The Minister keeps trying to do a smoke and mirrors show on this particular problem. He says the old Minister. Every time he keeps referring to the old Minister. The old Minister actually signed the contract. That’s the difference here. The present Minister is responsible for the implementation for the contract while it’s still active, live, valid, et cetera. The Minister keeps avoiding that reality. Why does the Minister refuse to take responsibility for the present legal contract? Has it already been struck down and thrown away that we’re not aware of? We need some clarification why he’s refusing to deal with the present contract on the books. Thank you.
Robert Hawkins on Question 111-17(3): Deh Cho Bridge Project Cost Overruns
In the Legislative Assembly on June 8th, 2012. See this statement in context.
Question 111-17(3): Deh Cho Bridge Project Cost Overruns
Oral Questions
June 7th, 2012
See context to find out what was said next.