Thank you, Mr. Bouchard.

We’ll allow the Minister to reply. Minister

Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I’ll respond to some of them and

then I’ll ask Mr. Guy to respond to the Woodland Manor and update requested on the health centre and Mr. Neudorf to touch on dredging.

The municipal funding, as we put it out yesterday, has been kept at $28 million, in spite of our attempts to do passive restraints but it’s important to protect that funding.

The issue of building Highway No. 1 to the border and the need to increase widening, I’ll note that as well.

I’ll ask, once again, Mr. Guy to touch on the other schools that possibly need upgrades. The French schools, we’re not in a position to do what the Member has suggested at this point. We have to, in fact, take a wait-and-see attitude.

I appreciate the comments

on the parks and I’m

sure the Minister of ITI will appreciate those comments. We, after our briefing last night, have the offer and the request for a further sit down with Members,

so we we’ll be happy to do that when the

Members have that time.

I’ll ask Mr. Guy to touch on a number of these other items, Woodland Manor, the hospital, upgrades to SMCC. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. I will now turn it to Mr. Guy.

Thank you, Mr. Guy. I believe I heard the Minister indicate to go to Mr. Neudorf. I will concur. Mr. Neudorf.

Thank you, Mr. Neudorf. Continuing on with the general comments, I have Mr. Blake.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a few comments on the capital, starting with education here. The Moose Kerr School is not going to be on the plans here until 2019, but just from what’s happened here with our capital process with Moose Kerr School, it is up for major retrofit or replacement, and that’s the same case we had here with the Stanton Territorial Hospital. I hope in 2019 that we follow the same practice as we did and replace Moose Kerr School when the time comes. I’m sure we’ll see the cost savings there.

Also under health, the health centre in Tsiigehtchic was built in the mid-

‘80s. It still has the same

linoleum as it did when they built it, many of the same features. It clearly doesn’t look like very much has been done to that except blocking the unit. The 35 years is almost up, so when the time comes I hope that they do replace that building as well.

Just a couple other things with housing. I’m glad to see we are doing a lot of retrofits within my riding and replacing a few units in Fort McPherson. But as I mentioned quite a few times, we are doing a good job retrofitting and replacing units, but there’s a big demand for housing, and even the Finance Minister has been pleading for people to move back to our territory. But where are many of these people going to live with some people on a waiting list for up to three or four years? Are we going to build tents for them? What’s this government’s plan? I mean, we need to build more units. That’s the bottom line.

The other thing was under airports. For many years the community of Tsiigehtchic has been wanting an airport in the community, especially for freeze-up. We are doing a better service now with the ferry and building ice crossings, but for emergency purposes it would be great to have an airport, plus it creates employment.

Residents in my riding are very happy with the recent Building Canada Plan putting money back into the Dempster Highway, Highway No. 8. As we all know, the community of Aklavik would also like to have their road to Willow River put in place. We’re doing a great job there and I commend the Department of Transportation for providing funds to the community to actually purchase a bridge, and we’re hoping that that bridge can be put in place this winter when the time comes. We can’t wait until April as, you know, new year funding. They have to make sure that the community has those funds in place in February to make the most of our winter season.

I see under Transportation, as well, under the marine division, the Louis Cardinal hull upgrade. Many of my constituents want to know when are we going to receive a new ferry. Even a couple of years back the engineers felt that the hull was due for replacement. I’d like to know when we’re going to get a new ferry.

Those are the comments that I have for now.

Thank you, Mr. Blake. I’ll go to the Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ll respond to some. On the Tsiigehtchic Health Centre, we’ll take note of the Member’s concern suggesting that it be replaced as opposed to repaired.

The issue of housing and building more units, of course, is one that we’re going to struggle with as we put more money in, but a lot of that is going to be eaten up b

y the cutbacks of CMHC. That’s on

the list. We hear that from every community.

I’m going to ask, Mr. Chairman, if Mr. Guy can talk to the Moose Kerr School, and I’ll ask Mr. Neudorf if he could touch on the transportation issues tied to the Tsiigehtchic Airport, the Willow River Road and the new ferry to replace the Louis Cardinal.

Thank you, Minister. We’ll go to Mr. Guy.

Thank you, Mr. Guy. Next we’ll go to Mr. Neudorf.

Thank you, Mr. Neudorf. Mr. Blake, do you have some follow-up questions?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just on the Willow River Bridge, I don’t see the point where the department provided this bridge. Installing it was $2 million and all we get on a yearly basis is $200,000. I know the department did provide a bit more than that this past year, which was great, but it’s time for the department to step up here and provide the $2 million to actually put this in place. You know, we’re throwing around $200 million or $300 million here on one highway. A little infrastructure that means a lot to the community would really go a long way

here. This is better than 1 percent of what they’re spending here.

The other thing is with the airport. I know Fort McPherson is an hour and a half away and yet they have an airport. The reasoning why we can’t have an airport in Tsiigehtchic doesn’t make sense. We’re an hour away, yes, but in an emergency situation, which we have many times, it’s up to the community to organize bringing people in, in an emergency. I mean, it’s not up to the health centre. They’ve got a lot of play in this. It’s the people. They take their own responsibility to ensure the safety of the residents and I really don’t appreciate that answer I received.

But, once again, at Moose Kerr School, I hope we do end up replacing that when the time comes, such as we did with the Stanton Territorial Hospital. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Blake. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The fiscal reality is what is driving us all and it’s evidenced quite clearly in the capital plan and we have a much longer list of infrastructure projects than we have money. The issue of prioritizing or having to make choices is always before us. So I appreciate the Member’s frustration on some of these requests.

The Willow River, I’m not sure what the opportunities are. I haven’t talked fully to the Minister of Transportation if there are ways, but we’re now faced with political choices and we’ve capital planned and flexed the process and everything has been through. Any new add-ons are going to have to be the subject for the 18th Assembly and in keeping with it, as well, the typical choices that we’re going to have to make about our funding, but we’ll definitely have the list of needs that have been identified by the Member for his communities. The Moose Kerr School is going to be on the list for, at the very least, a major reno. So we’ll hope, as the Member does, that all the reviews will come up in favour of a replacement. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Committee, we’re on Capital Estimates, 2016-2017. Next I have Mr. Dolynny, followed by Mr. Moses.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I welcome the department here today. I just want to first talk about the economic landscape. As you heard earlier today from the Minister of Finance on the fiscal update, I think it’s important that we view this capital expenditure budget, but I think we need to be wary of some of those high-level issues that we heard and I think many of us know as well.

We know that this current government, the 17th Assembly, struggled in balancing expansion of growth and keeping it in mind with revenue growth.

That’s been mentioned many times. This is even more pronounced now when we see our GNWT revenues flat for the next five years, as has been forecast, and yet we’re still seeing capital spending at the 2 percent level. Another way of looking at it is we have a two to one relationship there. This proportion of relationship will only mean that our short-term debt financing will go to appease our capital appetite in the next couple of years if we continue down this pathway.

As we’ve heard the Minister earlier today, we cannot continue to go down this deficit spending path as we end the 17th and go into the 18th . We

need to make sure of specific investments for our economic future, we know that’s a given, but continuing to increase our borrowing limits for both short term and long term is not a solution to ensure such a future.

As we’ve heard, we’ve got to live within our means and live within our fiscal capacity, and we’ve got to make sure expenditure growth is controlled. Mr. Chair, I say, without prejudice to the current Minister of Finance, we have to get this House in order, b

ecause from my perspective, we’re heading

down a path where I’m not sure if we’re going to be able to maintain all existing assets as they are and meeting all the legislative requirements that are before us. So I speak caution as we move forward.

As for the current capital plan before committee and for the sake of not repeating some of the same comments of my colleagues of yesterday and today, I can tell you that there have been some issues with the Public Works and Services department so-called red flag list. As you heard yesterday, committee talked about a lot of confusion in this area, and I have to echo those comments. We’re seeing planning studies being done and completed in one year and then showing up as being proposed in the next. A point in question, the Fort Simpson Health Centre was one and the Tulita Health Centre are examples of this confusion. So, the question is, why? Is there any way you can clean it up?

I have a suggestion for the department. If you want faith and committee’s ability to trust this red flag list information, you have to make sure this data is accurate moving forward. We can’t flip-flop from year to year. Second, if we want to proceed, and in the interests of consensus government, the list should be a public, living, breathing document. A lot of the stuff is happening behind the scenes and I think the public would be enriched knowing some of this information that should be at their fingertips. So I challenge the government to set that standard high as we begin the 18th Assembly shortly.

Changing gears, tapping into the Building Canada funding is important. Committee does fully support your efforts. H

owever, as we’ve heard time and

time again, committee has tried to influence and

provide some feedback on the project priorities. As we’ve heard in communication back and forth, sharing your completed list with committee is not asking for our input. So I’m asking, as we move forward, can committee have at least some degree of input as you make your list finalized as you are applying for these much needed funding dollars? Again, a suggestion for improvement for the 18th Assembly.

As committee did appreciate the briefing yesterday regarding the newly proposed P3 Stanton Hospital, it’s unfortunate that we can’t share this with the public. So I challenge the department, I challenge the Minister to try to get this out as soon as we can and provide all those options that we talked about.

One of the things that struck me, and a question that has not been quite rectified, is the issue of funding. Why do we not look at other options for funding for this rather than a P3? I like to use the example, Mr. Chair, the building we’re in right now, the Legislative Assembly. This was done under what was referred to as a public bond. This was an opportunity that money could be raised by Northerners, invested by Northerners and where money stays in the North. I’m really suspect why we didn’t try to use that type of tool to move forward. There was never really a discussion point and never really finalized. Again, I’m hoping that we’re not too far down this garden path that we can actually maybe look at that before we embark on this very expensive P3 initiative.

I know that the department has done a lot of…(inaudible)…money analysis, but everyone knows that this P3 hospital project will not be cheap in the long run. Jobs will more than likely go to lots of Southerners and our local businesses will be left on the sidelines, literally with table scraps. This has held true. We know that there have been issues even in Hay River recently with the same proponents who are looking at building a hospital in Yellowknife.

There are issues in Hay River with many businesses being left high and dry and I

’m not sure

if there are litigation issues in the works, but I can tell you that it does concern me. Knowing that that is the microcosm of what is to come for Yellowknife, I do think we need to have that high level discussion. So again, what guarantee do we have to protect local small business operators that are being shut out of this project? I think that’s a question many businesses have and I know they’ve asked me.

On the subject of this new hospital, I know, again not getting into details, it’s not as public as it should be, but what has been mentioned a little bit here is the re-profiling of the old hospital now. What has not been discussed and talked about is the fact that if this building, this hospital, now gets re-profiled to whatever it is. Whethe

r it’s retail, commercial

space, or even space the government may use in some type of form or arrangement, right now, and my numbers are a little old here, Mr. Chair, but not less than a year ago when the new office building that we constructed came on line there was well over 150,000 square feet of commercial real estate vacant in Yellowknife and that basically represented about 14 percent of vacancy.

Again, I don’t have

the statistics of how much vacant space the re- profiled hospital might offer to the environment around Yellowknife, but my quick calculation, just trying to figure out, it could be up to another 10 percent of commercial vacancy added to an already 14 percent market, thereby lifting the overall commercial vacancy rate to over 20-something percent to be fair.

In the world of investment, this puts an imbalance in any economy and creates a lot of dissention amongst landlords, large landlords and smaller landlords, and what really happens is that larger landlords are usually able to make do during these tough economic times.

It’s the smaller landlords

that don’t. These are the landlords that are going to struggle if we’re putting this much more vacancy on the market. So I caution, and again,

I’d like to hear

the high-level discussion, if that has been researched as to do we have concerns that by doing that we’re going to be creating even more imbalance in an already very tight, very tough marketplace which is commercial real estate. So, again, a bit of a loaded question, but one which gravely affects many of the larger and smaller landlords in the city of Yellowknife.

At committee, as we’ve heard, parks upgrades, I think the chair mentioned that earlier. I, too, want to commend the department for the multitude of park upgrades we’re seeing throughout the Northwest Territories. However, with one caveat, that these beautiful parks it seems that, with climate change I guess, if we want to use it in that loose term, we have the ability to use our parks for longer periods of time. One of these parks closed in the middle of September when really many people camp well into September, even in early October, so I challenge the department as they’re doing their operational plans with their contractors that we need to look at lengthening the opening and the earlier opening of our parks so that the public can actually enjoy a lot of the infrastructure that we’ve provided. Finally, Mr. Chair, there’s been some concern for years that the government’s plan for long-term care beds will not fill what we call the impeding demand, given the dramatic aging of our NWT population. Now, we’ve heard how difficult it is to predict and we’ve heard that there have been many commitments and many planning studies involved, but we haven’t really seen a lot of specific investments. Now, the budget does have some good news, and I would welcome the department’s overall view on how they’re dealing with this

impeding issue of aging in place. Also, with the aging of the NWT population, how are we going to be able to find long-term care beds?

I’ll stop there for now, Mr. Chair. I know there are a few questions in there and I definitely have more questions as we get into departments. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. In regards to the red flag lists, what has happened, the amount of money in the capital plan is varied and we went, most recently, from one hundred and twenty-five back down to seventy-five, which meant that things on the list had to be re- prioritized. You can only do a certain number with $75 million, which is a very small amount of money when you have an overall budget of $1.8 billion and we do have input throughout this process with Regular Members and one of the things where we could point to is the ratio over the money for the Build Canada Plan was switched to put a few more dollars

into

the

communities

instead

of

transportation. Transportation initially got most of the money, they still got most of the money but I think it’s now 85 percent. It could be argued that it should be more, but there was a move of another 5 percent to make sure that we tried to put some more money into the communities.

The issue of the local business, it is a priority as was pointed out by Mr. Kalgutkar. There is a clause in the contract that we could hold the proponent accountable for that’s going to allow us to keep track of that. There are checks and balances. There’s going to be oversight required, and as we indicated, if you have names of business that are experiencing difficulty, if you could give them to us we would follow up with the businesses and the proponent to see what can be done.

The issue of re-profiling the current Stanton. There are a number of options as we discussed yesterday. What use may be available, some of it may have an impact on the market as that work is fleshed out that particular market impact variable will be dealt with.

I appreciate once again the comments and commendation to the parks folks.

I’ll let Mr. Dolynny

pursue the issue of the parks opening with the Minister of ITI.

As well, the issue of the long-term care beds aging in place, are there going to be enough. We have a very big proposal on the table in Yellowknife plus we have to as well figure out the home of the extended care piece that is being moved out of Stanton. So I anticipate, as the Member said, when health comes up he would be asking those specific questions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Next on my list I have Mr. Moses.