Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, first of all, all airports in the North are legal size, therefore they are all certified by Transport Canada. Most of them are. I just want to clarify that. Secondly, all paved surfaces deteriorate over time from heavy use. The surfaces then eventually become unsafe for aircraft operations. The life expectancy of a paved airstrip surface is about 20 to 25 years. There was an overlay in Fort Smith in 1984. There are a lot of cracks created in this airport and defects that are very visible in the airstrip pavement in the Fort Smith airport. A routine check, by filling and patching these cracks, can no longer guarantee a safe runway surface. Therefore, a full overlay must be completed for safety reasons. I believe this particular project has been delayed in previous years, the department informed me, and it was determined that the best course of action to take, at this time, is not to have this airport deteriorate any further and to go ahead and do the overlay project. As a result of that, the decision was made to go ahead with this project. I know there is concern that there are quite a few communities that have been requesting their airstrips be lengthened, and we are putting in lights where they are required. As a result, the airports that are functioning in the north, if they are certified, that is because they are of legal size. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, there was a letter sent to the Chairman of the Standing Committee on Resource Management, Mr. David Krutko, dated January 7. In there, we provided the information in a number of areas that the committee requested the department to provide. So, that information has been sent. We also attached the information with regard to route maps for major, scheduled air carriers, flights and the passenger statistics to all the communities. I think that the information requested by the committee when we did the review of this department, we feel has already been provided. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, in regards to the regulation that was developed by Transport Canada about the length of airports, that has been developed recently. Upon the request of Members of this House and upon the request of communities and the airline industries in the north, we lobbied Transport Canada and the Government of Canada and were able to get an exemption from the regulations. We can continue to use our airports in the north, using the existing air carrier of choice. We have an exemption until the year 2010. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the specific question that the honourable Member is asking is the difference between Fort Smith and Arviat, I believe. The aviation statistics that we have from 1991 to 1995, aircraft movements in 1995 in Fort Smith is 6,566, whereas in Arviat there were 1,374. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, we have a lot of information, but that is one type of information we do not have right at our fingertips. We will have to get back to the honourable Member on that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My question on this particular topic also has to do with the overlay of runway in Fort Smith. We took this program over from Transport Canada. Can the Minister advise us what priority did Transport Canada have on this before the GNWT took it over?. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, when the negotiations were underway, we negotiated the operations and maintenance costs of these airports along with the future capital costs that we foresee happening with the airports. I am sure that all capital was taken into consideration. We tried to get the most from the feds during negotiations. I am sure this was part of the deal, but we need to get more information on this for the honourable Member.