I have never seen anything like this in the Northwest Territories but I have seen it in other jurisdictions. In Ottawa, a person bought a car for $3,000 or $4,000. He couldn't pay for it for a couple of months and it was taken away. I was president of ITC at the time and he asked me if I could help him. He said he agreed to give his car back but they said he still owed them money because they could only sell it for $800. Would this type of thing happen, when the secured party did not try hard enough and as a result the debtor still continues to owe after the collateral has been sold?

In this case, will the borrower be a party to assessing what is a reasonable value for the collateral once the collateral has been seized?

What you are saying is that if a person has a $100,000 boat, the boat has been seized, the collateral was a $50,000 cottage, and apparently, over a ten year period when the boat was not yet paid for, the soil has not been favourable or has rotted the foundations, the bank cannot turn around and say your cottage is no longer a $50,000 cottage, it is only a $10,000 cottage, because we have neglected to inspect the soil and it is rotted. Is that what subsection 65 will tell me?

Mr. Chairman, I will try to be very clear here. What I am getting at here is that if the collateral is seized by the secured party and it may be disposed of through auction, that does not guarantee that it could be sold at book value. I guess my question is, is there any way that it can be properly, independently assessed, other than by the secured party, before it is disposed of for the purpose of liquidating it to pay for the original debt?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On Clause 59(2)(b), "the satisfaction of the obligations secured by the security interest of the secured party disposing of the collateral," -- I wonder what that means -- "...and any surplus shall be dealt with in accordance with section 60." What I am understanding here is that the collateral owner or debtor may share some of the surplus. However, I do not see anywhere that the debtor could be or should be protected so that the collateral is not resold under value, except...I don't know. We seize your mobile home -- I will use Tony's scenario here -- that you bought for $10,000. You owe $4,000, so we seize your mobile home. However, the best offer we could get was $400, so you see, therefore, you still owe us $3,600. There is nothing for the debtor that he gets a fair shake out of that collateral, unless I am misreading that completely. The simplest part is there but the other side is not there.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I understand that the government is one of the major sponsors of the Sport North activities that we all support. I also thank the Minister for recognizing the athletes from my riding. That's not the subject. The subject is not Coral Harbour, either. The subject is, is there a fair practice being made in selecting who should be in the Arctic Winter Games? My question to the Minister is, will he then intervene, using his good office, in finding out exactly what happened during the selection process for 1994, and report, in writing, to this House? Thank you.

Madam Speaker, I guess my expectations are a little bit high because I've been at this for over a week now. Can the Minister tell me, then, who was present and directly involved in this? I'm told that Coral Harbour did not have a coach. I wonder if that is the reason why they weren't selected. My actual question, Madam Speaker, is who was present and directly involved?

Thank you, Madam Speaker. My question is to the Minister of MACA, in his capacity for being responsible for Sports and Recreation. I know, Madam Speaker, that he must be getting tired of my question, but I have not been repeating any of them. I am still not sure from his return to oral question that any of my original questions have been answered yet, other than the general process that the Arctic Games follows. But, I'm still not sure what actually happened during the past month.

I'm very, very happy that the South Slave, who came in eighth place, managed to get five players.

---Applause

I wish we could do the same thing in the Keewatin, coming in second place. My question is, what exactly was the selection process of the players for the NWT open men's hockey team in 1994?

(Translation) Thank you, Madam Speaker. My statement today is on a subject that I have already raised in this House regarding the selection of the senior men's hockey team for the 1994 Arctic Winter Games. I have received a response from the Minister to my oral question regarding this matter, but I am still left unclear as to why there were no players from the Coral Harbour team picked to represent the NWT at the Arctic Winter Games. (End of translation)

I do not know what the selection was, who was involved directly, what criteria was used and when the decision of team selection was finalized. Until I am clear on these matters, I am unable to give my constituents a satisfactory response to their concerns. However, Madam Speaker, I would like to tell the Coral Harbour men's hockey team that I support them all the way and I hope that, despite this setback, they can keep the faith and I fully expect that their day will come. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

---Applause