Mr. Speaker, I think the Minister was trying to run down our clock so we cannot continue to ask questions on these matters.

-- Laughter and applause

I guess my next question would be, will this committee take into consideration or consult the seniors?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In fact, Mr. Speaker, the deputy ministers responsible for each of the departments and all three Ministers in the social envelope met with the Seniors' Advisory Council last week, when they were in town to discuss issues such as this one, and to discuss how the council's input might be received by this review committee. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

-- Applause

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, we do not know what the timing of the report will be, and that could take substantial amount of time. As the Minister stated earlier, he has to take that under advisement. We feel fairly strongly as Members about this and wondering if the Minister would consider reinstating the fuel subsidy until this report has been completed and that we can discuss it in the House, especially considering the fact that we do not know when this report may be forthcoming? Mr. Speaker, Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I seem to be getting mixed signals here. I heard the Member, earlier today, indicate that Members of this House and the public want the program restored. I also heard the Member say that a piece meal approach is wrong, and that Members will not support a rejigged or stop-gapped program. I am not sure whether the Member is recommending that I reinstate the program to the level at which it was last year or, as I understood from the Social Programs Committee, to look for a manner to make sure the program was carried out in the 1997/98 year at a funding level similar to that which is in the current year's budget. It is difficult for me to respond without having some clarity. I would also like to point out that it was only Friday that I met with the Seniors Advisory Council. They indicated that they thought they would be willing to come forward with some suggestions in relatively short order. I asked them to make sure that it was very quick so that if we are able to identify funds to continue this program, we can announce it sooner, rather than later. I think it would be far better to wait to get some advice from the seniors on the design of a program before saying that I will restore the program to the former levels.

-- Applause

Yes, thank you, Mr. Speaker. My comments today were, Mr. Speaker, that this review should be completed as quickly as possible, and that we needed a clear cut policy of support to give to our elders, and that the current piece meal approach is confusing and frustrating. But I think it is important to know, if the review is going to take substantial time, if the Minister will consider reinstating the fuel subsidy as it was before the summer, and I understand that there is no money in this particular budget for the fuel subsidy at the present time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I took the question as notice as to the timetable for the report of the committee. I cannot necessarily agree with the Member that the report will be a long time coming. I will, when I respond to the question taken as notice, give a timetable for responding. Yesterday, I was accused of not being able to listen well. I have a three year old son who does not enunciate very well, and I think that I listen very clearly. I have listened to the recommendations that have been given to me and where the funding should come from to provide this service. One of the suggestions was already in the business plan which was presented to the Standing Committee on Social Programs. One would require a reduction in social assistance or income support payments to people who are already desperately in need. The other required moving funds from the Housing Corporation into the Department of Education, Culture, and Employment. Given the tone of the questions I have heard to the Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation in the last few days, I am not sure how much support there would be for reducing funding to the corporation at this time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My written question today is for the Minister of Education, Culture, and Employment. In view of the recognition that the assistance to seniors, and programs to seniors are inconsistent and that a study is being undertaken, I am wondering what defence and justification can be offered for such inconsistency which would result in the unfair treatment of some seniors, and in fact, discrimination against seniors trying to live independently in their own homes. We have heard recently in this house, that there is going to be a one year postponement put on the implementation of phase three of the rent scale, because its deemed to require further assessment and study, because it may be imposing financial hardship on low to middle income families. I do not how much revenue this government is forfeiting by such a postponement, but in light of the department's admission of the need to review support to seniors, why does the same principle of postponement not apply?

Why has the department taken such a hard line with respect to a program affecting such a cherished and respected sector of our society who have worked hard, make our communities richer and more balanced places to live, and citizens who may not have the physical ability to go out and find ways of supplementing their usually fixed and modest incomes. Why has the department taken such a hard line? Thank you.