This aspect of protecting the jobs, it is not as if the company that suffered these problems was the only game in town where we have to protect the last swan hill or the last mine going here. There are indeed other companies that need these kinds of workers. So I don't know that I entirely support the contention that the taxpayer is taking an $800,000 hit here to protect some jobs. Would the Minister care to comment or agree or disagree with me that that is really a good argument? Did these jobs really need protecting? Thank you.
Bill Braden on Committee Motion 2-14(5): Options For Measures To Stabilize Power Subsidy Costs, Carried
In the Legislative Assembly on March 22nd, 2004. See this statement in context.
Committee Motion 2-14(5): Options For Measures To Stabilize Power Subsidy Costs, Carried
Item 20: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters
March 21st, 2004
Page 134
See context to find out what was said next.