Thank you Mr. Chairman. That is a grand speech, but personally I have some major problems with it. I do not agree that we should be cutting people that need it most, especially seniors. It does not matter, oh, we have to think of reality here. Reality is, times are changing. Things are getting tougher in the communities.

We take the emphasis, well, you know, they worked all their lives, they should pay for it. I do not think that is the case. This was a subsidy that was put there to assist people in regards to keeping them in those communities, and keeping them independent. We either look at that cost, versus the cost that it will cost this government to put them in institutions which basically seem to be the method that most governments are going at now. Let us push them aside, and say, that is the end of it. You have done your time, you are no good to us, so we will push you out the back door, and go out to pasture. We are treating these people like a bunch of cattle.

I think the statement from the individual on the social committee, I do not think that there was consultation with myself, as an MLA, and the constituency I represent. From the statistics you can see in my riding, especially in the Inuvik region, there are 148 people. Out of that, 84 people have been affected. In Gwich'in, that riding, basically the Mackenzie Delta, people have worked many years to have their own homes.

The ratio that you are using for the people that are qualified, is so far down in the streamline of putting them on the bottom of the barrel basically for them to get the subsidy, they are still going to be able to find other revenues to get through the rest of the winter.

I think that using the formula you came up with, it is not practical in the sense of the word and for using the excuse that, "Well, we have to cut so we are going to take $200,000 from the elders' subsidy." We just passed a couple of motions dealing with the way things were moving around in the budget, somewhere in the realm of $5 million which everybody blinked and passed a motion and that is the end of it. When it comes to individuals in the communities such as our elders, we seem to have a real problem just saying, "Sorry, we support our elders but they have to take the cuts, too." I think they have taken enough cuts living in the North all their lives and raising their families.

Most people work for this government to get to where we are today and most of the other people that work for the government and go south and basically retire down south, maybe that is the message we should give to our seniors. That is, they are better off going south because this government does not care for you. I think this is the message that is coming from the Minister as well as the Member from the social committee. I think surely we can find $200,000 elsewhere.

Also, the Minister said he consulted. There is a letter here from the seniors, Esther Braden, clearly stating that they were not consulted. If the Minister says he consulted them, I would like to know the method he used because when my phone started ringing, basically I do not think I was consulted either. We just finished going through a process of moving capital and things around, consulting MLAs that are affected.

You talk about consultation and the whole idea that we cannot do anything about it now. I believe we can do something about it now -- put a motion on the floor and basically find the money elsewhere. Do consultation fairly so that everybody is involved and come up with a formula that we can all live with. But, I do not think that is what I am hearing here. If there is a method out there that someone can come up with, the more power to them, or just leave the thing the way it is and find $200,000 elsewhere would probably be the simplest process. Thank you.