Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Premier, Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm glad to hear the Member has a sense of humour and I certainly hopes he takes up the offer to come to the opening.

Mr. Speaker, I don't know what happened. I think the Member has convinced himself that there's some devious plan here and that the cost to consumers has gone up. Well, he's listening to himself too much.

---Laughter

Mr. Speaker, let me say again, let me say the cost to consumers, the cost to industry, is $6 a tonne based on 2002 dollars, or $6.75 per tonne. It doesn't matter what the total cost of the bridge is. That's how much it's going to cost those who use it. It's $6.75. It doesn't matter what the total cost is. Mr. Speaker, the balance is paid for by others. Let me explain that again. It's $6.75 a tonne to consumers. There was a report done by the co-op stores and others in 2002 saying this is a savings. That remains.

Mr. Speaker, the other money that goes into it, we, as a government, are putting the costs for operating the ferry and the costs for building and maintaining the ice road into the pool of money to pay for this bridge. That will go in annually. That is indexed, as is the $6.75.

Mr. Speaker, in addition to that, the federal government are putting a little bit of money right now through the Aboriginal Business Development Corporation. They are also considering the P3 money and we hope they provide that. In the event that they don't provide that, the government, out of our increased fiscal resources, are putting up to $2 million in to pay for our additional costs to balance it out. So this doesn't go directly on the backs of consumers. Mr. Speaker, how much is that $2 million worth? Well, if you took 25,000 people living north of the river, then that's roughly $80 a person per year, but you can't do it that simply because there's also the benefit to the mines. So that $2 million could be argued it costs somebody something, but it's going to be marginal, Mr. Speaker, but that's the only piece that's in addition to what was there in 2002. It's still the $6 in 2002 dollars, Mr. Speaker. It's very simple. It's easy. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Yes, I thank the Premier for his economics lesson, Mr. Speaker, but the problem is, and the fact remains, that the last cost-benefit analysis that was done on the project was done in 2002 at 60 to 70 million dollars. The project has more than doubled in price. The totals were, at the time, $4.50 to $5 a tonne, that's what the cost benefit analysis was based on in 2002. Totals now are going to be $6.75 a tonne. All I'm asking, Mr. Speaker, is where is the evidence? If the Premier can stand up here today and say that that is in fact the truth, show us. I haven't seen anything that would indicate that prices aren't going to increase here in Yellowknife. The reason why is because the government, now that the project has changed in scope, hasn't gone back out to the transportation companies, hasn't gone back out to industry, hasn't gone back out to the chambers of commerce, hasn't gone back out to the municipalities. That's why, Mr. Speaker. So where is the evidence? Where is the proof? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We don't have to go back to the trucking companies or the industry again. It's still the same amount as we said it was in 2002 indexed. So that $6 is now $6.75 or so. By the time the bridge is built in 2010 it will be something different. That's the same deal that was offered to the industry and trucking companies in 2002. It's still the same deal. Mr. Speaker, it's very simple. It's not hard to figure out.

What has the cost of the total project gone up? Well, there was a presentation done to the committee on it. I can give the Member another copy of it if he wants to take another look. If he wants to come to my office, I'll lead him through it. Mr. Speaker, if the whole committee wants to come to my office, I'll do it with the whole committee, but, Mr. Speaker, we know the cost has gone up. We also know that the population's gone up; we know that there are now soon to be three diamond mines operating north of the river; they've gone underground; they're using more fuel. There's lots of reasons why or how there's going to be the dollars to pay for the bridge. There's more tonnage going over that bridge than we ever expected. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

The question is leaning a bit toward asking the Premier's opinion on something, but I'm going to allow the question if the Premier is willing to answer it. I'll put the question to the Premier. The honourable Premier.

Mr. Speaker, I'll answer in a general way. Up to now and including the time when the financing is in place for the bridge for the bridge corporation, then the GNWT has been up-fronting the costs. We have taken out a loan in advance of it, but that will be recouped once the bridge is built. All of the costs are to be borne by the operation of the bridge, and, Mr. Speaker, I'd venture to say that includes any liabilities, would be borne by the Bridge Corporation and would be paid for out of their profits from operating the bridge. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Final supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess just a follow-up question to that. Who is currently paying the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation's legal fees, Mr. Speaker? Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think I already answered that one, but the GNWT has loaned the Bridge Corporation money to pay all of their costs up to now and will continue to do that to the point that the financing is in place for the bridge. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Oral questions. The honourable Member from Inuvik Twin Lakes, Mr. McLeod.