It’s not our intention at this time to increase the $28 million. Part of the challenge is capacity within the department. We still have a lot of the federal money that we’re working with. Again, we feel that five years is a sufficient amount of time to evaluate the progress of the New Deal and see where we need to go from there. If it means increases, then that’s something that we’ll have to come back to the Assembly for. Thank you.

I’m disappointed in that answer. I’m not asking for a review of the total aspect of the New Deal, but simply a review of the infrastructure contribution, the capital part of contribution that this government gives to communities. I think that

certainly could be done between now and the end of March.

We do supplementary increases for all manner of things, and communities and their capital structures are a huge part of the Territory and our residents, and they’re the basis on which most of us survive and live. So I would really encourage the Minister to rethink and just evaluate the infrastructure contribution formula only by March 31, 2011. Thank you.

We could evaluate the infrastructure agreement, but it’s not our intent... I mean, we’re looking at three or four months to try and get this in. So it’s not our intent at this particular time to try and make an increase to the infrastructure budget until we do the overall evaluation. Thank you.

I understand, I understood the statement the first time, but I guess I have to encourage you to change your intent, which you’re not willing to do. So I will agree to disagree with you. Thank you, that’s just a comment.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Just a comment. I have nobody else on my list. We’re on page 4-4, activity summary, regional operations, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment, $28.002 million. Agreed?

Okay, that concludes our detail. Can we go back to page 4-2 to do the summary page? Municipal and Community Affairs, department summary, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, $28.002. Agreed? Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don’t think it quite concludes. We were on regional operations and we had community operations to conclude.

I don’t have anything on that page. Thank you, Mr. Bromley, there is no dollar figure on that page so there’s nothing to discuss. Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I request permission to go back to 4-4. I understood that there would be questions on 4-7, but I would like to ask one on 4-4 in the absence of that opportunity. Thank you.

Is committee agreed we go back to page 4-4?

Thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Bromley, on 4-4.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I wanted to bring up something that I have brought up in the past with this department. That’s that it’s not really

fair for communities with greater capacity, due simply to their size, to be the sole beneficiaries of reduced costs and greater local benefits associated with higher building standards and efficiency standards. I think that nor really is it fair that use of NWT funds, tight as they are, should be directed towards inefficient infrastructure. So once again I would like to ask this Minister what has been done to introduce the building standards that the larger communities enjoy and that the GNWT enjoys along with the reduced costs of operation and the greater local economic benefits associated with labour intensive work on efficiency and so on. What are we doing to start setting those building standards for communities that will bring those benefits? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The communities have all submitted their energy plans and we continue to share best practices with them. The Member talks about the large communities as opposed to the smaller communities, and I give the smaller communities a lot of credit. I mean, they know their communities, they know that if they build a building that meets all the standards, that’s very efficient, that it’s a benefit to them and I can’t see a lot of the communities... I believe those days of building a building where the air just flows right through are long gone. So I give the communities a lot of credit and I think they’re doing an excellent job of working with the Arctic Energy Alliance coming up with their energy plans. So they realize that there’s a huge savings to them too, especially to some of the smaller, more isolated communities where things cost a lot more. They, I think, realize that it’s beneficial to them to build a good quality building, because it’s obviously going to bring their costs down. Thank you.

I’ve heard this line repeated often by this Minister, so I would like to ask, would this Minister commit to providing Members with documentation that in fact all of the community infrastructure being put in by communities are meeting the NWT standard of 25 percent better than the model in the National Energy Building Code?

The line that I’ve repeated often is that I give the communities a lot of credit for putting in good quality infrastructure. We don’t regulate the standards, so we’d be unable to provide that information to the Member. Thank you.

My understanding was that Municipal and Community Affairs worked closely with communities on infrastructure advising. Is this Minister saying that he does not know and cannot determine what quality of buildings are being put into our communities?

We’re well aware of the good quality of buildings that are going into our smaller communities. The Member was talking about building standards. I was saying we didn’t regulate building standards. We don’t impose it on them. It’s basically a community’s decision and the communities are knowledgeable enough to realize that they need to make a good investment into sound infrastructure to help their overall cost in the long run. Thank you.

I’ve heard this line many times from this Minister and I’m looking for evidence. I think we’re an evidence-based government and I would like to request that the Minister provide Members with the degree to which community infrastructure is meeting the NWT standards. I’m not asking him now in this question to introduce standards, I’m asking him to provide evidence for the statement he repeatedly makes.

These are government assets and we work with the communities to advise them of best practices.

I think as you go travelling to more of the smaller communities, you’ll see the standards of building that they have put in. I think they’re being standard. If the Member’s looking for blueprints or plans, it’s maybe something that I would have to work with the communities to see what we can provide to the Member.

I appreciate that offer to work with communities to provide that data. Thank you. I’ll expect that soon.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Just a comment. I have nobody else on my list. Mr. Bromley.