Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The concerns the Member has brought up are Territories-wide concerns. We are getting those concerns from a lot of people in the Territories, that the HAP program has become too narrow. It does not meet the majority of the people's needs, so one of the first things we are going to undertake is to do a needs survey with the community, identify the community's preference and the types of homes they need, and that is going to also drive the development of new home-ownership and other housing programs. By the fall of this year we will have a new range of housing programs in place for next year's building season.

It does not seem fair to me that a person that makes $50,000 or $49,000 gets a $100,000 house, and a person that makes $51,000 does not get anything. That is not a fair way of distributing things, so we will be addressing new programs for those that are over the threshold as well as for those that are in more need under the threshold. There has got to be a broader range of programs, and we will be doing that. It will be in place for next year's building season, but it will not be in place for this year's building season. As it is right now, Mr. Gargan, lower income people, even though they are not eligible at the outset, can become eligible if they prove, for example, that they burn straight wood to bring the cost of operating the unit down. In the smaller communities like Jean Marie River or wherever, they can still get a unit if they prove that.

I realize that some of the older home-ownership programs, the first units that Indian Affairs put in, in the West, are in pretty bad shape now, as well as some of the SSHAG units. Communities went out and harvested small logs and slapped something together in the SSHAG program, as it was called, so those have to be adjusted as well. It may not make sense for the corporation to put a HIP, home improvement program, into those units because you do not gain a lot of ground and you spend a lot of money, so it may make sense just to replace the unit. That will be addressed as well, but as I have been telling people who have concerns about the program, there is a light at the end of the tunnel. That light will get wider the farther into the fall we go, and we will have new programs and they will be programs that meet the communities' needs because the communities, and the Members as well, are going to have some input into how those programs are developed. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To my left is Mr. Larry Elkin, the president of the Housing Corporation. To my right is Mr. Jim Pratt. He is the vice-president of finance for the Housing Corporation. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes I would like to invite my witnesses in the House.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That is really a dead issue because the bill did not get second reading, and I do not plan to re-introduce it in the near future. For the Member's information, a certain number of steps are involved. The first is to amend the legislation. Then it would go through first and second reading through this House, and then it goes to the legislation committee so that it can go through public consultation. The legislation committee reviews it; the public, the housing authorities, agencies, boards and commissions, or whoever wants input at that time could do so. That is the process. But, it did not get that far. If it had gone that far and had been passed, then you could have eliminated the board and saved $300,000 direct costs and $300,000 indirect costs, which would have made it available to negotiate with the feds to take it off the GST because it would have been under the government's arm, it would have been a department. You would have to keep the shell of the corporation in order to get CMHC funding. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It would still be called a corporation but would be run like a department, if the bill had been passed. It was not passed.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think the Member is asking about a senior citizens' facility. All I am aware of, right now is that there are a total of 14 units going into Cape Dorset and a total of five units going into Lake Harbour. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Once again, there are going to be no savings because the bill is dead.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We will not save one cent because there is no change.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a return to a question asked by Mr. Pudluk on February 21, regarding Resolute Bay pipeline freezing. I wish to provide an update to Mr. Pudluk on the freezing of the Resolute Bay water pipeline. It was the water supply line between Char Lake pumphouse and the water treatment plant which froze when a check valve at the Char Lake pumphouse failed. Public Works crews were able to thaw the line and restore normal service on February 16th. In the meantime, water to the town site was maintained by trucking water from Char Lake to the water treatment plant. The faulty valve has been replaced. In an effort to avoid future such occurrences, DPW has installed additional alarm systems at the water plant and at the pumphouse. If an alarm goes off, a telephone dialer system places a phone call to DPW personnel. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.