Thanks, Mr. Chair. I'm not really sure I have much else to say. I was trying to get it all within my time frame there. But once again, I do thank the Minister for his responses. I look forward to the information he has committed to provide. I'm glad he has agreed to have an inspector go out and check out the site, Mactung, for liabilities and I look forward to working with the Minister and this particular division to make sure that we have our devolution house in order to prevent this sort of thing from happening again. But I’m worried about what is going to happen with Prairie Creek as well.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I do appreciate the answers from the Minister. Once again, though, I am very concerned that this happened under our watch, part of it, and my objective in asking these questions here today is to show the importance of that division, the work that they do, and I know that they have started this work to get some sort of guidelines, policy framework, in place. They even changed legislation so that there are mandatory requirements for financial security, looking at the forms of the security, and even mandatory requirements for closure plans.

As a smaller government, we just can't afford to not get this right. We are not like the federal government.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I guess that's my point here, that we don't actually have to wait for the Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board to make a determination. We can actually make a submission directly to the board at any time, it doesn't have to be a water license renewal, and try to get the security increased at any point to make sure that we're not exposed in any way. That’s my concern, here, that I think some of this happened under our watch, and I want to try to prevent this from happening again. I’m just curious. What kind of involvement did the financial assurances and liabilities division have in the management of financial securities for the Cantung mine?

Thanks very much, Mr. Chair. I am just wondering, when the GNWT took over the jurisdiction post-devolution, did we make any efforts to get the water licence security for Cantung increased? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. The reason why I raise this is we had a similar situation for another mine further down the road from Yellowknife called Giant Mine, where the GNWT had a surface lease, for that property and we incurred some liability as a result of that, because there was no financial security required under that surface lease. I’m just wondering, can the Minister then tell me what the outstanding reclamation liabilities are for Cantung, and whether we actually still have any exposure as a result of a surface lease? Thanks.

How much financial security is held under the surface lease, and what form is it held in? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I want to move on. It's my understanding the GNWT may still hold the surface lease for the Cantung Mine. Can the Minister confirm that?

Could the Minister make available a copy of the contractual arrangement, even if he has to do it in confidence. I would be really curious to see it. Thanks.

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

My next question is: After we took over the jurisdiction for securities with devolution April 1, 2014, did the GNWT take any actions to transform that promissory note into a more secure form of financial assurance? If I could just talk a little bit about that. A promissory note is just a letter saying that somebody is going to promise to pay somebody some money. A much more secure form would be something called an irrevocable letter of credit, which is issued by a chartered bank. You give that to a bank and the bank pushes the cash across the counter. That's a much more secure form of financial assurance. Did we do anything to get a more secure form of financial assurance out of North American Tungsten when we had the watch of the Cantung Mine? Thanks.