Michael Miltenberger

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Member is correct; there were arrangements made for a sit-down between some senior staff and Chief Sangris. I haven’t been informed whether they were successful, but I know that contact has been made.

We’re engaged in a number of initiatives that have tax implications. Firstly, coming out of the last October round table we agreed to look at what’s possible in terms of tax shifting. Since then, within existing tax structure, given the fact that we’re still struggling through a recession, to see what may be possible in terms of tax shifting within the existing tax structure. We’ve also since then announced that we’re going to be renewing and coming forward with a plan to have a full discussion on the Greenhouse Gas Strategy, which is going to lead us into the discussion tied into carbon...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The concern would be that they’re already paying taxes and that if we, in addition to the federal government who controls all the royalty taxation, in addition to that put on another tax, it would possibly be seen to be as the Member characterized. We also have to look at the current economic circumstances.

I think the key goal for us first is to decide the structure and shape and the criteria for a fund, what it’s going to look like, how it’s going to be set up, how tight is it going to be, is it going to be like the Norway model, and then the discussion about what kind...

Thank you. We’re collectively working to a time that hopefully by the end of this month we’ll be in a position to bring clarity to all. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s all within the budget figures that have been shared with the Members. I believe it’s $182 million for the total project costs. Thank you.

First let me say that we as well are in the accountability business that the public has a right to know. The discussion in the House has always been in terms of the information that is available at what time to allow and the appropriate time, so that the government in fact is able to complete the work on whatever the issue may be and not be in a situation where the confidential information is discussed in the House. Our relationship with the lenders is one where we’re continuing to work with them within the terms of the agreement to make sure that this bridge gets built.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We’ve been working very closely with myself and the Minister of Transportation and Cabinet. By my rough estimation, I think I’ve spent about 10 hours this session before committee on various aspects of the bridge where we’re engaged fully with committee on a plan coming forward that we believe will help in due course and allow us to get this project on the final footing that needs to get completed, recognizing that it is going to be a self-liquidating investment. It will be paid back through the tolls that are raised. This is a huge priority, as the Member has pointed...

Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes, that Bill 4, An Act to Amend the Social Assistance Act, be read for the second time.

Mr. Speaker, this bill includes amendments that would:

replace social assistance appeal committees with an administrative review group that will hear appeals of decisions made by social welfare officers or the director;

limit the jurisdiction of social welfare officers, the administrative review group and the appeal board in respect of issues pertaining to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms;

make other minor changes.

Thank you...

We are departments of the same government. We sit at the same Cabinet table. I will follow up on the commitment that I have made to make sure that... I’ll talk to the Minister of ITI, we’ll bring in our staff to make sure that we are doing all the appropriate things possible and if there are any avenues left to explore.

Happily. Happily.