Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Just with respect to this activity description, especially with environmental protection…. I’ve got a couple of incidents in my riding of late, the most notable, of course, being the Trout Lake fuel spill, and once again, there was another spill, I believe, in Fort Liard. Maybe the Minister can provide a brief discussion about how the department interacts and gets involved with a leak of this nature.

Thank you,

Mr. Menicoche. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you,

Mr. Chairman. The response is basically one, in the case of Trout Lake, where once we were notified there was an issue, we responded immediately to make sure we went in there and contacted the other related agencies. We wanted to make sure the appropriate steps were taken to contain and limit and then look at remediation. As I indicated to the Member in the House, of course there are a number of other groups involved, including Northland Utilities, which has a primary responsibility.

Part of our job as well is, once we’ve contained it and remediated it, to make sure to do a debriefing and review of what happened and why and what steps do we take, working once again with other agencies, to make sure we try to avoid situations like that, where there’s a valve failure because of ground moving. There are always issues that come up in people’s minds, as we’ve talked about, in terms of climate change, the ground shifting, those types of things. That would be basically what our role is.

I’m interested also in who approves tank farms, et cetera. One of the big issues that came out of the result of Trout Lake was that somebody obviously signed off on the final installation of the piping and of the tank and of the need not to have a berm. I’d like to find out who. Is it this department that approves that type of installation?

There would have been an application put in and a plan reviewed by the appropriate agencies. I don’t believe ENR has a clear role in terms of the type of design and those types of things. Our concern would be the issue of whether they’re double-walled and if there are appropriate berms and such. With the issue of the failure because of the valve breaking off because of shifting ground and those types of things, there would be questions. There would have been a plan in place that would have been filed. I’d have to commit to the Member to get that information for him, but I don’t have all that detail with me.

Yes; I would like at least a further update on some of the questions and a bit of an update on exactly what happened and how it happened and the events that led up to it. I’m curious about, once again, the fact that somebody signed off on installing the piping and tankage.

I don’t know if the Minister has the detail in front of him, but it has been my experience that double-walled tanks, if they’re going to be permanent, must have a berm. That was one of the key issues that may have helped in this situation. Somebody must have determined that this double-walled tank was a temporary installation, so it didn’t need a berm, but if it’s a power plant, it’s not really going anywhere. I think our rules or guidelines must have been misapplied in this case, and it has a bearing on what happened at Trout Lake.

I made note of it in the Member’s statement as well. One of the things I’d like to be looking for is to do the post-mortem on this case and look at our guidelines and strengthen them in order to support our small and remote communities that take a lengthy time to respond to any events like this, especially when there’s a lack of oil spill equipment around. The community’s got to be commended on

doing their best with what they had, but small and remote communities should have that much additional protection, I believe. I’ll continue to work on the Minister’s office with this matter.

I’ll just reiterate my commitment when the Member raises the issue in the House about the sharing of the information we have. As well, we will commit to getting answers to the specific questions the Member’s asked in regard to who signed off, which agency signed off the installation and approved the design, and such of the….

Before I speak any further, Mr. Chairman, I see that Minister McLeod has his hand up. He may help us inform this discussion.

Just to add a little bit to the Member’s questions regarding roles and responsibilities when it comes to bulk storage of fuel — there are different classifications. In and on Commissioner’s land, there is the National Fire Code, which outlines the general responsibility. It states that the owner’s, or owners’, authorized agent is responsible for carrying out provisions of the code.

In and on federal lands, the responsibility falls under Indian and Northern Affairs. The spill in Trout Lake was on federal Crown land and therefore falls under the jurisdiction of Indian Affairs.

I’d like thank Minister McLeod for that clarification.

It still heightens the need that overlapping jurisdictions must look at the primary objective, which is to take care of our land and our environment — and of the water, too; we seriously have to add that bit, because the product release did make it into the lake, and the lake is the key centre of their lives, especially in Trout Lake.

Once again, I’d just like to follow up on the Minister’s commitment that we work together on this issue now that the federal people are involved. We’ve all got a stake in this, especially the people who are losing the most: the residents of Trout Lake. We’re here for the betterment of their lives. If we can get continued commitment to work on this file, work on the issues, and strengthen our regulations — and, as well, to suggest strengthening regulations to our federal counterparts — I think that will go a long way in preventing future events from being so serious.

Thank you,

Mr. Menicoche. Not a question. I’ll move on to Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In this section I noticed some interesting things that have

changed, and I’m just curious. I see that Public and Regulatory Hearings, Participation Support, has dropped by $50,000, and I’m just trying to get a sense as to…. They don’t think they’re needing it? Is it one of those things, and they don’t believe any major issues are coming up or whatnot? Or is it just an area where they think they can do it smarter and better?

Thank you,

Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you,

Mr. Chairman. That was a sunsetted fund, so it lapsed because it was sunsetted.

My apologies. I did note that, but the fact is the points still stand, because obviously it was important — you brought it back as a new initiative. Is the department not seeing that this is an issue coming forward?

Mr. Chairman, we’ve made do with the resources we have. As well, as has been pointed out, there’s been a number of positions added to help us deal with environmental monitoring and assessment and those types of things. So to this point, we have been able to soldier on without those funds.

Quite admirable, if the Minister is soldiering on.

I see that there’s reduced energy efficiency in Alternative Energy, Grants and Contributions, of $200,000. I just wonder — it just seemed as if these energy grants just got going a couple of years ago, and now it’s being reduced. I’m just trying to get a sense of where this government’s focus is on this area. Maybe there’s an obvious explanation to the Minister, but it would appear to be a less obvious explanation to Members, and I just want some clarity on this area — why that area is being reduced and what the noticeable impact will be.

Mr. Chairman, that particular program fund, based on our Actuals, was under-subscribed, so it was reduced. But at the same time we’ve also…. There are funds there for EnerGuide for houses, the Energy Efficiency Incentive Program, the energy efficiency side of ecoTrust, the support for Arctic Energy Alliance. We also have a wood pellet pilot project, once again tied to the ecoTrust, and $450,000 for an alternate energy program.

Some may say under-subscribed; some may define it as under-promoted. My cup runneth over — it’s more than half-full.

Mr. Chairman, I noticed that under the Grants area on this page — Grants and Contributions — Arctic

Energy Alliance is taking a little bit of a beating. If I may just quote some quick numbers, I see in ’06–07 they received funding of $800,000. Then you go to ’07–08, where obviously something horrible happened, and unfortunately, I was here to see it: they dropped down to $260,000. But some revelation came by, and then they got funding up to $1.6

million. Now they’re down to just over

$1 million.

Mr.

Chairman, I’m just trying to get some

understanding, under this Grants and Contributions line item, as to where this government is in support of the Arctic Energy Alliance. Is there some reason this section should lose almost, we’ll call it over, $500,000? That’s one-third of their funding, practically. This is going to have a noticeable decrease, and I’m just kind of concerned about that. Does the Minister have a response to that?

Mr. Chairman, the relationship of the government with the Arctic Energy Alliance has, up to this point, been based on a department-by-department basis. The intent, I believe, is to move to government funding, having a funding arrangement with Arctic Energy Alliance, as opposed to going department-shopping, looking for support. We recognize the importance of the Arctic Energy Alliance, and we have been trying to sustain them.

In regard to the specifics of the current status in the budget, with your indulgence, I’ll ask Ms. Magrum to provide some detail.

Thank you, Minister. Ms. Magrum.

Thank you,

Ms. Magrum. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you. Okay, well, that’s actually good news, in that these mysterious documents don’t quite read that clearly. I’ll accept that as the obvious answer or, I should say, the more obvious answer to it now.

Mr. Chairman, I’m going to leave it at this, for this time on this section, but I just want to stress my full support for the Arctic Energy Alliance and the work they do. I’ve been known to pop by there for advice and insights on a couple of projects. Our Chair of this moment supports them, as do other Members, and of course, the Minister and the staff.

That being said, Mr. Chairman, when we look at oil prices now, among the many other options, this is going to be an area that…. We don’t know what our oil bills are going to look like — or our power bills — this fall. We can only just horribly speculate as to where they’re going to go next. My thought is, if they’re getting so many customers a day, every day, trying to figure out how we could do business better, I bet it’s going to double or triple here, once it starts getting cold and we start getting some of those winter bills in. There’s going to be almost a frenzy of saying, How can we do business better?

I want to put on record that I

appreciate the

increase, as I’m sure they do as well. But that said, we have to keep an eye to this sector, because I think people are going to subscribe to this option and these ideals more and more as we move forward. If that day comes — and I’m sure it will — when oil hits $200 a barrel, it’s going to be a nightmare here, and people are going to be screaming for any possible solution to do things smarter and better. I think this is the avenue people are going to attempt to tap into for options in order to be able to just keep their homes.

My biggest fear is that our costs of keeping our homes with the lights on — and, of course, heated — are going to certainly outpace the cost of our mortgages, because these energy costs are certainly picking up momentum.

Anyway, I’ve rambled on enough. The real issue is that I wanted to make sure it was on record that I appreciate the work they do there. They’re very insightful. I’ve even asked them just average questions, and they work very hard to make sure they get back to me. I know it’s not just me as an MLA, but they do that for the average person out there. The shop is very sensitive to the average customer’s need.

Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to make sure that stuff was on record.

Thank you,

Mr. Hawkins. I’d say you’ve done that. I think I can move on to Ms. Bisaro.