Thank you, Mr. Chair. I had indicated I would like to follow up on the specifics by division and so I will here, very briefly.
The proposal for a tank farm to increase capacity and upgrade, code upgrade, and I understand there are some serious challenges, structure challenges that need to be corrected in this community. I’m happy to see that work being undertaken. But I do want to stress again that there are opportunities to avoid the costs of in this case doubling the storage capacity and, of course, with that, the ongoing costs of forever trying to meet the new environmental standards and so on.
The community of Tulita has winter road access. It’s directly on the Mackenzie River. It’s one of the easiest communities to deliver to, of course. It’s a
real, perfect opportunity for reducing our use of fossil fuels. It’s surrounded by forest and they could use the jobs, I’m sure. I can check with my colleague on that, but I bet they could use the jobs in that community. This is a real opportunity where, again, this project demonstrates the high cost of ongoing, and increasing and predictable costs of relying on fossil fuels when we clearly have some alternatives that are available. Those are not solely, of course, the responsibility of this department. This department is helping in that direction, but I think the Minister is answering for the government so I have to ask this question: Why aren’t we avoiding these costs? And while I’m at it, what are the costs of doubling this infrastructure in terms of capacity volume both for gasoline and for diesel versus the cost that’s maybe in a percentage term versus the cost that’s being put to upgrade it to proper code level? Thank you.