Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Anything further, Mr. Bromley?

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks for the Minister’s response. Yes, that would seem to be the appropriate vehicle. So maybe I’ll just ask the Minister to commit to making sure that there’s come discussion and consideration in the Financial Administration Act, the new version dealing with that renewal to provide that transparency in a practical way, monthly or quarterly or something like that. I’ll leave it at that. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Madam Chair. The borrowing plan, which will be debated and approved in the House, is a key part of the bill that’s currently being reviewed by committee. So that will definitely be there. I’m assuming it will receive the full support of the Legislature. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. General comments. Next I have Mr. Dolynny.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I’d like to welcome the department here today. As I think you heard from the opening comments, a little bill with some big impacts. I think that probably summarizes it best.

Just for the sake of time and to dig into some of the details regarding why we’re here, we’ve heard from the Minister there were some mitigating circumstances which put economic pressures on the short-term borrowing. One of them was the firefighting expenditure unforeseen in 2014. Has the department done a full cost accounting of this yet? Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Madam Chair. It’s not clear to me the question. Have we done a full cost accounting of the fire season? Have we done a full cost accounting of this proposal? If the Member could elaborate. Thank you.

Thank you. I thought I was clear, but I’ll ask it again. Has the department undertaken a full cost accounting of the 2014 fire suppression season? Thank you

Thank you. We have one of the supplementary appropriation requests before the House has the final supplementary request, which will bring to a close the fire season costs and then we’ve, as well, engaged in a comprehensive review that is still underway in terms of the fire season and its impacts that were discussed yesterday when we were looking at ENR’s budget. One of the key areas being looked at is the administration and finance side. Thank you.

Thank you. So what we’re hearing today from the Minister is that we’re still writing cheques for the 2014 fire season. This full cost accounting still has not been before the House and today we’re being asked to authorize borrowing of something that this committee has not seen a full vetted process and due process on. To that in itself, it seems a bit problematic. We’re supposed to basically accept the fact that this process, which is still not before the House, is going to be done away with after this bill has full assent. Being the fact that this had a huge mitigating circumstance on our short-term borrowing, I find that in itself to be a bit problematic.

Moving on, Inuvik-Tuk highway, this was a project which was deemed to be an accelerated process for this upcoming year, which I would assume put some negative impact on our short-term borrowing. Can I get an update here? What impact has the Inuvik-Tuk highway accelerated program had and what effects has it had for short-term borrowing before the House? Thank you.

Thank you. First, if I just may comment, this full cost accounting, the final supplementary request for the fire season to close the books was reviewed this morning in committee and is in the process to come before the House. So, that work has been done. It was in and out of committee this morning. So it’s not quite accurate to say that the Legislature is being asked to take things on faith or without having seen what the costs are. We have demonstrated that, I think, through the supplementary requests.

In regards to the Tuk-Inuvik highway in terms of the cash and the impact on our short-term borrowing, I’ll ask the deputy to respond, Madam Chair, but I would point out that because we had the foresight as the Legislature to agree to advance this money, it kept the project live. They’ve caught up, they’re on target, on time and on budget to deliver the road, which was the biggest concern and we are in the management and risk management business and we made a choice. In that case in the longer term it’s going to stand us in good stead.

Madam Chair, with your indulgence, I’ll ask the deputy if he could respond further in regards to the specifics of the Tuk-Inuvik highway. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Mr. Aumond.

Thank you, Mr. Aumond. Mr. Dolynny.

Thank you. I’ll return to the firefighting expenditure at a point in time, but for now I’ll leave it. The Minister and I have differing views in terms of what an appropriation for supplementation is and what a full cost accounting is. I think the two are two different animals of two different entities. So we’ll get back to that in due course.

It looks like $60 million did affect the bottom line with respect to short-term borrowing, which has a definite impact on the $275 million of room that we have. Interesting when I was listening in earlier to Mr. Bromley’s response and we heard from the deputy minister that as of April 1st we’re back in a surplus position. I found that comment to be a bit of a concern because really I don’t necessarily see it as surplus, but really that we’re back into an operating room or short-term borrowing. It’s as if we’ve got extra money to spend or that we have money to spend for operating. So maybe it’s a culture thing, but surplus is not necessarily the word I’m looking for. More of a comment.

To the issue of the low rider offset that was promised by the government back in the fall of 2014, this was a $20 million promise that later was discussed in the House. What impact did that $20 million low rider offset at the Snare River have on this situation we have before the House?

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Madam Chair. There are two things. I’m assured that the 13 percent rate increase wasn’t put onto the backs of the ratepayers and cost about $20,000. Thank you.

Sorry, I heard $20,000. Can I get a clarification? Was that $20,000?

Thank you. I’ll get the deputy to be more specific. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Mr. Aumond.

Thank you, Mr. Aumond. Mr. Dolynny.

Thanks for the clarification. I would assume that a government is doing its due diligence when their times are tough, as we’re finding ourselves near this fiscal cliff and wall of worry and debt wall. I’m assuming the government has gone to every one of its cupboards, department cupboards, and looked at any lapsed spending, any sunsets that weren’t used, any re-profiled funds that may or could be used to help mitigate short-term cash position.

Maybe the department can explain what was done in order to really do a sweeping effect across departments in terms of trying to find that type of money that could be lying dormant in other areas that is not being profiled or used today.