Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess we could ask a similar series of questions that we had asked previously where there was an exemption of BIP on a capital project. Although in previous experiences, those capital projects weren't much larger than the one, I am assuming, we are dealing with here. Mr. Chairman, I need to ask the Minister if there has been any analysis done to figure out how much BIP would have cost. I still don't understand why the decision was made to exempt BIP. I think it sends a wrong message about what the government is doing. I don't know if we are ever going to fix this, but if the government has evidence to suggest that the BIP does not work or that it costs too much money or it gets in the way of government advancing its agenda, whether it be providing housing in small communities to professionals or figuring out that the stick built houses don't work for some reason, I don't know what the reasons might be. But the government has an obligation if it decided that BIP does not work for us and it's costing too much money, then say so. You can't spend years revising the policy, working out the policy, having a whole office on the BIP and then at a whim and on its own discretion say in this case it's not going to apply.

The transparency is the important thing here. I don't know if it should be acceptable for the Minister to say, he's been a Minister there for four months and for him to say this decision was made previously and I am going to follow it, at least if the Minister has a view of the situation and feels that is the way to go, he should be prepared to defend that and not just say the decision was made before I was there and we are going to go with that. I have some questions. I want to know what kind of cost-benefit analysis was done and whether the Minister himself supports this initiative regardless of what the instructions from the last Cabinet has been. Thank you.