When we look at the home equity assistance program, and there have been a couple of cases that have been very loud in the media, what the member has to prove is that there has been a greater than 20% reduction of the value of their home in that area. Trying to prove that is almost impossible. I think there's been one approval that has come out of Treasury Board over the last 20 years in favour of the member.
We've had some members who have lost in excess of $80,000 or $90,000 on the sale of their homes. I believe the home equity assistance program is a good program, if it were accessible. You can call anything fair, but if you make the barriers of access so high that no one can get at it, then I think it's rather redundant to even have it in place.
My problem is that when someone moves from one area of the country to another and experiences a major financial loss, I think consideration should be given to the conditions that are on the ground at the time. Just to say that you have to meet a 20% reduction.... There's one particular case that comes out of Alberta because a community was designated to be within one township instead of another. The person lost a considerable amount of money, and no consideration was given to what happened in the greater environment, in the regional environment, that caused that drop in the house price.