Mr. Chair, I just wanted to ask the Minister about his comments here in terms of the housing that he's planning to put into the communities. Even 118 units, even if we don't receive any type of favourable response from the federal government, we have 118 units, as you mentioned. That's quite a few units. How is it going to work with the communities in terms of putting

these units into the community in terms of the lot development, power poles and any other infrastructure that has to go to get a lot ready for these units? Right now they're sort of rushing the lots to get into the communities because of the weather and the communities that don't have all-weather roads or access to a winter road is only open for a short period of time and the gravel pits need to be opened and get gravel into the communities. So I just wanted to ask the Minister in terms of what type of security or what kind of plans did you put in place to make sure we have our lots well developed and in place before we get these units built on these pads? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chairman, we have identified 33 units to go into communities who are on the winter road system and they have been ordered. We're hoping to get them in with the winter road this year. So they will be in those communities. We have 33 units already identified. Again, we're hoping to have a response back as soon as possible from the federal government. Once we get, that then we'll have a better idea of the rest of the allocations by way of barge and whatnot to the other communities. So right now, the allocation that we have, what they committed to is the allocation for the winter road, the 33 units, which will be going in basically right now to get them into those communities on the winter roads. So, again, I'm hoping to get a response back from the federal government. Again, I believe it will be a positive response and I think that we have to assume that and if we don't, we'll have to readjust it after that period. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I wanted to ask the Minister again in terms of the coordination efforts by Housing with other departments in terms of developing the lots for the communities for these units to be in the communities. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, we will be going into each community and having community meetings and getting community consultation and making them aware of the number of the allocation, the lots that are going to be required, and also with that consultation with the communities where these units should be built. So we will be going community by community in regards to the allocation, and also working with the communities to identify the appropriate lands that are going to be needed to build these. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. In terms of the part of the consultation and coordination with the communities that are going to receive these units, would the Minister then look at the other departments that need to be part of this consultation and coordination to get these pads ready? An example is the MACA sewer and water system, and NCPC for power poles that need to be in these lots, and probably other agencies and other organizations to coordinate that this is what needs to happen to have these lots prepared and ready for these units that would be coming into the communities. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, we are doing that to ensure that are able to work with the other departments to ensure that we would have this smooth transition to get these units on the ground, and also working with MACA and the Power Corporation and also other departments to ensure that we are able to deliver a number of units. We are going to, but, like the Member says, there are implications in regards to water/sewer delivery, to extension of your power grid, to looking at your road systems and whatnot. I think it is important that there is going to be a major undertaking to do this. We do have to work with the other departments. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The $4.8 million to fund emergency and other repair programs and various seniors' programs, under this concept here, is a certain amount allocated out of this solely for Senior Citizens' Home Repair Program? I know the Minister indicated earlier that he said it is application based. It is pretty general. Everybody could fill out their application under the emergency and it would eat up on the other programs. In this funding or the different programs he has outlined, do they have a certain amount of money that is dedicated solely for that purpose? I wanted to ask that question. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, Mr. Chair, we do take applications in the fall time and also we are able to identify where the needs are. Based on core needs, we try to identify those people in most need where we think the emergency or crisis is. Through that information, through the applications, we have a general idea of where the dollars should be spent on the repair programs. Then, from there, they are basically allocated by each community, based on a number of applications and also where we see the highest need based on core needs. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Yakeleya. Thank you. Next I have Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I used the last opportunity I had to speak on generality, so I would like to try to focus on specifics here. It is in regards to the Novel housing which was mentioned in the Minister of Finance's budget statement. Also, I had the opportunity to ask the corporation some specific written questions. I received a reply on that. I appreciate the answers. It was quite lengthy. It contained a lot of information, but I do still need some clarifications. The first one is -- and I will try to be brief in my questions -- one of the things that the Minister indicated is that this project hinges on three different things. One is, of course, that the pipeline has to get through. The second one is that ATCO has to get the contract. The third one is that the federal government

funds this. One of the things I am wondering, because it says here that the Minister received a positive response from former Housing Minister Fontana. I would like to ask the Minister whether he was able to get anything in writing. If not, why not? When you are aware in a minority government that the government could fall at any time, why would he not have gotten something concrete that he could go to the new Minister of Housing Finley with? Thank you. That will be my first question.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the simple answer is that the funding we are asking for is in future funding, which is 2011-2012, because we are not sure who the government is going to be of the day, and that this government could not make commitments to future obligations, similar to this Legislature here. CMHC does have our proposal which has been given to them. They are pretty receptive to the proposal. Again, it is based on the approval of future governments to continue the lobby, continue to keep them aware of our proposal and see where that goes. Right now, because of the future commitments, the federal Minister could not commit to future allocations because it is outside the mandate of the previous government and also because it is future funding for 2011-2012. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Ms. Lee.

This project was estimated at about $200 million last year, but now it is up to almost $300 million. It is a huge project that I think the Minister would be well advised to put in writing. I am not sure that, this being a future project, should preclude that. My understanding also, Mr. Chair, is that the agreement that the former Minister Fontana gave is to the effect that the federal government will fund it at the back end, meaning that they would only invest whatever their portion is once the project is up and running, which tells me that the federal government is not ready to take those risks and liabilities associated with this project, which puts into question for me the trust and confidence they have in this project. So I think that is something that the Minister really has to work out here.

I have a lot of questions here, so I am going to move into the next question. That has to do with an assumption here which says that, one of the assumptions, of course, is that the ATCO has to win the contract. Let me just state that I don't have any knowledge or information, but ATCO, I know, is a good company. They do a lot of work. My question here has to do with this as a business project. Is the Minister not concerned that a government is actively promoting a project like this, which the government has already stated in my written answer, that the government has been very active in promoting the Novel initiative? It is right here in the written answer. Is the government not concerned that the Minister and the government spending time and energy and money actively sponsoring a project like this might be seen as interfering with the private market effort? I could see it as we have two airlines, First Air and Canadian North. Would it not be problematic to any third party if the government starts lobbying for one airline to get all the contracts for the pipeline or something like that? Has the Minister ever considered that it might be inappropriate even for a government to sort of back one company and to say, even though the government says it is assumed, this is not going to go until they get the contract...Well, if the government backs the project, the government says they are going to buy from ATCO, isn't it ...It says in the answer here that the government has not really talked to Imperial Oil in a serious way because they don't want to talk about it until they know that they are going to go with the pipeline, but there is too much of that grey stuff that I don't really like. I would like to know if the Minister, as a Minister of this government, addressed that question in his mind about whether that is an appropriate thing for him to do.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, there is the only one company in Canada that has a patent on this idea. The company that has the patent is ATCO Structures out of Calgary. No other company has patented the idea. That is what it is. It is an idea of how you take workforce camps and, at the end of the project, and once it is over, you are able to convert it at a cheap cost, useable modular homes. Again, it is all hinging, like the Member mentioned, that once the project is concluded, we will work an arrangement out with the Mackenzie gas pipeline group, not with ATCO; with the outfit that will build the pipeline and purchase these camps. We will take it off of their hands after the project is concluded. Again, it all comes down to federal commitment for the $90 million. Again, that is hinging on the federal decision to go forward with this project and fund it. Without the federal funding, there is no project. Because of those reasons, that is the reason we are looking at this.

I would just like to point out we are not the only jurisdiction in Canada looking at this idea. Manitoba government is looking at it in regards to Labrador and Quebec. There are other First Nations' governments across Canada who are seriously looking at this type of arrangement for economic developments that are taking place in their backyards that they want to be able to see a win-win situation with these developments where you don't have the 500 to 600 man camps in your backyard and you don't get anything out of it.

Again, it is the concept. It is starting to spread. Other groups are looking at this. We are not the only group that is looking at it. Again, it all comes down to a company that has a patent and basically they are the only group that has the patent in Canada. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Ms. Lee.