Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Sorry, Mr. Ramsay. Before closing comments. I’ll go to the Minister of Transportation, Michael McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Premier has already outlined the scrutiny that this project has been under since inception. This motion that has been put forward by the Member is really a call for what already occurs. The Auditor General already conducts an audit of the Deh Cho Bridge Project through the consolidated financial statements. We as a department, as well as other departments, cooperate fully with the Office of the Auditor General as they perform this audit. In the past year we’ve already provided reports and other information requested by their office and will continue to do so.

I think it’s pretty clear in the last couple of days that our focus has been on moving forward with the completion of this project, the Deh Cho Bridge Project. I’m a little concerned that it would not be very helpful to impede some of the good work by initiating an audit midstream. These reviews, audits of this type, are usually done at the end of a project to ensure that all decisions that have gone into a project are taken fully and considered.

I’ve already made commitments in this House to do a thorough review of this project when it is completed. Of course I would certainly support further review by the Auditor General, if the Auditor General thinks it’s appropriate. However, she makes her own decisions to that end and decides which projects and programs warrant further scrutiny. The question is not whether or not there should be a performance audit by the Auditor General but rather when that audit should occur. Should it be now or should it be at the usual time when projects are at their completion? Having said that, we would welcome any opportunity to demonstrate how we as a government have been working at this and managed this project and made decisions related to this project.

I do want to point out, however, that I’m a little concerned that there is some suggestion by the wording of this motion as to all employees and officials actively cooperating. It almost implies wrongdoing by our department officials. I take offence to that. I think if that’s the intent, then we need to have some evidence to that front. Maybe the wording should be changed. I don’t think that’s very appropriate to say that we almost suggest that we would not cooperate. That is something we would do and have done in the past. I think the staff, our staff that work very hard, would take some offence to that and I certainly do.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will be supporting this motion, because I believe that the situation we find ourselves today, this is one of the largest P3 projects that we’ve taken on. We’ve established legislation that was supposed to protect us, that being the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation Act. We had a concession agreement we were hoping spelled out the terms and conditions and now we find ourselves in the situation we’re in today where we have to take on $165 million into our books and deal with the effect that is going to have going forward.

Not having a P3 policy in place that clearly identifies these type of arrangements, I think it’s better to learn at the front end from your mistakes than find out down the road that you’re well over your head in regard to these types of scenarios. I think it’s important that we take the time and allow for those questions to be asked by the Auditor General and review those documents that we have in place whether it’s the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation Act and exactly what was in the concession agreement and how the financing of this was handled.

Yes, there were some things out of our control, but at the end of the day we are now burdened by a project that totally ended up being out of control. I think it’s important that we can direct the Auditor General from this House to consider certain matters that we feel are important and that she takes the time to assess those particular matters. That’s what this motion is doing.

It’s important to realize that we, if anything, want to ensure not only ourselves here in this House but the public that we are doing due diligence by allowing this project to be scrutinized by the Auditor General to ensure that everything was done in our power so that next time we get into these type of arrangements we have the legislative tools in place to protect the public purse and ensure the transparency that is required and that we are able to avoid these type of situations to happen in the future.

With that, I will be supporting the motion.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. To the motion. I will allow the mover of the motion closing comments. Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First off I’d like to thank all the Members that have stood up and indicated they will support the motion that we have before us today.

Just to a few of the comments I heard, yes, the Auditor General was too busy to look into the process that allowed the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation and the relationship between the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation. That was a few years back. We all know much has changed in that time.

For example, the contractor of record, ATCON Construction, of which we had a $165 million negotiated contract, is gone. The Deh Cho Bridge Corporation, for all intents and purposes, is finished. The $165 million is on the back of the residents of the Northwest Territories. That is a lot that has changed.

Again, I think, for me, responsibility and accountability and transparency are words I do not take lightly and I do not use lightly. I’ve been after answers and trying to hold people to account for making decisions they have made. I hope through an effort like this with the Auditor General of Canada we can hopefully put some closure to this, get some recommendations from the Auditor General of Canada that will point us in the right direction on what went wrong so that we can learn lessons as we move forward.

I’m very disappointed that the Premier and his Cabinet are going to abstain from this vote. This motion is not calling on this government to do anything. I feel badly that my colleagues across the way cannot stand up here today with their colleagues across the floor and support a motion like this knowing full well that mistakes were made, that there were major issues with our relationship with the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation, the process that allowed it to happen, and the fact that we were here for I think it was over five hours yesterday debating a supplementary appropriation for $165 million. Again, I think you’re making a mistake by not standing up here. I really do believe that. I think you should stand up. I think you guys should have the courage to stand up and vote with us on this motion. That’s how strongly I feel about this motion.

The other thing I heard from some of my Cabinet colleagues across the way was the word “cooperate” was causing them some consternation. I believe they’re reading too much into the motion. The word “cooperate” is a nice word. I think all of our officials, whether they were working for contractors or the Department of Transportation, there’s nothing, there’s no negative connotation to the word “cooperate” in this motion. It’s not implying anything. I think these guys are again reading too much into this motion. I would encourage them to vote in favour of it. It’s the right thing to do. It’s the responsible thing to do.

I thank those that are going to have the courage today to hopefully direct the Auditor General of Canada to have a good look into the Deh Cho Bridge Project and the troubles that it’s caused this government and the people in the Northwest Territories. We don’t even know the future ramifications of those problems yet.

I’d also like to request a recorded vote.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The Member is requesting a recorded vote. All those in favour of the motion, please stand.

All those opposed to the motion, please stand. All those abstaining from the motion, please stand.

The results of the recorded vote: nine for, none against, six abstaining.

---Carried

Item 18, first reading of bills. The honourable Premier, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek unanimous consent to proceed with first reading of Bill 6, Supplementary Appropriation Act (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 2, 2010-2011.

---Unanimous consent granted.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, colleagues. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Deh Cho, that Bill 6, Supplementary Appropriation Act (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 2, 2010-2011, be read for the first time.

---Carried

Item 19, second reading of bills. Item 20, consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters: Tabled Document 4-16(5), Executive Summary of the Report of the Joint Review Panel for the Mackenzie Gas Project, with Mr. Krutko in the chair.

I’d like to call Committee of the Whole to order. We have Tabled Document 4-16(5). What is the wish of committee? Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I move that we report progress.

---Carried

I will now rise and report progress.

Could I have report of Committee of the Whole, Mr. Krutko.

Mr. Speaker, your committee would like to report progress and that the report of Committee of the Whole be concurred with.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. A motion is on the floor. Do we have a seconder? The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.

---Carried

Item 22, third reading of bills. Mr. Clerk, orders of the day.

Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Accordingly, this House stands adjourned until Thursday, March 25, 2010, at 1:30 p.m.

---ADJOURNMENT

The House adjourned at 5:11 p.m.