That's a good project, so is Highway No. 6. So has every Member from Nunakput since I've been here raised the issue about the highway to Tuk or fixing up the Dempster Highway. So yes, we have, as we all seek now, far more projects than we have resources. So I know maybe the Dempster is not good for Yellowknife directly, but it's good for the rest of the Northwest Territories.

So, Mr. Speaker, I would support this motion and it is an issue of lifting the shroud of darkness and veil of uncertainty, if not darkness, that currently seems to hang over this project and it's a case most fundamentally of due diligence. So I will be supporting this motion.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. To the amended motion. The honourable Member from Great Slave, Mr. Braden.

Tough acts to follow, Mr. Speaker, but I'll get in here and do my bit at bat here. There's almost a theatrical, dramatic element to this and a question that we can put to ourselves, Mr. Speaker, to bridge or not to bridge?

---Laughter

There's the rub. I've been 43 years living in Yellowknife and in the North, Mr. Speaker. I've seen several versions of this movie. They've all had the same sad, sorry, no-go ending and it's about time now that we can change the ending of this story.

---Applause

I can't imagine a better time for us to endeavour to do this. Four years ago, in fact almost to the day, Mr. Chairman, it was June 12, 2003, four years ago that the Deh Cho Bridge Act passed in here and I was happy to be one of the people to support it then. So we tried to rewrite the ending of the story then and it's before us, not the bill of course, but the same nagging, lingering questions. Gee, can we really do it? Yes - we - can.

---Applause

Why should we go ahead? If we don't stop saying, as my colleague here -- maybe that didn't pick up on the mic -- Mr. Miltenberger said. the little engine that can. We are. If we don't believe we're the little engine that can, then what are we doing here?

--Applause

We've got to get this one going. Mr. Speaker, the colours that I wear federally are no secret to this House, but I must say that I have got....

---Interjection

Careful. I must say I have some confidence in what we have heard from Ottawa...

---Interjection

Thank you very much.

---Laughter

...in the financing proposals. They are ideas, they aren't nailed down yet but they are ideas that have been put out there that will indeed enable Ottawa to come to the table for this project.

I asked the question a little while ago and my colleague Ms. Lee referenced the other visionary transportation projects that are before us now. One is a port and road project that would come down from the North that would, in effect, bypass the infrastructure we already have here. What would be seriously threatened if the signal that went up from this Assembly is we don't know about investing in this very significant piece of infrastructure across the Deh Cho River? So if we start rewriting another bad ending to this story, that's the signal we are going to be putting out. We are going to compromise this and my colleagues from north of Yellowknife or the North Slave region, the Tlicho, what chances are they going to get of roads that will connect to communities? We had better send a signal out to industry and the rest of Canada that we believe in ourselves, we believe in the future and this is one way of showing it.

---Applause

Mr. Speaker, I am more and more concerned about the environment conditions, climate change, that is going to erode the predictability, the security and the stability of the Mackenzie River crossing. We are facing more frequent, more surprised interruptions because of low water, because of ice conditions, combinations that are spilling, if not at least a nuisance and inconvenience, they are someday going to pose real hardship for the economy of this whole region as well as the safety of the travelling public and the crews on the Merv Hardie ferry. We may be compelled, for reasons beyond economics, to make sure there is that 24/7 connection.

Mr. Speaker, the mines are going to pay for this bridge. We are blessed to have that resource there and those

companies there that we will be able to put to work to pay for this bridge. If that bridge had been in place now with the toll structure that we know of, somewhere in the neighbourhood of $2.5 million would have been collected this winter, Mr. Speaker, $2.5 million this winter from the traffic that went up to supply the mines.

I recently read that I think by 2012, something like 14,000 truckloads of material are going to be required compared to the 10,000 that went up this year. How much more in fees are we going to collect? Mr. Speaker, every year that that bridge is not built is that much revenue that is not going to be coming back into this project. Let's build it now.

---Interjection

Mr. Speaker. I am not going to support this motion. I do believe though in putting it forward, my colleague Mr. Ramsay and those who are supporting it, were putting something constructive on the floor here, Mr. Speaker. That is that the information requested in the motion is nothing more than four years ago in the debate. Okay, I'm getting there. The government should be very forthcoming in saying we will present the revised analysis. We will present the revised risk situations, the revised traffic numbers. Here is what we are willing to put in front of people. That has to be something that the government, at its peril, will not present to this Assembly and indeed to the public of the Northwest Territories.

Mr. Speaker, there is one part of the bill or of the motion that I do find troubling and it's on this basis that I find I cannot support it. The motion recommends that the government not enter into a binding agreement committing it to the Deh Cho project until it has provided Regular Members and the public with said information. If we say we do not want you to enter into a binding agreement until you have shown us the information, that still doesn't give us a veto or a say. The bill doesn't ask for that, but the signal that this motion sends out, Mr. Speaker, to financiers, to constructors, to regulators or anyone else involved in this project, is that we are putting it on hold again. We are putting it at political risk because of the upcoming election.

We need to keep the mandate alive for the government to continue to make this deal, but as I said and I want to underscore this very clearly and as emphatically as I can, we are old. Those new revisions, those new levels of risk that the government feels it can and should undertake on our behalf for this project. Do this and I think we will be able to proceed with confidence. But I am not prepared, Mr. Speaker, to ask the government, in effect, to put a stall on this project. I want to rewrite some history and I am not prepared to revisit the story that we've seen time and time again, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Braden. To the amended motion. The honourable Member for Monfwi, Mr. Lafferty.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker...(English not provided)

Mr. Speaker, in summary of what I said, this whole purpose of the motion that's in front of us, I think it has to do with transparency and accountability. They've talked about this bridge for a number of years. Even when I came on board two years ago, I hadn't really heard of the bridge project. I heard it may happen depending on federal funding. If federal funding comes in, then make a move on it. All of a sudden, we are in the 11th hour and boom, boom, boom, we want to build this bridge.

At the same time, Mr. Speaker, we have to consult with our neighbouring groups. We have to consult with the Tlicho Government that are impacted with this as well. Over and over, we talked about the all-weather road, a road to resources, the road to Tuk. Those are key important issues in our region. In three or four weeks, the ferry is not running. We have survived how many years now? I am sure we could survive another thousand years.

I am not saying I do not support the bridge, but we have to get our priorities straight first. That means we have to serve our communities. We must do this together as our elders have stressed over and over every time we go to the community; work together. Have BLT in our community; bannock, lard and tea. Just face to face, let's jump on board, open the door to the big bus that you guys are travelling on. You got lots of room on there. We need to share the information.

All we are asking for is transparency. Give us some documentation that's been outlined here. Once you do that, consult with our neighbouring groups, get their input. What does an elder think in Behchoko? What does an elder think in Whati? As Ms. Lee indicated, we see more people in the community here when the ferry is running or when there is a bridge in, but at the same time we will see even more people come in when there is an all-weather road. We will see more people at Tim Horton's, Wal-Mart, all those stores. They will certainly benefit. Even my colleagues down south, they will benefit as well. Those are key areas that we need to focus on.

I would just like to close off, Mr. Speaker, and that is that we definitely need to share information and move forward. We are sitting here waiting for information. Apparently the bus is starting over there, we need to jump on board. Let's work together. Mahsi.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. To the motion, as amended. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, like all my other colleagues here, probably every single one in this building would believe that good infrastructure is critical. It's important to the growth of the Northwest Territories as a whole. It's good for the people. It's good for the people, it's good for business, it's good for everything. Mr. Speaker, just like the road to Tuk someday, just like the bridges and roads in the Sahtu and maybe the roads that link the Tlicho communities, good infrastructure to Yellowknife such as a bridge is a significant step forward for everyone. Mr. Speaker, I am absolutely behind the principles of the bridge; absolutely.

Let's put it this way. The fact is, I think we have Members here who are refusing to read the motion. Mr. Speaker, the motion does not derail the motion in any step, in any

method. It does not stop this in any way. What it actually says is let's get some updated information. It says tell us what it's going to cost before we build it. Don't worry; don't tell us you will send us a bill later. Mr. Speaker, if we are talking about a $100 bill cost, maybe I could believe blind faith. Maybe if we were talking about a $1,000 project, I may be able to accept it on blind faith. But, Mr. Speaker, when we are talking about a multi-million dollar project, I want us to ensure that we give the same amount of scrutiny we give to every one of those schools, every one of those RCMP centres, every one of those roads we plan to build. Mr. Speaker, we need to read this motion very carefully and it says all you have to do is bring the information to us. Then we will look at it. Mr. Speaker, we just want a hard number to know what we are talking about. Blind faith only works so far, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, blind faith will allow me to step over a puddle and hope that I won't fall in, but blind faith will not lead me to jump across this river and help support building this bridge without knowing what it's going to cost, Mr. Speaker. I don't think any Member here can accept, well don't worry, we will fill in the number later on the contract.

---Interjection

Well, I can't imagine anyone here is foolish enough to think that. Mr. Speaker, there is no blank cheque support from me on this project until we know what it's going to cost. Mr. Speaker, if we can say we knew what it cost five years ago, that is completely unacceptable because Cabinet comes to us practically every month and says by the way, this project costs more than it did last year or last month and by the way, we need an extra 10 or 15 percent. You know what? It doesn't erode the fact that it's an important piece of infrastructure. It just further casts into concrete how important it is to get a real fixed dollar number on this project and then we can decide, is that number, if it's $130 million, we can handle that debate and say is that acceptable? Maybe it is. If it's $140 million, we need to have that number to say is that acceptable? Is it acceptable to put the coffers and the people in the Northwest Territories at risk for that type of value? Is it acceptable? So, Mr. Speaker, I won't talk as long as many of my other colleagues did...

---Applause

I will tell you, it was painful sitting here listening...

---Laughter

We promised to come here and not accept things just at any cost. Mr. Speaker, we can't accept this just at any cost in blind faith without having the sense of what this is going to cost. I think it is totally irresponsible of us to just assume it will be okay. Mr. Speaker, I do not assume it will be okay and I am not going to assume the federal government is going to come behind us and sweep up and say don't worry, we will cover the shortfall. We need to have a comfort letter from Ottawa. We need to have a comfort letter, heck, from Cabinet. That could be just in the fact of what it's really going to cost.

Mr. Speaker, in closing, I want to make it absolutely clear that I am in support of the bridge, the principles of the bridge, but, Mr. Speaker, I cannot accept in blind faith to build the project without at least some facts of what it's going to cost. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. To the motion, as amended. The honourable Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes, Mr. McLeod.