Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm a bit confused here with respect to this particular section. I read that to be an incidental thing, so that in case you're down in a hospital, in case you're down to get your truck, in case you're down for a meeting somewhere in the city or in Ottawa, that you make sure you're not stupidly penalized for having a cigarette in your pocket when you're coming from another jurisdiction to the territories. But, this amendment is not incidental any more. It is an actual measure. At one carton a week, it doesn't take five weeks to come up to the Northwest Territories. Do you need that many cigarettes en route?

The idea of the original section was not to bring in cigarettes for the purpose of smoking them in the territories, but to make sure that when you're travelling you are not out of cigarettes from point A to point B in different jurisdictions. I don't see this as in the same spirit or intent of the original section. I don't know if I'm understanding it, but I see that this has changed the whole intent of the bill. I don't know how this can be an amendment.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Final supplementary so I guess it had better be a good one. During the 11th Assembly, it included a section for general freight subsidy. The Minister indicated that this was taken out and now they are looking at some other form of subsidy, perhaps for specialized or specific items, et cetera. Why was this taken out?

Madam Speaker, I want to know why there is no transportation strategy with the idea of general subsidy for remote communities or small communities for potential staple foods.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I hear that these are the specific subsidy programs, but my question was, are there general subsidy proposals in the transportation strategy, especially the small communities, other than Pelly Bay, et cetera?

Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Minister of Transportation. The official transportation strategy of the Government of the Northwest Territories, tabled during the 11th Assembly, included a need for a general freight subsidy to lower the costs of living in the remote communities. Is the freight subsidy still a part of the current transportation strategy of this government?

As I stated in my Member's statement, if the mothers, especially in low income, and average mothers cannot actually afford...I'm told in Repulse Bay that Similac is $17 a can and it is $19 for Enfalac. Those cans are not very big. Will he investigate to find out whether that can be reinstated as a medical benefit? Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is directed to the Minister of Health. Is the Minister aware that mothers in Keewatin -- probably in most of the territories, too -- are no longer provided with Enfalac or Similac infant formula as a medical benefit under our health care plan?

(Translation) Thank you, Madam Speaker, and thank you colleagues. Like I said, they can only obtain this type of formula when it is authorized by Social Services following a written letter from the nurse stating that the baby is ill. This makes it very difficult, to say the least, for single mothers and parents who are unemployed. They are unable to provide their children with suitable formula and the recommended formula is only made available after their children have become ill. Madam Speaker, this situation is unacceptable and it must be addressed immediately. I suggest that we provide a subsidy for infant formula sold in communities of the Northwest Territories. I was thinking of a subsidy similar to the one put in place for naphtha fuel. When it became clear that naphtha was not affordable for hunters in the Northwest Territories, such a subsidy was provided. Surely the health of our children deserves the same consideration, so they can have a healthy life-style. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

---Applause

Madam Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to finish my Member's statement.