Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, one of the areas we're also looking at is giving more authority to communities to the local housing authorities to let them take on more program responsibilities such as the program delivery. Like you say, at least the documentation will be there in the communities and that the individuals that you talked to are there and you can walk into the office the next day and say, hey, I forgot about this. I think it's important that we restructure the organization so that it does reflect the people that you're serving. I fully support that, knowing the challenges people face in the communities. I think you will hear loud and clear that people come in and in some cases eight months or a year later they still don't get a reply. I said that's frustrating. One of the things I've directed the department to do is take a close look, when we do this mandate review at how we deliver programs and services to the communities and to our clients. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. I have Ms. Lee next. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Could I ask the Minister how many PYs are under this division?

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Krutko.

Seventeen.

Just for clarification, Mr. Krutko, we're on page 8-29, operations. Is that 17 PYs for operations?

Yes, 17 PYs.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Ms. Lee.

So we have 17 PYs for $1.4 million where we had three PYs for almost $400,000 in executive. Next, I see the travel budget, Mr. Chairman, and the travel budget for 17 people is $71,000. We just went through executive where the travel budget there was almost $100,000 for three PYs. I think lest there be any suggestion that I somehow am blinded to what's happening in the needs of communities, I just think it's very unfair that 17 people have to share $71,000 in travel budget while the executive spends $100,000 in their travel budget. How are these district people who are supposed to...The mandate says here on page 8-28, "One of the major functions of this division is to assist communities in developing their own capacities to deliver housing programs." I heard earlier from a Member saying it's expensive to travel. I'm wondering if they have a special road they travel on that's a lot cheaper than the fancy Ministers and executive staff. Let's start an argument on that.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, like the Member stated, that's part of doing business up here. It is a costly endeavour and in most cases your highest costs are your travel costs. These individuals have to basically deal with the local authorities. They're the ones who look at the land development that has to be associated with our housing packages and also ensure that all the logistics are done to deliver our programs. I think that's the cost of doing business. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think another thing that should be noticed here is that there is a reduction in the budget for this year of almost $350,000. This is the point that members of Social Programs have made and Member McLeod, who is quasi-Social Programs committee member, has firsthand experience and he talks about the fact that while the budget for headquarters keeps in line or keeps growing and their travel budget grows as fast as they spend, the operations budget that is supposed to be for those people who are on the ground who keep in touch with people on the ground the corporation is reducing the budget. You know, last year, in 2003-04, the budget was $4 million. The corporation reduced that budget to $3.9 million the year after, but they actually spent about $500,000 more than what was budgeted. It seems like the principle that applies for executive where you get what you spend, here they're reducing it back to previous years. Where is the fairness in these rules? Executive gets what they spend and operations gets less than what they need. Is that the rules the Housing Corporation operates under?

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, under grants and contributions in regard to clients, most of those are because we are now managing the staff housing portfolio from the government. In this case there's the $300,000 for a buy-back to purchase back a unit that was owned by a government person. That's why you see the change of $300,000. But that is an ongoing cost because we have to cover the cost of those assets which we are now managing on behalf of the government.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Ms. Lee.

So back to that travel budget of $71,000, if 17 people are sharing that budget, how are they expected to travel to communities to see what's going on in terms of the mandate that they're supposed to be delivering?

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, like I stated, the majority of those 17 positions are technical people we send to our regional operations when we look at our programs, IHP, building multi-plex units or seniors facilities. They're the ones who do the logistical work. So the majority of their travel is from headquarters to the regional offices and then into those communities to ensure that we have everything in place to construct a lot of these units. In most cases they'll go in two or three times a year just to oversee those programs or projects. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Ms. Lee.

I think that's enough for now. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you, Ms. Lee. We're on page 8-29, operations, operations expenditure summary, $4.101 million.

Page 8-30, operations, grants and contributions, contributions, total contributions, $2.262 million. Mr. Villeneuve.