Okay. Thank you, Madam Chair. There has been discussion among other Members about the Novel housing proposal, and I think I share with every other Member an expectation, a hope, that this opportunity -- it's an extraordinary opportunity -- can become something that, indeed, we will be able to apply that will make a difference for our communities. It is exactly the kind of thing, Madam Chair, that we can and should expect as a legacy from the Mackenzie Valley pipeline and with that context, a fair amount of information has been circulated about it. It's still obviously, though, kind of finding its feet. Like some of the Members, I need to be satisfied on some of the business context and the business approach that we are taking this. I should also acknowledge, too, that the Minister has invited me as well to go to Calgary to see the factory, to see the product and talk to the ATCO folks. I haven't done that yet. I look forward to the opportunity to do that. The business

approach to this is really central to having a look at the product itself.

I think, if I recollect from a little while ago, the discussion Ms. Lee was having with regard to the contributions that were lined up for this and, indeed, correspondence from the Minister, which was tabled on February 1st, would indicate that there is very close to $300 million suggested as the total financial picture that we could potentially be looking at.

I had written the Minister back in August of last year, Madam Chair, with a number of questions related to the project. One of them was in respect of the contributions that were outlined at the time. We were told that the Government of Canada was being prepared for a $90 million one-time contribution; the Government of the Northwest Territories was in it for $121 million; and, the Mackenzie gas project/ATCO was in it for a $26 million involvement. The question I had at that time was, what's in it for ATCO? Why are they making a $26 million contribution? There was a six-point response, Madam Chair. It covered a whole bunch of areas: to reduce socio-economic cost, to seek agreement with the GNWT for all structures to remain in the North, to develop a positive position with impacted communities, to quicken the regulatory approval of the project, to secure a GNWT socio-economic agreement prior to regulatory board hearings. There was a vested interest in here by the MPG and ATCO to make a contribution to this. But in the discussion that I hear now, and this is what I wanted to confirm and I would like to double check this, ATCO is not making a contribution? They are in this for the money now. All of these quite more social and philanthropic agendas aren't on the table anymore? Just what is the nature of the contribution that is anticipated, or had been anticipated at least last August, from ATCO, Madam Chair?