Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Thank you to the visitors in the gallery.

Item 7, acknowledgements. Item 8, oral questions. Mr. McLeod.

Mr. Speaker, I also failed to mention before that I feel for the local agent in Inuvik, who is the first point of contact for a lot of people. He has to bring this extra cost to the consumer even though it’s out of his hands, too. I felt I needed to mention that.

I’d like to direct my line of questioning today to the Premier. I’d like to ask the Premier if there’s anything that this government can do to prevent the residents of Inuvik being burdened with the extra cost of trucking the fuel up.

The mandate we have as the Government of the Northwest Territories, when it comes to fuel supply, is to stay out of the private-market sector. In this particular case we did sit down and try to gather information as to what was happening and worked with the community in trying to get as much information as possible.

I understand and I respect the fact that we try to stay out of the private market. However, we still have an obligation to the residents of Inuvik who are being faced with this extra cost.

I’d like to ask the Premier if he would communicate with Esso and NTCL

the need to resolve this issue

without passing the extra costs on to the consumers of Inuvik. As I said before, it was pointing fingers back and forth, and that’s not my concern right now. My concern is protecting the residents of Inuvik. So would he communicate to these two companies the need to get this resolved without passing the extra costs on to the residents of Inuvik?

Mr. Speaker, we have gotten involved at the government level through our petroleum products, especially in Public Works and Services, which deals with fuel in communities that do not have a private-sector market. We’ve contacted them and raised concerns. The first piece is to ensure that the community had enough fuel supply for community needs, and we were informed that would be the case. When it comes to the marketing side and price structuring, they’ve not been prepared to have a discussion with us on that basis.

Mr. Speaker, earlier today I spoke about the problems in local housing organizations that public-housing tenants are experiencing since the transfer of the public housing rent subsidy from the N.W.T. Housing Corporation

to Education,

Culture and Employment. Although there is more than one department involved here, the main issue is the role of Income Security. However, I will be addressing my questions to the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.

Mr. Speaker, has the Minister completed a comprehensive review of the transfer of the public housing subsidy program from the N.W.T. Housing Corporation to the Department of Education, Culture and Employment?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the Member for asking that question. It has been an ongoing discussion for the last couple of years now. Yes, we have done a formal review of the program itself with the involvement of the N.W.T. Housing Corporation.

There are various components to the review. It’s a large project that we are undertaking, first with the complication with various parties — complications with our department and the N.W.T. Housing Corporation and also LHO frontline staff. We are proceeding with presenting the information package to the Social Programs Committee members within the next few days. Mahsi.

Can the Minister provide the cost of the transfer from the N.W.T. Housing Corporation to the Department of Education, Culture and Employment, including new positions, when the report is given to the Social Programs Committee?

On April 1 of 2006, we transferred the corporation to ECE, Education, Culture and Employment. At that time the dollar figure was $30 million to subsidize those programs, and out of that, we did receive an additional $1.3 million to administer the program. Out of that, 10.75 positions were transferred. Of that 10.75, three were placed in headquarters, and the remaining 7.5 were all located as client service officers throughout the Northwest Territories region. Mahsi.

Yesterday I was asking some questions in regard to the Deh Cho Bridge project and information about that project, and I wanted to continue on that line of questioning.

The first question I have…. Again, I alluded to the fact that there is a cost-benefit analysis now located on the Department of Transportation’s web site. I'm wondering if the Premier is aware of that, and whether in fact he is satisfied that the information contained in that cost-benefit analysis is worthy of the project going forward.

We were gathering all the information together to provide to committee, as committee had requested. I'm aware that Transportation had just recently posted that one report, and it is the second piece of that report. There was an additional report done when the project was first looked at, and that one is now out and will be part of the package I bring the Members.

As for the value of that report, it does show that there is still a benefit, though reduced as a result of the increased cost of that project.

Another question would be whether anybody on the other side of the House has actually read the cost-benefit analysis. I'd like to know that. The reason I'd like to know that is because in there it says that in 2003 we had a positive benefit on the bridge project of $39 million, and in 2007 that went to minus $50 million.

The Member is quoting from one piece of it. There are a number of categories that are highlighted in there. When you look at the actual community percentages, as I've stated, there is still a benefit in a number of factors. There is less of a benefit there from the first report to this one.

As the Member stated, it’s out there publicly. I would encourage people who are interested in this project to have a full read of that, and not just refer to the specific clips some Members like to use.

I think the Premier might be referring to the part of the cost-benefit analysis that, it would appear, the Department of Transportation wrote themselves, in terms of the benefits. Again, I'd like to ask the Premier: what was the basis for his government proceeding with the project? On what did they base their decision to move forward on the project?

We've inherited that project. The Member is asking what was the basis of the 16th Legislative Assembly. The fact is that this

project was established, the fiscal parameters were identified, and as a government we were in the position that as long as conditions of the concession agreement were met, it would be proceeding.

Final supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

We're in an exercise now where we're looking at reducing spending by $135 million

over two years, and we have signed on to a project that’s going to benefit us a net negative result of minus $50 million. I'm wondering again why this government would pick up where the last government left off and follow through on this project when it’s going to have a negative impact on the net fiscal reality here in the Northwest Territories.

Mr. Speaker, again I would encourage members of the public and those who are interested in this to read the full report as to the cost-benefit analysis. There are sections where, yes, that was reduced because of the increased cost of the project. But there is still a somewhat reduced area of benefit — but still a benefit — to a couple of the communities in the Northwest Territories, which provide for half the population of the Northwest Territories.

My question is for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.

As I mentioned in my Member’s statement, the N.W.T. Literacy Council works diligently to advance literacy and numeracy skills for N.W.T. residents, and in so doing is contributing to our overall economic and community growth. Can the Minister advise if the advancement of literacy and numeracy skills is a priority for his department?

Mr. Speaker, the literacy programs and projects in the community are an important factor for the Department of Education, Culture and Employment. We do continue to support these programs and organizations to make them a real success in our small communities and throughout the Northwest Territories. So, yes, we are supportive of these programs.

I’m very glad to hear the department is supportive of literacy and numeracy and advancing those skills. I thought I heard the Minister say there was funding support in there. Can the Minister confirm that funding for the N.W.T. Literacy Council will be multi-year funding indexed to inflation?

Mr. Speaker, we do provide funding to the N.W.T. Literacy Council on an annual basis. Last year we contributed $480,000, and this year we will continue funding that organization, because we certainly want to see some enhancement in the community. The department would like to see some positive results out of the community with respect to the community-based literacy programs. We will continue to support that initiative. Mahsi.

I don’t believe I heard the words “long-term” or “multi-year” in there. I wonder if the Minister could clarify, please.