Bob Bromley

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you, colleagues. I think possibly the biggest thing we can do here is a thorough and complete review and possibly restructuring of the Northwest Territories Power Corporation. I think this is something we all know at heart. All our residents and constituents have been talking to us about this. We have some real opportunities here. People can start generating and delivering their own energy needs and contributing it to the grid through net metering and so on. We need some real progressive grassroots work there, so let’s get that done.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just very briefly I wanted to add my voice of accolade here to Ms. Bisaro and Mrs. Trudel and to those who helped put this together.

We heard earlier today about some of the waste recovery proposals the Minister of ENR is proposing. This is a full cost accounting approach. We know that our food now comes from thousands of kilometres away. To have that energy expended and the cost.... A lot of that food going to waste is crazy in today’s world. So very briefly, all kudos, and I’m very happy to see this bill go forward.

Mr. Speaker, this government is committed to a preventative approach to addressing the root causes of issues that we face. Milk is the single most important nutrient to the healthy development and benefit of our youth. The issue has been brought to us by community representatives, by health workers and by educational workers and teachers. Many thanks to them for bringing this forward.

Many people have seen, or heard recently from my colleague, the frightening photographs of many of our youth who are in desperate need of dental surgery and the backload we have there to deal with. Sugary drinks...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate this opportunity to address you. I want to start by thanking the Member for Great Slave for bringing this forward.

The context within which he brings this forward is important. Climate change is happening throughout the world. It’s a global issue. We know what some of the costs are. We’re starting to have an idea of what some of the costs will be. We’re talking about loss of some of our wildlife species and fish, some of our reliable water sources and perhaps, most importantly, our climate. Our climate is becoming very unreliable and relatively extreme...

Mr. Speaker, thanks to the Minister for those comments. In the area of natural gas to communities for energy supplies, I’m wondering if the Minister would commit to giving serious effort to working with communities to come up with some sort of ultimate solutions rather than these interim fossil fuel solutions that could prove to be very expensive — leapfrogging, as many communities are choosing to do, to a renewable energy source — or at least giving that some thought and investigation.

I’m afraid I cannot thank the Minister for that; I didn’t hear an answer there. Clearly, this is a source of greenhouse gas emissions. We are talking energy issues here. This is probably the biggest single source of increasing the cost of living; let’s put it that way. What are we doing to come up with new ways of transportation that do not require hundreds of millions of dollars of investment every decade in highways and so on and that can actually reduce our costs? What are we doing outside the box that is creative and is actually going to decrease our costs and emissions from transportation...

Third time lucky. I would also like to recognize Mr. Brian Kardash, a resident of Weledeh, and of course his father. I would also like to recognize Sue Bevington and her companion, also residents of Weledeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am encouraged to see this government bring some focused attention to our energy issues in its recent Energy Priorities Framework. In particular, I see us beginning to act in ways that recognize the need to reduce energy costs through common sense activities like conservation, efficiency and switching to local and renewable sources.

The framework is full of excellent recommendations. I suggest that our people take a look at this. I see it is open for comments, and the government is obviously wanting feedback on it. I encourage people to do so.

However, significant gaps...

Something seems inconsistent here, given that we had planned quite a number of millions of dollars for this ’09–10 as short a time as less than a year ago. I’m detecting some inconsistencies there. I don’t have any specific further questions. I appreciate those comments.

Thank you for those comments. Given that major work was scheduled for this coming fiscal year, as short a time ago was this year or less than a year ago, I assume that considerable planning has been done for that work. Given that, should money be available for ’09–10, I’m assuming that a substantive amount of money could be productively spent in ’09–10 on that school. Is that correct?