Could the Minister tell me if this highway chipseal overlay program will be used for kilometre 24 to 34 on Highway No. 6?

That’s a very specific question and I think it’s chipseal all the way to 28. I should point out that there is some consideration at this point for some internal reallocation that we provided notice to the Members that fall outside of the capital plan as it is money already approved but reallocated.

I’m asking a question, because I’m noticing that chipseal, that’s about the same age as the chipseal on Highway No. 6 from kilometre 1 to 28 that is being replaced, and the other highway, well, the adjoining highway, I’m wondering if there is a plan to do that.

The reason I indicated kilometre 34 was because it was put down and ripped up, from what I understand, a few years back. Then I’ve seen other documentation that indicates that if there would be...in the reconstruction it would be from 34. If the Minister is having difficulty with the question because it’s too specific, I guess my… Not too stupid, no; too specific. I wanted to just ask the question if he knew if they we’re going to do a chipseal overlay from where the chipseal actually exists now on Highway No. 6.

Thank you for that clarification, Mr. Beaulieu. Minister McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. There’s never a question that’s too stupid. Mr. Chairman, the Member is asking a question that’s outside of the capital plan that’s in front of us and we don’t have the specific detail, but the answer to his question is no, we’re not planning to replace the area that he is talking about.

The next question goes to Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. Chipsealing Highway No. 7, I’ll get to that later, but firstly I’m glad to see, of course, more expenditure on Highway No. 1, and especially the work that was done this year. Our constituents were very pleased with the first, I think it was 35 kilometres of chipseal from the Providence junction towards Fort Simpson. Perhaps if the Minister can elaborate on further work that’s going to happen within that section and if there are any other sections that will be completed this year towards Fort Simpson, and up to and including if there’s an opportunity for the Village of Fort Simpson to cost save if there’s going to be some chipsealing done around Fort Simpson as well. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Minister McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We plan to continue the chipseal work that was undertaken this year. We had anticipated we would do 70 kilometres from the junction heading towards Simpson. We weren’t able to do that, so we will have to carry that over and continue that next year.

As part of this capital plan, our intention is to start from -- time providing and weather cooperating, of course -- complete the work that we identified for this year and start next year from Checkpoint and head in the other direction up to kilometre 375.

I’m glad the Minister laid out that plan and it’s something that we certainly look forward to, but the chipsealed section from Checkpoint towards Fort Simpson is slated for some work. If the Minister can comment on that, because there are several sections that do need to be replaced. As well as from the ferry crossing at the Liard crossing toward Fort Simpson there are sections of chipseal that need that remediation work as well. Is that some of the priority of the Department of Transportation as well? Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, we will be replacing some sections of the chipseal that is damaged and is causing some issues with safety from Checkpoint on to Simpson.

If the Minister can keep my office advised so that we can provide an opportunity for the Village of Fort Simpson to do some cost savings when that equipment is in the area.

Of course, the second one I raised in the House last week was the condition and work plan for Highway No. 7. I’m still curious about that. The Minister did indicate that the waiting on the engineering study was going to be completed this fall. I assume that it’s completed by now. When will they assess the engineering work that was completed? Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, the engineering study is not completed as of yet and we hope that will be done fairly quickly. We had a budget of $5 million to do reconstruction and, of course, as the Member is aware, a lot of the money that we spent for this year has gone to repairs of areas that are really challenging us. There are some areas where we’ve had the road fail on us and ditches that are needing replacement that we did not anticipate. So about three-quarters of the $5 million has been spent. We have in the budget $4 million for next year.

Just in terms of Fort Liard, or actually kilometre, I think, 0 to 38, which is the Fort Liard access, how much of that $4 million will be

dedicated to that section there, Mr. Chair? Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, that is still to be determined at this point.

When the Minister and I were in Fort Liard a couple of weeks ago, residents, of course, expressed the interest of getting that section chipsealed or a portion thereof. Is that something that the Department of Transportation can look at? Because some sections are... Actually, they have been completed for a couple of years now. I don’t know if 0 to 38...38 kilometres there would be doable. If not, Mr. Chair, can the Minister at least commit to some kind of a work plan that within the perhaps three years that’s something that the department is looking at seriously, and up to and including on the capital plan, Mr. Chair? Thanks.

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. I’m not sure the Minister can commit to the next Assembly but… Minister McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That will be a little difficult to tie our government for a multi-year investment plan. However, we certainly can commit to developing our engineering study and using that as a guide for future investment. It will certainly identify the areas that need to be placed as priority and attention that needs to be put on those areas. We will develop a multi-year work plan for that piece of highway, or the whole section of this highway; however, the funding will remain in the hands of each government as we progress. Thank you.

I don’t see why we can’t commit to the future there. If once the engineering report is complete, I would certainly like to see a developed work plan and at least we have that for the future, something to work with, because I believe that that baseline work will certainly confirm and at least solidify a departmental plan when it comes to expenditures and, of course, the degradation of the road, it would be nice to have that engineering study to do it, because the residents already know it there, Mr. Chair. Yes, I would certainly like to see a well-developed work plan and, of course, I would like to see it in the capital plan there, Mr. Chair; however, we’ll take the small steps and get that engineering work done and if the Minister and the department can at least come up with a work plan, I’m glad he’ll review it with me and I would like to share that with the community as well. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, as we indicated earlier, we haven’t firmed up our work plan for the long term as we’re still waiting for some information and some testing that’s being done, and to get the engineering reports back. It would be fairly easy, I guess, to look at portions of the road that are reconstructed to chipseal, but I am a little

hesitant as there is so much need for this Highway No. 7 that if we did take some money out of the construction costs to chipseal, then, of course, that would leave us with a little less to do reconstruction. So that’s going to be determined. The reality, of course, is Highway No. 7 has to be reconstructed right from start, from zero all the way to Checkpoint and that’s going to be a long-term investment and we need a plan to do so. Thank you.

I’d like to thank the Minister for those answers. Just to reiterate one more time, that at anytime that there’s a federal meeting, that he just continue to raise the issue that we want tourists and Canadians to view our spectacular North at Highway No. 7 at Fort Liard. It is one of the entry points and tourism numbers by road that Parks Canada just released that they’ve increased fly-ins into Nahanni National Park and I’m glad for that, but drive-ins, the numbers are just that much poorer, Mr. Chair, and it’s because of the condition of the road. I know that the amount of investment that the Minister is talking about is significant and certainly getting the federal government as a partner as we work towards developing our North would certainly go a long way, Mr. Chair. So as part of our federal engagement strategy, I really think perhaps we should maybe consider Highway No. 7 as one of the hot item topics, as it were, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

We’ll certainly keep that in mind. Every Member has raised issues that are hot item topics, and looking at our five-year needs, if we were to try and accommodate all of the projects and all of the needs that are out in the Territories -- there are many -- we’d probably need about a $2 billion budget for five years. But, Mr. Chairman, we’re anticipating we’re going to continue to talk to the federal government to reinforce the need that we have in our infrastructure and encourage them to invest in the Northwest Territories. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Next on my list I have Mr. Krutko.

Maybe just a suggestion. I see $2 million on Highway No. 5. Maybe we could do Highway No. 7 to speed up the process.

My question is in regard to the Tuk resource gravel access road. I know I’ve been asking for the same type of arrangement for the Aklavik access road to their gravel source. There was a motion passed in this House supporting both projects, but again it seems like we are not as far ahead in regard to the Aklavik project as we were in regard to the Tuk project. So can the Minister give me an update on exactly where we are with the Aklavik gravel access road project and do we see any capital investment in that in the future, hopefully somewhere in the range that we gave to the Tuk project? I believe, in the budget, I see $1.4 million. So maybe you could

elaborate on what that $1.4 million, what the total costs for the Tuk resource road are to date.