money here and there for training, but I believe that the whole Non-Renewable Resource Strategy identified all those potential funds and training programs. Yes, we have in a sense considered other options. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have heard the Minister on several occasions today and over the last couple of months indicate that if someone would give him the money he could do a lot more. Given the fiscal reality of the day I do not think we are going to be getting any new monies. I am not satisfied that all options out there have been looked at. In this day, with the shortage of money, we have to be fairly creative. I want to ask the Minister, because I know for a fact that there have been submissions in terms of a construction of a bridge and I know of two proposals that were submitted in the last term. I have been contacted by one of the organizations that submitted a proposal to the 13th Assembly and there has been no answer, no response at all.

It was my understanding that these submissions were made with no cost being incurred to the territorial government. I would like to know if he is aware of those submissions that were made to the Department of Transportation.

The Minister responsible for Transportation, Mr. Steen.

Mr. Chairman, I am not aware of anyone offering us a bridge.

Mr. McLeod.