Thank you, Mr. St. Germaine. Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, you know that members of the Standing Committee on Social Programs never received any detail that would justify the seriousness of the need to replace the building and that's one of the reasons that we were surprised. It seemed to all of a sudden appear in the five-year capital plan because it hadn't been seen by us before and it didn't start appearing at the end of the plan and working its way forward as we were expecting that most projects would. So members of this committee would welcome seeing a copy of that 1998 assessment. I hope the Minister will distribute that to members of Committee of the Whole, please.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am hoping that my executive assistant is listening because we have both technical assessments available and they should be here momentarily.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In the absence of that information, it's difficult for us to say any more than what we said in our reports. All I can say is Members will have to have a look at that and as we said in the Standing Committee on Accountability and Oversight's report, we will certainly be trying to make sure that Members in the 15th Assembly are aware of our concerns with this issue and that they have a very good look at it before considering the budget when the money should start to fall in the next year. We have not yet been convinced that it's justified. So I am looking forward to seeing the information and we will follow up from there, I guess.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Mr. Miltenberger, do you have any comments to make on that?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, this capital project has been on the books for some time since it was identified through the technical assessment and we have a big box of assessments being lugged around the corner by one of those poor pages. I appreciate the Member's comments. The information was there. If it wasn't provided, it was an oversight. We would have been more than happy to provide that, but here it is and the two projects have been in the process almost simultaneously. The information is there and will be handed out. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the Minister is being questioned about the renovation on the Fort Smith Health Centre and he says he has technical assessments for both projects. What are both projects? There is nothing in the committee report that is talking about any other renovation project, so why does he have a technical assessment on both projects? Maybe he can enlighten us on that.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, they are there for comparison purposes. These projects are very similar. They are happening in the same time frames and have gone through the same procedure and process. So they are there. If the committee doesn't want them, that's fine. I wanted them to have all the information available, so that we had the full facts. Thank you.

Thank you. I guess the question was what two projects are you referring to? Mr. Miltenberger.

Sorry, Mr. Chairman. The technical assessments for both Hay River and Fort Smith and I am prepared to bring in the technical assessments for every facility including the upcoming proposed renovations for Stanton, as well, just so that everybody is aware that this work has been done, has been going on over the years and is part of the issue of protecting key assets. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just find it strange that the Minister is trying to tie these two projects together. The committee report and the questioning in the House today had not raised the renovation project in Hay River at all. Yet, the Minister is talking about if we want to leave "them"... Does the Minister feel from his comments that if there is anything about the question about the Fort Smith renovation that automatically includes the Hay River renovation in the issue of the problem raised by the committee? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are attempting to respond to issues of concern raised about a capital project that is very similar to another one. The information is there. I expect at the end of the day, the committee will make the decisions it deems appropriate. There is a concern raised about doing half-life renovations in the committee report. I think it's very critical to point out that Hay River, Fort Smith, the planned one for Stanton are all half-life renovations and protection of key assets. So it's an attempt to provide as much information as possible. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I hear what the Minister is saying, but it doesn't sound like it to me. There is a renovation project for Hay River's hospital and it's been on the books for awhile now as a result of a technical review and just because the Standing Committee on Social Programs raised concerns with where the Fort Smith renovation was coming from in terms of timing and cost and raise that, I guess there is something I find not too comforting about the Minister's desire to tie Hay River to it. If there is a problem with Smith, we will have to consider them in tandem. If there was going to be any delay to the Smith one, it's automatically going to have to be delayed in Hay River as well. I don't like the tone of that. It sounds threatening to me. There was no mention today of the Hay River renovation from the committee or Members around here until the Minister brought it up. I just want to express my concern about that. I don't like the tone of it. It's in keeping with some comments that the Minister made to me as well after he heard about the committee's concerns about the capital project in his riding. It is in keeping with comments that he also made to me and I just want to state for the record I don't appreciate it. Ministers are not in their positions to promote projects in their own riding and when they don't get the support they want for them to threaten other Members who already have capital work that is planned for their riding that has been on the books and properly gone through the capital planning process. I don't like the tone of it and I want that on the record. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would just like to point out that I made a considerable effort to make sure we moved Hay River up a year and that it stayed on the list. So it's unfortunate the Member doesn't like my tone. So if she doesn't like it, I apologize for the tone. This is an intent to work through a budget of $200 and some million and to do it in a balanced, fair way. That's what we are attempting to do. Thank you.