Mr. Chairman, in doing our estimates, as I said earlier, we were very conservative in the numbers to make sure we are on the right side of the ledger sheet. In doing the estimates for those communities that are accessible only by ice road or by air, we estimated that 90 percent of their supplies, goods that come in by road will come in directly from the south with only 10 percent coming from Yellowknife. If it happens that they enjoy some of the benefit that would come from the communities on the road, then that could change a bit. Mr. Chairman, we have been very conservative in doing it and I would expect that the $10,000 figure we have in total is probably on the high side. Thank you.

Thank you. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have another question about the concern raised by the people we heard from during the public hearing process and one of the concerns was the ability of the bridge to have different uses such as hooking up a telephone or cable line across the bridge or if it happens that we have a pipeline coming through that bridge or being able to attach a pipeline onto that bridge or something parallel to it, and the Minister has indicated that this is one of the issues that is being discussed in the negotiation with the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation. I wonder if the Minister could advise us what the major issues are with regard to that. Why is this issue a difficult one, if it is one? Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Handley.

Mr. Chairman, when we did our estimates and projections for the bridge, we did it as a bridge with the purpose of carrying vehicular traffic. We have no objection to the bridge being used for other purposes, whether it's carrying a power line or Internet or whatever it may be, as long as it doesn't compromise the basic purpose of the bridge, which is for traffic. Our main concern would be safety and, of course, we don't want to see it shut down at periods of time and so on, because it is there for motor traffic. Those would be the basic concerns, Mr. Chairman. Any such agreement is something we would have to work out with the owners of the bridge. I don't anticipate there would be great difficulty on what we could do as long as it isn't compromising the primary purpose for the bridge. Thank you.

Thank you. Ms. Lee.

I think the conflict or controversy about this bridge is the question of ownership. This sort of thing doesn't happen very often. It's not usual for a public infrastructure to be owned not solely by a government in Canada, although I understand there are other examples, but it is certainly a new thing for the Northwest Territories. We are advised that the bridge will be subject to all of the highway laws because it will be construed as being a highway for that purpose, but at the same time the Minister is indicating to us there will be some negotiations as to who is going to be responsible for any risks or responsibilities that arise out of that. Also, whether one gives permission about what could go on that bridge or what different uses there might be. There is also a question about ownership. Are we to understand that all those provisions are subject to agreement, and what is the mandate the government is taking to this negotiation process from this legislature? Can we know about what the government's position is with regard to these areas, the use of the bridge and the liability question? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Mr. Handley.

Mr. Chairman, I will ask Mr. Vician to give the detail on that. It's fairly technical.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Mr. Vician.

Thank you, Mr. Vician. The chair will recognize Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, with regard to the Deh Cho Bridge Act, I fully support the initiative that is being taken. I think it's about time that we, as the Northwest Territories, took our place with the rest of the country and our neighbours to the west, the Yukon with their bridges at river crossings. They have seen a real increase in their tourism traffic, year-round access in and out of the communities. I think because of the infrastructure they have in the Yukon, they've had an advantage over us when it comes to tourism traffic and bringing down the cost of living in the Yukon for those residents who are on the highway systems.

I feel that we, as a territory, have to take that major step and the Deh Cho Bridge is the start of developing that infrastructure. We do have other crossings in the NWT such as the Liard River crossing, which is a ferry operation, Camsell Bend, which is another section of the Mackenzie, the Tsiigehtchic Mackenzie crossing and the Peel River crossing just to name a few, where the only means of crossing during the summer months is by ferry. I think that to bring down the cost to residents of development in the Northwest Territories, we have to find ways to give industry and the people of the North assurance that they can operate in the North and avoid these high cost operations. When we have to wait to put an ice bridge in, and wait when the ferries go out because of the break-up and freeze-ups, which has a major impact in all our communities where the cost of goods and services are driven up, it's important that we deal with that. So with that I do support this motion and thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Mr. Chairman, I spoke to this bill and to the proposed Deh Cho Bridge in a Member's statement this week, so I don't have a lot to add to that, but I would like to say that the Member for Deh Cho came here with this bridge as a goal and he set himself to see this come to reality within his four-year term. I just want to commend him for his persistence and also his community for bringing this forward. I do think it will be for the betterment of all people in the Northwest Territories. I want to congratulate them and say I will be supporting the bill. Thank you.

Ready to go clause by clause?

We are on page 1, clause 1.

Clause 2.

Page 3, clause 3.