Thank you, Mr. Chairman. When we left here last night, we had a few questions that we were looking for some answers to. Some of the ones that come to mind I wanted to know. I wanted to know the existing square footage of the Deh Cho Hall, the amount of that square footage which is now occupied by client departments of the GNWT and the amount of square footage occupied by non-government organizations who are co-habitants with government departments. That's my first question. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the building as it exists now is the total size of 4,488 square metres. The GNWT portion of that is: the district education council section is 1,469 square metres; Education, Culture and Employment is 344 square metres; Aurora College is 429 square metres; Department of Justice is 105 square metres.

For the non-government users: the John Tetso Memorial Library is 233 square metres; Open Door Society is 365 square metres; Multi Media Centre Society is 27 square metres; and, cultural centre is 187 square metres. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mrs. Groenewegen.

That was a pretty fast list there but I was trying to do the math here. Could the Minister pass something out with this on it and maybe even has the GNWT client departments added up and maybe the NGOs added up, so that we could get a sense? Draw us a picture; this is the whole building, this is the government part, this is the NGO part and this is the vacant part. That's what I am looking for.

Also, Mr. Chairman, while we are getting that...Are we getting that? Mr. Chairman, are we going to get that?

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will provide a summary of the building usage, the complete facility as it is, the GNWT users and then the non-government users. I will leave it to the Members to do the addition. I don't have that tallied up by GNWT and non-government users. We do have the square footage for all occupants and then the total facility as it stands is calculated. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, I will look forward to seeing that. I think we are allowed to ask hypothetical questions in Committee of the Whole. If you were building a building just for your government client departments, would these amounts remain consistent? Are they just taking up large amounts because they are in an old building with big rooms or under the standards of space that would be allowable to them, how does that compare with what they have now versus what they would mean under PWS standards for allowable sizes for offices and common areas, et cetera? Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the space occupied by the GNWT users is relatively the same, approximately 320 square metres less would be what we would look at for our current requirement. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So I need time to add up these numbers here, but, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask the Minister, did PWS consider what their costs would be, what their lease costs would be if they went out to tender for this space to be provided by a private developer? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, as I stated yesterday, the department, the recommendation by Public Works and Services to the department was a couple of options and ultimately one, the best value for money long term would be replacement of this facility. Once that project is agreed to -- and that

would have to be agreed to ultimately through the building or business planning process coming up in September -- if that is agreed to then the department, we would have to look at should we build our own or should we now go out for lease space. So that decision is yet to be made. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With respect to the fire marshal's report and the deficiencies that need to be corrected in the building to bring it up to code which constitute this over $3.5 million, have you had any discussion with the fire marshal as to the absolute outside limit date on occupancy and the undertaking of those corrections? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, if we do not show a plan to repair the immediate requirements that we've been instructed to do, then the occupancy, we could be terminated as early as this summer. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Well, that's good to know, Mr. Chairman, because I still think that there is readily available land which is already zoned for the purposes of a building like this in Fort Simpson in a very prime location and I think that answer says that there is at least a small window of opportunity to have some more discussion on this. I think that's what we should do. I mean, what you have to do is show a plan and maybe your plan is that everybody's moving out anyway. Because you're going to move into leased premises. I haven't given up on that idea that that could be provided and delivered by a private developer much more quickly than the Minister probably anticipates. Yesterday he mentioned something like two to four years. I think that's if the government was building and I think that if they had a sense of what they wanted and could consult with the community quickly enough they could come up with something much more quickly than that.

I guess, Mr. Chairman, I'm just...I don't mind spending money. I don't mind investing money. But I hate wasting money. You know, when this need has come to our attention for something in Fort Simpson, I by no means begrudge the folks of Fort Simpson and the surrounding area good quality facilities that meet their need. That's not what this is about. What I have a problem with is putting $3.5 million into a building because of poor planning that ultimately could, unless we just did a renovation of that building and those upgrades meet the code, are incorporated into, are considered just the first phase of a renovation program, then I guess it wouldn't be to the same degree of loss, but I'm not prepared to, from what I know, make a determination as to whether or not that's a good investment.

But if we're going to spend $3.5 million to increase or extend the life of a building by two to four years and then tear that building down, I'm embarrassed, and I think the whole government should be embarrassed by such a plan. I thought earlier today I could sit down and say $3.5 million equals this and this and this to put this in perspective, but we all know we don't need to do that. Three-point-five million dollars is a lot of money and it equates to a lot of infrastructure on the ground, or a lot of government positions, or a lot of assistants in our classrooms and our education system. I mean, it's quite unthinkable that we could waste this kind of money. So I will be letting other Members speak to this, obviously, but I'm going to put forward a motion to delete this and ask PWS and the Department of Education to come back with an alternative plan. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, ultimately this House has the authority to direct us as it feels is the most appropriate action to take. Ultimately, as I said yesterday, there is no capital money in the budget to deal with Deh Cho Hall and that plan, even with this approval to do some renovations to keep it useable for the time being while we look at, as we've directed, the replacement of this facility, that plan would then have to go into the business plan process. The capital plan would then go before committee. If committee feels that renovation is the most appropriate means, then we would take that direction and go with the direction of the House. If committee wants to delete this, then so be it. We'll have to come up with another plan as to what we do. Ultimately without this money approved, we will miss the deadline we have. The next session we have is October. Even for coming back with a plan, an alternate plan, we don't have the authority to expend any money on this facility at this time. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Next I have Mr. Braden.