Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The water and sewage subsidy program is something that I have been pursuing for a number of years, since I was elected over two years ago. I have been in contact with the Ministers and the deputy minister quite often and they have been trying to keep me abreast of the developments in this policy. The reason for my pursuing it was that the village of Fort Simpson is a tax-based municipality, however, it is not a full-fledged tax-based municipality. It is labelled as a tax-based municipality. I think the majority of the people in the community don't pay taxes. There is a minority that pay taxes. As a result of that, they call it a tax-based municipality. It is an odd type of arrangement.

Every year the village has to go to the government to get subsidized because of the accumulated deficit that arises through the year towards the water and sewer subsidy. When I heard the policy last week, I was quite pleased because it helps the community of Fort Simpson. It is the type of thing we have been pursuing. I just want to let people here know that in the community of Fort Simpson, the people who live in the area I live in, pay $15 a trip, no matter how much water we get. Some people get water twice a week, that is $30 per week or $120 per month. Some people get water three times a week, so it may be as high as $180 per month. This has been going on within the last couple of months. The water and sewer subsidy is not in place. As a result of that, the people who deliver the water are a private business. He has to pay for his costs. So because of the lack of subsidy, we have to pay that much. We are already paying the level that was stated here earlier today by some Members of how the costs will escalate if this subsidy program is put in place.

I am not for deferring this policy, but to accommodate some of the Members who have a concern, we could perhaps see if the Minister could do more consultation with the communities and get back to Members of the House as soon as he can to tell us the results of the consultations before this policy is put into effect. Perhaps that may be one way of dealing with this problem. It seems to be a consultation problem. Personally, I have been pursuing this in the House, so I am quite familiar with what is going on. I didn't know the details of the policy until the Minister announced it. It is going to have an impact on the communities, mainly in Fort Simpson and Fort Liard. In Fort Simpson, it will sure help.

At the present time, the Fort Simpson accumulated deficit is $560,000 towards the water and sewer program because there is no subsidy in place. They have been accumulating it up to that amount. All the other programs are right on. There are no problems there. But in the area of water and sewer, it is taking away the finances from other programs. So they are in a difficult financial situation because of this program. If this subsidy kicks in, I am told the village is going to recover this $560,000 over the next three years. So the community is going to pay for the accumulated deficit they are in. So this policy is definitely going to help the community.

The way this policy is perceived to be is, to accommodate Fort Simpson and Hay River, we are jacking up everyone's costs. That is what I am picking up from some of the Members in this House. We are dealing with two different items here. One of them is to equalize the pay to other Members by implementing the subsidy program in the community of Fort Simpson and Hay River. That is one area. Along with that, there are some changes in the hamlets to the commercial users and other municipalities. The commercial users are going to change. That is going to drive up the cost of some businesses, especially the businesses that use a great deal of water, like the hotels and so forth. That might impact on the room rates and so forth. It has a ripple effect in communities.

I just want to make it clear that we are dealing with two different issues here. One of them is to equalize the water subsidy program to the communities. The other one is that we are trying to get people to pay more. I just want to use the people I know in my neighbourhood in Fort Simpson as an example. Since we started paying $15 for a trip, that is $30 a week and $120 a month, people start conserving their water. You don't take showers as often as you normally did and you use the water very conservatively. Sometimes you run out of water.

Water is a commodity that is needed in our lives and it has all kinds of different uses, but people have been used to the cost of it. The Minister, in his statement, stated that there is a historical connotation to it. In 1987, this subsidy was introduced with 0.2 of a cent per litre. In 1990, it increased to 0.22 of a cent per litre. Now, it is up to 0.33 of a cent per litre. It is increasing. How long are we going to subsidize these communities? That is another question. We are talking about user-pay. The problem that I am hearing from Members in this House is that there was a lack of consultation. The other problem that I am hearing, what the Members are saying is that, to accommodate Fort Simpson, we are jacking up everybody else's costs. Is my perception correct? Is that the case? Thank you.