It would be good to get a copy of that study to see how he came up with the $378,000. The point I am trying to get at is, will there be ongoing costs associated with this and, if there are, would that be put into the main estimates so it will show up in the capital expenditures by community so we know this is an ongoing cost? As I mentioned in the past, there has been almost $2 million spent on shoreline erosion and I think the problem is going to get worse before it gets better. This is not only affecting Tuk, it's affecting other communities in the Delta. We are seeing the effects of global warming. My concern is this could be a major expenditure of government and we have to be prepared and plan for it. It would be good to see what that engineering report says and where it came from. I would like to know, from that study, are we sure this is all the money that's going to be needed to do the shoreline erosion restoration program of $378,000 or are we talking about ongoing funding?
David Krutko on Bill 11: Supplementary Appropriation Act, No. 3, 2002-2003
In the Legislative Assembly on March 12th, 2003. See this statement in context.
Bill 11: Supplementary Appropriation Act, No. 3, 2002-2003
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters
March 12th, 2003
Page 736
See context to find out what was said next.