Madam Speaker, I think it was generally agreed that the fiscal cost of this thing may in fact be so enormous that this government, under its present fiscal conditions, wouldn't be able to afford it. One of the ways that we're looking at an indirect subsidy, for example, is the work that we did in Pelly Bay with the Coast Guard and the icebreakers coming in, in trying to find a new way in which to bring dry cargo and POL products into that community in a more cost-effective way. So we're doing more of that. In Mr. Arvaluk's riding, in particular, right now we're taking a hard look at direct POL products, and possibly dry cargo down the road from Montreal, to see what the costs would be there. We've proven and will prove that the POL, for example, out of Montreal direct into Keewatin will provide significant savings to this government, that hopefully we can pass along to other people. So we are looking at more transportation directed policies where we would do things more cost-effectively, rather than a direct subsidy to food products, similar to what we did in the past. Thank you.
John Todd on Question 447-12(5): Status Of Freight Subsidy In Transportation Strategy
In the Legislative Assembly on March 31st, 1994. See this statement in context.
Further Return To Question 447-12(5): Status Of Freight Subsidy In Transportation Strategy
Question 447-12(5): Status Of Freight Subsidy In Transportation Strategy
Item 5: Oral Questions
March 30th, 1994
Page 980
John Todd Keewatin Central
See context to find out what was said next.