Thank you, Mr. Bell. Supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, for allowing that rather far-ranging question and for the Minister's answer. I will come back to the theme of workers choosing not to live in the Northwest Territories. There is a concern in the city, Madam Speaker, that workers who are now residents of the Northwest Territories may look at this and say if I can get my way paid from Edmonton, I am going to move to Edmonton. I get the big salary, I enjoy the lower cost of living, I am closer to friends and relatives and other kinds of amenities. What kind of protections are there in the socioeconomic agreements, Madam Speaker, that will prevent or deter workers from actually retreating and leaving the Northwest Territories?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Bell.

Madam Speaker, in much of this discussion, we tend to want to focus on the hypothetical, the what-ifs. We don't know what's going to happen and obviously we can't chain people up and force them to work or force them to live somewhere. We have to do our best to make sure that it is an environment that people want to live in; that's what we are here to do. We are here to improve life, reduce the cost of living and make sure this is the best place in the country to live. I believe it is. Will some people want to move south because they have now seen a window? I don't know. I guess hypothetically that is the case. The mines do provide the charters coming north. They are aware of who is on these charters, but they can't insist that because you have chosen to move south for whatever reason that you can no longer be employed at the mine. I hazard a guess that they would run afoul of provisions of the Charter of Rights by suggesting that. So I think it's important for us to focus on what we can improve in the North, instead of looking at protectionist measures and trying to project the absolute worst-case scenario. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Final supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. The Minister is right; we have to pursue an incentive and an attractive environment to work and live in, but I will go back to what I started with. The North has had such a history of fly-in/fly-out resource development and we have worked so hard to counter that. The agreements that we put in place under considerable pressure, Madam Speaker, to get the diamond companies to comply with our desire to leave some of the product here so we could work on it is one example of how we have worked so hard to make this happen. The concerns I raise about workers now potentially making these kinds of choices is a signal that we have to do as much as we can to make this an attractive environment. So I would come back and ask the Minister what steps he is taking with Diavik to constructively reverse the opportunity they've made, and not just wait for another two years before this agreement comes up. What steps are we taking right now to help Diavik attract and keep workers living in the North? Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Bell.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I have met with the company, Diavik specifically, a couple of times recently about this. We've had discussions around training for the most part because that really is the answer here, is to make sure that programs like ASEP are up and running, and are able to provide training for people who are currently not employed and who want to be employed, but I think that's the answer. As we stated earlier, Diavik is complying with the terms of the socioeconomic agreement. Their explanation for having to do this is one of a very hot economy in western Canada and the fact that 30 percent of their workforce is coming from the South is highly sought after for southern projects. They're trying to make sure that there's not a disincentive for them to come north. It's quite possible that as these people come north and get more familiar with life in the North, that they'll in fact want to relocate here, and I don't think that we can discount that possibility either, Madam Speaker.

So, much of this is hypothetical, but I would say to the Member the Member is aware of people who are specifically coming to his office and suggesting that they're now going to leave the South, this is the window they've been looking for because the $10,000 in northern allowance payments they get from the company was really now something they were going to leave on the table and take the $3,000 travel benefit, and that was the difference. But I'm prepared to sit down and talk to the Member and committee about that. So if the Member has some specific names or incidences, we can sit down and discuss that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Item 5, oral questions. Mr. Pokiak.

Thank you, Mr. Pokiak. The honourable Minister of Public Works and Services, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, the Member is right; there have been a number of problems with a number of projects in Sachs Harbour. Unfortunately we've had weather delays, and that's one of the issues we have to deal with as residents of the Northwest Territories. Accessibility is hampered at times, as we've heard earlier today. The Sachs Harbour health centre renovation is largely complete. They were planning to do a substantial completion inspection in April, but it was aborted due to weather. In fact, the people doing the inspection tried to get into Sachs Harbour yesterday and they were delayed. Weather again became an issue. They are hoping to get in there today. My understanding is that the weather has gotten better and they should be in there today, and we should have an inspection report completed hopefully as early as Monday. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Supplementary, Mr. Pokiak.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Thanks for the information, Mr. Minister. I think living way up there you depend a lot on the weather I guess. It's good to hear, as the Minister just reported, that they are planning to go up there. I think once the inspection is complete and the renovations are done, the whole community and people in Sachs Harbour will be very happy to be able to utilize the health centre. So I'm taking the Minister's word, Madam Speaker, that they are trying to get into Sachs Harbour. We can't fight with Mother Nature. So I would just like to say thank you for the Minister's response. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you. I didn't hear a question there I don't believe, Mr. Pokiak. Thank you. Item 6, oral questions. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I'm still concerned with this EDAP program that we're not really getting anywhere, and I'd like to hear some real solid answers from the Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation. I want to start hearing some real details of how we're helping honest people out there to get them into houses, and I want to see some reasonability of this program, because I still think it's out of touch and it's only helping certain people. The reason I say that is because the program is structured in such a way that if you have two incomes, you're practically exempt from this program the way the structure is set up. So I am overly concerned that it could be looked as the program of the well connected, and it has the appearance of only helping very few. That being said, I did a little calculation on Canadamortgage.com and if you have a purchase price for a house of $200,000 and you have a down payment of $72,000 your mortgage payment is under $800 a month. So what is the methodology of this program? Is it to ensure that people have payments as little as possible? Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The honourable Minister responsible for the NWT Housing Corporation, Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, as we know, this program, the Expanded Downpayment Assistance Program, is to assist people wishing to get into their own homes through home ownership because they are paying well in excess of 25 or almost 30 percent of their income, which could be better served by getting into home ownership. This is not only for people in the high income bracket, this is also there to assist people and get them out of social housing and get them into home ownership, but only where their income shows that they able to pay to maintain a home, and also be able to ensure that they are paying well in excess of 30 percent of social housing. This is not only intended for people with high incomes. The subsidy program that's being delivered through this program is a subsidy, which is depreciated over 15 years when that individual occupies that unit. It's not automatic that you get $70,000. It's a subsidy that's provided to those individuals to subsidize them so they can get into home ownership, knowing that they are better off in home ownership than they would be in social housing. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. I have two more people on the list for oral questions and the clock is

running out. So I would just ask Members to be brief and Ministers to be brief, so we can get those two Members' questions on the floor today. Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. With that in mind then I'll just ask directly is it the design of this program to get people out of social housing, which is a good thing, but is it designed to get them out of social housing at any cost? Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, as I stated, this program has assisted 570 people in which we were able to leverage $42 million through bank financing to assist us with these 570 people. Yes, the goal of the program is to get people into home ownership and give people independence so that they are not stuck in social housing. In a lot of communities 90 percent of our houses are social housing facilities. We have to get them into a home ownership program. One of the programs we have is EDAP. The other program is the Independent Housing Program. We have programs designed to assist people to become homeowners. The large portion of the cost of these facilities is based on where you do your assessment. In Yellowknife everyone knows the cost of building in Yellowknife you are looking at $250,000 to $300,000 for a home. In the program we can support people up to 40 percent of the value of the home and the property it is on. So there are maximums of how far you can go with this program. So if you are looking at a $300,000 home, then you can see how 40 percent of that will fall into the number that the Member is talking about. But we hear from this House, we have passed a motion for ourselves to bring down our core needs by 10 percent by 2007 and this is one way that we are going to do that. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Supplementary, Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I will agree with the Minister that putting 570 from social housing into home ownership is a great thing, it really is. But we were only able to help 14 people last year. If the Minister wants to mention that we are going to start putting people from social housing into outrageous $400,000 houses, that is a little out of touch. I think the program needs to be cut in half and we could help 28 people with reasonable payments. Would the Minister table the sliding scale of this program, so we can all clearly see how it applies to families so we can get a real sense for this program? Would he table that? Thank you, Madam Speaker.