Mr. Speaker, for the process of clarity, for the 16th Legislative Assembly, my offer
is to debate the fact that we support the Deh Cho Bridge proceeding.
I'm not willing to debate schedule by schedule. We've never done that with any other contract in the Government of the Northwest Territories — at least, that I recall in my days — on something like that.
I've sat down with committee. I've provided them with all the information that has been requested. Yes, there are some outstanding schedules. Those lists of schedules that were outstanding were provided to the Members as well.
Part of the duties we have — as we heard earlier, regarding another bundled project within the Government of the Northwest Territories — is if we're going to come to a very public forum and debate what business is put on the line, then what business would be ready to put its numbers on the table, knowing that it could be undermined by the next proposal that comes forward?
One of the issues, or primary functions, of government is the way we do business. The fact is, in a consensus-style government, when you talk to other jurisdictions — the budget process, the contracting issues — the opposition may raise an issue, but all they can do is make an argument that it was a bad decision, because the majority rules in all cases.
We know a majority doesn't rule. That's why, in this style of government, we share all the information we can, and that does, by fact of consensus, put all Members under the confidentiality of the rules we operate with. If we want to stick to that system of governance, then we must honour the processes that are in place.
I’m trying to do my part with this whole process, so I offered up the opportunity: as the 16th Legislative
Assembly, do we support this project or not? I’m not ready to go and debate line by line, as two of the Members would like to have done in this Assembly.