I’ll commit to have discussions with the Minister of ITI, and we’ll look at what’s being recommended in terms of going forward. I’ll make sure that I have enough

information about the mechanics of setting up a tax credit, so that if the Member raises the issue or wants to discuss it further, we’ll have that detail so we can have an informed discussion. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.

Thanks, Mr. Speaker. I hate to say it but, for clarity, it just sounded like he was going to have a discussion about the process and maybe even just muse about the idea. Really, what I’m asking for is for the Department of Finance to investigate the costs, procedures and policies required. It doesn’t mean go write them. It just means go investigate the mechanics of creating one and how much it would cost us. That’s the type of discussion I’m just trying to get on the record. That’s all I’m asking. Would he be willing to do that so then we can have a full discussion when it comes to budget time next time around to say is this something we want to do, because if this is what it is, this is what it will cost? Thank you very much.

When it’s time to discuss and review the finance budget and business plan, we will be ready for a fulsome discussion on film tax credit. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Range Lake, Mr. Dolynny.

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. The Minister of Transportation, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Once we complete the environmental assessment, it goes through the review process. I’d be more than happy to share that level of detail with all Members of this House. Thank you.

I think the general public is a bit concerned here that this government, this department received one round of $2.5 million, just received a round of another $2.5 million, and we’re going to be breaking for the summer months, we’re not going to be back here in the House until

October. Again, the question to ask: When can we see an expectation of information being shared to the public regarding the first round of due diligence studies of the so-called bore holes and how much aggregate or sand is out there? My second question: When can we see this new round of information be available to the public? Thank you.

That would undoubtedly happen this coming fall. It’s important that this work gets done. I can’t underline that enough. We need to know what we’re getting ourselves into. We fully intend to try to identify where the granular material is. This is our effort to do that, to go through the environmental assessment process so that when decisions are made by this government, we will know what we are getting ourselves into. Thank you.

Again, I do appreciate it is a very complex project and we’ve got to do our work to make sure we’ve got all the answers. The point is that we have done quite a bit of work thus far on this project and we get to that point where it’s called a tipping point. We’re pot-committed, so to speak, in poker terms. I want to make sure that before we get to that next round of ask from this government, can the Minister make guarantees to this House that we’ll get answers to these first rounds of so-called information before there’s a future ask of money from this government? Thank you.

We had hoped to get before committee and give a presentation on the status of the Inuvik-Tuk highway. We have provided a written update to the committee, and we were happy to do that. This fall when we have more information, again, we’ll be very happy to work with Members on that side of the House to show them what we’ve done that will identify where the granular material is and next steps forward. We’re going to need the support of Members to ensure that this project moves forward. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Dolynny.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, I do appreciate the complexity of the project. However, will the Minister commit to publishing publicly all findings in the next round when we meet back in October? At the next time of session, would he commit to publishing all findings so that the public can see clearly what Members are seeing so they are, in fact, informed as we head down the rabbit hole on this very expensive project? Thank you.

When that material becomes available, we will ensure that Members are brought up to speed on that material. Again, our best guess would be it would happen sometime this fall. I know we’re back in the House in October. Hopefully, during the October sitting we can have

that time to sit down with committee and go over the findings that we have arrived at. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was listening to the questions very intently by the Member for Range Lake and I just wanted some clarity on this particular subject. It’s not coming from an angle of criticism but more as an official clarity on the issue of 75/25 split. That’s been bouncing out there quite a bit. I’m not speaking pro or against the project. I’m just more committed and curious, of course, around the firmness of that offer from the federal government, because this is going to be an important element of the dialogue on the future bridge. If the Minister of Transportation could get that on the record, the willingness of the federal government to continue that 75/25 split if it goes beyond what we believe is the early estimates for the road. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The Minister of Transportation, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We continue discussions with the federal government on the funding. It is $150 million. Again, those discussions are ongoing on how that funding is going to roll out and what the split will be, and we’ll continue those discussions. Thank you.

Would the Minister be able to provide some correspondence on that type of discussion they seem to be having with their federal counterparts? Everyone in this House knows that this is going to be a challenging and very emotional debate if that 75/25 breaks down. We don’t know where that number will end and that’s why it’s fundamentally important early on to know that we do support the intent of this project and we have the support of the federal government to get behind it before it starts. As we know – and I’m not trying to turn this into the Deh Cho Bridge example – but who knows where the costs could go if we don’t firm them up early? Thank you.

We have to get a determination of what the price is going to be on the construction of the Inuvik-Tuk highway. Before we go to the federal government and get that number, we need to know exactly what we’re talking about. Again, this is part of the exercise of doing the geotechnical work, going through the environmental assessment, and like other partially federally funded projects in this territory that we’ve seen through the Building Canada Plan, we need to do an environmental assessment first. We are going to continue down that road. Again, Mr. Speaker, the

discussions are ongoing with the federal government and we will continue to move the project forward with the thoughts that the Members have brought up today. Thank you.

I just want to make sure it’s clear on the record, I’m fully supportive of the money being spent today on the environmental assessment and I wouldn’t want anyone to think that that isn’t the case. I’ve even stood steadfast on any questions from the public when they say we should stop now before it goes out of control. This is absolutely critical information to get the right price. I don’t change that.

Is the Minister saying today that we have to get all the environmental assessment work done for us to be able to develop a price in order for us to have a formal discussion with the federal government regarding the 25/75 split? If that’s the case, that is the answer for the House. I just need that as the answer when the public asks me what’s happening with the money and what’s happening with the cost of the road. Thank you.

The federal government’s expectation of us is that we would go through the environmental assessment. We would find out what the construction costs would be on the project. Again, we will be going forward to the federal government if that price gets higher than the $150 million that they’ve committed. That’s a discussion that we will continue to have with the federal government as this project moves forward as we know better what the costs are going to be. I can assure the Member and other Members of this House that that is an important part to all of this and we will continue to pursue that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Item 9, written questions. Item 10, returns to written questions. Mr. Robert McLeod.