Obviously the reason for my questioning is that no matter how or what process we follow from here, this is a totally arbitrary figure. There is some danger that the boards being offered this were seriously under-funded and the 40 percent they are now expected to shoulder may impact on services that they can deliver to their service area.
My concern is that we have not been able to come up with a process that identifies what boards can really afford in terms of making up the deficits. After all, once you have accumulated a deficit, if you have to take the monies out of your ongoing budget, it has to have some impact. I would have expected that the monies that boards were being advanced would be monies that the department required in full by them to deliver the program.
I am having trouble understanding how these boards are going to make up that 40 percent. I am trying to get a sense from the Minister, is that a final offer? Are they going to have to come up with that entire percent? Or are we still looking at making sure, as he has said, that there will be no negative impact on programs and services? It may be impossible for a board like Stanton, for instance, to come up with 40 percent of that accumulated debt without negatively impacting the services that they deliver.