Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I’d like to thank my colleagues Mr. Hawkins and Mr. Menicoche.
Members are pleased that the Department agreed to share the Process Convention for Review for alternatively financed projects with the committee, mentioned in the department’s response to the Auditor General’s first recommendation. This process convention forms the basis of a P3 policy.
The findings in Paragraph 33 of the Auditor General’s report raised concern among some Members. In September 2007, the Contract of Indemnification Exemption Regulations was amended to allow for a specific indemnity in the Concession Agreement in favour of the Deh Cho Bridge Corporation. This amendment exempted the Minister of Finance from, among other statutory requirements, the requirement to give Members of the Legislative Assembly at least 14 days notice,
and enabled the GNWT to make a major financial commitment that now approaches $200 million. Members noted that the Concession Agreement was signed and the amendment to the regulations made after the Legislature had been dissolved.
During the public meeting, the Auditor General’s review team expressed the opinion that the Executive Council acted within its legal authority to make the amendment. The Financial Management Board Secretariat confirmed that the GNWT had used exemption regulations to enter into a contract or agreement on previous occasions.
The committee is pleased that, as indicated in the public meeting, the government is considering bringing forward changes to the Financial Administration Act that would modify the current process so that all indemnities would come before the Legislative Assembly.
Phase II
The committee is satisfied that the department has updated the information in its risk matrix in response to the Auditor General’s second recommendation, that the department update the risk matrix and provide more complete information on mitigation measures responding to potential risks.
The department provided the committee a measure of confidence that it is closely monitoring the day-to-day progress of the bridge. Department officials identified plans for environmental remediation at the site, electrical work, and clean-up within the project’s current budget and general environmental liabilities. The department has considered the cost of an ice bridge and ferry service should the bridge be delayed. The department has $1 million in a separate budget for toll collection, which, it concedes, is small, but the amount is being discussed.
The department did not address lifecycle or additional remedial costs in its responses. The committee observes that paragraph 65 of the Auditor General’s report includes mention of a catwalk as a necessary part of the design, however, in the public meeting, the department stated it has decided to build the bridge without one. The committee is at a loss to explain this discrepancy.
Recommendation 2
The Standing Committee on Government Operations recommends that the Department of Transportation thoroughly investigate the necessity and practicality of installing a catwalk, and report back to Members with other options for maintenance and inspection duly compared, within the scope of the Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code.
Mr. Speaker, I’d like to pass on the continued reading of this report to my colleague Mr. Yakeleya. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.