Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to make a few comments. I've been on record through the life of this bill when it was introduced and second reading and throughout the committee process, I have been on record as supporting this bridge, Mr. Chairman. I must say that when I was elected to office a few years ago, I had no idea that I would actually leave the Assembly with a law that would see a bridge in the very near future. Hopefully, before we leave office or soon thereafter, we will see the turning of the sod in that area. Also, I'm really looking forward to driving over that bridge and knowing that this capital city is connected to the rest of the world and the rest of the country every day of the year, and won't be disconnected for a good length of time each spring and fall. I remember during the campaign in 1999, a number of my constituents said get that bridge over there because you cannot plan Christmas holidays or springtime and so on. I do believe that this could not have been a reality without the partnership idea that we have here. I must thank the work of the Member for Deh Cho, Mr. McLeod, for taking on this project from the beginning, and working step by step, tirelessly to make sure that everybody pays the attention to it that needs to be paid. We hear all the time from Mr. McLeod that there's not enough going to the communities, but boy oh boy he could always point to that bridge not too far from his community and say he had a major part to play in that.

Mr. Chairman, since this legislation was introduced, I've had the occasion to talk to my constituents, especially at Tim Horton's, and I happened to be talking to the truckers who were having coffee there. I learned that there's a premium added to the work that they do to drive supplies to the North, especially during break-up or when it's close to break-up because they're not able to predict how long the trip will take. So instead of charging by mileage as would be the case in other parts of the country where there is disruption like this, they charge a premium for getting stuff from High Level or Edmonton or wherever the point of departure is of those supplies.

Also, I am pleased to have discovered and to note in our committee report, that in fact the cost of goods will go down and there will be a savings. Yellowknife Co-op is reporting a savings of as large as $300,000. That, spread out throughout the year, will benefit the membership. The Co-op, in particular, does a lot of work with the communities, so I know that it's a good news item. An operation that big will gain a lot. One could only assume that that would translate the same for other operations like Wal-Mart or anywhere else, and that will translate into the benefit of the residents of Yellowknife.

I know that in our public hearings, constituents had questions about what the impact of this might be to the fly-in communities. Maybe the Minister could shed light on that, because if that is the case -- and I believe that communities around the lake, whether it's Lutselk'e or some of the communities in North, if their supply point is Yellowknife and the Yellowknife businesses are saying that there will be savings -- one would assume that that saving would be spread out to those communities. The Minister's statement indicated that there might be a small increase, but not a big increase. So I guess any potential increase there might be for surrounding communities is the cost of fuel. But I don't see anything different in this equation other than having a bridge. By all accounts, the cost of carrying goods from southern points to here will be less.

So I think that in the end, not only will the cost of goods go down, but we will become a tourist destination for the rubber tire tourist group. I'm sure that there are lots of people who like to get in their RVs and travel all across the country and North America. I am certain that when they look at a map right now and see a dotted line between the remaining parts of Highway No. 3 because it's not paved and it's such a horrible road, and if they see that there's a ferry, when you're competing with every other destination in the country or Alaska or wherever they could go where they don't have to risk damaging their very expensive RVs, I'm sure Yellowknife and the Northwest Territories fall right off the potential designation points. There's no way of telling what we'll be seeing in terms of tourists five, 10, 20 years down the road once the bridge is built.

Also, I support this bridge for many other reasons, one being that I believe it is the role of government to build public infrastructure, and it is a very important role for government to build highways and bridges. Yet I know that if there were no such partnership as this, that we would never be able to get $55 million to build a bridge. We know that. That is more than what the government has budgeted for an entire year of capital spending. So there is no way we could come up with this money. It was very good of Mr. McLeod and his team in Fort Providence to come up with the idea, and to push it as hard and as far as they have.

Also another thing, I know that there are lots of discussions in this Assembly about the fact that there's such a discrepancy in dollars spent between bigger communities versus small communities. I think it's a very legitimate fact for the area that the Member for Deh Cho comes from. In the Fort Providence area, they have not seen as much direct benefit from some of the economic and industrial development that's happening with the mines. They might just go as far as Rae-Edzo, but not as far as Fort Providence. So I think we always have to support in this legislature where we are working on a project that would benefit the area that doesn't see such benefits normally. So I really do believe that that is one of the best things about this project.

I do have to state, Mr. Chairman, that there were concerns raised in the community, and that has to do with the ownership of the bridge. There is a little bit of fear out there that the fact that this bridge will be owned by someone else other than the government, that somehow this would not be public property and that public government will not have the control necessary to make sure that the road is accessible and that it's available to every resident living in the North and every visitor who may travel on that bridge. But I do believe that through the work of this committee and listening to the people and making necessary amendments, we've addressed some of those concerns to a large degree. But I am going to have some specific questions, especially sections pertaining to liability and so on, for the Minister and I'm hoping we'll be able to provide those answers to those concerns.

Maybe I should end by asking the question, Mr. Chairman; the Minister stated that the government will own it so that all the pertinent legislation will apply, such as the Motor Vehicles Act, but he also mentioned about the fact that there's a question about liability and insurance. So may I get the Minister to elaborate on what he knows about what the implications are for liabilities and insurance that he's negotiating with the Bridge Corporation? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.