Just one more, Mr. Chairman. In response to the Minister about fire prevention and education. The Minister indicated that the funding is unconditional. I think most Members understand that but there is a problem, particularly in non-tax-based communities. If you look at the state that the municipalities are in, if you look at the audits that were done on them, some of them are having serious financial problems. Even if we give them money for fire protection as unconditional funding, the first priority for that municipality would be to put that money towards their deficit. So in that instance, municipalities would do that, so it makes it more difficult for them to do anything with fire prevention or education at the community level. I have noticed many of our municipalities have a debt recovery plan in place and they are trying to get themselves out of debt.
For the last few years, we have had problems with the formula. It has only been two years since we implemented the last major changes to the formula financing for hamlets. Previously, because the municipalities weren't properly funded, they kept getting themselves into trouble, and many of these municipalities are still dealing with a debt recovery plan. Most of the funding, even though it is funded unconditionally, is put towards the deficit of the municipality. So it makes it even more difficult, when you talk about fire prevention and education at the community level. That doesn't even occur. The only thing you hear about is education material from the fire marshal's office, but nothing from the municipality in their fire prevention plans. The work isn't carried out at the community level. That is why I am raising these concerns. Maybe the department can take a look at giving separate funding for mandatory fire prevention. Maybe this whole issue should be reviewed by the department, rather than saying it is lumped into your unconditional funding. Perhaps it should be conditional funding. That is just a comment, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.