Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak to this motion and hopefully clear up some confusion that centres around this particular issue. Mr. Speaker, it was never the intent of the department to cause this much of an issue by deferring these two particular contracts that we had for the first part of the Dempster Highway. The department did divert money from those two projects towards the bridge project, the Campbell Creek bridge.

In the past, the department has been following a process whereby we inform MLAs as a matter of courtesy when we move money from one section of a riding to another riding, although it is within the same project. We have done this. We have also informed Members when we move money from one project to another project. We have done that in the past. We are well aware of what is required.

When we interpret the specific reference under the Financial Administration Act, this particular clause, we interpret it to mean a budgeted project. The budgeted project is $5 million of the whole Dempster Highway. We know that we have within there some projects, or whatever you want to call them, contracts, but they are not the specific project that is referred to in the Financial Administration Act. That is how we have been operating.

I was hoping that through further discussion, possibly under the supplementary appropriations, we could have assured the Member that not all the $950,000 went to the bridge. In fact, $550,000 of this money, some of it went back into his riding through other contracts and other projects, if that is what he wants to call them.

Now, if I want to be more specific, I would show that the Campbell Creek bridge required another $425,000 to meet the tender. We needed $425,000 to keep that project on speed because it had a high priority. We have done that. That left $550,000 out of the $950,000 of the projects.

Those $550,000 now add up to this. We had a public tender contract and it was awarded to Geometry Aquatic Study Arctic Red, for $92,100. Gwich'in Development Corporation geotech investigation of kilometre 143, $30,000; that was awarded and it was a public tender.

Then, yet to be tendered, we have culvert replacement, kilometre 0 to 20, which was one of the original projects, we have allotted $200,000 to that. That is out to public tender right now.

We kept $202,000 out of this money for miscellaneous surveying and administration. The total comes to $950,000. We did not spend the total $950,000 in the Inuvik riding.

What our letter indicated to the Member was, should there be money able to go back into that project, we will put the money back. That is exactly what we are trying to do by retendering the public tender for kilometre 20 culvert replacement. We put it back for tender. However, we do not have the same amount of money to do the job.

However, we did indicate in the letter to the Member that we would do this, this year, if possible. If not, the project then is referred to next year, but regardless of how you look at this, there were no infractions, as far as I am concerned, to the Financial Administration Act. I do not believe I should be censured or anyone else on this would be censured. I definitely will not support the motion and I request Members to seriously consider what is being said here. Thank you.