Chair D. Harrison: — Welcome to the Standing Committee on the Economy. I’m the Chair, Daryl Harrison. We have Nathaniel Teed chitting in for Meara Conway, Darcy Warrington chitting in for Tajinder Grewal, Racquel Hilbert, Hugh Gordon is chitting in for Sally Housser, and Jamie Martens is chitting in for Kevin Kasun, and Kevin Weedmark is our last member.

I’d also like to mention that we’re joined today by a number of educators who are here at the legislature to participate in the SSTI [Saskatchewan Social Sciences Teachers’ Institute on Parliamentary Democracy] program. They were in the Chamber yesterday to observe proceedings, and they’ll be sitting in here to observe committee work. Welcome to all of you. We’re pleased to have you with us.

Today we’ll be considering the estimates and supplementary estimates for the Ministry of Highways. We’ll then consider the resolutions for all estimates and supplementary estimates committed to this committee.

General Revenue Fund

Highways
Vote 16

Subvote (HI01)

Chair D. Harrison: — Our first item of business today will be the consideration of the 2026‑2027 estimates and the 2025‑2026 supplementary estimates no. 2 for the Ministry of Highways. We’ll begin with consideration of vote 16, Highways, central management and services, subvote (HI01). Minister Gartner is here with officials from the ministry. I would ask that officials state their names before speaking for the first time, and please don’t touch the microphones. The Hansard operator will turn your microphone on when you are speaking to the committee.

Minister, please introduce your officials and make your opening remarks.

Hon. Kim Gartner: — Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you about the Ministry of Highways ’26‑27 provincial budget. I’m joined by ministry officials and staff from my office today. I’ll now introduce them, and if each of you could please give a wave or a nod, as most of you are sitting behind me, as I call your name.

So please welcome Kyle Toffan, my deputy minister; Bill Pacholka, assistant deputy minister for the operation and maintenance division; Wayne Gienow, assistant deputy minister for the design and construction division; Tom Lees, assistant deputy minister for the policy, planning and corporate services division; Chris Ference, executive director, corporate services; David Munro, director, strategic planning and budgeting; and Christian Kainz, my chief of staff.

So thank you. I’d like to begin my remarks now, providing some context. This year’s provincial budget is about protecting Saskatchewan. This is during a time of uncertainty in the world. Like other provinces, Saskatchewan faces challenges, but we’re resilient and working hard to meet the challenges of today and protect Saskatchewan for generations to come. Our province is charting a course when it comes to attracting investment into industries that create jobs and wealth.

Saskatchewan’s international trade missions are a voice for our great province to strengthen Saskatchewan’s relationships and opportunities around the world. The Ministry of Highways plays a pivotal role in these efforts. Saskatchewan is a landlocked province with more than 26 500 kilometres of provincial highway network, the largest per capita highway network in Canada.

Our highways and transportation network move our export-based economy which sustain our quality of life. This is done for the benefit of all who make their lives and livelihoods in Saskatchewan. Our province’s transportation network is also key for people to access health care and education. It moves the food, fuel, fertilizer, and other goods the world needs.

The Ministry of Highways protects Saskatchewan by keeping its people and the province’s export-based economy moving and connected to the world. Our industry partners rely on transportation to ensure our goods can get to more than 160 markets around the globe safely and efficiently. Our strategic transportation investments look at the entire province as one vast, interconnected network with key goals in mind. Through these goals we continue to invest in projects that (1) enhance safety, (2) enable our citizens to live their lives, (3) support the growth of our export-based economy, and (4) protect the citizens of Saskatchewan.

What does that mean? Let me navigate you through some of the details. The Ministry of Highways ’26‑27 budget of $764 million focuses on safety and a significant investment in strategic infrastructure, supporting Saskatchewan’s export-based economy. Our investments ensure transportation remains a key driver to ensure we support Saskatchewan. The budget includes an investment of $401 million in capital projects. And with this year’s budget, our government has invested more than $14.6 billion in transportation infrastructure since 2008, improving more than 22 700 kilometres of highways across the province.

We continue to deliver on Saskatchewan’s Growth Plan goal of improving 10 000 kilometres of highway by 2030. We will improve more than 850 kilometres of highways this year. With this year’s budget, we will deliver more than 7900 kilometres over the first seven years of that plan, which puts us well on track to meet our goal.

Major projects are one of the underpinnings of Saskatchewan’s export-based economy. Business, industry, and shippers rely on timely access to global markets. It’s a priority to ensure Saskatchewan’s transportation network and supply chains are safe, reliable, and resilient.

This year we are investing $44 million to continue multi-year projects that increase safety, improve traffic flow, and enhance strategic transportation corridors. Those projects include beginning Highway 2 twinning north of Prince Albert, which is a key corridor to access northern Saskatchewan, continuing Highway 5 twinning, and improvements east of Saskatoon, which is a main economic corridor to one of the biggest potash mine projects in the world.

We also continue to prioritize passing lanes, a key part of enhancing safety and maintaining efficiency. Between 2013 and 2025 we have installed over 60 sets of passing lanes, covering about 290 kilometres of Saskatchewan highways. This year we will be completing passing lanes on Highway 10 between Fort Qu’Appelle and Melville, which connects communities, tourists, and agricultural sector, and Highway 17 north of Lloydminster along the Alberta-Saskatchewan border.

We will continue to plan for future passing lanes on other high-priority corridors. This supports our exporters as they trade Saskatchewan’s goods with the world, and it underlines our ongoing commitment to highway safety for Saskatchewan people.

Safety is, and always will remain, the top priority in all our highways work. This year we will continue delivering specific projects to enhance road safety across Saskatchewan. We will invest $20.1 million for intersections, guard rails, and lighting improvements. This includes projects like a turning lane on Highway 47 north of Estevan, improvements on Highway 13 through Arcola, a turning lane on Highway 17 north of Lloydminster, and design improvements at the intersection of Highway 11 and Enterprise Lane at Davidson.

Other investments in road safety include pavement markings to provide visible lines for the safe flow of traffic, our sign stewardship program to keep 124,000 highway signs in good condition, and mowing approximately 44 500 hectares along highway right-of-ways to ensure clear sightlines for drivers. These investments are important improvements that make routes safer and more efficient.

We will deliver rehabilitation work on various segments of the network across the province. This year we will improve more than 820 kilometres of highway including more than 260 kilometres of repaving on portions of Highway 2 north of Assiniboia, Highway 16 from the Manitoba border to Churchbridge, and Highway 48 east of Davin; 140 kilometres of median treatments like micro surfacing; 350 kilometres of light pavement treatments; 50 kilometres of thin membrane surface and rural highway upgrades; and 20 kilometres of gravel rehabilitation. These investments support our export-based province and keep Saskatchewan people and products moving.

Our culverts and bridge projects will also improve our infrastructure and meet the needs of our highway network. We will invest $78.7 million to repair or rebuild 13 bridges and more than 100 culverts across the province. This includes completing the Highway 2 over Highway 1 overpass at Moose Jaw, and replacing Highway 955 bridge over Clearwater River about 60 kilometres north of La Loche.

The Moose Jaw project remains our biggest project work this year. A key part of that project is raising the height of the overpasses which will benefit farmers and shippers in the more efficient movement of their products. We’re aware that the Moose Jaw overpass has been struck many times by over-height loads. We are hopeful the new height standard will eliminate those incidents. The Highway 955 bridge project will support improved access to the North and access to its resources.

Our government continues to deliver significant investments in the transportation network that supports northern Saskatchewan. Transportation infrastructure connects northern communities, businesses, and industries such as mining to the rest of Saskatchewan. Our road network provides access to jobs, health care, education, and other services.

This year’s budget will see more than $86.3 million to build, operate, and maintain our northern infrastructure. The ’26‑27 investment is above the five-year average of over $80 million annually. This includes $45.8 million in capital improvements to roads and airports and $40.5 million for operations and maintenance. This encompasses operating and maintaining northern airports, ice roads in the winter, and the Wollaston Lake barge in the summer.

It also includes Highway 102 segment improvements, Highway 106 thin membrane surface upgrade, Highway 135 gravel upgrade south of Pelican Narrows, Highway 155’s engineered seal, Highway 165’s grade raise east of Beauval, Highway 915’s gravel upgrade commencing to Stanley Mission, and as previously mentioned, Highway 955’s bridge replacement over Clearwater River. These are important northern economic corridors that support industry and residents.

Transportation plays an important role in rural Saskatchewan. It keeps our rural communities connected, supports the people that drive our economy, and strengthens the very foundation of the province. We are investing $33 million supporting municipal programs, making strategic transportation investments including 20.4 million to support economic growth and safety on rural municipal roads, an increase of $2 million on capital projects, $8.6 million to improve and maintain roads that connect our highway network through the urban highway connector program, 2.2 million for truck route agreements and other municipal partnerships. By investing in the networks that help our municipal and industry partners, we are protecting Saskatchewan.

The aviation sector plays an important role in protecting Saskatchewan as well. It creates employment, facilitates trade and tourism, provides emergency services, boosts economic activity, and improves our quality of life. Aviation aids the natural resources sector by transporting employees and mining equipment and helps farmers to manage their crops. It protects Saskatchewan’s quality of life by ensuring access to northern communities, connecting air ambulance, providing air service for policing, and supporting other public resources during emergencies like wildfires.

The ministry supports the aviation sector through the operation of 16 northern airports, along with providing funding to a network of more than 100 community airports through the community airport program. We will continue to invest in the community airport program, providing $850,000. When combined with matching partner funds, that is a total investment of $1.7 million for these local airports.

[16:15]

Rail service is critical for getting Saskatchewan products — food, fuel, fertilizer, and forestry products — to market, protecting our economy. The ministry continuously monitors rail performance provided by Canadian National Railways, CN; and Canadian Pacific Kansas City railway, CPKC. We meet regularly with CN and CPKC to discuss rail performance, disruptions to rail service, and general challenges in the supply chain.

The ministry also has a long-standing relationship with shortline railways in the province, including providing annual funding to offset operational costs. Shortline railways are an important connection for producers and industry to get their products to market. Saskatchewan has more than 2100 kilometres of shortlines run by 13 operators. All receive a proportionate share of the funding for track investments, maintenance, and other improvements. They also help preserve Saskatchewan’s road network by more efficiently moving bulk goods on rail.

The level of funding for this important work was nearly doubled in the 2025‑26 budget. In 2026‑27 we are pleased to continue investing $1 million toward shortline railway infrastructure. When combined with matching partner funds, that’s an investment of $2 million to improve shortline rail across the province. Supporting the sustainability of rail corridors in rural areas will continue to be a priority for this government.

Our 2026‑27 highways budget holds true to our dedication and commitment in improving and maintaining the transportation network to support Saskatchewan’s export-based economy and sustain the province’s quality of life. We will continue making strategic investments to move people and connect our province to the world. Every culvert, every kilometre, and every bridge we improve will continue building a better province and protecting Saskatchewan.

And with that I will conclude my remarks. Myself and my officials will be happy to take your questions. Thank you.

Chair D. Harrison: — Thank you, Minister. I will now open the floor for questions. I recognize MLA [Member of the Legislative Assembly] Warrington.

Darcy Warrington: — Thank you to the Chair for providing me the opportunity to speak. Thank you to the minister and his officials. I would just like to say that, Minister Gartner, I have a great deal of respect for you. He governs over many of my friends and family in the Kindersley area, so we often have a good laugh about the people we know and share in common. And I will get up to that Macklin bunnock tournament one of these years to see if I can give you a run for your money.

All that being said, my name is Darcy Warrington. I’m the MLA for Saskatoon Stonebridge and the shadow critic for Highways. And it’s a pleasure to be here today on behalf of the opposition to ask questions for the people of Saskatchewan. And thank you to all of your ministry officials and to all of the elected officials and staff in the room today for being here.

You alluded to, in your opening remarks, raising the height in Moose Jaw. I think that that’s a really welcomed initiative. We’ve seen also in Saskatoon — beyond the overpass that was struck in Moose Jaw recently — four overpasses struck recently by over-height loads over roughly a one-month period. So a very strange series of events in a short period of time that requires some dialogue.

The Saskatchewan Trucking Association has suggested that additional signage should be considered to eliminate these costly accidents that have resulted in over $1 million in damage; significantly slowed down traffic short, medium, and long term — in particular around the cloverleaf near Saskatoon Stonebridge — in various areas due to required repairs and safety concerns.

What was the sign stewardship program budget in 2025 and 2026 versus the 2026‑2027 budget? And how can the Ministry of Highways use this budget to be proactive and/or reactive in properly informing farmers, industrial transportation drivers of height restrictions within municipalities or provincial highways leading into these municipalities?

Hon. Kim Gartner: — Thank you for the question. In regards to 2025 compared to 2026, so in 2025 that sign stewardship budget was 3.597 million. In 2026 the budget is 3.647 million.

In addressing the promotion of safety and the bridge strikes in particular, so we have had discussions with the city of Saskatoon and our transportation partners in that regard. You know, in the end it does fall back to the companies and the responsibility of the companies and the drivers to accurately keep track of the height of their loads, right.

And I’ll let Kyle talk to that a little bit, but what we’ve done as a ministry is we’ve investigated and we’ve gone out and personally visited all of our sites with overhead structures just to make sure that the heights are recorded correctly. And they’re just going through that analysis right now, and maybe Kyle can clarify that too.

As far as bridge strikes in total, so since 2013 we’ve had 52 bridge strikes. Fifty of them are on three bridges in particular, and all three of those have now been raised. So that leaves two strikes where the bridges haven’t been raised. And I’m going to pass this over to Kyle to clarify some of that.

Kyle Toffan: — Kyle Toffan. So as the minister pointed out, we really do see raising the bridges as more of a long-term solution. Just to give a bit more details, the three bridges that he was referring to are around the Regina area and Moose Jaw area.

So the Moose Jaw one was referred to in his previous remarks. One-half of the bridge was done last year by the fall, and the other half will be done this construction season. I think that’s the bridge that we’ve received most of the bridge hits on over the course of the time frame Minister was speaking about.

The other ones have already been raised. So Highway 6 just south of Regina, that was done a couple of years back. That was another one that saw frequent bridge hits. And then Highway 11 just adjacent to Highway 6 north of Regina was another one that received numerous strikes and has been raised as well.

So we’re in the process of making sure that we take that long-term vision so we don’t have these issues coming up in the future. Signage is no doubt part of that process. That’s why we reviewed every single overhead structure with a sign and a bridge with a sign on it over the past month or so. And the results came back very positive. Everything’s sort of in place, and where a sign wasn’t in place we’re putting it up right now.

A couple other points on this. What we do is we want to make sure we’re talking to the Saskatchewan Trucking Association on the education component of this, making sure truckers, through their training, have adequate information on how the permitting process works, how to even measure their load, that type of thing.

You mentioned a few of the bridge strikes that happened in Saskatoon. There was one on our network as well, just around the Moose Jaw area on Highway 39. And I’ll just give you an instance here that sort of rings true.

So the permit that was obtained — there was a permit — it was for 4.88 metres. The bridge was signed as a 5-metre and it was measured at 5.18 metres. And so he was driving something that was way over his permit and way over the bridge height. So it’s more than just the signage. If he would have just been looking at the signage in that instance, he still would have been in trouble. So it’s really more than that. It’s the permitting process, it’s education, it’s really all of the above. And we need to make sure that industry works with us closely to prevent future bridge hits.

Darcy Warrington: — Thank you, Kyle. And I would just elaborate a little bit on what you just said there. Certainly we do understand that part of the issue is education and enforcement. I think in general those instances maybe would not have happened . . . or could still very well have happened with proper signage.

We do have some concerns with the damage that’s being done. How will the Government of Saskatchewan perhaps either allow a return of some of the damages through insurance or fines to the city of Saskatoon for the 900,000‑plus damage, for example, on the cloverleaf coming into Saskatoon?

[16:30]

Hon. Kim Gartner: — So thank you for the question in regards to damage for the city of Saskatoon and their insurance. So I’ll go back to what we have in place first if something were to happen on ours. And what we have in place is fines, which we’re currently reviewing those. And also we would be going after the insurance companies as well, if it was one of our structures.

Now your question was about the city of Saskatoon. They would have the same avenues, but it would be under their jurisdiction, for their insurance company. Like they would make the claim against the insurance companies themselves. We wouldn’t be doing that for them.

Darcy Warrington: — Yeah I guess the question is just in regards to . . . It’s obviously a connector to the highway to Regina. It’s basically on the outskirts of town. So you know, you talked a little bit about the urban connector program and $8 million being available for that. A large chunk of that — if this person didn’t have insurance — would be eaten up very quickly.

So I just have concerns that municipalities are going to take on the brunt of some of these damages, especially if they’re not insured or they don’t have the proper permits, fines aren’t being collected. I’ll move on though. Thanks, Minister Gartner.

Snow removal on our highways is an important focus for the Ministry of Highways: improving traffic flow, flow of goods from area to area, improving safety. Our ministry’s snowplow operators are skilled and knowledgeable in their ability to alleviate pressures of snow events and wind, through their care and attention to removal of snow to keep roads passable and safe.

It has come to our attention over the last two years or so, there has been a change to how snowplows are deployed. It used to be that snowplow operators had the independence and the autonomy to deploy snowplows when they deemed necessary to utilize less expensive deployment with half-ton trucks to scope out and seek areas that might require attention with a physical snowplow.

We understand the snowplow operators are compensated the same regardless, but certainly there might be savings and efficiencies for chargeable rates, fuel costs, etc. How much is that hourly rate for deploying snowplow operators with a half-ton truck versus how much is the hourly rate for deploying snowplow operators with snowplow equipment?

Hon. Kim Gartner: — So I’m going to start. And just to clarify, there’s been no change in policy. And I’m going to turn it over to Bill to discuss some of that after I’m finished.

But the purpose behind sending the plows out, the plows are special equipment, right. They’re designed to perform specific duties. And the reason that the plows are sent out is, if they encounter a problem they fix it right away. It negates the need for a second trip or a trip back, grab a plow, come back out.

So Bill’s going to just clarify a little bit around the policy side of it in the extreme case that they may use a half-ton.

Bill Pacholka: — All right. So Bill Pacholka. As the minister mentioned, we haven’t had a change in policy. Our policy is that we do want the snowplows to be operated. And as the minister mentioned, quite often they’ll go out and they will see a problem out there. Now they can address it, you know, whether it’s some icing up, some frosting, a snowdrift, sometimes animal removal off the road.

And that’s something that we want to ensure that we have done, that we have that covered off with the surveillance of the road. And so if there is an occasion where they’re going out and they see a problem, they can deal with it. They’re not travelling back to the shop, going through the circle check of the second vehicle now, and then taking that second vehicle out and doing it.

We’ve looked at that in the past, and almost every time we encounter some type of a situation where we needed that plow out there. And if I understood your question correctly, I think that’s what you were asking about.

Darcy Warrington: — Yeah, so thank you for your responses. I’m confused though. I’ve spoken with some Ministry of Highways snowplow operators, and they tell me within the last two to three years they used to have the autonomy and independence to choose to take the half-ton over the snowplow. They’ve also told me, though you haven’t indicated a difference in the cost, that it’s roughly — and I’m paraphrasing them — $60 an hour for them to use the half-ton truck versus $120 to use the snowplow, compounding that with increased fuel costs.

We’re talking about people with great experience, great knowledge. They’ve done this for a long time. They would never put people in a position to jeopardize safety, but they’re telling me that there’s some inefficiencies here.

So I guess I’ll follow up by asking again, was there a time in the last two or more years where snowplow operators had the autonomy and independence to take out half-ton trucks? You actually discussed extreme situations where that might be the case; perhaps that’s where this response could go.

Bill Pacholka: — The guidance that’s provided are for the staff to take the snowplows out. We have 71 different sections out there, which means 71 different supervisors. And at a local situation they may do things slightly different.

That is not something that they’re directed to do. And if there are situations like that, we take effort to correct that because that is not the way that we want to operate. You know, that may be an equipment operator’s opinion that it’s less efficient. But overall we find that it’s more efficient for us to do it this way.

Darcy Warrington: — What year did the Highway Hotline or technology allow folks to see where snowplows are situated within the province on the roads?

Bill Pacholka: — Yeah, that started around this time two years ago. And then last year it was on full-time.

Chair D. Harrison: — If I could just interrupt for a second here. I want to mention that Megan Patterson, MLA Patterson, is chitting in for Kevin Weedmark, MLA. Thank you. Carry on.

Darcy Warrington: — Thanks. And you were finished, sorry? Your remarks were finished?

Bill Pacholka: — Yes.

Darcy Warrington: — Okay, good. Sorry, I didn’t want to interrupt you. Moving on, reliance on out-of-province companies. In the 2024‑2025 remarks from Minister Marit, he suggested that 96.3 per cent of highway work went to Saskatchewan contractors.

Our question is, how does this percentage compare in the 2025‑2026 budget? And is there still zero American companies being contracted for this work?

[16:45]

Kyle Toffan: — Thank you for that question. So we had, as you pointed out, 96.3 per cent Saskatchewan contractors on our construction projects in ’24‑25. ’25‑26, the number is 93.6 per cent at the end of March. And 6.4 would be the residual, and that would be to Alberta and Manitoba companies, so our neighbouring provinces. And there are no US [United States] companies doing our construction work.

For our consultant contracts we have 99 per cent to Saskatchewan consultants. And then the residual would be out of province, so around 1 per cent. And that was very similar in both fiscal years. So it hasn’t been really any change from ’24‑25 to ’25‑26.

And just on, a little bit on the procurement process and how we get to this. So from a construction project standpoint, we focus most of our work on hard tenders. So we do the design work, and then we tender it out. And that’s based on price and past performance, is the two best-value items that we take.

And then on the consultant contracts we usually do requests for proposals. And some of the factors that go into that are their team composition, price, experience, and past performance. And there’s a bit of a weighting that goes into that. But it’s quite successful on getting Saskatchewan content, both for construction projects and also for engineering.

Darcy Warrington: — Thank you for those responses. My colleague, the former shadow minister for Highways, pointed out I didn’t ask about the percentage for 2026‑2027, the projections.

With that, the same information, you know, you said 93 per cent, Manitoba and Alberta providing the other 7 per cent; 99 per cent for Saskatchewan for consulting. I would be curious for that number for you to provide, whether when you say “out of province” you’re indicating Alberta or Manitoba, or if you’re indicating “out of province” as in it could be out of country.

So those figures for 2026‑2027, and an additional comment on the 1 per cent consulting.

Kyle Toffan: — So I’ll just talk about the 1 per cent for consulting first. I don’t have the actual company or where that company is from, but we do from time to time see people brought in from Alberta for very specialized types of work or design work. But they do have to be registered to do engineering in Saskatchewan.

So the chances of that being a US company, I can’t think of an instance in the past however many years that I’ve been doing this where we’ve had a US consultant doing engineering work. Because usually they wouldn’t have the engineering credentials for Saskatchewan. And so the likelihood is it’s coming from Alberta, but I don’t have that information for you. But it is one contract, based on our records, for about $300,000. So that’s what it would make up.

For the ’26‑27 projections on percentages of local Saskatchewan contractors, or consultants for that matter, we don’t have that information. We are hesitant to give any projections just because the tenders and the RFPs [request for proposal] are still live. So we have to go through our process. We have our spring tender package that is coming out or is out in the public right now, and we’re waiting to see what the results of those are.

Darcy Warrington: — Thanks for those responses. Fair point. Certainly willing to hear those projections at a later date. I wonder if you could table for us . . . By the way, obviously there’s a certain capacity that the workforce here in the province can provide. So we recognize that, you know, it’s acceptable to have some of the employment, some of the resources come from out of the province, but we would prefer those to be Canadian companies. I think the government also sort of makes statements about us sometimes that we might have people who used to live in America that do consulting for us. So I think it’s a fair question.

Wondering, Deputy Minister Toffan, would you be able to table that information for us in terms of not only the 1 per cent making up the $300,000 contract where that company originates, but any future companies that originate in the United States, once those projections are released?

Hon. Kim Gartner: — Can you just clarify that, the question for us? Like what are you asking us to table? Like are you asking us to provide the $300,000, a confirmation that it’s not American?

Darcy Warrington: — Yeah, the origin of the country for the 1 per cent on the $300,000 contract that Deputy Minister Toffan . . . We’d like to have that tabled to learn the origin of that work.

Kyle Toffan: — Yes. We might even be able to get it right away before the end of the committee. We just didn’t have it written down that way because it was a sort of a rounding I guess is what it came down to. And we didn’t have it listed off. So we’re trying to get it, yeah.

Darcy Warrington: — Okay, thanks. Similar but different, reading the remarks from Minister Marit and the remarks from MLA Gordon last year and you discussed culverts and a hundred or so culverts that are being installed. And he made remarks suggesting that Saskatchewan’s looking to utilize as much made-in-Saskatchewan products, services. However when it comes to culverts, admittedly some extra alliances had to come from, in particular, Alberta.

Comparatively how is this going over the last two years and with projections for the future budget? I think I can find the number that was quoted for the work that was done in terms of culvert installation, but also curious to see how that initiative is going in trying to encourage more Saskatchewan companies to be a part of that work and those resources.

Kyle Toffan: — So I have good news. The 1 per cent consultant, my team was able to capture what that is. So it is what I thought it was. It’s a specialized piece of work for airports. So it’s a Canadian airport consulting company. They have offices all over Canada but the closest ones to us are in Calgary and Edmonton, so I assume that’s where they came from. So that was one contract for around 300,000.

To your other question about culverts, of course we have work ongoing on culverts every single year and making sure that we keep on top of these. There’s thousands of these all over the province. We always encourage Saskatchewan companies to diversify their operations, and we do have some really good Saskatchewan local companies that do culvert installation. Almost in all cases they supply their own culverts and so they’re familiar with what they’re using, which product they’re using, what steel, what size, whether it’s the corrugated steel or just a regular sort of steel.

Our budget for this upcoming year is $33.1 million for capital. And what I will say is we have looked at alternative ways of doing this, whether we had conversations with Evraz, InterPro. And the challenge is is that we are not big enough and don’t have enough need for one whole mill run, for instance. And so what we’ve asked them to do is, when they do a mill run for another client and they have the ability to add to it, that we might consider taking that. And so that’s an open offer to them.

The other challenge with that though is that we would have to get somebody to install that type of pipe that’s familiar with it and efficient using it. And so the chances of that I think are positive, are good. But we haven’t gone down that path yet of buying like, you know, 300 pipes and then getting a contractor to install those. We just haven’t done it, but we have looked at it.

[17:00]

Darcy Warrington: — Thank you for sharing that. I’m going to move on a little bit to some northern highways. I’m going to list five so I’ll read slowly. And my question is regards to highways 106, 135, 155, 915, and 924. My question around those highways: they had highway improvement scheduled for last fiscal year, as well rehab design work for airports in Cumberland House and Ile-a-la-Crosse.

Is all of the scheduled work and improvements, infrastructure, investments specific to that work that was proposed last year completed? If not, is this continued work and resources allocated for the project coming out of this year’s $86 million northern highways infrastructure budget?

Kyle Toffan: — Thank you for that question and the list of projects there. We’re still getting a little bit of information I think on the two airport projects.

But just on the list of road projects . . . So they all have elements of funding in this upcoming fiscal year. So Highway 106 was tendered in late 2025, and work is ongoing throughout this year. 924, it’s a fairly sizable project: clay cap, soil stabilization. Previous years we spent in the range of $10 million on that, and this year there’s a little bit left over to do, so there’ll be a small amount of work there.

And then Highway 135, that’s a this-year project. 915, it’s yet to be tendered. And that’s I think near Stanley, somewhere in that range. It’s a two-year project, and so it’s yet to be tendered, but it’s part of our plans. And then 155 is an engineered seal this upcoming year as well. So they all have elements of budget for this year. Some are multi-year projects; some of them are just starting.

So the other thing I’d just mention: that investment for the North, it includes both capital and the operations and maintenance. The capital, as the minister pointed out in his remarks, is above that average. But we really don’t have an allocation for the North. We never have. Things ebb and flow. Last year was higher; this year’s lower. But we take a provincial-wide look at our network and determine where the needs are.

So last year was a particularly high year because we had a very big bridge project in La Ronge for instance, very significant work on 102 north of La Ronge. And those projects have been basically done, and now we move on to the rest of our network as well. So we’ll continue to kind of look at prioritizing across the network.

And that’s why that money kind of goes up and down over the years. But the average is about $80 million over a five-year period, and so we’re just kind of over that for the total investment in the North.

Darcy Warrington: — Thank you for those remarks. I’m very familiar . . . You know, there’s $36 million less for northern highways, and it was due to a major project. I guess my question is just ensuring that projects that were supposed to be — or potentially were supposed to be — finished last year aren’t taking a portion of that $86 million project where some extra dollars could have been going somewhere else.

So I’ll ask a different question about those highways that should help me indicate a better understanding. Which of those highways were multi-year projects that were proposed in the previous fiscal year for 106, 135, 155, 915, and 924? And again particular interest in knowing if there was cost overruns and some of that money is additional for those projects as a result of them not being completed as initially projected.

[17:15]

Kyle Toffan: — Okay, so just to answer your question directly. Multi-year projects: 915 is the only one that we are planning as a multi-year project in this upcoming year that’s just beginning. So that’s going to be done in ’26‑27 and ’27‑28. That’s the forecast right now.

The other multi-year project that’s on the list that you provided is 924, but it’s more of a situation of the past. So we had it as a four-year multi-year project. This is the last year of that project. There’s $100,000 or so of residual that needs to be done. The other projects should be tendered, started, and completed within the fiscal year.

You had asked about overtime, over-budget type projects. Our team does a very good job of forecasting on that. In fact we do overcommit our budget to allot for some of that risk. And so about 20 per cent we overcommit. We know that there’s going to be at any given point in time across the province where things aren’t going to be done because of weather or other things that are out of our control.

Last year in the North it happened to be wildfires. And so it didn’t actually impact the projects on your list to the extent that it could have, but we did refocus some of our attention on bridges that burned.

So we had three bridges that burned down because of wildfires, and community access was ultimately the important thing. And so we refocused on forest fighting efforts. If you can’t cross the bridge, then you can’t fight the fires. So we did refocus, which meant that we held back a few tenders for a period of time because we weren’t going to let tenders out when the forest fires were going on because they had timelines associated with them. So we didn’t want contractors to be held to account on something that was out of their control.

We’ve caught up on all that now; like that’s not an issue anymore. But I just wanted to be upfront and transparent on the issues that we were facing last year and what we were dealing with.

Darcy Warrington: — Okay, thank you for those responses. Deputy Minister Toffan, I think you do an admirable job in the bear pits at SUMA [Saskatchewan Urban Municipalities Association] and SARM [Saskatchewan Association of Rural Municipalities] addressing questions and actually being knowledgeable on some of these highways, being able to speak specifically to driving them. And I appreciate the work that you do on that and being aware of so many different roadways in our province.

There’s one gentleman from Cumberland House who was asking about Highway 123, and he suggested at present the road has seriously deteriorated, washboards, and potentially damaging for vehicles, inadequate drainage.

I believe it became apparent no one has visited Cumberland House. Or sorry, I won’t put words in anyone’s mouth. You personally haven’t visited since 2024 or so. And I just wonder if you could speak to the five-year plan for Highway 123, any projected work, maintenance, rebuilding for that particular highway.

Kyle Toffan: — Thank you for that question. Yes, and you’re right. We were up there for a meeting with council and the First Nation as well around this time of year in 2024, and we got to experience the road when it was particularly rough. There was some rutting. There were some parts that were very challenging. We actually had a Cat there too, just making sure that we put extra time and effort on the maintenance at that point in time. You saw the pictures. I’m sure everybody did. And so those are real.

We had a very good conversation about what we should do to alleviate the challenges both short term and long term. We did double our capital investment on that road in that particular year from about 4 million to about 8.4 million to deal with some of the roughest spots, and we did up our maintenance as well. We do plan on going up to that stretch this year. I don’t know when yet, but that is the plan. It’s on my road tour list.

I just want to give you some numbers here. And some of this came out at SUMA; some of it didn’t. Over the last 10 years the ministry invested more than 14.8 million in Highway 123 capital improvements. And I mentioned in 2024 alone we invested 8.4 million to add strength to the existing road and improve the roughest spots including the gravel surface and improve drainage as well.

In regards to maintenance, so this is one thing that I just want to provide some information on. So I might not be there. My ADMs [assistant deputy minister] might not be there. My executive directors might not be. But we do have our operations crews on that road constantly both in summer and winter, and we do get information from them regularly on how the condition is going. Grader operators, for instance, snowplow operators — those types of folks that, you know, we all have a lot of respect for — they do very good work for us.

On the maintenance side we provide about $4.2 million over a five-year period. That’s about the amount. So just under a million dollars on average a year just on the maintenance side. And the total amount for maintenance and capital over the past several years is 23.8 million, so a significant investment on that road for sure. But we are always interested in having more conversations on how we might be able to improve the situation on that stretch. And we plan on doing that in the next short while here with the community.

You also asked and I didn’t give you an answer on Cumberland House airport, and Ile-a-la-Crosse as well. So we are doing design work on that right now. It might not lead to capital work this year, but we are working through those projects right now. And I was actually at the airport as well when I went there in 2024, and I did an airport tour this past year of numerous airports of our 16 that we have. And those airports are extremely busy and they are a lifeline to those communities, both in the form of air ambulance but also police, firefighting, and other things. So we will be doing design work on those two airports that you mentioned, and I just wanted to circle back on that one too.

Chair D. Harrison: — MLA Gordon, you have a question?

Hugh Gordon: — Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for your comments there. Just with respect to Highway 123 though, this comes up almost every year in estimates and has for quite a long time. The numbers you’ve provided, maybe on the face of it, appear to be impressive. However we have 130-kilometres-or-so stretch road that is not up to the same quality and standard as other grid roads or secondary roads, for that matter, in the province. We’ve heard stories.

And I was up there last year. I drove that road. I’d argue there were some parts of the asphalt that are actually worse than the grid part. But I had meetings with councillors up there. I travelled in that community, toured that community. It’s the sole lifeline for that community. And yes, it’s a small community. It is our oldest community in Saskatchewan, dare I say Western Canada. It’s a gateway to the Delta.

There are people there who depend on that road as a lifeline for all kinds of emergency services. I’d also say there’s also a detachment there where officers are required to get in and out of the community on an emergency basis. Ambulances have to travel that road and they’re not stationed necessarily there. There’s medical staff that are there.

So that being said, I want to know from the ministry, where exactly does Highway 123 fall in your priority list of projects, of highway, to finally bring it up to the same standard as other grid roads? Where does Highway 123 fall? If you’re able to share that with us today.

[17:30]

Hon. Kim Gartner: — Thank you for the question. And you know, certainly recognize the importance of highways all across the province. And in this case you asked about building this to the standard of a grid road. Now for 11 months of the year, that’s a good road. It’s frozen, and then we go right from being frozen to wanting dust control on it, right.

So I mean there’s certain things that are very unique about building roads in the North, and it’s not a simple answer as far as being able to do one section, right. If we were to look at the entire section of that full 92 kilometres, we’re looking at $200 million to rebuild that road to the standard as discussed.

If I look out across the entire province we probably have . . . We have 10 projects at least that I can think of that are over $100 million. Our capital budget is 400 approximately. So when we look at budgeting, it’s got to fit in the context of the entire province and that deals with, you know, safety. It deals with the travelling public. It deals with the economy. It deals with changing traffic patterns, what we’re hauling, where we’re hauling it, and how much we’re hauling.

You know, the priorities change almost every year, and in this environment that we’re in right now with the economic growth that we’ve got going on, to me it seems to be almost on a monthly basis. So we do operate on a five-year plan, but as I said in numerous discussions, that plan is very fluid and it’s for those reasons in particular.

Now you know, changing traffic patterns, conditions, all of that fall into it, and we have to look in the context of the entire province. If I’m looking at a $200 million project in one spot, that doesn’t leave a whole lot of money for anything else. So we need to break those projects up into specs, into swallowable portions I guess, if you will, and that takes some budgeting.

Now what I’ve told people is, anything that isn’t already in construction or already in the budget is a work and a discussion in progress, because we have to take into account the entire province. We don’t budget specifically to the North or specifically to the South, East, or West. We have discussions with regional parks and with provincial parks on their access.

So when we look at the plan, what I tell people is we have a five-year plan, but it’s very fluid and it changes year to year, and at this point it seems to be month to month because of economic development that’s going on. We have a spring that’s here now. That presents certain challenges. You know, as the frost comes out of the ground, certain highways don’t fare as well as others, and neither does a road like Highway 123. And that goes back to the construction of it. You know, what we have available to construct roads with is certainly different in the North than it is in the South.

All that has to be taken into consideration when we do the planning process and development of the budget to 401 million this year. And I’ll be real honest. A $200 million project — that’s tough to swallow for an entire province.

Chair D. Harrison: — Yes, please, go ahead.

Darcy Warrington: — Okay, thank you for that. Respectfully graders are getting stuck. The highway is beyond maintenance. I don’t think anyone over here is suggesting $200 million full rebuild. But it doesn’t seem like there’s enough in the capital budget side to show that there is a commitment to having this highway fixed or more passable within 5 or 10 years. But all that being said, I think I need to move on.

The price of fuel has gone up significantly enough that it could create concerns for projects that have been accepted through the recent and past tendering process, that were accepted prior to the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz. What sort of budgetary considerations have been made for the likelihood that some of the projects could rise above a 7 per cent threshold and trigger additional costs to be beared by the Ministry of Highways for projects in 2026‑2027?

Kyle Toffan: — So thanks for the question on the price of fuel. Of course it’s something that is a big part of our business — oil and gas products, fuel, diesel in particular. We are monitoring the situation. Obviously we don’t control the geopolitical events. We are takers of what happens. We do monthly forecasting to ensure that we get up-to-date information from our project managers on how things are going.

I just want to talk about that 7 per cent adjustment as well. So we do pay above 7 per cent. So if the cost of the fuel goes above 7 per cent, we will pay the difference to the contractor to make them essentially whole, because they can’t possibly forecast geopolitical events either. But there’s also the downside of that too. So let’s say that fuel, the bottom falls out of it and it goes down 20 per cent; they also pay us. So it’s on both sides of the equation.

One thing that actually helps us is that we don’t do all of our tenders at one point in time. We kind of stagger them throughout the year, and then it hedges a little bit against these types of events that lately have been very volatile. So you might get a 10 per cent increase in the price of oil, and the next day it goes down 15 per cent. It’s just so hard to peg.

We do have some industry-accepted practices that are used to do this benchmarking of 7 per cent. So that’s all kind of done and we accept that, industry accepts that, so it’s all fair. And like I said, we’re just going to continue to monitor. We’ll do our forecasting. I will say this, that our forecasters have been very accurate over the past two and a half years since I’ve been DM [deputy minister] at Highways. What they can do on road projects relative to my background, which is on buildings and real estate, it’s actually really impressive. Lots of times they’re within 1 per cent on a 400‑plus-million-dollar budget. So it’s quite impressive. I have a lot of faith in what they do.

And our industry partners are actually really good at it too in providing information. So they provide us really good information. We’re able to do our forecasts and ultimately give good information to the minister and others, make decisions.

Darcy Warrington: — Thanks for that. Oh, thanks for that. I wasn’t sure if my microphone was on. Maybe I’m just going to throw it back to MLA Gordon. Glad to be sitting beside him. He’s certainly a knowledgeable person to be, you know, asking for guidance.

Highway pullouts are crucial for the safe transportation of goods throughout our province, not only for commercial truck drivers but also for the general public. Last year, Minister Marit was asked about highway pullouts. He suggested what a highway pullout costs, how the cost varies based on multiple situations, and also shared that the federal government should be providing more support on these, and we agree with that. All great points and important to note.

We also agree, as I said . . . Sorry, I’d have to look at written questions to see if MLA Gordon asked the question again. But the initial question to Minister Marit was, “how many pullouts . . . total have been budgeted to be built this year?” Minister Marit did not address this during committee, and it’s safe to assume the number was zero.

How many highway pullouts were built for truckers in 2024‑2025, 2025‑2026 so that they can inspect their loads every couple hours? And how many are proposed to be built in the province for 2026‑2027?

[17:45]

Kyle Toffan: — So I want to provide some information in the form of numbers here on what we already own and what we maintain. So the ministry owns and maintains 19 rest stops. We have 10 vehicle weight inspection stations. And one thing that we maybe didn’t have last year when the conversation with Minister Marit took place is we actually have 243 roadside turnouts or blisters in Saskatchewan where trucks can pull off and do their inspections or do their sort of like logbooks or whatever they have to do to continue doing the very important work that they do for our economy.

Also in relation to the relationship that we have with stakeholders, we did set up a committee a while ago — it included SGI [Saskatchewan Government Insurance], STA [Saskatchewan Trucking Association], several trucking stakeholders, and of course Ministry of Highways — to take a look at the priority areas for these rest stops. And we heard them pretty loud and clear, so not just stopped at that but we actually took some action.

And so you asked about ’24‑25. There were no projects that were done in ’24‑25. ’25‑26 we started the Moosomin rest area, which is a very significant project. And that was the first one that we took from the work of the committee. And so the entire project is expected to be completed this summer. In fact I drove past it a couple weeks ago, and it looks like it’s almost ready. It’s a total cost of $3.1 million, and 85,000 is left this fiscal year.

So it’s not completed yet but very, very close. That is going to include washroom facilities with running water, garbage and recycling receptacles, lighting, space for up to six turnpike double semi-trucks, along with other truck and passenger vehicle parking. And it will be at the Moosomin weigh scale site. So we’re trying to utilize the infrastructure that we already have and build onto it for another purpose. So being quite creative on that.

The next one that we’re looking that we’re currently doing some design work on is the Kindersley rest area. So that is in detailed design. It’s going to be again expansion of the weigh scale site on Highway 7 near Kindersley, including more truck parking similar to the Moosomin project. That’s what we’re going to try to do, utilize some of that space that exists.

And then we have a whole laundry list of other projects that we’re looking at, in future states on Highway 1 and Highway 16 in follow-up to the work of the committee.

Darcy Warrington: — Thank you. I’ve got a bit of a grin hearing that that Highway 7 one will be added. I drive by that weigh scale all the time. So that’s heartening to hear that you’re taking concerns of STA, stakeholders, SGI seriously and doing that work, it sounds like in a responsible way.

We are running short on time. I might have to pose some questions outside of this committee in written statements.

But I’d like to move to shortline rail. Shortline rail makes up almost a quarter of our railway kilometres in the province and plays a crucial role for many communities, agricultural producers, and businesses. It is clear that shortline rail will need more than $1 million from the provincial government invested last year to rebuild and maintain these crucial rail lines, even with the 1 million that’s matched from another level.

So how much funding in this budget . . . Well we know. Sorry, I’ll move on to my next question. You told me in your opening remarks. But as I’ve alluded to, there’s concerns that this $1 million doesn’t go very far to address, you know, needs. The government highlighted that it was an 88 per cent increase recently, going from roughly half a million to a million.

Question: can the department share how many lines are at capacity and for how many years they have been at capacity?

Hon. Kim Gartner: — Thanks for the question. I guess I would start by saying that shortlines are a very important part of our transportation network and they work in conjunction with our highway system and our class 1 railways. And in an export economy, of course any way that you can get your equipment to market or your product to market is very important. And shortlines are an important link, especially to the class 1s.

You know, we’ve been advocating at the federal level for stable and predictable funding for our transportation system, and that includes shortlines; it includes class 1s; it includes highways. You know, we certainly appreciate the work that we’ve done with the shortline group, and they appreciate the conversations that they’ve had with us.

And the $1 million grant towards the construction and maintenance of their shortlines, they greatly appreciate that and they’ve made mention of that. And especially in the budget, last year it was more — almost more than doubled, I believe — and we maintained that this year to the $1 million mark.

As far as capacity issues, you know, in our discussion here we haven’t really heard that. But we will reach out to the shortlines and we’ll have that discussion, see if there is a capacity issue that they’re feeling.

Darcy Warrington: — Thank you for that. Yeah, I guess each of the railroad ties is $400. The removal is additional. It doesn’t go very far with the large network of railways that they have to maintain and make repairs.

We’ve been pushing for a costing review by the federal government with the CTA [Canadian Transportation Agency] transportation agency to ensure a fair price on transport for producers. We’ve pushed this with the Ag minister and continue to stand united on this matter. What actions has this minister or the ministry taken on this front, and will they push for a costing review?

[18:00]

Hon. Kim Gartner: — So I guess I would start. I was very fortunate to be able to attend a federal-provincial-territorial meeting earlier this year on behalf of the province of Saskatchewan. And it was great to be able to be an advocate for our transportation system that we have. You know, anything that we can put forward and take the opportunity when we get it, to press the federal government to understand our challenges that we have, we’re going to take it. And we certainly did at that meeting.

But I’d like to go back to your question, which was the full costing review. So a costing review for the rail lines typically comes up in terms of assessing the effectiveness and fairness of the maximum revenue entitlement program, the MRE.

So to be competitive as a grain-exporting country, Canada must ensure that its grain producers have access to international markets by providing them with reliable, efficient, and cost-effective transportation.

So in 2023 as part of the freight rail review, Transport Canada sought input on several key issues, including the MRE. And in its submission the Ministry of Highways, in consultation with the Ministry of Agriculture, recommended that the MRE be maintained.

So any chance we get to be an advocate for the producers of Saskatchewan, we’re going to do it, and that includes our full transportation network.

Chair D. Harrison: — Having reached our agreed-upon time for consideration of these estimates, we will proceed to vote on the 2026‑2027 estimates and 2025‑2026 supplementary estimates no. 2 for the Ministry of Highways. Before we begin the voting process, Minister, do you have any closing comments?

Hon. Kim Gartner: — Sure. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’d like to thank the members of the committee for the questions, and for the government members sitting here as well and putting up with my answers.

As we move forward it’s always the goal of the Ministry of Highways to have a safe, reliable, and sustainable transportation system in Saskatchewan. And I look forward to further discussion on that, so thank you very much.

Chair D. Harrison: — Thank you, Minister. MLA Warrington, do you have any closing comments?

Darcy Warrington: — Thank you to the Chair. I’ll just say thank you for your remarks. Truly appreciate you both and all of your staff that are with you here today. All the elected officials and staff. I think this was a good dialogue, a good starting point for everybody to learn more about what’s going on at the Ministry of Highways, the good things that are being done and the places where we maybe need to work towards greater goals.

And I’ll point out that it’s 1‑1 in the hockey game, and there’s an SSTI reception for members to maybe go attend after this. So I hope everyone gets a chance to maybe get together over with the teachers that left us at the beginning of this meeting. So thank you to everyone for being here and for putting up with my questions and comments.

Chair D. Harrison: — Thanks again, Minister, and also to your officials for being here this evening. And you are free to go here before we go to vote on our estimates.

We have vote 16, Highways, on page 75. Central management and services, subvote (HI01) in the amount of 19,833,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Preservation of transportation system, subvote (HI04) in the amount of 137,085,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Transportation planning and policy, subvote (HI06) in the amount of 4,672,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Infrastructure and equipment capital, subvote (HI08) in the amount of 400,866,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Custom work activity, subvote (HI09) in the amount of zero dollars, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Operation of transportation system, subvote (HI10) in the amount of 168,174,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Strategic municipal infrastructure, subvote (HI15) in the amount of 33,017,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Non-appropriated expense adjustment in the amount of 306,396,000. Non-appropriated expense adjustments are non-cash adjustments presented for information purposes only. No amount is to be voted.

Highways, vote 16 — 763,647,000. I will now ask a member to move the following resolution:

Resolved that there be granted to His Majesty for the 12 months ending March 31, 2027, the following sum for Highways: 763,647,000.

MLA Martens has moved. Is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried.

General Revenue Fund

Supplementary Estimates — No. 2

Highways
Vote 16

Chair D. Harrison: — Vote 16, Highways. It’s page 14 of the Supplementary Estimates No. 2. Central management and services, subvote (HI01) in the amount of 19,000. There is no vote as this is statutory.

Preservation of transportation systems, subvote (HI04) in the amount of 2,700,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Infrastructure and equipment capital, subvote (HI08) in the amount of $14,000,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Operation of transportation system, subvote (HI10) in the amount of 7,480,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Strategic municipal infrastructure, subvote (HI15) in the amount of $2,000,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Highways, vote 16 — 26,180,000. I will now ask a member to move the following resolution:

Resolved that there be granted to His Majesty for the 12 months ending March 31st, 2026, the following sum for Highways: 26,180,000.

Megan Patterson: — I so move.

Chair D. Harrison: — MLA Patterson has moved. Is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. We will now proceed to vote on the remaining 2026‑2027 estimates and 2025‑2026 supplementary estimates no. 2 committed to this committee.

General Revenue Fund

Agriculture
Vote 1

Chair D. Harrison: — Vote 1, Agriculture on page 29. Central management and services, subvote (AG01) in the amount of 11,014,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Industry assistance, subvote (AG03) in the amount of 4,726,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Land management, subvote (AG04) in the amount of 5,925,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Policy, trade and value-added, subvote (AG05) in the amount of 6,272,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Research and technology, subvote (AG06) in the amount of 38,258,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Regional services, subvote (AG07) in the amount of 34,119,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Programs, subvote (AG09) in the amount of 36,170,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Business risk management, subvote (AG10) in the amount of 524,300,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Non-appropriated expense adjustment in the amount of 2,125,000. Non-appropriated expense adjustments are non-cash adjustments presented for informational purposes only. No amount is to be voted.

Agriculture, vote 1 — 660,784,000. I will now ask a member to move the following resolution:

Resolved that there be granted to His Majesty for the 12 months ending March 31st, 2027, the following sum for Agriculture: 660,784,000.

MLA Patterson has moved. Is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried.

General Revenue Fund

Energy and Resources
Vote 23

Chair D. Harrison: — Vote 23, Energy and Resources on page 43. Central management and services, subvote (ER01) in the amount of 23,147,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Energy regulation, subvote (ER05) in the amount of 13,075,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Resource development, subvote (ER06) in the amount of 16,190,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Non-appropriated expense adjustment in the amount of 4,775,000. Non-appropriated expense adjustments are non-cash adjustments presented for information purposes only. No amount is to be voted.

[18:15]

Energy and Resources, vote 23 — 52,412,000. I will now ask a member to move the following resolution:

Resolved that there be granted to His Majesty for the 12 months ending March 31st, 2027, the following sum for Energy and Resources: 52,412,000.

MLA Martens has moved. Is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried.

General Revenue Fund

Environment
Vote 26

Chair D. Harrison: — Vote 26, Environment on page 47. Central management and services, subvote (EN01) in the amount of 12,893,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Climate resilience, subvote (EN06) in the amount of 5,345,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Fish, wildlife and lands, subvote (EN07) in the amount of 20,371,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Forest service, subvote (EN09) in the amount of 8,570,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Environmental protection, subvote (EN11) in the amount of 50,480,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Clean electricity transition, subvote (EN19) in the amount of zero dollars, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Non-appropriated expense adjustment in the amount of 436,000. Non-appropriated expense adjustments are non-cash adjustments presented for informational purposes only. No amount is to be voted.

Environment, vote 26 — 97,659,000. I will now ask a member to move the following resolution:

Resolved that there be granted to His Majesty for the 12 months ending March 31st, 2027, the following sum for Environment: 97,659,000.

MLA Martens has moved. Is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried.

General Revenue Fund

Immigration and Career Training
Vote 89

Chair D. Harrison: — Vote 89, Immigration and Career Training on page 81. Central management and services, subvote (IC01) in the amount of 11,329,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Immigration, settlement and credential recognition, subvote (IC02) in the amount of 8,335,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Training and employment services, subvote (IC03) in the amount of 11,766,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Labour market programs, subvote (IC04) in the amount of 124,535,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Non-appropriated expense adjustment in the amount of 1,528,000. Non-appropriated expense adjustments are non-cash adjustments presented for information purposes only. No amount is to be voted.

Immigration and Career Training, vote 89 — 155,965,000. I will now ask a member to move the following resolution:

Resolved that there be granted to His Majesty for the 12 months ending March 31st, 2027, the following sum for Immigration and Career Training: 155,965,000.

MLA Hilbert has moved. Is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried.

General Revenue Fund

Innovation Saskatchewan
Vote 84

Chair D. Harrison: — Vote 84, Innovation Saskatchewan on page 85. Innovation Saskatchewan, subvote (IS01) in the amount of 32,242,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Innovation Saskatchewan, vote 84 — 32,242,000. I will now ask a member to move the following resolution:

Resolved that there be granted to His Majesty for the 12 months ending March 31st, 2027, the following sum for Innovation Saskatchewan: 32,242,000.

Megan Patterson: — I so move.

Chair D. Harrison: — MLA Patterson has moved. Is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried.

General Revenue Fund

Saskatchewan Research Council
Vote 35

Chair D. Harrison: — Vote 35, Saskatchewan Research Council on page 103. Saskatchewan Research Council, subvote (SR01) in the amount of 45,229,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Saskatchewan Research Council, vote 35 — 45,229,000. I will now ask a member to move the following resolution:

Resolved that there be granted to His Majesty for the 12 months ending March 31st, 2027, the following sum for Saskatchewan Research Council: 45,229,000.

MLA Martens has moved. Is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried.

General Revenue Fund

Trade and Export Development
Vote 90

Chair D. Harrison: — Vote 90, Trade and Export Development, page 121. Central management and services, subvote (TE01) in the amount of 8,527,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Strategic policy and competitiveness, subvote (TE02) in the amount of 2,208,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Economic development, subvote (TE03) in the amount of 12,350,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. International engagement, subvote (TE04) in the amount of 19,477,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Non-appropriated expense adjustment in the amount of 120,000. Non-appropriated adjustments are non-cash adjustments presented for information purposes only. No amount is to be voted.

Trade and Export Development, vote 90 — 42,562,000. I will now ask a member to move the following resolution:

Resolved that there be granted to His Majesty for the 12 months ending March 31st, 2027, the following sum for Trade and Export Development: 42,562,000.

MLA Hilbert. Is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried.

General Revenue Fund

Water Security Agency
Vote 87

Chair D. Harrison: — Vote 87, Water Security Agency, page 125. Water Security Agency, subvote (WS01) in the amount of 85,778,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Water Security Agency, vote 87 — 85,778,000. I will now ask a member to move the following resolution:

Resolved that there be granted to His Majesty for the 12 months ending March 31st, 2027, the following sums for Water Security Agency: 85,778,000.

MLA Patterson has moved. Is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried.

General Revenue Fund

Lending and Investing Activities

Saskatchewan Research Council
Vote 172

Chair D. Harrison: — Vote 172, Saskatchewan Research Council, page 153. Loans, subvote (SR01) in the amount of 18,000,000. There is no vote as this is statutory.

General Revenue Fund

Supplementary Estimates — No. 2

Agriculture
Vote 1

Chair D. Harrison: — Vote 1, Agriculture, page 11 in the supplementary estimates no. 2. Central management and services, subvote (AG01) in the amount of 3,000. There is no vote as this is statutory.

Programs, subvote (AG09) in the amount of 2,400,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Business risk management, subvote (AG10) in the amount of 101,400,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Agriculture, vote 1 — 103,800,000. I will now ask a member to move the following resolution:

Resolved that there be granted to His Majesty for the 12 months ending March 31st, 2026, the following sum for Agriculture: 103,800,000.

MLA Martens has moved. Is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried.

General Revenue Fund

Supplementary Estimates — No. 2

Energy and Resources
Vote 23

Chair D. Harrison: — Vote 23, Energy and Resources, Page 13. Central management and services, subvote (ER01) in the amount of 2,000,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Energy and Resources, vote 23 — $2,000,000. I will now ask a member to move the following resolution:

Resolved that there be granted to His Majesty for the 12 months ending March 31st, 2026, the following sum for Energy and Resources: 2,000,000.

MLA Patterson. Is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried.

General Revenue Fund

Supplementary Estimates — No. 2

Immigration and Career Training
Vote 89

Chair D. Harrison: — Vote 89, Immigration and Career Training, page 15. Labour market programs, subvote (IC04) in the amount of 1,864,000, is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Immigration and Career Training, vote 89 — 1,864,000. I will now ask a member to move the following resolution:

Resolved that there be granted to His Majesty for the 12 months ending March 31st, 2026, the following sum for Immigration and Career Training: 1,864,000.

MLA Patterson has moved. Is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. Committee members, you have before you a draft of the third report of the Standing Committee on the Economy for the thirtieth legislature. We require a member to move the following motion:

That the third report of the Standing Committee on the Economy for the thirtieth legislature be adopted and presented to the Assembly.

MLA Martens has moved. Is that agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

[18:30]

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. That concludes our business for today. I would ask a member to move a motion of adjournment. MLA Martens has moved. All agreed?

Some Hon. Members: — Agreed.

Chair D. Harrison: — Carried. This committee stands adjourned until tomorrow, April 22nd, 2026 at 3 p.m.

[The committee adjourned at 18:31.]

Published under the authority of the Hon. Todd Goudy, Speaker

Disclaimer: The electronic versions of the Legislative Assembly’s documents are provided on this site for informational purposes only. The Clerk is responsible for the records of each legislature.