Thank you. I hope that works out. As I understand it, these are fairly dramatic in terms of the size and implication. The wiping out a road is a small thing in an event such as this. Obviously, there is a concern there, but it sounds like the department is aware of that and working on that.
The Minister mentioned $2 million for maintenance, and that remains to be seen – again it’s an estimate – and that there will be hiring as a result of that. He used that to justify the economic development aspects of the road. That’s a very strange statement to me. We can hire people without having a road there if we just want to pour government dollars into hiring people. I thought we were talking about real economic development.
I appreciated the Chair allowing me earlier, after letting the Minister wax loquacious several times about his dreams about this project for as long as he can remember, and I appreciated the Chair allowing me to question in that regard. I’d like to ask one more, with the Chair’s permission. Have we considered, in terms of economic development that would actually address the cost of living and many other broad government goals, self-reliance and so on of our communities, a way to engage their real skills other than grading and digging? Have we considered working to make these two communities the first totally renewable energy communities in North America with less of an investment but much greater provision of very long-term and meaningful jobs that would allow skill development and engagement of our population up there? Thank you.