I seem to recall that clearly, but okay; I will accept that.

Mr. Chairman, with classroom size has there been a change between the old, typical design of classroom size per square foot to a modern size design? Therefore, if we go to a wholly full-fledged new school, in theory, would the school be smaller because of the new standardization of designs in comparison to renovating the existing school?

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My understanding is, as we are talking about a renovation…. I’m not aware that we’re talking about a new school at this point.

I’m just trying to seek clarity in the area that we have an existing project that needs to be renovated, which I do support, and the motion falls from heaven today, and I’ll certainly be behind it.

That said, I just want to be clear that if Hay River were to get a new high school on that formula, I’m just trying to get a sense of the old “it’s better to renovate versus build new.” I was always under the understanding that if you renovate existing — typically a lot of our schools are fairly old, but they have large classrooms, working spaces, et cetera — you’d be able to retain those spaces. I was under the understanding that if you went new, there is a standardized size for programming space, and it’s smaller, if I understand that correctly. Would the

Minister be able to clarify that in that particular scenario that is the case?

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Aumond.

Are those standards typically smaller than from the deputy minister’s experience from older schools to modern schools?

Thank you, Mr. Aumond. Next on my list is Mr. Bromley.

Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to follow up on my first line of questioning, for which I benefited from the questions and responses from my colleagues and the Ministers involved. Given the expected completion date of the education plan — two weeks from today, as we have heard twice from the Minister of Education — and given that Public Works and Services is ready to start their planning right away, as we’ve heard from Mr. Aumond, and assuming that there will be some obvious renos that could be done that are either not affected or minimally affected by the education plan, can we at least assume that substantive work could start in the following fiscal year; that is, ’10–11?

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Miltenberger.

Yes, Mr. Chairman, 2010–2011 is the plan for construction to start.

I am just looking at some numbers, which I’m not going to cite, that were provided, I believe, by the Ministers involved here and that indicate substantive work is not really scheduled to start until ’11–12. Perhaps I could say: can we expect that given the conditions that I’ve stated, the

degree of work scheduled for ’11–12 could actually be done in 2010–2011?

The Member is asking me to speculate on hypotheticals, but the Minister of Public Works and Services indicated that if it all goes well — and we hit every step and everything is done on time — there could be an opportunity to do things at an accelerated rate.

That is good to hear. Perhaps it would be the Minister of Public Works and Services…. I don’t know, but could I hear some better definition of “accelerated rate” than just leaving it completely open?

I thought accelerated rate was very clear, but I’ll get the Minister of Public Works and Services to make it even clearer.

Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Minister Michael McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The rationale for not moving forward on this project is because it wasn’t ready to start construction as we had initially planned, because there was a functional review of the facility that would include some enhancement and some renovations and things of that nature.

We are still quite keen to move ahead with this project. We still think that it is of high priority. The Department of Education is moving forward with their functional review. We expect to do the design. We will put emphasis on getting the design done, and I can certainly commit that I will take it to FMB for consideration as soon as we have all the pieces together.

Right now we are not in a position to do that. The project is not ready for approval, because we don’t have all the parts — all the pieces, all the design, all the planning — that needs to be done. However, if we can get this thing put together, the intention is not to hold this project back. The intention was to defer it until we could get all necessary parts of this so that we can get approval. I certainly can commit to bring it to the Department of Finance, the Finance Minister and FMB for consideration, if it’s ready prior to what we had initially planned. Up to now we have figured it would take all of this year to get all that compiled.

Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Bromley.

Thanks.

Thank you, Mr.

Bromley. Next on my list is Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just to be very clear, certainly I’m in support of making sure that if we are going to have a midlife

retrofit on the Diamond Jenness Secondary School, it incorporates everything that we would like it to incorporate.

I’m not suggesting that we should take a band-aid and put it on a building and then close your eyes and cross your fingers and hope for the best for the next 35 years. I do want to see it incorporate all things. I’m just having a hard time accepting that from what I heard — when the Ministers, Education, Public Works and Services and everybody came down there, the deputies, and looked at that school — about high priority, red flag; “Let’s get on with it.” I have a hard time reconciling that to this being pushed back this far in the capital plans.

I’m encouraged to hear the Minister say that if the work gets concluded that needs to be concluded — the consultation, the design — in fact this government would be prepared to bring forward an expedited, fast tracked, accelerated version of this project. Second to this I hope that everybody in Hay River who might have a part to play in getting this project the kind of approvals and the kind of input you’re talking about is listening, because this is a very significant commitment that I’m hearing here today. We don’t want to be responsible for dragging our feet or slowing the process.

But I do want to ask about the financial implications of this. If this can be moved forward, are there any financial constraints that could see this project set back?

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Minister Miltenberger.