Mr. Speaker, there are only two options: proceed or not to proceed. Those are the two options that we have been working with and we were trying to find an alternative solution to this so that at least it would save the GNWT money over time. We are very limited on timing now, so again, we will be updating those two Hay River Members next week and give them more detailed information at that time. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Blake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have some questions for the Minister of Public Works and Services. It has to do with my Member’s statement here today.

I would like to ask the Minister, has there been any action to address the traffic and parking concerns raised at the Moose Kerr School? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Blake. Minister of Public Works, Mr. Beaulieu.

Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. I don’t have that information here with me. I understand that the Member was concerned about the road being very close to the school. I will have the Department of Public Works contact the administrator of the school and see if there is anything that can be done immediately to address that issue. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, also in my statement I mentioned that in 2019 there will be either a replacement or a renovation of the school, so I would like to ask the Minister…

Excuse me, Mr. Blake. I would like to remind Members, while they are in this House, shut the ringers off on your phones. Put them on vibrate or silent. Mr. Blake, I’m sorry, continue.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will start again. In my statement I mentioned that in 2019 the school will either be renovated or replaced. I would like to ask the Minister, will the price to renovate Moose Kerr School in 2019 be close to the cost of a new facility? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, when we are doing a midlife retrofit, such as what the plan is here, I understand that there was already a bit of a retrofit in Moose Kerr School. I believe that was in 2000. If we are referring to this after the 40 years, in 2019, there is a certain point under which we make a decision to replace the facility, if it exceeds a certain percent, if the renovation would exceed a certain percentage of cost of a totally brand new unit. When a retrofit can be brought in and the life of the facility can be extended to a reasonable time period, then that retrofit is done and everything can be replaced and the extension can be done lower than a certain percent of the cost of a new school. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, in 2019 the school will be 50 years old. I would like to ask the department, will the department replace Moose Kerr School? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, determining whether or not this facility will be replaced, again, will be based on the judgment on whether or not the school can be brought up to the standard of the day, with a certain percentage towards what it would cost to replace the whole entire school. But at 50 years old, I imagine that it would be a very close examination with the Department of Education on whether or not it would be more feasible to replace the school. Thank you.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think we could learn something from the Housing department that was going to renovate the Joe Greenland Centre and ended up replacing it.

Will the Minister make sure that the Moose Kerr School is on the red flag list? Thank you.

From what I understand, the school is in the capital plan. So it’s not a situation where it would be put on a red flag list to enter into a capital plan. The school is actually in the capital plan and scheduled for a major renovation or replacement in 2019. Thank you.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Health Minister will tell you he does not have early access to the Auditor General’s report. Of course, he’ll probably tell you it’s all arm’s length, and of course, he doesn’t know anything about it until it’s tabled by yourself, Mr. Speaker. This is a paradox that now sits before this House.

Can the Minister of Health explain why the wording in the Minister’s statement given on February 25th of this year mimics much of the wording in the report tabled by yourself, Mr. Speaker, yesterday, and the report I’m referring to is the Auditor General’s report. Is this a case, and only the Minister can answer this, of the Department of Health and Social Services, Minister Abernethy as Minister, getting ahead of the report before the public had its shot fairly to review this? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister of Health, Mr. Abernethy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I got my first briefing on the Auditor General’s report the day before the Auditor General tabled it and I got that report and that briefing from the Auditor General himself. I did not see the report until yesterday when it was tabled. In fact, I read it while sitting here in Committee of the Whole and that was the first time that I saw the document.

But I’m not a moron; I was involved in the review of the Child and Family Services Act in the 16th Assembly and I participated with Mr. Bromley and Ms. Bisaro and Mr. Krutko and Mr. Beaulieu while we travelled throughout the Northwest Territories and listened clearly to the people of the Northwest Territories about the challenges that they were facing with respect to child and family services. I became the Minister four months ago. Immediately after I became the Minister of Health and Social Servicers, I sat down and I read the review of the Child and Family Services Act from the 16th Assembly and it doesn’t take rocket science to look at the report, dig into the department and realize that there are challenges. I reviewed the act, I started having discussions with the department and, clearly, without question – and it doesn’t take an idiot to figure this out – we have accountability issues, we have reporting issues, we have performance issues and I am the Minister of Health and Social Services and I’m committed to making these improvements. I was one of the ones who championed for the review in the 16th Assembly and

I truly care about the child and families of the Northwest Territories.

I wanted to make a statement in the House to let the Members know that things are happening. It came up in committee, it came up in front of the House when we did the budget review. So I appreciate the Member’s opinion, but I accept it for what it is, an opinion. Thank you.

I won’t call a point of order on the Minister’s opinion of himself, but I will leave it at that.

The arm’s length of this report must be pretty short because they’re using such similar language as it is in the report tabled by you, delivered by the Auditor General, Mr. Speaker. The Minister’s statement on February 25th stands on the record of saying why is

this information very, very similar in your statement as the department’s response. It says the department was trying to get ahead of this by saying, here are the answers and when it shows up a week later just pretend, oh, we’re tweaking everything. Can the Minister, without a long story about how great the world is in the 16th Assembly

and his good friends hanging out with him, explain why the wording is so, so similar? It tells me that they’re trying to get ahead of this. Thank you.

Thank you. It kind of sounds like the Member didn’t review the Child and Family Services Act from the 16th Assembly

because the two are very similar. Thank you.

The answers provided by the departments are very, I don’t know how to describe it, are exceptionally similar to the answers provided in the Auditor General’s report. So I would say this: Why are they identical? Only the Minister can answer this and if he wants to continue to dodge

and try to play games about, oh well, it’s this or it’s this, and now the Member hasn’t read the report, he can play games, but the public can see this. The fact is there’s zero accountability on this and they’re getting ahead of the Auditor General, which breaks the spirit and the intent of consensus government and that has to stop.

Thank you. I’d hardly say that we got ahead. I was talking about some of the positive things that we were doing and the Auditor General clearly indicated that we’re not. So I would say that the things I was speaking to are the good things that we’re trying to do in response to the 16th Assembly. Frankly, much of the wording in

both of those documents is consistent and I would encourage the Member to maybe review or read the review of the Child and Family Services Act from the 16th Assembly. Thank you.

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

I’ve read that report. I don’t need to be schooled by the Minister. The facts lay simply before themselves. The Minister’s statement on February 25th , the language is practically identical

to chapters 39, 41, 19, 42 and 80, as oh, things are wonderful, but yet if you read the Auditor General’s report pointing to those sections, it’s similar. It only draws one conclusion of the everyday person: the department doesn’t want to be responsible for these things so they’re downplaying them upfront and then they’re going to use the angle, oh, but don’t worry we’re on the file, so let’s not get too excited.

Can the Minister explain simply why the wording is identical and we’ll deal with that so we can all move forward? Thank you.