Thank you, Madam Chairperson. I sort of have difficultly with the language that is being used in the motion. I realize that phase two is going to go ahead, but my understanding was that we were going to ask the government to evaluate after phase two to fix up all the problems that they had in phase one, so that they don't repeat the errors that they have done. After they do phase two, then we want the government to do an evaluation on those phases and then do a report and hopefully during the business deliberations in the fall, we will have some sort of report pertaining to this on the evaluation to say how good of a job has been done and then we will take it from there for the following year. That was my understanding.
The way the motion reads, I don't know what the mover means by restructuring the current market housing initiative. I don't think we need to restructure it. Maybe improve the current market housing Initiative pertaining to, rather than amortizing it over a number of 20 years, maybe to 25 years, so that it is more affordable for the clients. Those are the types of things that this evaluation would take into consideration, is stuff like that, to make improvements on it, not to restructure. I don't know what he means by restructuring. I have difficulty with the wording of it.
We want to see the results and to be more efficient. I am in favour of phase two and I am in favour of an evaluation at the end of phase two. I am not sure if I am going to support this or not, because the wording is not really what the intent was. Thank you.