Brendan Bell on Question 404-15(5): Implementation Of The Mackenzie Gas Project Socio-economic Agreement

In the Legislative Assembly on February 22nd, 2007. See this statement in context.

Further Return To Question 404-15(5): Implementation Of The Mackenzie Gas Project Socio-economic Agreement
Question 404-15(5): Implementation Of The Mackenzie Gas Project Socio-economic Agreement
Item 6: Oral Questions

February 21st, 2007

Page 1122

Brendan Bell Yellowknife South

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would suggest that all our agreements are good and all meet the GNWT and I think the public interest objectives as laid out. Mr. Speaker, of course, they are different. This project is different. As I've indicated, very much a two or three-year construction window and then a tapering down into operations. With the mines, it's different. Open pit mining, obviously a number of people onsite for a continued period of time, Mr. Speaker. So they are different agreements, Mr. Speaker.

The other thing, as I've indicated, with Diavik, with BHP, with the De Beers agreement, we didn't have the federal government coming to the place with $500 million largely for socio-economic issues. So there are a number of other things going on. I think we need to see through that lens when analyzing and trying to compare the various different agreements that we have between government and industry. Thank you.

See context to find out what was said next.

Brendan Bell on Question 404-15(5): Implementation Of The Mackenzie Gas Project Socio-economic Agreement

Help us improve OpenNWT