Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a number of comments, many of which have been expressed already by my colleagues and I’m sure will be expressed again, but I feel they are important enough that I will repeat them.

You know, at the outset, I want to say that I agree with the fiscal strategy which has been outlined by the Finance Minister both last year and this year. I think it is the right way for us to go, and the fact that we’ve scaled back our capital budget for this year as compared to last year is a good thing. We don’t need to be putting ourselves in a situation where we are stressing ourselves to the max, particularly with the Deh Cho Bridge Project now in our lap as well.

I’d like to say that I think the changes to the planning process are proving to be beneficial and I

think both Ministers have alluded to that already. I believe, and I’m glad to hear the Minister say, now that we are approving the capital budget in the fall, that it is having a beneficial and positive impact on the work that we’re doing.

I do have some concerns in terms of carryovers. We’ve had huge dollar values of carryovers in previous years and at some point in time I would like to get the information of the carryover from this current capital fiscal year and how it’s going to impact on the budget that we are discussing right now.

Again, a positive note, I’m really glad to see a continued focus on deferred maintenance. I think it’s been a specific focus of our capital budgets. I think this is the third or fourth year ongoing now and I think it’s making a difference in our properties and our assets and I think it’s certainly a way that we want to continue to go.

As well, I am impressed with sort of a bit of a shift in thinking. I think Minister McLeod referred to it as thinking outside of the box, but particularly in terms of our heating requirements, innovative heating requirements and energy adaptations for new buildings and particularly referencing the computer centre here in Yellowknife and that we are using waste heat from power plants, we are looking at geothermal. All of those things are positive and they will assist us in keeping our infrastructure costs down, so I would hope that that is going to continue.

In terms of the Housing Corporation, I know that it’s not officially part of the budget, but I do need to comment on the declining federal dollars relative to operation and maintenance of our housing stock. We increasingly add to our housing stock, we build new units, we replace new units but we also build many new units. At the same time, I don’t see that we have a plan to deal with the O and M costs that are going to be more and more on the backs of this government as opposed to the federal government through the next 15, 20, 30 years. So I think it’s something that I know that the government is aware of it and is working on it, but I think it’s something that we need to stop hoping that the federal government will bail us out. I wouldn’t say stop fighting. We definitely need to keep fighting for the money, but I think we also need to put a contingency plan in place and I don’t sense that that is out there.

To me, it points to a need for the Housing Corporation to do a significant evaluation and analysis of their policies, and to totally revamp them and revise them so that they work for our current situation that we’re in and the times that we’re in.

I do have a concern with the lack of projects in the Department of Education, Culture and Employment, specifically with regards to Yellowknife. We have received or we have seen a 10-year education

facility plan for Yellowknife. I am concerned that the recommendations from that plan, that report, are not reflected in this capital budget. I am particularly concerned about Aurora College with a lease that expires in 2012, with Sissons School which is badly in need of renovations and upgrading, and with Mildred Hall School which needs completion to their renovations which have never actually been done. I see no indication in the budget or in future years that these things are going to be looked at, so that’s a general concern.

Like Mr. Bromley, I would like to see analysis or evaluation of MACA’s infrastructure contribution formula for communities. I gather that I think we have been told that that is in the works. I certainly hope if it’s not in the works that it’s going to be in the works. Certainly the amount of infrastructure contributions to our communities for capital has been pretty much steady for quite a number of years and it really needs to be evaluated. Community infrastructure deficit is only growing. It never seems to go down, it always seems to go up. This is something that this government has to be aware of. I would like to see an evaluation and an update of that contribution formula certainly before the next capital budget.

In terms of our general capacity for capital projects, I’d like to know the impact of the Deh Cho Bridge Project on our capacity to deal with capital projects. We have been kept up to date over time as the Deh Cho Bridge Project has progressed and changed and we’ve been updated, and I thank the Minister of Transportation for that. But I do have a bit of a concern that in continually increasing our infrastructure capacity we’re adding more buildings, but we also have a Deh Cho Bridge Project which impacts our ability to finish these projects, to get them completed on time. That’s just a general concern.

I am, as Mr. Bromley, concerned about the way that this government in general accounts for operations and maintenance costs for new buildings. In terms of capital projects, we’re very much up front about the cost for the project and it gets substantiated. Once the building comes on line all of a sudden it’s kind of like the government goes, oh, gee, we have to heat this, we have to put lights on, and so on and so forth. Those costs are not planned for. They need to be. When we know a building is coming on line in the fall of any particular year, that budget year needs to include operations and maintenance costs for that new building. It’s a change in perhaps budget planning that I think is coming, but I don’t see much evidence of it. It really is an important part of our operations and maintenance budget. I do appreciate that we are starting to get better O and M costs in the project substantiations for capital projects. I think that’s a really good start, but we now have to take the next step and put those O and M costs into the operations budget.

Lastly, I just want to comment on the capital infrastructure budget binder which we received. The documents were easy to understand and I particularly appreciate having the project substantiation documents in the binder up front so that if there are any questions, it can be looked at. There’s an awful lot of information in those projects’ substantiation documents. I appreciate having that up front.

I will have questions about specific projects when we get into departments, but that’s all I have for now.