I wholeheartedly endorse the earlier comments of the Member of Weledeh, and I'd like to follow up on his statement. Consider us a tag team, if you will, at a wrestling match.

This question is addressed to either the Minister of Finance or the Minister of MACA, as they choose.

Considering the huge impact on our environment that abandoned mine sites have and considering the financial impact that mine cleanups have on the government’s financial bottom line, why do we not yet have a legislative or regulatory mechanism in place to ensure financial security for the G.N.W.T. in respect to mining and other land leases?

I'd like to remind Members to direct their question to one Minister, and then it will be up to the Executive to decide.

I will go to the Premier, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I’m looking for maybe a bit of clarification on whether it’s in the area of securities or a taxation system on leases. For example, on the taxation side of leases outside of municipalities, on Commissioner’s Land, we are looking at what we call PATA, and that is the Property Assessment and Taxation Act. We're looking at that for review during the life of this Assembly, to bring it back with potential changes that may be able to incorporate that piece of it.

There are other sections, within our jurisdiction or the federal jurisdiction, that attach costs that have to be set aside in trust funds, for example, for that type of remediation. And yes, we have learned from the past: for example, the Giant Mine, where we have now had to book some liability, along with the federal government, in those areas.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My apologies for my previous misstep.

The reference is to the Commissioner’s Land Act. It’s not the Property Assessment and Taxation Act to which we refer.

Mines without financial security are often abandoned, and the cleanup then reverts to either the federal government or the Territorial government. Giant Mine is, unfortunately, an excellent example.

What is required is a small change to the Commissioner’s Land Act to require companies that are leasing land from G.N.W.T. to provide financial security. This change can be a huge motivator to industry to respect the environment.

When such a small change can have such a big effect, can the Minister advise when the security will be put in place through an amendment to the act? We have three years, or a little bit more, left in our reign. Let’s get it done.

I'm aware that the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs has, in fact, looked at the specific piece and has reviewed a draft, so that work is underway. They would be prepared, once they’ve come up with a draft, to sit down with Committee at the appropriate time.

That's extremely good news. I like to hear that.

I would ask the Minister if he could provide us with some kind of timeframe. Are we talking six months,

are we talking a year, are we talking four years, or are we talking the next Assembly?

One of the works we look into, as an overall government, is the legislative agenda, and seeing what, on that agenda, is a list of priorities. The Government House Leader has been pulling that together and shared a version of that with Committee and would seek input as to whether we should continue to pursue certain initiatives or add some of them. It includes timelines.

I’m also aware that a specific piece MACA is working on is dealing with all commercial leases — not just for mining, but all across the Territories.

My question is for the Premier. It is in regard to his comments yesterday to Mr. Hawkins. It was an example that he used for vacancies. Through that exercise we would become aware of vacancies which are out there, but it would also be an easy way to look at the direct impact on individuals.

We also have to realize that there is a direct impact on communities that have these vacant positions and haven’t been able to have the basic programs and services delivered in their communities. I hope what I heard from the Premier is not that we’re going to add more pain to the communities by way of not allowing them to have basic programs and services by way of mental health workers, alcohol and drug workers, income support workers — you name it. A lot of our communities don’t even have the basic programs.

I would like to ask the Premier to make it clear to the public that they are not going to be cutting essential services to communities where there are none, where we’re trying to fill vacant positions.

One of the things we’re operating by as the 16th Legislative Assembly, and

the work we’re doing around the financial aspects and looking for reinvestments and savings, is we align with the goals we’ve set. One of our goals is sustainable, vibrant, safe communities. What we would look at in general is…. Vacant positions would be an easier process, but we still have to go back and align with the initiatives we’re trying to establish as the 16th Assembly. When we focus on

those initiatives, if there are vacant positions that align themselves with that and help us deliver those programs, they wouldn’t just be an automatic pull-off-the-shelf.

There are a number of activities we can align ourselves with, whether it is vacant positions that don’t align with our priorities that we’ve had a difficult time fulfilling, as well as, for example,

retirements that are occurring. We could time this, as well, in a whole number of ways, and we’re looking for how we would do that.

In light of the area where I believe we do have to cut, I also recall that coming into the 13th Assembly, we had some 4,500 employees in the Government of the Northwest Territories, which included Nunavut. Now we have almost 6,000 employees in the Government of the Northwest Territories, which is almost double the number of people in the public service, yet there are 3,000 employees here in Yellowknife.

I would just like to make it clear to the Premier that we are still suffering in the communities because of what happened in the 13th Assembly. We’ve never

been able to catch up with the number of vacancies and the challenges we face. We are having to hire nurses from down south to come in and work shift work, costing us double the cost of trying to put people in communities.

I’d like to ask Premier again that if any cuts take place, they do take place where the growth has happened and not in communities.

As I’ve stated earlier, this is going to be a broad approach. We’re looking at all departments. The larger your budget is, the larger portion will be looked at just for the fact that that’s where the budget is. We are going through an exercise that will look at the strategic initiatives that we’ve set as the 16th Legislative Assembly. We’re

going to look for opportunities to re-profile, to make better use of the dollars we do spend. We’re going to have to live within the financial cap we have with a billion-dollar expenditure.

As the Member pointed out…. He mentioned 6,000, but when you look at permanent employees or casual employees, we’re around 5,400 employees within the G.N.W.T. Those are areas from the program-delivery side that we’ll have to look at. We’re going to come out with a balanced approach that Members will look at and will be able to work with us on if we’re heading down the right path or not.

I’d like to ask the Premier if there have been commitments made by Ministers to particular communities on issues. I was with the Minister of Health in Tsiigehtchic. They’re trying to get a nurse as the community hasn’t had one for four years, and they’re also looking at a mental health physician for that community.

I’d like to get some assurance from the Premier that if there are any commitments made by Ministers to communities, to try to ensure they fill those vacant positions, that they don’t come back now and say, “Sorry, we’re not committed to that.” I’d like to get some assurance that those commitments will be lived up to.

Mr. Speaker, again, as we begin laying out the plan we have for the 16th Assembly, targeting areas where we want reinvestment, areas that we want to re-prioritize, those activities will occur. Ministers who make commitments need to align their commitments with that plan. I would say if Ministers are making commitments that don’t fit with that plan, they’re going to have to justify to this House and Members why that commitment was made and not honoured.

Mr. Speaker, I’d like to ask the Premier if he has a system in place to notify affected MLAs if there are going to be any vacancies in their ridings by way of positions. Then we can be informed ahead of time, and we will be able to react to our constituents when they find out there are notices given or that positions are going to be removed from our constituencies.

We’re going to work in a way that is respectful for Members as well as for employees when we do make decisions on what positions may be affected. We’re going to work in that environment, where we’re working in a transparent forum. We definitely don’t want Members to walk back to their communities when a decision has been made and you’re approached by people who you’re not aware have been affected. We are going to try to do business differently. Even with that, we’re coming back to this House, to Members, for input, so you’ll be aware of the changes that are going to take place.

Mr. Speaker, I’m getting really tired of talking about the Deh Cho Bridge. I think the Premier is probably getting tired of talking about it too. So I’m going to start asking my questions of the Auditor General, instead of him.

But just one more set of questions for him, first.

Laughter.

Mr. Speaker, does the Premier support and will his cabinet co-operate with a whole disclosure to the Auditor General of Canada of the correspondence and documents related to the Deh Cho Bridge project for an independent review?

Mr. Speaker, we are co-operating with the Office of the Auditor General. This issue came up as a result of the review of our public accounts, which happens normally between January and February. This loan guarantee was asked about, and they’ve asked us different questions. We’ve been working to provide additional information, and we’ll work co-operatively with her office.

Mr. Speaker, since that information won’t be received and reviewed and dealt with overnight and there’s going to be some time lapse here, I’d like to ask the Premier: are there any other significant dates and milestones related to our government’s participation in the Deh Cho Bridge project that are still yet to come and that we should know about?

Mr. Speaker, the significant time frames for our government have come to pass in the sense of the extension that was granted through the banking institution on the loan guarantee, as well as the lending of the dollars for the bridge corporation. The one aspect is, as we are informed, the lawyers are doing their work to dot the i’s and cross the t’s. If it were to come back to this table and require any change, then that’s when it would come back to our table.

If any deficiencies are identified by the legal review and the dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s, as the Premier has said, and any decision comes back to our government, could the Premier share with us what his reaction would be, at that time, to a request for an extension or any other kind of concession regarding this project on behalf of our government?

Mr. Speaker, we’re entering the area of “what if something happened.” My position, as I put out to Members, is that with any changes to what we are involved with — for example, the requirement for an extensive loan guarantee, a change to a concession agreement — I would come back to Members and seek their input prior to making that decision. I stand by that commitment.

Back to my question about any significant dates or milestones. Is there a time frame around that final scrutiny of that legal document? Is there a date by which it won't go any further?

We've been informed by the parties that the lawyers require until the third week of February — February 22, in and around that time frame — to sign off the final document. And again, if there are no changes that affect our side of the equation, it’s a go. The only reason it would come back is if they try to renegotiate a portion of that. Then it would come back to our table. If they go ahead and sign the deal, as do the banks and the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation, the process is underway.