I cannot speak to the specifics of Aklavik, but in general, there has always been a concern with respect to transfers to individual communities about their ability to provide the kind of full range of services. That is largely because we, as a department, were able to spread the costs of positions over a large number of communities and were work planning as a component of it, we would have an individual who plans work for ten or 12 different communities. Providing that same level of expertise for every individual community is simply, there are not enough resources to be able to do that, so the solutions really have to be community specific solutions. In some cases, there are existing hamlet foremen that are already providing a significant number of services and the addition of the assets previously maintained by Public Works was not a significant change in what they were already doing. Those have worked out, obviously, well. In situations where there was not previously much in the way of previous involvement in significant maintenance work, there was not an established planning capacity within the community, then that has to be looked at the time the transfer agreements are negotiated and we have to be a little bit innovative in terms of how we deal with it.
In some cases, the communities may simply be too small to be able to effectively carry out the range of functions that are required to be carried out, but each community is a little bit different and, again, I do not know the specifics of the negotiations that took place in Aklavik and what the issues there were, but certainly trying to provide sufficient resources for all communities to be doing the types of work that we have been doing has been a real challenge.