Thank you, Member. That's really pushing it. And I'm not sure if the Member's -- Minister of Finance, did you want to entertain the question?

Madam Chair, I mean I'm -- I'm not going to speak on behalf of the Government of Nunavut. It does so happen that the deputy minister might know something about what was going over there. So in the interest of collaboration, why don't I see if the deputy minister has any information on that.

Deputy Minister MacKay.

Thank you. Member for Great Slave.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I quickly Googled, because I remembered there was an announcement recently and there was a loan agreement given to the Kitikmeot Inuit Association for $7.25 million to work towards the Grays Bay port. So just some information there.

The Minister -- or sorry, the Member for Yellowknife North did take my question, was was it just on the Lockhart portion versus the overall. So not to repeat and to move on as per our conversation, Madam Chair.

My question is even if the business plan for this part of the road doesn't go forward or doesn't indicate that this is sound necessarily, can the Minister speak to the scientific portion of the work that's being done. So I guess, for example -- I mean, this is pushing it a little bit, but considering we're going into a knowledge economy and there is going to be need for a lot of these -- this type of scientific information that is being collected from this road as part of the work to advancing it, is there work being done on sort of that aspect of it? What does the Minister think around the scientific aspects of the investigations regardless of whether they end up in a road or not. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Member. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm certainly not speaking as a scientist any more than I am on behalf of the Government of Nunavut. But in terms of the assessments that are taking place, those assessments are environmental assessments and geotechnical assessments and assessments of the terrain, and it is information that does include scientific understanding and scientific study of what is in the area. From the perspective of wanting to determine an appropriate route, but it's one that certainly adds to our knowledge of the region, certainly adds to our knowledge of the region in a variety of ways, including traditional knowledge of the region being recorded and made available. So there is certainly a positive investment that's taking place in terms of understanding, you know, more about the territory and particularly more about an area where there's very strong indications of potential for, whether it's mineral resources, but also in terms of understanding the other natural resources that are there. So, you know, that is all good news.

Now, obviously, right now, it's coming at a high cost because it's a level of technical assessment that's with the perspective of potentially building a road, but there are, as with other projects and other infrastructure projects, there's other benefits of having more knowledge and more scientific information and data. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister. Member for Great Slave.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And I appreciate the Minister answering off the cuff there on not quite a financial question.

And it is my understanding that most of that data, and all the data collected in the North, does play into a wider database that can be accessed and used by the government, so always a big fan of spending money on any sort of scientific study.

My question has to do with industry partnerships around the Slave Geologic Province road. While very important we get Indigenous engagement and involvement and even ownership in that road and its operations, has the Minister been approached by anybody to discuss potential cost sharing with industry or any of the mineral players that might be interested in the region? Thank you.

Thank you, Member. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, so, again, the lead on delivering the project and project detail is the Department of Infrastructure. I'm not sure, again, if Minister Archie necessarily has all of her materials with her. I've not been directly approached, but I don't know that I would be necessarily. Again, I think it probably would be Minister Archie who would be the first point of contact.

I can say more from the Department of ITI, there is a lot of interest in general in the region and in being ready and available to be part of what is being envisioned out there.

So for -- and out there the Slave Geologic region. But let me, if I could, I'll check in and see if Minister Archie has anything she can share at this point. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, obviously, there is interest -- industry. We have not discussed potential cost sharing to date yet; however, we are sharing some of our information with industry and others. And, you know, being this is the mandate of this Assembly, I do want to make note that Indigenous involvement and support are crucial to the success of this project. There may be many economic opportunities as it move forward. So, you know, we have engaged with some of the Indigenous groups as well. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister. Member for Great Slave.

Thank you, Madam Chair. This will just be probably a little bit of a comment. I'm glad to hear, that the Indigenous organizations are being -- and consulted and at the Minister's forefront. I guess I just wanted to point that out or bring up that line of discussion because this is the southern portion of the diamond -- the diamond mines ice road and therefore once -- or the sooner we can get this portion of the road constructed, the potential for the diamond mines to have more longevity and more money to put towards exploration. So just a comment on why I also strongly still support construction of this road. Thank you.

Thank you, Member for Great Slave. Any further questions on the Capital Investment Expenditures? Seeing none, Supplementary Estimates (Infrastructure Expenditure), No. 2, 2021-2022, Department of Infrastructure, capital investment expenditures, energy and strategic initiatives, not previously authorized, negative $45, 274,000. Does committee agree?

Supplementary Estimates, (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 2, 2021-2022, Department of Infrastructure (Capital Investment Expenditures), programs and services not previously authorized, negative $7,634,000. Does committee agree?

Thank you. Supplementary Estimates (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 2, 2021-2022, Department of Infrastructure (Capital Investment Expenditures), total department not previously authorized, negative $97,421,000. Does committee agree?

Thank you. Committee, do you agree that you have concluded consideration of Tabled Document 438-19(2) Supplementary Estimates (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 2, 2021-2022?