Michael Miltenberger

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, as well, always appreciate an opportunity when the Member has to tell me what to do. I appreciate her advice.

In this case we are very much on the same page. We’ve already had discussions with staff that we want to do a debrief about how the process works. We’d like to come and sit down with committee, as well, to get feedback so that we can, as we look to the cycle next year, address a lot of the issues that may come up. A lot of them may be issues related to process or content.

We are very much interested in trying to learn from this first run through, now that...

This is Ms. Margaret Melhorn, deputy minister of the Financial Management Board, and Ms. Louise Lavoie, assistant comptroller general of the Financial Management Board.

Again, I’d like to tell the Member that in fact the evidence that is there would indicate that this is not a way to productively try to impact the cost of fuel in terms of affordability. The Conference Board of Canada has come to that conclusion, as have many esteemed economists, that in the long run there are major economic and social/political costs to that type of regime. At this point it’s not an area we have an intention of getting actively involved in.

Mr. Chairman, I’m here to introduce Bill 17, Forgiveness of Debts Act, 2008–2009.

This bill requests authority for the forgiveness of certain debts listed in the schedule of the act.

Pursuant to section 25 of the Financial Administration Act, the forgiveness of a debt obligation to the government exceeding $1,000 must receive Legislative Assembly approval. When a debt is forgiven, no further collection action shall be pursued.

The forgiveness of certain debts being proposed in this act will not require a new appropriation. Allowances for doubtful accounts were charged to an appropriation at the...

The information I’ve seen from other jurisdictions where they’ve attempted to regulate gas prices just shows in the long term that there are no real long term benefits to the residents of that jurisdiction. In many cases it has a counterproductive influence, where if the prices aren’t right or if they’re too low, the folks who supply the fuel will just go to other jurisdictions where they can get a far better price. I don’t think, on the face of it, that we want to be running down the path setting up those kinds of forces in the market system we currently have.

Yes, Mr. Chairman.

There is a plan to sit down and do the debriefing. We’ll see what Transport Canada comes up with in terms of the official report. We had officials on the ground in relatively short order, and they have perspective and some information and advice, I think, to bring to bear to ensure, as the Member indicates, that we do a proper post-mortem and debriefing to find out what happened and why and what can be learned from the incident to ensure that there’s no repetition in the future.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Ms. Birch is from Justice.

Mr. Speaker, the barge contained 577,000 litres of fuel. The compartment that was punctured had about 85,000 litres of fuel. My understanding of the process is that the barge was hauled in to where it could be dealt with and repaired. The punctured compartment was pumped out, and the amount of litres that were taken out was of course measured against what was supposed to be in there. What those numbers are we don’t know yet. That information hasn’t been shared with us that I’m aware of. It’s still under investigation.

I don’t think that at this point it’s an issue of any kind of cover-up or...

Yes, Mr. Chairman.