I'll revise my thought. I will ask the question: why can this project not be left until the full budget in May-June?

Mr. Chair, I understand that storage is important. But again, with no prior-years’ expenditures, I really wonder why this project is included in the interim appropriation and would suggest that it probably could be left until the full budget. There is no question there. Thank you.

Mr. Chair, I thank the Minister for that explanation.

I guess I would urge the government to consider extending the time span of the Evergreen Project. If we're currently on five years, I would ask them to consider changing the term — the lifespan of equipment — to, say, six years, to try and save some money. I know that's debatable, but that's my suggestion.

I do have a question with regard to a project which doesn't seem to be an ongoing project. There are renovations to the vital records processing and storage facility, and I'm wondering about the urgency of that project.

Mr.

Chairman, I have a similar

question relative to the infrastructure upgrades for the Technology Service Centre. I understand that we do have a greening program for our technology and evergreen program — or whatever the title is. However, I’m wondering again as to the urgency. There’s a fair amount of money that’s involved in these upgrades and server replacements, I think. So again, I ask the question whether or not there is a sense of urgency to these projects and if they cannot wait until May/June when we look at the whole capital plan? Thank you.

I wanted to ask a question relative to the FIS system. I understand that it’s an ongoing project, but I would like to know whether or not there is an urgency to this project. My understanding is that these capital projects that we’re looking at in this interim appropriation are those that have a sense of urgency or they’re under contract or there’s a safety issue required. So if the Minister could advise if there’s an urgency to this project, as much as it’s needed. I ask that question. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am in agreement with my colleague Mrs. Groenewegen in her comments, but I would like to make a few of my own. I’ve mentioned previously that I feel there’s a necessity for us to take a different mentality in regard to our budgeting and our fiscal planning.

I spoke the other day about living within our means and establishing a budget which more closely reflects the actual costs that this government incurs over a year’s period. I know this is an interim appropriation, but I want to re-emphasize that it is extremely important that we change the way we budget, in my view. I would hope to see that when we get our full budget in May/June, the numbers are much closer to reality and that supplementary appropriations become a thing of the past, used only if absolutely necessary in an emergency situation.

I wanted to comment on the Minister’s remarks. He states on the first page that the capital investment expenditure amount reflects the full-year requirements for projects currently under construction, projects that need to be tendered. And then on the last page he states that the $110.291 million in the capital investment expenditures represents a 4.7 per cent increase from the 2007-2008 capital plan.

I’m concerned that if the capital expenditures that we’re approving as part of this interim appropriation are not the full amount of capital that’s required for ‘08-09 because it’s only those items which are under contract or safety measures or are ongoing, we’re already a 4.7 per cent increase over last year’s capital. So when the full budget comes forward in May/June, how much more are we liable to spend on capital? I would like an explanation of that statement.

To the report from committee. I totally endorse the statement that we need an overhaul of the entire capital planning process. I think that’s been mentioned more than once. I just wanted to reiterate that as well.

Lastly, my concern about energy efficiency planning is that we are being proactive and not reactive. I would like to emphasize that as well. There is a statement in the report from committee which says, “Energy efficiency does not appear to be a consistent component of new infrastructure design.”

I am in total agreement with that and would hope that the government would be moving forward with a coordinated plan to minimize our expenditures in terms of energy and efficiency and so on.

I will have some questions later on. Thank you.

I am sorry that I didn’t hear you for the loud applause.

In my short time here as MLA, we’ve talked much about energy, the environment and climate change. It is accepted that as human beings, we are hurting our house — our planet. Some say that we are destroying it.

It is also accepted that we can take actions to reduce the hurt. Members have discussed many of these actions: building codes and standards, reducing energy consumption, less hurtful energy sources, water conservation to name just a few. I sense a willingness on the part of this government to take action, but I see no indication of any comprehensive plan.

I know; I know: “It is early yet; we’re developing the budget and so on and so on.” But as this government prepares the 2008-2009 budget, it is a

necessity that energy savings and sustainability be a cornerstone of the document.

We need to take a page from the book of the city of Yellowknife, which has just been named a number one city, by the way. It has taken a few years, but the city of Yellowknife has committed to energy planning and action. Currently some $500,000 is earmarked for activities related to the energy plan.

We need to follow their excellent example, Mr. Speaker. Not only do we need a coordinated energy plan for the government of the N.W.T. that covers all aspects of energy, climate change and environmental protection, but we need an energy coordinator to implement and manage the plan.

Taking this bold step is not something we have to do on our own. There are many N.W.T. organizations and individuals out there who are willing to assist in the development of a plan.

We must establish a working committee and an energy and sustainability planning committee with public representation from industry and interested individuals and organizations. I believe the Arctic Energy Alliance is one such organization which can provide excellent advice and support for such a planning committee.

This is a long-term strategy, but we must include it in our first budget in order to reap any kind of rewards in the life of this Assembly. We can guarantee financial savings by being proactive. We can guarantee environmental savings through being proactive. The time to act is now.

Mr. Speaker, I was going to ask the Minister if he would come back to committee for input, but he’s beat me to the punch, so good for you.

I would urge the Minister to get a policy in place as soon as possible. These kinds of projects are somewhat unusual, and we need to have as much governance, as much of an umbrella for overseeing these projects as possible.

If the Minister could respond to my question in terms of timing — I realize that “as soon as possible” could mean tomorrow; it could also mean three years from now — if he could give me a narrower time frame, I’d appreciate that.

Mr.

Speaker, I think I heard the

Minister said yes in there, that he would look into a policy. Having assumed that yes, there is a policy about to be formulated, I’d like to know when that might happen and when we could expect to see the completed document.