Thank you, Mr. Roland. Third supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If the Premier didn’t have time to put together a budget that was going to be palatable, that was going to be reasonable, then we should have gone with the status quo. What we’ve ended up with is something not very acceptable. I know we asked for a compressed process. We expected better than this. We didn’t get it.

Would the Premier agree to return to an interim status quo budget until such time as we can come together and not take these very, very drastic measures that are proposed in this budget?

No.

Oral questions. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Premier, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m working with the Department of Executive, pulling all the dates, times and all of the process that unfolded, looking at our legislation, looking at the process and looking at how we can tighten it up. That work is ongoing. I’ll have to get an update here within days, and I can get back to the Member as to when we hope to bring on our responses forward to committee. The work is ongoing.

We have to be clear on this. We’re also trying to relook at history here. There were all kinds of meetings, as we tabled in this House back to Members, about meetings, times, events. If you want to relive that again, the dreams about bridges, the fact is that the Government of the Northwest Territories.... If we held ourselves to the same measures that some Members are trying to hold government to on one project, we would have to close three-quarters of our communities and move them into Yellowknife or maybe move Yellowknife or the Northwest Territories into a small community in Alberta or B.C.

When we talk about the message we’re trying to send to Canada and the fact that we need investment in the Northwest Territories in stuff like hydro development, in stuff like the Mackenzie Valley Highway — when we talk about the cost per capita, they could easily come back to us and say it’s not cost-effective to invest in the Northwest Territories. But they do, because we are part of Canada, and they recognize that difference. We’ve got to start doing that same thing in the Northwest Territories.

I don’t dispute the fact that we should be doing some of that fine work that the Premier talks about, but we should have a foundation of information in order to base our decisions.

Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the Premier pretty much a point-blank question: how could any government sign a $165 million concession agreement three days prior to an election, with a five-year-old piece of cost-benefit analysis work being their only instrument that they have at their disposal? How could that happen? How is that good government, Mr. Speaker?

Mr. Speaker, like I’m telling the people of Canada, the federal government and the Prime Minister, the Mackenzie Valley Highway is of national interest. It will help us economically, and it will help us develop the territory. That project is in a similar fashion; it’s not only one piece that you make your decision on.

Where’s the vision? We need to ask ourselves: where’s the vision for the Northwest Territories? Do we want to stay with a “hat-in-hand” mentality,

going to Ottawa saying: Give us more; give us more? Or instead: Give us the tools, and we can build the Northwest Territories.

The Premier has a good point there: we need to come up with a vision; we need to engage the stakeholders here in the Northwest Territories. In this project the stakeholders weren’t engaged. They were engaged in 2002 and 2003. The government has yet to prove to residents in the North Slave region that the cost of living will not go up as a result of this bridge being built. Where’s that evidence, Mr. Speaker? I’d like to ask the Premier that question. Thank you.

I think that question has been answered a number of times — of course, not to the satisfaction of the Member. I think all you have to do right now is drive through some of the business parking lots and look at all the tractor-trailer units parked in their parking lots, because they had to stock up for the closing of the ice crossing. Let’s ask the businesses that.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Mr. Speaker, that’s the problem: they didn’t go back out and they didn’t ask the businesses. They asked them in 2002 and in 2003. They didn’t go back out, prior to signing that concession agreement on September 28, and talk to the stakeholders in the North Slave region.

I would like to ask the Premier: what is the timeline for coming back with this look into exactly what happened, so the residents of the Northwest Territories can finally get a better picture of how exactly the government put $165 million at risk? Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I told the Member in an earlier question already today, earlier in this line of questioning, that I would be going back to the Executive to get the timeline and come back to the Member. I’m prepared to do that.

But let’s be realistic here. We’re talking about an investment in the Northwest Territories. The Member sees it as risk. I think we’re making investments in the Northwest Territories for the betterment of the Northwest Territories, for the long-term credibility and development of the Northwest Territories.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Oral questions. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.

I would like to ask the Minister responsible for the NWT Housing Corporation some questions, most particularly on the appeal system.

Also, I would just like to thank him for coming to the Nahendeh riding. We did visit a few communities there, and we look forward to a return visit.

The continued concern that I get on a daily basis when I travel in my communities is basically appealing decisions by the housing corporation board. They are wanting to follow up on issues. I’m finding that an appeals system — and it’s something that I’ve been pursuing for some time now — if it were in place, would address a lot of these concerns from constituents and concerned citizens.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Mr. Miltenberger.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to commit publicly that as the Minister responsible for the Housing Corp., we’d like to continue to conclude our trip, which was interrupted. I’ll commit to that.

The issue of the appeal process, as well, the Member has raised before, and it’s a good one. It’s one the Housing Corporation has put on their work list, and we are looking forward to being able to come back to committee, and to this Assembly, in the fall. We’ve indicated, as well, to the Member that we’d like to be able to look at processes that are already there that we could either pattern ourselves after, such as the Student Financial Assistance appeals or the Income Support appeals process. We recognize that the Member has raised a very good point, and it would give another avenue for due process for clients.

Quite often it’s simple things that constituents are appealing to the Housing Corporation and the managers, but once that manager makes a decision, he’s not going to change his mind. So they’re coming to me, as their MLA, to say, “There’s a glitch here in the system. I’ve been asking about this renovation,” or “It needs repairs.” Often it’s simple things, and having an outlet for constituents to address those concerns is very important.

I’d just like to ask the Minister, Mr. Speaker, what type of appeal system does he foresee being implemented?

Mr. Speaker, as I’ve indicated, we’re going to look closely at the appeal system that is now there for Income Support — there’s another one for Student Financial Assistance — and we’re going to do a jurisdictional check as well. The intent is not to try to recreate the wheel or reinvent the wheel, so we’re going to take the best from the systems that are there. We’ll be sharing that work with the Members and the committees.

Once again if the Minister can let me know, and let the House know: how soon will

they begin this work, and when can they implement such a system?

Mr. Speaker, as we conclude this budget process and as we move forward, that item has already been identified. As the business is laid out and the work is laid out for the coming year, that’s one of the items we intend to be able to bring back in the fall, with a clear outline of what’s being recommended.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final supplementary, Mr. Menicoche.

Will the process include any public consultations? Mahsi.