Mr. Speaker, the answer to that question, of course, is no, we’re not sole-sourcing.

Mr. Speaker, I am aware of this concern, and I have had discussions with the president. As we pull together the LHO chairs, the managers and district staff, as well as headquarters, and reorganize that there are a number of issues that are on our plate, to try to look at improvement, that concern is one of them.

Mr. Speaker, I’m sure that people are using our programs and services with NWT Housing Corporation. They really don’t have an avenue of appeal; in fact, they have to appeal right now to the person who ruled against them in the programs and services that they wanted. What existing avenues do they have currently?

Mr. Speaker, right now, as Minister, I communicate to this House and to the Member that I did a very steady stream of housing issues. They tend to go to MLAs; they tend to go to other elected officials. One of the areas that we think we can take a page from is income support. There’s a local appeal process as well as a Territorial one, so we don’t have to break new ground or reinvent the wheel here. It’s just a matter of making sure that we have all the checks and balances.

There’s something that’s been outstanding for quite some time. Is the Minister looking at instituting something this year? Mahsi.

We would anticipate something that we could come forward with and share with the committee. We know that once we conclude the May–June session, we’re going to be moving quickly into business plans. So this is one of the items on the to-do agenda, and I’d like to get to that in time for that secondary process.

I’d like to follow up on the statements about the voluntary sector that have been made by my colleagues. I was really pleased to hear the Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs state

that we need to take action to ensure that the volunteer sector stays strong. I’d like to ask the Minister: other than the N.W.T. Outstanding Volunteer Awards, what is MACA doing to strengthen the volunteer sector?

Mr. Speaker, we do a lot of work in the area of volunteering and volunteerism. Historically, we have worked very closely with Volunteer NWT. The decision of the federal government to pull the financing has made it very difficult for that organization. They are looking at ways to acquire some support and have had contact with us.

We have had a lot of discussion around that issue, looking at ways to maybe find outside sources or within our own government to help them. But we do, as the Member indicated, provide the volunteer awards program. We also provide through our department the Fire Service Merit Awards. Everybody knows that the firefighters in our communities are one of our key community resources. We also provide training for some of our volunteer organizations and fund some of the training opportunities for the staff. We’ve been lobbying Statistics Canada to have the N.W.T. included in the national surveys on volunteering. As I indicated earlier, we have provided some funding to Volunteer NWT. to develop their resources to promote volunteering. We’ve had workshops on volunteering in a lot of communities, and we’ve done a lot of research into funding opportunities, so there’s quite a bit.

We also work closely with other departments, FMBS. We’ve developed a guide for the program managers within government to further clarify the funding policies for NGOs and other volunteer organizations. And of course, one of our more popular programs is the Youth Ambassador Program for major games. It’s been quite a success with Canada Winter Games, and hopefully we’re going to see the same results with the Arctic Winter Games.

We also, for the last two years, have been bringing our sports volunteers to be recognized and attend the Chances for Children events, Mr. Speaker. We also have an ongoing communication, as I indicated, with Volunteer NWT.

I thank the Minister for that summary. I don’t mean to lessen the value of any of the things the Minister mentioned, but I don’t believe that those are working towards strengthening the sector; I think those are maintaining the sector. I’d like to know whether there are any specific actions the Minister is considering relative to the voluntary sector to help strengthen it.

I think the Member and all Members are aware we’re going under review at

this time to see where we can place emphasis on new investments, new initiatives, and also going through analysis of where things can be reduced. It would be difficult for me to say at this point, until those processes are done, whether or not we’d be able to be in a position to put more investments into this area of volunteerism.

The time for question period has expired. I’ll allow the Member a supplementary question.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As has been mentioned previously, the voluntary sector goes beyond the purview of Municipal and Community Affairs. It involves people in the health area; it involves people in the justice area; it involves people that cover all departments within our government. I would like to ask the Minister if he would give me an opinion, in his role as Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs, if he doesn’t believe that the centralization of the point of contact for the voluntary sector would be a benefit to that sector in them moving forward and accomplishing more for our volunteers.

The Member is asking for my opinion; I’d be glad to share it. In my opinion, anything that would enhance the issue of encouraging volunteerism or providing support to volunteerism, I would be in support of.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to seek unanimous consent to go back to item 7, oral questions.

The Member is seeking unanimous consent to return to item 7 on the Order Paper, oral questions.

Unanimous consent granted.

We will return to oral questions, item 7 on the Order Paper. Mr. Abernethy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m going to break from history here, and I’m going to ask the Minister of Transportation some questions on the Deh Cho Bridge, mostly because his department is the one that released the cost-benefit analysis. The discussions on the Deh Cho Bridge have dominated the debate in this House over the last couple of weeks and couple of sessions. These concerns raised seem to be about process rather than the project itself. I sometimes think we’ve forgotten why we’re even considering this project.

I’d like to ask the Minister of Transportation: what direct benefits are there to proceeding with the project and building this bridge at all? Can the

Minister please provide some clarity to me and explain what the benefits are?

Mr. Speaker, the direct benefits of the Deh Cho Bridge are undeniable. The economic advantage of this bridge is in lowering transportation costs. The cost of living is going to be reduced, as one organization, which is the Co-op, has indicated. It will bring down the cost of goods. The benefits to the community of Fort Providence, the Deh Cho communities and of course, the environment…. The environmental direct benefits are that it will reduce the…. If there were a spill on the Mackenzie, that would be reduced quite considerably, and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions would help deal with the climate change that we’re facing in the North today.

Mr. Speaker, once again to the Minister of Transportation: based on the cost-benefit analysis that recently came out — which we know is an addendum to the larger one that came out in 2002 and needs to be seen as a whole, which is available on the web site — which compares the costs and the benefits…. When you look at that, why did this government proceed with the bridge?

With the cooperation of the community of Fort Providence…. And of course it’s been our own analysis that the decision to proceed had strong benefits to the government and the people of the Northwest Territories. It was a decision that was made and that the 16th Assembly

wants to continue, because we see that the benefits of proceeding with this bridge far outweigh the costs in terms of putting the bridge in. This is a good benefit for the people of the Northwest Territories. We’re going to get a good deal after 35 years on this project.

There’s been some suggestion that this is not really a P3 project, in that the G.N.W.T. is doing all the work and taking all the risks. What has the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation done to warrant their involvement?

Mr.

Speaker, the

community of Fort Providence combined alliance prepared the initial proposal to build the Deh Cho Bridge. The Deh Cho Bridge Corporation put together a professional team to develop this project. They delivered this project in terms of meeting some of the navigable waters requirements by Transport Canada. There’s been consultation and meetings in the communities. There’s been the impact review process and the environmental impacts. It also examined the culture and social impacts of this bridge.

The Deh Cho Bridge Corporation lined up the financial backers of this project, and the corporation is working very closely with the department in terms

of putting this project into reality, to have this bridge be a go for the community.

Final supplementary, Mr. Abernethy.