Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am still of the opinion of the original motion, in support of the original bill, and this paperwork before us just kind of supports your original judgment. On the email in question on the last sentence, it says, "Our preference remains for the NWT to put in place its system," and the system the government has negotiated in this case, so it has full control over revenues, and, as the Minister mentioned in the past here, ease the impact of the tax on to the residents of the Northwest Territories, and, in doing so, it's better to understand the impacts of the tax. When I first heard about this and coming from an area with no road system other than seasonal and we depend largely on aviation, so I went and had some discussion with our largest courier to have some discussions with the Minister, and they did to better understand that because you do not want to see an increase in aviation and pass that cost along to the customer, which in 10 out of 10 cases always happens. The customer ends up paying. There is an exemption, so, if you add on the exemption to support the cost of capital, your annual rebate, as the Minister mentioned, it is going to come in at your tax return season, which is kind of like once every 14 months by the time you get it in your account.

The other bill coming would help adjust the rebate system to our territory from the tax collected as identified in that last quoted sentence I mentioned earlier. So the cost of capital is going to be somewhat eased onto the residents, seeing that the residents are going to see payments, multi payments, per year compared to annual payments on the federal backstop, plus add on the exemption of aviation fuel. I think those are evidences enough for me, and other heating fuel rebates, that we are trying to ease the burden of this tax onto the residents. So I feel comfortable with that. I feel comfortable that our government has negotiated in good faith and came back with a package that I am satisfied with. Thank you, Mr. Chair.