We talked earlier about the increase of oil and gas in the Sahtu and I want to ask the Minister if he has had any type of preliminary discussions with his federal counterparts to see that this important proposal seeks a favourable response so we can start developing the resources in the Sahtu in a responsible manner and that the Mackenzie Valley Highway is a must for the people in the Northwest Territories.

At this time we are discussing the feasibility of perhaps traveling to Ottawa to discuss this directly with the Minister, or waiting for the federal government to do the allocations based on whichever way they intend to allocate the money that’s put into all of this, including money for the Building Canada Plan or any money as far as municipal infrastructure. Thank you.

Thank you. The delegation that actively lobbied for the Inuvik-Tuk highway did a

successful job. I’m sure they can use some of their points as to how to start working on the Mackenzie Valley Highway. Specifically, I’m speaking from Wrigley all the way up to the Dempster Highway. I’m looking at a huge chunk of the road into the Sahtu, and with the oil and gas activity, I’ve asked the Minister, is there a game plan from the Government of the Northwest Territories when they go down to Ottawa to lobby the government, who then would see the importance of this highway, along with the activity that we could start earlier in building the Mackenzie Valley Highway. Thank you.

Thank you. Yes, our intention is to lobby the federal government with the whole Corridors for Canada III. We have not completely determined how we are going to do that, but we are developing a plan to approach the government. Whether we do it and communicate with them in writing or if we communicate with them face-to-face is something that we have yet to determine. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think one of the most effective ways is to lobby, to go down face-to-face with your partners to show the benefits of the Mackenzie Valley Highway from Wrigley further up north. I want to ask the Minister, is that something the Members will have some input on as to what type of lobbying will seek the most benefit from our proposal in Corridors III.

Thank you. Again, we haven’t made a final determination of what that lobbying would look like. We can keep the Members advised as we move through the plan to determine how we hope to launch our lobbying efforts with the federal government. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. The Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My first set of oral questions was, if I may define it as chapter one on the Deh Cho Bridge today. Now chapter two, I’d like to talk about the deficiencies and certainly the outstanding deficiencies left on the Deh Cho Bridge. I see the Minister is flipping papers so I’ll do a little bit of a stretched out intro.

The issue is such that we need to fully understand what the deficiencies are. So, I’d like to ask the Minister about some of them in particular, but let’s start off by enlightening the public. With the list of deficiencies, although I don’t have them, would the Minister be willing to table publicly what all the deficiencies are and what we estimate are the true costs of outstanding deficiencies, as well, can we compare that to the amount of money we still have

left on the project to address all these deficiencies? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister of Transportation, Mr. Beaulieu.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m not sure of what deficiencies the Member is speaking of. I know there was some work being completed on the bridge and that work is underway. I think the majority of that work is completed at this time. Thank you.

Thank you. There are a lot of deficiencies and I understand are still outstanding on this particular bridge. As such, that’s why I was asking for it publicly. I don’t have a copy, but I can certainly start with one of the deficiencies to enlighten him.

As I understand, right now the scour rock issue at the Deh Cho Bridge is still outstanding and I thought it was being addressed through a negotiated contract. Would the Minister be able to confirm if there was a negotiated contract to solve the scour rock problem and, as such, is it still in place? Because I certainly have seen not one but two tenders on the same issue come forward. So if the Minister could enlighten the House on that. Thank you.

Thank you. The piers have been mapped with scour rock over the past summer. There has been a stockpile of rock, 6,000 cubic metres of rock has been stockpiled. A public tender for shaping and placing the rock is out and it closes today. Thank you.

Thank you. So, then, there are deficiencies. Okay, so how much was the negotiated contract negotiated for with the folks in Fort Providence in partnership with Ruskin? Thank you.

Thank you. As I indicated, the tender for shaping and placing of the scour rock, the tender is out. The bids are in and the tender is closed, but I don’t have the costs because I don’t have the evaluation of the tenders at this time. Thank you.

Final, short supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. How much is left in the reserve to address all these deficiencies and would the Minister table publicly a list of all the deficiencies so we know what we’re dealing with? Thank you.

Thank you. There is $7 million left to do any of the deficiencies. There’s a list of deficiencies beyond the piers, the scour rock around the piers. I can present that. I could table it. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are in follow-up to my colleague Ms. Bisaro’s questions with respect to the Giant Mine. I’d like to ask the Minister of the Environment, I know he’s aware that there’s a potential conflict of interest here with the proponent, the double role that the government is playing in this case being that there is no mining company and we are both the proponent and the regulator. Now the federal government has developed a firewall to try and keep the processes separate between the regulatory side and the proponent side.

Do we have such a firewall between the two components to avoid such a conflict of interest in the GNWT’s situation? Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister of Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. Miltenberger.

Yes, Mr. Speaker. We as well try to make sure we work to make sure we have those same type of firewalls. Thank you.

Thanks to the Minister. I’m glad we have that and I hope the Minister at some point can explain to us in detail how that works. But for now, I’m sure I heard the Minister say that he has rejected some of the environmental assessment recommendations, accepted some and proposing to modify some, accept, reject and modify, but I’m not aware of any decisions having been made at the Ministerial level yet on these environmental assessment recommendations.

Was the Minister speaking for himself or was he speaking on behalf of the proponent team, the actual project team, which is the proponent in this case?

At this juncture, I was speaking to the contents of the letter that was written to Mr. Spence and signed off by both governments.