Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have a few comments. I agree with Mr. Abernethy, that I am pleased to see that we are not reducing our expenditures at this time. I think, in the current economic situation, that we’ve chosen the correct way to go and to keep our investments and our spending on infrastructure at a high level, not as high as last year, because that was a bit much. I think where we are going is in the right direction.
I also like the fact that we are shifting, as the Minister put it, to a more corporate approach to planning and delivering of infrastructure. I think that we are headed in the right direction. I see some changes in some of the planning that has been done through PWS and through the Ministerial Committee for Infrastructure and I like what I see. I get a sense that we are thinking further ahead. We are trying to streamline things somewhat and we are not reacting. We are being proactive, and that, in my estimation, is a great way to go.
I am concerned about the size of the infrastructure budget. I agree with it, but I need to say I am a little bit concerned that we don’t bite off more than we can chew. I think that the recognition was made in this budget that last year’s budget, this current year,
the ’09-10 infrastructure budget, was huge and the ’10-11 is proposed to be large, but not huge. So again I think we are going in the right direction.
I am also a bit concerned about the carry-over amount. They will be added to the ’10-11 budget whenever that is determined, but we will have carry-overs for the ’09-10 budget year and the size of those carry-overs can have an impact on whether or not we are going to be able to accomplish all of the projects that we are proposing to do in our ’10-11 budget. I think it has been reasonably well thought out and probably most projects will get done, but I am concerned that over the 10-year period or eight-year period, we’ve had significant carry-overs every year and I would just encourage the government to keep working on reducing that carry-over amount.
I also approve of the focus on deferred maintenance. I have mentioned that before and I am very glad to see that that is a focus of this particular capital plan.
Lastly, there is mention about providing funds to community governments. It is a stable source of funding. I think the proposal is to keep the level of funding from last year and carry it forward for a number of years, but I think we have to be careful even in this era of gas tax money for communities for various and sundry infrastructure, that as our communities take over more and more buildings as the government devolves buildings and various other infrastructure to communities, we have to make sure that they have the funds available to look after those buildings to do the maintenance required on those buildings and also to replace those buildings if that is necessary, because many of the buildings that the GNWT has given to communities are definitely not new.
So I would encourage the Minister to consider in future years maybe doing a cost of living increase on the infrastructure money that goes to communities, but to at least consider evaluating the amount that they currently get, evaluate how their circumstances are changing, and change the amount, hopefully upward if it’s considered to be necessary. Thank you, Mr. Chair. That’s all I have.