Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Steen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Since we are going to deal with the bridge, I suggest we direct the question to Mr. Vician.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Vician.

Thank you, Mr. Vician. Mr. Krutko.

Regarding the strategy the Minister mentioned, I have been trying to get any reports or strategies from people in the department. I was not able to access anything. All I was able to get was a letter to the chamber of commerce in Inuvik which identifies that AESL -- it is an engineering consulting firm based in Edmonton -- were looking at rough numbers of a 700-foot crossing with a one lane bridge that would cost $2 million and a two lane bridge was going to cost $4 million. That is quite a difference between the numbers they are coming up with and your $30 million that you are estimating out of a 1980 report. That is why I ask the question of how you come up with these numbers. Can the Minister tell me why there is such a gap between the evaluation of this engineering firm versus the numbers you are coming up with?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Minister.

Mr. Chairman, I do not know where the Member's information is coming from. The only information that I am ware of that references the bridge is what the Member supplied to this House and table in this House, a suggested feasibility study done by the chamber of commerce in Inuvik and they put a rough price on the bridge of $2 million. Other than that, I am not aware of any feasibility study or any cost analysis done on that bridge.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe the deputy minister just mentioned there was a 1980 study, and that is how they came up with that information. So if the deputy minister is stating there was a 1980 study from the department and that is where your numbers are coming from, where is that study that you are talking about?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Minister.

Mr. Chairman, I will allow my deputy to respond to that because that was some comment he made earlier.

Thank you, Mr. Steen. Mr. Vician.

Thank you, Mr. Vician. Mr. Krutko.

I would like to ask the Minister, is there a possibility of getting a copy of that study that was tabled in this House?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Steen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes.

Thank you, Mr. Steen. Mr. Krutko.

Can the Minister state is his department working in conjunction with the people of Fort Providence in regard to their feasibility study that they are doing to look at the feasibility of building a bridge across the Mackenzie at this time?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Steen.

Mr. Chairman, the council of Fort Providence did not approach the department before they approached Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development for the funding for a feasibility study. They did not approach the department. They did not get us involved. However, they are now approaching the department with regard to us supplying them information on their feasibility study. I would not actually classify it as working with the Fort Providence group, but we are working with their consultants in supplying them the information they asked us for. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Steen. General comments. Mr. Krutko, I will give you one more shot at general comments.

I want to ask a question with regard to the response I received from the Minister on a particular petition that was tabled in this House about the building of an all-weather road from the Dempster Highway to Aklavik. It was also in support of the road system from Wrigley to the Beaufort Sea. In the statement, the Minister basically states that they support the Mackenzie Highway, the Canadian North coast and also the cost of an all-weather road to Aklavik, but must defer until the Government of the Northwest Territories is in a much stronger economic and financial post. How long does the community of Aklavik have to wait until they get an all-weather road in response to the petition that was tabled in this House?