Mr. Speaker, we have given the deputies who are working on this task three objectives for them to work toward. One is we have asked them to clarify a core capital need and develop an infrastructure policy. What is our policy with regard to, for example, territorial facilities versus community facilities? Should we be ranking a territorial hospital with the same criteria that we are as a community water system? Is there a way of doing this differently? We've asked them to give us some direction and propose some policy framework for us. A second task is we have asked them to look at potential ways of doing our capital projects differently. Are there ways of doing some things by the public partnerships, for example, levering other infrastructure investment. The proposed Deh Cho bridge is a good example of how we can do capital projects differently without just using our money. A third one, Mr. Speaker, that we've asked the committee to look at is strategies for coping with infrastructure impacts as a result of resource development. A lot of our infrastructure is being stretched to its limit because of the resource development going on. Is there a way of dealing with that kind of pressure more cooperatively and jointly with the big resource development companies? Those would be the three main tasks that we are looking forward to. We have also given a fairly tight time frame for this to be completed. Thank you.
Joe Handley on Question 28-14(6): Review Of The Corporate Capital Planning Process
In the Legislative Assembly on February 17th, 2003. See this statement in context.
Return To Question 28-14(6): Review Of The Corporate Capital Planning Process
Question 28-14(6): Review Of The Corporate Capital Planning Process
Item 6: Oral Questions
February 16th, 2003
Page 100
See context to find out what was said next.