Thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from Frame Lake.

That's it for me, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

I'm going to go to the Member from Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just so we can get this on the record, can you tell us what is the cost up to this point, then, of the Inuvik Wind Project in total?

Thank you. I'll go to the Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. $88 million.

Thank you. I'll go to the Member from Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And can you tell us what was the original budget? Therefore, you know, how much this project has gone over. Thank you.

Thank you. I'll go to the Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to make sure that I have the right number in this. Around $40 million, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. I'll go to the Member from Yellowknife North.

Okay, thank you, Mr. Chair. I mean, I echo some of my colleague's concerns there, but I just wanted to make sure that we're all clear, the scale of the cost overruns that we're talking about in this case.

And so it looks like part of where we're finding the money to pay for these cost escalations is to reduce money going into NTPC upgrades. Looks like $2 million is being taken out of that. So what kind of upgrades are we sacrificing here? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. I'll go to the Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, it's projects that I believe are generally resulting from a delay in the projects -- sorry, let me start that again.

There was a delay in some of the upgrade projects and knowing that there would be some delays, they were able to reallocate those funding. So, really, all of the projects on these lists are not cancelled, necessarily. It's that there's a recognition that there are things not happening at the pace that they were originally expected to, for a variety of different reasons, but then we're able to take that money and put that towards this area of need. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And so these upgrades, are they set out in, say, an asset management plan? Like, is there a plan with scheduled upgrades that, you know, is justified based on expected, you know, life of certain parts of our assets, or are they expected -- you know, need for replacement and maintenance at certain times? Are these upgrades part of such a plan that, you know, has been thought through and listed what upgrades are required at which dates?

Thank you. I'll go to the Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, there is, indeed, an overall asset management plan and capital project plan for NTPC and, you know, some of that involves studies that are being done around what alternatives and changes could move forward, what communities might see, you know, advancement of hydro projects and, in some cases, those studies can be funded elsewhere, or in other cases can be delayed, and in other cases, again, some of the future improvements projects can be pushed back or have planning done in advance hopefully to produce better estimates, although, again, in this case, it was -- this estimate of $40 million, I just want to note was from back in 2017. So to say we went from an estimate in 2017 to a final cost in 2024 that is significantly different, ideally we're in a situation going forward and, again, including with some of those that are put on hold, that that gives us some time to have a better estimate going in. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I guess what I'm trying to get at here is if we set out ahead of time that certain equipment or infrastructure needs upgrading or replacing or maintenance or repair at certain times, it's generally based on our expected costs of what would happen if we didn't do those upgrades or maintenance or repairs, you know, things might start to break down or they don't work efficiently, or. Do we expect any increase costs in repair, maintenance, O and M, from delaying upgrades that NTPC has previously identified that it requires? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. I'll go to the Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, not necessarily. So there certainly are, you know, standard periods of time on any piece of infrastructure or equipment that would suggest, you know, an ideal window within which you would replace or repair or renovate and, you know, any sort of deferred maintenance across the entire government spectrum has those built in. But by not doing it, you may be increasing the risk of a future -- increasing the risk that the equipment or the asset can become unused or less useable or less efficient, but that doesn't necessarily guarantee that it is in that situation. So obviously when the decisions are being made as to exactly what projects or what planning studies or what research to delay or should be delayed or just may frankly be delayed, that would be the ones that we would want to take money out of, whether it's, again, any infrastructure or situation would be the same, NTPC being no different than that. There's always a balance that's every year done around -- out of the pool of funding available for any given year for maintenance, what areas have the greatest risk and need and those ones get priorities, and maybe others that are ready to go in terms of timing that just have to be delayed. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from Yellowknife North.