We will move along to page 11-8, page 11-9 and page 11-10, activity summary, Environment and Natural Resources, forest management, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, $1.403 million. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With regard to forest management, one of the things that the communities I represent is that forestry is a very important element to the community’s ability and sustainability to use wood heat and using wood as a product for building cabins. To use those products, we have wood misers in all the communities I represent. They are fully utilized through different programs to use that type of product and ensuring that there are workshops in the different communities where different people

come from southern Canada who are experts in the field of different uses of wood products: the harvesting of wood, the management of wood, the usage of wood for constructing different products. Fort McPherson is part of the workshop where they built a tourism information cabin. They built it in just a matter of a couple of days as part of the workshop. I was impressed with what they were trying to do. It took the community’s efforts, along with funds received from Indian Affairs through the band. This is the type of stuff the Department of Environment and Natural Resources should be doing in our communities, rather than having to use federal money through Indian Affairs to do these types of workshops.

I’d like to ask the department what we’re doing to develop a cottage industry in our communities when it comes to usage of wood products and being able to use the different expertise that is out there to assist us in developing that industry in the communities, generating employment, and being able to use the resources around us such as the forest resources. I’d like to know where the department is going on that and what we are doing to really stimulate that part of our economy.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Not a hundred percent sure how that relates to this particular capital, but I will go to the Minister for a response.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have come out with our Biomass Strategy. We’ve met with committee. It’s in the business plans and we’d be more than prepared and happy to have that full discussion when our business plans are before the House or anytime the committee would wish to ask us to appear.

For the purpose of today’s exercise, while it’s under forest management, our capital plan relates more to the support services for aviation and things like lightening sensors and those types of things.

My question is more around the activity description of forest management on page 11-8. I think as a department we seem to put a lot of focus on the managing or the forest response or forest repression aspect of the business. We’re not doing anything to really look at using the forest resources and the trees before we have to respond to a fire. To having more of a management plan with regard to managing the forest products and developing forest inventories, looking at the different forest species. I’d like to ask the department if, as he comes forward to forest management, we could look at more than just how we’re going to respond to forest fires. What are we doing to manage the forest in such a way that we’re benefitting from the forest rather than just spending money on forest repression?

As we look at managing forests we are doing a whole host of

things. We are continuing with our inventory that we’re undertaking on Crown lands. We’re working with communities on community forest management plans that are anticipating in the boreal forest area the development of possible biomass facilities that would allow communities to have access to ongoing biomass supplies close to their communities. We’re working, with interest, as we’ve indicated in this House yesterday. For example, Member Groenewegen from Hay River South mentioned about biomass pellet plants. We’re investigating that opportunity. As well, we’re looking at our obligations and requirements under silva culture to make sure that we’re replenishing the forests. We’ve been up the valley working with communities as far north as the Member’s riding, looking at fast growing willows to see the potential there for biomass. We are doing a lot of work. We’ve tied in with Wilfred Laurier University through our science agenda to look at things like permafrost, the changes to the landscape, what’s happening with climate change as the forest moves north, what that’s doing to different species that make up the boreal forest. We are engaged on many fronts on this particular area.

In the previous capital estimates, I believe it was last year, there were dollars that were supposed to be allocated to a fire tower in my riding with regard to the Schiltee fire tower in Fort McPherson or outside of Fort McPherson. The money was reprofiled and expended in the South Slave region. I’d like to ask the department, at that time I had a commitment from the Minister that those dollars were going to be eventually reprofiled and spent on what it was supposed to be spent on in Fort McPherson, or Schiltee Rock as it’s better known. The commitment has already been made in this House, so when can I see those dollars being reprofiled and allocated for what it was originally intended?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Bohnet.

So when can I see it in the... Is the cheque in the mail or when do I get to see it?

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As the deputy minister indicated, it will be in the next business planning cycle for 2011-2012, I believe. Sorry, 2012-2013. So that will take us into the 17th Assembly. The Member for

Mackenzie Delta will be able to be given that assurance hopefully by the Assembly at that time as well.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Sorry; can I just confirm that we’re on forest management? Is that correct?

Yes, Mr. Bromley. We’re on page 11-8, page 11-9 and page 11-10.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just have a question on the North Slave regional warehouse upgrade that’s scheduled for 2011-2012. I see in the substantiation that there was some consideration to replacing the building, but it was deemed advisable to remediate it rather than replace it. The remediation costs were somewhat over a million dollars. The budget for the work being done is considerably less than that. I don’t see any planning to deal with the rest. I’m just wondering what the department’s plans are. I think we try now in our infrastructure plans to do things on a comprehensive basis and not leave projects hanging. If I’m reading this correctly, there’s a substantial amount of work that needs to be done to bring this 30-year-old warehouse up to code and up to snuff. I’m just wondering what the plans are for the rest of the remediation costs for this building.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Bohnet.

That sounds imminently reasonable to me. I guess perhaps the statement “the total remediation costs for the building was estimated over one million dollars” would more accurately read “the total replacement cost for this building.” I would just ask the Minister if he would check that and confirm that. I’ll leave it at that.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. For confirmation, Mr. Bohnet. Mr. Miltenberger.

Yes, Mr. Chairman, we will confirm remediation versus replacement.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. We’re on page 11-9, activity summary, forest management, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, $1.403 million.

We’ve concluded detail so we will go back to page 11-2 for the department summary. Environment and Natural Resources, department summary, infrastructure investment summary, total infrastructure investment summary, $1.653 million.