Thank you, Madam Chair. As I said to the standing committee yesterday or the day before, and last week and the day before that, it's our intention to utilize $5 million from the sale of staff housing, and the balance would be put against the deficit. I think that is the issue that Mr. Ootes wishes me to say, and, yes, it will be put against the deficit. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I have some problems with the motion, however, as a good-natured person, I think I will support it.

But before that, we have been trying for years to get a health centre in Gjoa Haven. There was money committed for that community. We have been trying to get a senior citizens' home in Gjoa Haven for many years now. It seems obvious that, in some cases, it's so easy to get money, to find money; in some cases, you try and try for years but you are not able to find funding, because you have to sacrifice in order to help other areas.

But, as I've indicated, as a good-natured person, I will support the motion. But I would like to send the message to Cabinet, to the Premier and to the Government House Leader that, when you try to get something for your community, you know the commitment is there already but are being told there is no money in the system because of reductions. When you find one area is needing some money, it seems to be so easy to find money in one area and yet so hard to find money for another area.

Anyway, Madam Chair, I will support the motion. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. 1, too, will be supporting this motion. However, as the honourable Member for Thebacha indicated, there hasn't been much information going out on this issue. I will be supporting this motion if we can be assured that this is the only money that will be going into this venture. We need to be assured that, if people

default on their payments, our government is not going to have to pour in another $5 million, $10 million or $15 million.

Agreed.

So I would like to know what will happen if people default on their mortgage payments.

I think Mr. Miltenberger is probably right; there hasn't been a great deal of debate on this issue. This is probably healthy, and I apologize if I sounded somewhat flippant earlier, because it is an important issue and it is a large expenditure.

What will happen in the Mortgage Investment Corporation, assuming we can find the other stakeholder investors of $15 million to start with, we will be a 20 to 25 per cent shareholder in this company on the initial basis. Our exposure will be to the tune of $5 million, period, and there will be no additional fiscal exposure to this company. It will operate independent of government and, in a sense, we'll be just like a tenant, or bridge financing, if you want; another alternative to the banks.

I don't want to get into a long debate with my friend, Mr. Picco, but I am telling you I have talked to the vice-presidents of banks, not bank managers, and I am telling you that they are not extending the mortgages; or, if they are extending mortgages, then the conditions are simply impossible for people to get. Secondly, they've said to me on many occasions that they can't afford to service it, and I believe Mr. Krutko just spoke to that. So, it's fine, as Mr. Picco says, to sit in Iqaluit with two banks and say everything's hunky-dory. Well, if you're sitting in Grise Fiord, maybe it isn't, or in Clyde River, Chesterfield Inlet or Repulse Bay.

I've tried to assure the Members -- and I don't know how many times I've gone through this -- that there are some safeguards in place. It was asked by Mr. Miltenberger and Mr. Erasmus. It's there. There is no alternative at the present time. We've got some responsibility out there to try to enhance opportunity for our people across the Territories and this is what this intends to do. If we're successful, and I've said, and I'll go public again, that this is a bold and somewhat risky venture but I've, hopefully, assured most of the MLAs that we won't spend the money without a clear commitment from external financial stakeholders.

I'm looking for support from ordinary Members. I understand I have it from some but, obviously, I haven't got it from others and they're certainly entitled to their opinion. I would suggest, Madam Chair, that we should proceed with the vote. Thank you.

Agreed.

--- Agreed

(Translation) Thank you, Madam Chair. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding a little bit on this motion. I am in support of the $5 million that is being proposed in the motion. First of all, when the Baffin leaders were meeting, there was a resolution made stating that the government shouldn't be selling off government housing before Nunavut is in place. They wanted the government to consider that resolution that was being made at that meeting in the Baffin.

Being a Member of the Legislative Assembly, I can be involved in decision-ma king. However, we have to represent the people who are in our region; we have to listen to their concerns and problems. For that reason, I will not be supporting this motion at the moment. I know the motion might be carried but I will not be supporting this motion at this time. Thank you.

The development of a mortgage and loan company was put in place over a year and a half ago and has no relationship to the sale of staff housing; although, the sale of staff housing will probably provide some momentum. The mortgage and loan company was put in place in an effort to provide alternative funding for level 11 and III communities in the mortgaging of new construction and new housing because we believed at the time, and I believe now, that the banks are not as aggressive as they should be in providing our people, who we represent, with the loan money that they need to build these houses or we're setting conditions beyond their ability to do the same.

The selling of the staff housing is an issue that came up during the budget deficit elimination strategy as an overall policy of this government but has no bearing on the Mortgage Investment Corporation which we started to develop over a year and a half ago. Thank you.