Thank you, Madam Chair. I think we’re getting some nice crunchy comments here. Thanks to the Minister for the opening statement here.

We recently took over utilities for all government infrastructure, and I didn’t hear anything on what the real opportunities and efficiencies are that we’re realizing here, locating problems where utilities are clearly over what they should be and so on, reducing costs, so what have we learned on that front.

The $8 million on operations and capital expenditure to deal with our maintenance deficit; somehow that’s magic. We’re only spending $8 million and suddenly we’re down to $290 million. That’s pretty miraculous to me, so I’m not sure I understand all the aspects of that. I assume this is just for building infrastructure and doesn’t include our highway infrastructure which, I’m sure, would be in Transportation where the deficits are increasing in leaps and bounds.

What work has the department done on employing – on the bottom of your page 3 – employment opportunities where they are most needed? You know, that’s an easy statement to make, but some of the members of committee have done research on this and had research work on it, so we need to be careful when we say statements like that. I’d like to hear how that’s being defined, or what the Minister will do to make sure that’s defined in the realest sense possible, so that we actually do capitalize on what we’re trying to do there.

I’m also interested in what we have achieved in terms of settlement maintainers and apprentices. What sorts and numbers and what communities. That could come out in specific comments later, if the Minister prefers.

The 25,000 tonnes sounds really good in terms of reducing government greenhouse gas emissions, 9.2 million litres saved, but the real question is: What is this in relation to our total emissions? That is, combined with new fuel demands of new infrastructure, what is our net reduction in greenhouse gas emissions and what is our net reduction in fossil fuel consumption?

I didn’t hear anything about the Green Procurement Policy. I, idealistically, look for this every year. Commitments have been made repeatedly to get this from a hollow couple of sheets of paper to an actual meaningful policy that’s implemented and enforced, and helps us to realize the opportunities we can for efficiencies and so on when we’re purchasing materials, supplies and small equipment.

Also, I’d be interested in any comments the Minister might have on our contracting practices. How are

we dealing with things to be more clear so it’s a fair playing field? How are we preventing over-specifications for contracts that unfairly shift the bias towards one supplier because he couldn’t meet a brand name or whatever? And, of course, sole source contracts. I don’t know how much the department deals with that sort of thing, but that is an issue that I hear a lot about in the public and see concerns myself from the stats we do have. Thank you, Madam Chair.