All those opposed, please rise.

Any abstentions? The motion is defeated. Seven in favour of the motion, ten against, no abstentions.

Committee motion not carried.

We’re dealing with Justice, appropriations authority required: $1,610,000.

Justice, $1,610 million, approved.

Education, Culture and Employment, appropriation authority required: $21,626,000.

Mr. Chairman, the project is scheduled to continue. The piles are scheduled for the fall of 2008, with panel construction to be completed by 2012. That’s on both facilities. The complex facilities are both adjoining each other.

The work or the review… .The cash flow has changed, as the Member stated, from ’08-’09 to ’09-’10, because that is a reflection of the work that they will be able to get completed. So the work is still proceeding. But from where they are today, they would not be able to complete as much of the work as they had scheduled.

The construction is continuing. It has not been delayed for a year, and nothing happened. They are still going to be working on the project, but it is taking a little longer to get the work done.

I would like to ask the Minister. My understanding was that construction was supposed to start this summer. I think that was the understanding of the residents of Inuvik. I would like to ask him: why it was delayed for so long? Is it because of the planning?

I think the people of Inuvik have done their part. They put in their input.

Is it because we’re faced with a $135 million shortfall that we move it into next year? We all had the understanding that the piles would be in this winter for construction to begin this summer. That’s the reason our whole recreational area for children

and adults alike was torn up. Now, if they’re doing the piles next fall, then we live a whole summer with a torn-up recreational area. I’d like to ask the Minister: why was it delayed to have the piles laid this fall?

As to the work, there have been ongoing meetings between the Department of Education, Culture and Employment, the consultant they’ve hired, as well as the District Education Council and the authority, along with other parties within the community, about the work that is progressing. For the actual detail I can have Minister Lafferty, as the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment…. Maybe he’ll give more detail than I can provide at this time.

The work is still continuing. As the Member indicated, we are still at the planning stages. The design development is scheduled for March 2008. That’s in the works. Site grading, drainage and ball-field work will continue in the spring and summer of 2008. So there is work scheduled for this summer and fall. The site work is scheduled to be complete in the summer of 2008.

The Member indicated it had something to do with an announcement. No, it doesn’t. The announcement of the $135 million that he referred to…. These two projects have been on the books. We are continuing with the project. Both our department and the community have met with PWS as well, in Inuvik on January 24. We did a presentation to them on the actual current status of where we’re at.

We are making progress to move forward on this. We certainly wouldn’t want to see this project on hold. We are making progress and proceeding with it. Mahsi, Mr. Chair.

Given the reality of the budget reductions we’re facing and all of those types of things, when I look at Education, Culture and Employment, I wonder why the government is moving forward with renovations on Lahm Ridge Tower. That building had over $900,000 worth of renovations done to it since 2002–2003. Given that we are facing these budget reductions, I’m not quite sure why we have to do another renovation to a building that appears to have been renovated on a fairly regular basis. I’ve been into a lot of the different buildings, a lot of different times, and I was always struck by how nice Lahm Ridge Tower looked inside and how well put-together it was.

My question is: why are we renovating a building that seems to be renovated on a fairly regular basis?

Mr. Chairman, I would have to go to the Minister of EC&E for detail on the plans for this facility.

Mr. Chair, this particular item we’re referring to is a renovation to the existing building we’re in. ECE has occupied that building for almost 20 years without any significant renovations.

The renovations are to meet the immediate needs of the staff. That has been identified by the department, and construction is scheduled for summer of 2008. So with ’08–09, $80,000 been requested to upgrade the facility that we currently occupy. Mahsi.

I guess I don’t quite understand what the definition of significant renovations is. I mean, in 2002–2003 they redid that entire basement. It’s quite nice. It’s got one of the largest boardrooms in it, completely rigged out: nice tables, everything. It looks fantastic. I think that cost about $300,000 and some.

I know they’ve done a lot of work on the second floor. You go into the main floor where the student financial assistance is. It’s quite nice in there. They’ve got all the fancy new desks, and they’ve got a whole new area set up for their computer people. It looks pretty good every time I go in there. It’s put together quite nicely. The third floor was renovated a couple of years ago, as well. They’ve put over $900,000 in renovations into that building since 2002-2003, so I’m kind of surprised by the comment that it has had no significant renovations.

I’d be curious about what it is they’re doing and why in times of cuts we need to keep moving forward and buying fancy new desks and making buildings look fantastic and pretty, when all they have to be is functional and usable. It seems a little odd, so I guess my question is: what do they have to do that is different than what they’ve done since 2002-2003, 2003-2004, and on and on and on? They’ve done renovations in that building almost every year.

The Minister of Education, Mr. Lafferty.

Mr. Chair, I don’t have the specific details of all the previous renovations that have taken place. Our department would have that information, but I don’t have that detailed information in front of me.

No comments? I have Mr. Ramsay on the list.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to talk a little bit about École St. Joseph and the renovation project.

In prior years we approved $9.2 million, and I see that it’s off the books. It’s not included in the proposed Infrastructure Acquisition Plan. I have some issue with that.

We’ve talked a lot about our acquisition planning process and how that’s messed up. There’s a cabinet committee now struck to try to look into revamping that capital acquisition planning process. I think that’s a good thing. If there was ever a reason why, this is it. I feel quite strongly about this one. Because it’s one thing if our planning process is a mess, but when that mess impacts other people, that’s where I have a big issue with that. This just was not right.

I’ve met with the school board officials, and they were under one impression. Obviously it wasn’t the right impression, and there’s no money in ’08-09 for that school. I’m just curious to know when the department was going to let them know. The communication on this has just been terrible.

Again, that’s a question for the Minister. I’d like to know when they told them there was no money in ’08-’09. They had told them subsequently to that. Initially they went out and did the work. I think that’s part of what the $9.2 million was spent on: going out and doing the work that was needed to be done to look at the renovation project. They came back with a figure. I’m not going to get into the figures right now, but the figure was too high. The department comes back to them and says: “Well, you’ve got to do it for this much.” They go out, and they’re scurrying around trying to make the project fit into what the department said they had. They go out and do that work, and surprise, surprise: it’s out of the budget in ’08-09.

Maybe a question to the Minister on the communication side: how did they communicate that to school boards when they yanked projects out for a year?

The Minister of Finance, Mr. Roland.

Mr. Chairman, I’ll give you some background to this, and then I’ll pass it on to Minister Lafferty for some additional information.

This project, as the Member has pointed out, has been on the books. Some work was started on some of the schematic design, and the work between the department and the authority involved in this specific area. There was a fire in August 2006, and work was undertaken between the department and the authority at that time. They came up with a fix that has relieved some of the pressures for the time being, and the department has looked at dealing with the project in ’09-’10, instead of in ’08-‘09. Minister Lafferty may have more detail as to that communication process.

The Minister of

Education, Mr. Lafferty.

Mr. Chair, that particular item has been discussed, not in detail, but the general discussion was that the Catholic school board…. I was invited from the department’s perspective, met with them and talked about St. Joe’s, where it’s heading. At that time I couldn’t share the detailed information, because we were still discussing it as a cabinet.

But the Catholic school board is willing to come back to the table and work with our department. If the cost is higher than what the Member has just indicated, then the board is willing to work with us to identify a consultant to pursue other options. That is currently being discussed by our department with the school board — the particular item. It is still an ongoing discussion between both parties. Mahsi.

I’m just wondering, in this process we have, how we would arrive at a figure of $41.5 million for the renovations at ’École St. Joseph. Is that just a number we pull out of thin air, or who does the estimation for that? Do we work with the school board in trying to determine what that number is, what it should be, how you get there? To me, it’s like you might as well just reach into the sky and yank a number out and put it on paper, because this number is nowhere near what was proposed before, Mr. Chairman.

Again, I just want to ask: how do we arrive at these numbers?