Thank you, Minister Steen. Mr. Bell.

Thank you. The deputy has made the case for bundling and suggested that money was saved. You've heard from this side of the House the question about whether or not money was really saved with the bundling. Instead of insisting on HP compatible equipment, it's quite possible we still would have ended up with HP and we would have gotten a better price from HP because they knew they'd have to compete. So I don't know that we can really say that we're certain we saved $100,000.

But philosophically, one of the things we've heard from the larger private-sector companies operating in the Northwest Territories, specifically I'm thinking of BHP and Diavik, is that they recognize the need to get away from bundling contracts. They, I guess, see that northern firms likely would not be able to have the capacity or be competitive on them, and have split up a lot of contracts to allow for some northern value added. This is something that the private sector has gotten into, not because they have to, but because they see that it makes sense and it's something that they feel a good corporate citizen should do in trying to build northern capacity.

Our government doesn't seem to take the same approach, or at least in this case they didn't take that approach. They felt that despite the fact that by their numbers 20 percent of it could have been tendered by northern companies, they felt the bundling and the savings were more important than working to build northern capacity. I guess that's what disappoints me. We know that that means there was tax revenue lost, there were transfer payments lost. We don't whether or not this cost us jobs or didn't cost us jobs, and I don't think we'll ever have an accurate read on that when it comes to specifics.

But I think we have this philosophy. We expect the private sector, and appreciate that the private sector adheres to this to a large degree. I think it only make sense for this government to do it. This is the flagship department, let's keep in mind, when it comes to competitive process, when it comes to contracting. I think all of the departments take their marching orders from this department. Certainly, if this department can do this, let's keep it in mind that other departments are paying attention to how they conduct themselves. I really wonder what other departments will do when they see this kind of conduct.

I think the departments try very hard here to make the case that this was the best expenditure of public dollars. I think it runs roughshod over our philosophy that says we may not always get the absolute best dollar, but we think there are other things that come into play here and we recognize that and that's why we've set up something like this BIP. It may be difficult to measure and that's something that we're trying to do over the next year -- the Department of RWED is -- but it still is important. It was important enough to the members of this House to not throw away the BIP and to not do away with the policy in total.

I would just like to express that I am disappointed that the bundling happened in this regard. Again, I'm disappointed that we didn't check with the local business community to determine what capacity they really did have to deliver on some of this stuff. I can tell you that after seeing the list of things that were purchased, they dispute the 80/20 split and say it's more like 60/40. Had we consulted with them, we could have had that debate and I'm sure rectified a lot of these issues one way or another, but we didn't and that's unfortunate. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Mr. Steen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I think it's important that we point out that we're not just purchasing equipment, we're purchasing a system. It's not a system where you have disconnected hardware systems. One of the main points supporting this vision of the department, and which I supported, was the fact that it wasn't just a suggestion of $100,000 savings. Both points had to be taken into consideration. The second one is that you had one supplier doing the installation, the troubleshooting and the warranty, and that was an important part of this decision. It's not just trying to save $100,000. The department is well aware of the government's policies and practices. As a matter of fact, what has been suggested to industry to do, that is break down larger contracts to allow smaller companies to be able to bid on them, is something that was suggested by the government. I agree with the member that if we say we recommend to industry to do this, then we follow the same procedure. But I believe the department did take into consideration this policy, and we did try to follow the policy to the letter. It's just that at this point in time it's no longer where it's part of a BIP issue, it is more of a contracting issue, and the department feels that this was the best way to go. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Steen. Mr. Bell.

Thank you. I do recognize that this is part of the larger system. As the Minister has said correctly, this was about installation, it's about troubleshooting, it's about warranty. I think it's also about training. I'm certain Hewlett Packard will be up here training the government staff to be able to operate the system adequately. But I think the one thing that we have to recognize, in my view, is that we missed an opportunity here to build some northern capacity in these areas. The deputy has indicated there probably will never be anybody in the North who's qualified to deliver a contract of this nature because it's so specialized, it happens so rarely and there are so few big customers. I don't know if that's true; it might be. But I think we can be certain that there will never be the capacity in the North to deliver on a contract like this if we don't involve northern companies.

Now when we do need troubleshooting, we're certainly going to have to fly somebody up from Calgary or Edmonton in order to look at the system. I think if we would have had one of the northern contractors involved looking over the shoulders of the engineers doing the installation, being involved in some of the warranty discussions, learning about troubleshooting and watching some of the training be delivered, certainly we would have had an ability to then have some capacity built and have northern operators be involved. There would have been -- as I spoke the other day in the House -- some transfer of technology, and I think that's a very important goal for us. So I do keep in mind that this is part of an overall system. I just think in this instance we missed the boat to build some capacity.

I think the folks here, the local northern firms bidding on these contracts, believe in the North, they're here because they love the North, they want to make this their home, they want to be involved here, they want to do business here and I think we have to give them that chance to do that. It is important to recognize that their business model has been premised on the idea that the government will give them some preferential treatment, or at least allow them to have access to the competitive bidding process on a number of these products.

The Minister has indicated to me that he has no qualms with the way the department handled this contract, and is satisfied that it has adhered to the policies and was well within the regulations. I think members on this side of the House have indicated some dissatisfaction and some reservations, and had hoped that the government would do things differently in future. I don't get the sense that the Minister is prepared to commit to that. But I'd like to ask the Minister if this contract were to come up next week, would the department do anything differently or would they undertake the exact same process -- sole source. If it was the same contract and they felt that somebody in the North couldn't handle the work, would they do things exactly the same way another time around should this contract come up in a week or a month or a year? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Mr. Steen.

Mr. Chairman, the question is hypothetical. But assuming everything is the same; the same issues were raised, the same type of tender and RFP was put forward, it would have been done basically following the policies of the government. If it's BIP, then we follow BIP. If it includes a contract aspect of it, then the department will follow the contract aspect. But if the member is suggesting that we would pay more attention to certain points that were raised here, we definitely will. But I can't respond to the specific question because it's hypothetical. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Steen. The Chair will recognize Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My question is in the area of water quality with regards to concerns I raised earlier today in the House, and also with the notice of a boil water order in communities which your department is responsible for, knowing that there is a question of not only process, but a liability question. I touched on the THM problem in Fort McPherson. I know certain efforts were made to improve the water quality in Fort McPherson, but we still have other communities. I've raised the issue with regard to Tsiigehtchic where there's supposed to be an improvement to the water treatment process there. There are still concerns with the colour of the water, and also the smell of the water. Also in the community of Aklavik where there was a percentage in the water system called H. pylori, in which doctors were prescribing antibiotics for residents of Aklavik to take because of the virus which you get from the intake of water.

So I'd like to ask the Minister or the Department of Public Works who is responsible for the testing, sampling and looking at the whole water quality aspect of water treatment facilities in our communities -- especially in my communities where your department does provide that service in Aklavik, Tsiigehtchic, Fort McPherson and also Rae-Edzo -- exactly what is your department doing in consideration of the water quality question; not just looking at the quality of water, but the side effects that we're seeing in our water by way of studies that I mentioned with regards to research and with regards to different scientific findings of THMs, the effect that it has on cancers and also miscarriages in women, and also with the problem in Aklavik where we're seeing large numbers of cancer cases in our communities?

I always hear from my constituents, asking if there is a correlation between the increase in cancer in our communities and the water quality and how the water has been treated in the past with chlorine or other types of chemicals. I'd like to ask the department if you document all the types of chemicals or additives that you add to the water system to process the water during certain times of the year, where you have large increases or spikes indicating increased mercury or increased metals in the water or, in the case of THMs if there are certain things you have to do to treat the water? Is all that information documented so that, if at any time in the future we have a major lawsuit on our hands, we, as a government, will know who the fingers will be pointed at and who will be held liable with regards to the court cases we're seeing in southern Canada?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Steen.

Mr. Chairman, I'm going to refer most of those questions to my deputy. But from the aspect of water treatment facilities and improving water treatment facilities in the communities, in relation to Tsiigehtchic, we expect that that project will be taken on this summer and completed by this fall. So Tsiigehtchic should have filtered water by this fall, and the purpose of that is to remove the colour from the water. That's the reason for the filtering process.

In relation to the reports on water samples, the department does do water sampling where we supply the service and our people are responsible to turn those over to the environmental health officer. I believe it's the environmental health officer who then identifies whether or not there are certain conditions of the water that have to be addressed. We would then take that to Health and Social Services, and they would identify what we have to do, what Public Works would have to do, or MACA would have to do in order to address the issue.

I'm not aware of the issue that the member mentioned in Aklavik, so I'll ask the deputy to respond to that particular issue.

Thank you, Mr. Steen. Mr. Rattray.

Thank you, Mr. Rattray. Mr. Krutko.

Just on the area of water testing, I'd like to ask the Minister or his department if we have expanded the testing of water from just looking at the basic requirements. Do we look for things such as THMs or other forms of bacteria, or do we just look at the colouring and the different types of heavy metals that may be in the water by way of mercury levels? I'd like to know from the department, have we seen an increase in the type of testing that we do to detect other types of heavy metals or other types of products that may find their way into our water system? You touched on the Aklavik situation, which I believe was H. pylori, or something to that effect. That was the title that was put on it. You have THMs, then you have the colouring problem in regards to Tsiigehtchic. I would like to ask the Minister, knowing what happened in Walkerton, that they tested for certain things, is there an additional type of requirement that we are now required to test for different types of bacteria that may be in the water? Are we expanding the testing of water in our communities, or are we just continuing to test for the basics that presently might be under the Canadian health standards? How far do we go with our testing?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Steen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I believe the testing aspects of the water are done by the environmental health officer. We're just required to supply the samples. We then get direction back as to what treatment we have to do to make the water meet the standards. In other words, if we have to put chlorine or whatever in, that's the direction we get back from Health and Social Services through the environmental health officer. I believe that's the process that is involved. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Steen. Mr. Krutko.

The reason I ask is because there seems to be more testing. Right now, basically the water tests are taken at the water treatment plant. Do we take tests from the lake itself, into the water intake system, into the water treatment plant, into the water truck and then into the home? Do we check all these different areas, testing water right from the intake from the water source to the turning on of a tap in someone's home? How far does that test go? Are we only testing in one area, or are we testing in all different areas of the water process so that we're testing at the front end and also we're testing at the back end so that we know exactly what the quality of the water was when we brought it in out of the lake, what the quality of the water is once it goes into the treatment plant, what's the quality when it comes out of the treatment plant, and what's the quality of the water once it's turned on in someone's home?

You have mechanisms in communities where water is either delivered through a water truck delivery system or a utilidor system. You have storage tanks underground. So how far do we test this water? Do we just test it after we get a notice from environmental health and then go back to try to nail some of these things down? How vigorous is the testing that you really do, or do you just test the water at the treatment plant?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Steen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I'll ask the deputy to respond to that specific question. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Steen. Mr. Rattray.