Madam Chair, I am very curious so I will certainly see that. Sidestepping this, but sort of along a similar vein, does Public Works ever drop a bit of, and I will just use the term – it may not sound friendly, but – the black listing sort of process where we have had contractors who have been unable to fulfill their obligations, whether they’re architects, engineers, contractors and construction, for major projects? I’m not talking about delivery of stationery. I’m talking about meaningful ones. How

do we report on those types of things? Do we have a way of ensuring that we just don’t keep hiring the same people who make the same types of mistakes on and on? That is a critical concern when we get to large projects. Do we have any enforcement tools that can create a list? I hate to use the word “black list,” but I’m going to say create a list to say, look, you screwed up on three projects in a row. We’ve just had nothing but disputes with you. Yes, you’re the low bidder, and yes, theoretically you can say you comply, but at the end of the day it creates a nightmare for us, you can’t do this project. Thank you.

Madam Chair, we are a public government so we can’t actually black list contractors. In many cases, in problems that exist, the GNWT is not always a party to contractual agreements between general contractors and their subs. A lot of the times, issues are coming to me about subs and the issues that a primary contractor may be having with some of their subs. These subs are contracted to the person we’re contracted with. Our relationship is with the contractor, not with the subs.

The GNWT procurement policies and contract regulations do not permit the government to actually black list contractors from competing on public tenders as a result of unsettled disputes that subcontractors may have with other suppliers.

On larger projects, the GNWT requires that the general contractor provide a labour and/or material bond. This bond is specifically in place to provide protection to subcontractors and suppliers with outstanding claims against a general contractor. The GNWT is not in a position to interfere with this legal process established in our contracts for the protection of our subcontractors.

We make sure the bond is there so that subcontractors are safe. If we have an issue with a contractor on the actual delivery of a contract, there are mechanisms in place for us to seek remedy on an individual contractor. But as far as dealing with their subs, and this is where I have seen a number of people have concerns about a primary based on something that a sub is concerned about, and we can’t do that. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Abernethy. Mr. Hawkins, your time is up. I’ll put you back on the list, if you wish. Mr. Dolynny.

Thank you, Madam Chair. This is the sixth department that we’re in the middle of process review for main estimates and I’m always haunted by the voices of our Minister of Finance, baton down the hatches, fiscal restraint, and yet when I look at this directorate in terms of what we’re doing just in compensation and benefits and changes to the overall structure of number of personnel, I find myself at odds with what I’m

hearing from the Finance side of our government versus what we’re seeing in this department.

Madam Chair, since 2011-2012 we’ve seen with the main estimates today an 18 – if my calculations are correct – an 18.9 percent increase in compensation and benefits, and even since the revised estimates of last year, we’re seeing a 14 percent increase in our compensation and benefits. Can I get a rationale as to why we need to see such growth given the fact that this exceeds, far exceeds forced growth and where we’ve had issues with some of our other budgets where we can’t even get forced growth in program development, but yet we seem to have more than enough money to deal with more personnel? Can I get a comment on that, Madam Chair?

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Minister Abernethy.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Unfortunately, we go page by page, if the Member were to go a few pages in, he would see that we have done a reorganization within the department. Asset management has gone down, the positions in asset management have moved into the directorate. There is zero change at the bottom line of the department other than some forced growth as a result of salary, UNW levels, but we moved a number of positions that used to be in asset management into the directorate. The increases that the Member is talking about are a direct result of that move, not a change in a giant addition of positions into this department.

Okay, I’ll give the Minister that benefit. Maybe I’ll ask my questions more so on the net change in the directorate. We’ve seen an increase in the number of positions in Yellowknife with 70 positions. There’s been a net increase of six positions overall. My question is: Why Yellowknife? Thank you.

Thanks. If the Member goes to page 7-18, which is asset management, he’ll see that six positions have been taken out of asset management, and if he then turns to page 7-14 he will see that six positions have been added into the directorate. These positions haven’t changed their location, they haven’t changed their job. We’ve changed the reporting relationship. There was a restructuring in the department. It isn’t an addition of positions to Yellowknife in any way, shape or form. The positions existed, the incumbents are still sitting in their seats, they’re still sitting on the same floor and they’re still doing the same job.

Okay, strike two for the Member. Alright, I’ve got one more bat here and I’m going to put everything into this swing here. The concern I have is we don’t see any positions here, and I know I’m jumping one page and I apologize, because I’m talking about the directorate here, no representation

of directorate in the Sahtu. I found that to be quite odd, given the economic activity in the Sahtu area that we would have seen directorate positions. Now, has that been looked at with respect to a reallocation in decentralization of directorate personnel? Why aren’t we seeing the Sahtu mentioned in this capacity? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. I’ll allow you to jump ahead a page. Minister Abernethy.

Thank you, Madam Chair. We are committed as a government, not just as a department, to getting positions decentralized where appropriate, and in the Public Works and Services we did create one new position and we located it in Hay River.

With respect to the Sahtu and Public Works and Services, the Sahtu is actually administered out of our Inuvik office, and we do have employees in Public Works and Services in the Sahtu and we’ll continue to do that. As work increases, we may find that we’re in a position where we have to consider additional resources in the Sahtu, but right now the requirements for deferred maintenance, the requirement for the build with respect to the new health centre and long-term care facility, those are being dealt with by our regional office in Inuvik.

Thank you, Minister. Next on my list is Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you. One of the questions I wanted to continue following up on in a similar vein was general contractors not paying their subs. Although I know that the department will have a, I’ll say a canned answer where they’ll say, well, it’s hands off and it’s not their problem, but that sort of speaks to the diligence I talked about earlier. I realize we’re a public government so we cannot necessarily blacklist per se, but how do we deal with that when we have general contractors not fulfilling, well I’ll call it their moral obligation but by all means their financial obligations by paying their subs? The bond will be the answer, but yet in some cases as of recent, I’m aware that one particular one had signed off and said that they did pay them. So what remedies does the GNWT have if we lose our rights under holding their bond in place? I mean, do we have any down-the-road rights to deal with these types of organizations? That’s a major concern. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister Abernethy.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Claims between contractors and their subs could range from a huge, huge variety of situations. A bond is a time-sensitive tool, and if a subcontractor with a legitimate claim fails to take action under the bond on the assumption that the GNWT will intervene for some reason, they may

jeopardize their ability to pursue relief provided by the surety. We make sure that the large projects have bonds in place to protect the subs and we make sure that those are adhered to, but individuals have to make sure that they utilize them as well.

Thank you. In large public infrastructure projects, and I dare not attempt to define what that may or may not be, but has there ever been any consideration that instead of writing the general to sign off on the fact that they paid their contractors or subcontractors in good faith, has the government ever considered writing the subs to ensure that they’ve been up to speed or paid up to date? Now, I realize that every dispute can’t be a simple yes or no, saying yes, we’ve been paid up to date or no, we haven’t. So I suspect and I recognize the difficulty there, but there would be ways of ensuring that they are paying, so when they’re signing off that that’s part of the compliance agreement to ensure that leads to their bond being released. Thank you.

Thanks, and I’ll go to the deputy for some more specifics, but at the end of the day we require our contractors to have a bond in place for their subcontractors and our contract is with the primary. The project that we’re getting is from the primary, and our dealings and our negotiations are with the primary. Their contracts are separate, independent legal documents between them and another party and it would be inappropriate for us to interfere with a separate legal contract between two other parties. We want to make sure that everybody is protected in the process. We make sure that the bonds are in place for these large projects, but for some more specifics I will go to the deputy minister.

Thanks, Minister Abernethy. Mr. Guy.

Thank you, Mr. Guy. Mr. Hawkins.

Is it normal for the government to be named in disputes when subcontractors have problems with the general? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Guy. Minister Abernethy.

Thank you, Madam Chair. With respect to litigation, individuals looking to bring a lawsuit against somebody tend to throw large nets and try to capture as many people as they can. They’ll write as many names on the list as they can, hoping to catch somebody. We have bonds in place, we have contracts in place and our dealings are with the primaries.