Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to raise a Point of Order.

Please state your Point of Order, Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I am trying to do my job as we are asked to do. As I have stated many times, one of the most important things that a legislator does is passing a budget. I'm not asking some broad, general, hard, difficult questions. But I'm asking a question that I need to make a judgment about this item. So I feel that I'm not able to do my job as a Member...

Ms. Lee, what is your Point of Order?

Point Of Order

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do believe there's a rule in the House that tells you you have a Point of Order where any activities or inactivities -- I don't have the rule number here -- a Point of Order, or it could be a Point of Privilege, and I'm sure the Clerk and the chair will take that under advisement. But I know there is a rule that says that if a Member feels that her ability to do her job in the legislature, or represent his or her people, has the right to ask that that activity or inactivity be stopped. So I'd like to make that request, and I'd like the chair to make a ruling on that. Thank you.

I'll call Committee of the Whole back to order. I'll now provide my ruling on the Point of Order raised by Ms. Lee. I find that what Ms. Lee attempted to claim as a Point of Order should have been presented as a Point of Privilege. Ms. Lee contended that her rights and privileges in the House were being infringed upon, as she was not being allowed to ask questions and speak to the issues.

However, in calling on Ms. Lee to confirm her comments and questions to the line item under consideration, the chair is merely applying our rules and procedures for debate in Committee of the Whole. Given the events in Committee of the Whole today, the chair finds it impossible to find that Ms. Lee has a prima facie case of privilege. Therefore, the Member for Range Lake does not have a Point of Order or a Point of Privilege.

We'll go back to page 10 and continue on with Municipal and Community Affairs, operations expenditures, regional operations, not previously authorized, $3.004 million. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, in regard to my earlier discussions in regard to the hamlet road, Tuktoyaktuk, $123,000, I still have concerns to how this amount of money was expended and how we are finding there was a lapse in these expenditures. So I would just like to ask the Minister exactly how many other communities have taken advantage of using special warrants to fix or repair roads in their communities? Has there been any other requests for special warrant to be issued for approval by the FMBS for these types of conditions where industrial development, regardless of whether it's oil and gas or mining activity that has taken place... I'll use an example of the community of Tsiigehtchic which has had oil and gas activity over the last number of years, where a lot of traffic has rolled in and out of that community by way of movement of oil rigs and heavy equipment, and they have been trying to request funding to work on a bypass road, but with very little support from this government. So what does it take for a community to access funds through a special warrant, using a similar argument that was used in regard to the Tuk hamlet access road, and which one of the issues raised at the time was because of the impact by way of oil and gas development and that there has been major reconstruction of this road because of the activity of those developments. I would like to ask the Minister of Finance exactly what does it take for another community to access these funds, and if you can tell me if there has been any requests made by other communities to seek these types of funding through special warrants?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Handley.

Mr. Chairman, for any community project to be eligible for a special warrant, as was the case in Tuk on this project, the need would have to be urgent. It would have to be of public interest, and there would have to be insufficient appropriation within that department's budget. To answer the question of how many communities have asked for special warrants for road projects, I don't recall any others that have made that request during the life of this government. I can't think of any offhand. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll use another example of community requesting resources from this government. I asked a question earlier this afternoon to the Minister of MACA with regard to the ball diamond for the community of Aklavik. They built a new community health centre on the ball diamond that was used by the residents of Aklavik, to accommodate the Department of Health and Social Services for a health centre for the community. The community is now trying to re-establish a new ball diamond for the children of Aklavik to have something to play on this summer, rather than playing ball in the street. To me, that's an essential service in regard to a priority of a community. We've been requesting funds from this government. There were commitments made for $250,000, yet we managed to get $50,000 out of the Department of Health. In this case, in which a community was able to get $1.3 million for a six-kilometre road, yet we can't even get enough dirt to put on a ball diamond. So I would like to ask the Minister exactly what does it take to see some fairness here that we distribute the wealth of this government fairly and across the board? I would like to ask the Minister exactly was this project scrutinized in the understanding that there are also other needs in other communities that could have used the same argument in regard to this special warrant in regard to repairing of roads that have been affected by development? We have development in the Sahtu region, we have development in the community of Tsiigehtchic, we have development in the Cameron Hills area and in the area of Fort Liard. So if every community came to us with this argument, will they get the same support of this government?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Handley.

Mr. Chairman, any community that comes forward with the same kind of request with the same level of urgency and public interest and inadequate appropriation, would get exactly the same treatment. Just for clarification, in this case the urgency was certainly that we had to maintain access to the solid waste dump and the sewage dump. The public interest was certainly that in this case there was... Sorry, the other part of the urgency, of course, is we can only haul gravel into Tuk in the winter on the ice roads. That had to be done then. The public interest part is that the road was worn out through the industrial use and other community use, to the point where we were going to lose the base of the road and have to do a much more expensive upgrading of that road if we didn't do it quickly. Then, of course, the department didn't have the appropriation or the money in their budget to be able to handle it. So any community that has the same level of criteria to meet those three standards we have would also qualify.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Page 10, Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, in regard to the $123,000, also part of the requirement of that fund that there was some 6000 cubic meters of gravel given to the community from the Department of Transportation. I would just like to know from the Minister if the communities are able to access other gravel supplies in other communities from the Department of Transportation, either airports or highways transportation, to a similar arrangement where communities can simply drive up to Transportation's yard and haul away 6000 cubic meters and basically say I'll replace it next year, or the next year after or three years from now. Is that offer available to other communities, or is it just this special circumstance where they're able to do that? I would also like to know has that 6000 cubic metres been replaced and what was the cost of replacing that gravel?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Handley.

Mr. Chairman, yes. If the Department of Transportation has a stockpile of gravel that is surplus to its needs within a given timeframe, then we would make it available to the community or another department. Usually it's on the condition that they will replace it. If it's surplus to our needs altogether, we've finished the project, then there may be some other arrangement made, because one government department wants to work with the others in doing that.

The 6000 yards that was borrowed from the Department of Transportation is either being fully replaced or is in the process of being replaced right now. I'm not sure if we've got a full 6000 back or whatever the amount was. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Page 10, regional operations. Mr. Krutko.

Can the Minister provide the information, because it's not clear in your answer if that actually has been replaced or it's going to be replaced. If you're telling us that there is $123,000 left through the carryover to expend, from my understanding the replacement value of that gravel was some $380,000. So can you give me the information on exactly how much money has been expended and what's the cost of replacing 6000 cubic metres of gravel that was borrowed from the Department of Transportation?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Handley.

Mr. Chairman, I believe the full 6000 cubic yards, or whatever the amount that was taken has been replaced. But out of the total project, which is budgeted at $1.3 million, there's $123,000 that was carried over. So that $123,000 is probably either to finish up the crushing or to finish the road, and I'm not sure of the exact breakdown. But the agreement is that all of the gravel that was borrowed from DOT will be replaced before that crusher leaves Tuk this summer.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. The chair will recognize Mr. McLeod.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to pursue the line of questioning Mr. Krutko is asking with regard to Tuktoyaktuk and the money that is being allocated for the road and the hamlet. I'm quite concerned. It seems like we have a double standard when it comes to roads in the Minister's riding and roads in the other Members' ridings. I have roads that are of concern in my riding. The community of Fort Providence spent a lot of money out of their own coffers and out of their own general revenues. Although I raised the issue with MACA many times that the road was deteriorated because the stockpile was never replenished because there was nobody in the region to fill the vacant positions, therefore, it never made it on the capital plan because the capital plan was never updated for three years. There were a whole series of events that lead to this. The road started to cave in throughout the community. My request fell on deaf ears. But I see when a road in Tuk has a problem, there is money available.

So I'd like to ask the Minister if he could explain to this House what the criteria is that's used to obtain some money for roads, which may be deemed as emergencies. I know in our case it was an emergency. I've never seen the Tuk road, so I don't know what the condition was. But what is the criteria used to determine who gets on as a special warrant or on the supplementary appropriation?