Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.
I appreciate the Minister’s willingness to have some continued dialogue on this and see where we can go with it. This has been achieved in some of our vision and goals that we set out in the 17th Assembly.
So I’m going to ask the Minister, given this, can the Minister provide some of the basic economic dollars as to the communities that do not have health centres or communities who do not have RCMP officers? What are we looking at in terms of the dollars that would be required, and have some discussion to see if we could at least move towards that direction?
As we sit here debating and considering the budget put forward by the government, the expenditures for the year are laid out. We’ve made an accommodation on the Heritage Fund. That will be included in this as we go forward. So we need to address that issue.
I would be happy to have further discussions with the Member in this venue or other venues of a more social nature where there may even be some food on the table to help promote discussion. But, very clearly, I anticipate that we will be continuing this discussion once we conclude the debate on this current budget.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I touched on the Jean Marie access road earlier in my Member’s statement, so I’d like to ask the Minister of Transportation some questions about the access road at Jean Marie.
Are there any plans in this fiscal year in the maintenance budget to do some specific work on that access road to Jean Marie? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. The Minister of Transportation, Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Over the years, after the Jean Marie access road was made passable through all seasons, an additional $1.5 million has been spent on that road to try to upgrade it. The department is going to continue to work on that road and continue to try to improve the road so that it is passable 365 days a year. Thank you.
Thank you very much. I’m really glad to hear that and maybe the Minister can specifically tell me what strategy that’s in, because it is a seasonal access road right now, meaning it does get soggy and people do get stuck. So the community would like assurance that they will get it upgraded to a highway status, passable year-round. Once again, would the Minister confirm that?
The money that will be used to continue to upgrade the road is from the regular maintenance budget. We could look specifically into the access road budget, as well, this coming year since that is all done by proposal. We would look at the Jean Marie road through the DOT Access Road Program as well. But there is no plan that I’m aware of in the immediate future to upgrade it to the regular highway standards that we have on Highway No. 1, for example.
I think the Minister meant Yellowknife standards where it’s chipsealed, as well, all their access roads. Just with that, it’s a priority of the community. It’s always been. I’ve been in this Legislature raising it time and time again.
Is the Minister aware of any other capital dollars aside from this operations and maintenance budget that is going towards the Jean Marie access road?
No, I’m not aware of anything that has been approved through the capital budget, but the DOT Access Road Program, although it’s an O and M budget, is used to do the upgrades on open access roads and upgrades to access roads, so we will be targeting that program to improve this road. Then we can also have discussions with the Member over the longer term. If he sees this road becoming a highway standard, then it’s something that we would have to bring back to the House because it would probably be a substantial cost.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Perhaps if the Minister can check firstly on the capital and then what specifically is in the O and M budget for the Jean Marie access road and get that back to me there.
I would be pleased to provide that information to the Member within the next couple of days.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. The Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are for the Minister of Education. I’d like to ask him a couple of questions with regard to his Response to Written Question 6-17(5), with regard to the explanation of funding and reallocation of funding for junior kindergarten.
In 2014-15, $1.8 million will be reallocated from education authorities, and I take it from the Minister’s response that this is from all authorities, even from those four authorities who will not get junior kindergarten in 2014-15.
I would like to ask the Minister if he would please confirm that my understanding is correct, that the four authorities who do not get JK in ’14-15 will, in fact, be losing money.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. The rolling out of the junior kindergarten starting this new school year, 2014-15, will cover 29 schools, and then the following year it would be the regional centres, and then the third year will be covering all of Yellowknife. It is a three-year approach, and it will cover all communities, all schools, the 49 schools that we’ve been talking about, the 33 communities. There’s going to be some decrease and increase into our formula when we deal with the school boards, so it does reflect on that as well.
I didn’t really hear an answer there so I will try again. My understanding is that, for instance, the two school districts in Yellowknife, Yellowknife Education District No. 1 and Yellowknife Catholic Schools will lose funding to provide junior kindergarten in 29 communities and they will not get kindergarten in the ’14-15 year.
My question to the Minister is: Does he consider it fair that the larger centres, four communities, will give up some funding with no return in ’14-15?
We have to keep in mind that we’re rolling out the junior kindergarten for all the children in the Northwest Territories. We talk about the larger centres and the smaller centres. We’re here for the Northwest Territories, so we are providing those benefits to those communities and, more specifically, those 10 communities that do not have licenced child care programming, daycare programming, and the preschools and so forth. At the end of the day, we’re serving the children of the Northwest Territories and it will benefit the whole Northwest Territories.
I find it interesting that the Minister twice in the last couple of days has referenced 10 communities without daycares and in the same breath that he’s talking about junior kindergarten, so I’m wondering if he’s equating daycare and junior kindergarten. I hope it’s not so.
I’m trying to understand the numbers in the answer that the Minister gave me to my written question. There are two high schools in Yellowknife. One is Sir John Franklin and the other is St. Pats. Sir John in YK No. 1 is the bigger high school but Yellowknife Catholic Schools will see a much bigger reduction in their funding: $214,000 for Catholic schools and only $62,000 for YK No. 1.
Why is there this big discrepancy when the bigger school is losing less money?
There is a breakdown for all the school boards, the 33 communities that we service. As I stated, some will be decreased, some will have a net increase in their formula funding, but the less minimal impact would be up to 1.5 percent, and I’m sure that’s manageable within the administration of the school boards.
When it comes to, let’s say, Yellowknife Catholic School Board, in 2014-15 there will be a decrease of $434,000, projected ’15-16 there will be a decrease of $264,000, projected ’16-17 will be $484,000 that will be given to the school board. It does vary between the school boards. In the Yellowknife district education authority in 2014-15 there’s a negative $569,000, ’15-16 projected $322,000 negative. But at the same time, 2016-2017, there is going to be a plus of $829,000, so $62,000 out of a $24 million budget. I’m sure that can be managed.
These are some of the areas that we’ve been talking about with the superintendents, so we are having ongoing discussions with them and we are rolling out the program this fall.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Final, short supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thanks to the Minister for those numbers. The Minister said in his response that our education authorities are run by professional administrators, and I totally agree with the Minister, and I, too, have confidence in those authorities and in the trustees that run the boards, but my understanding is that it’s been fairly late notice for these reductions to the superintendents and to the boards and gives them little time to adjust.
I would like to ask the Minister, for my information, when were the education authorities advised of these reductions, these changes in pupil-teacher ratio, and how were they advised? Was it to the board chairs? Was it to the superintendents? Was it by letter or by phone?
Throughout the Early Childhood Development Framework there has been a lot of engagement and the forum that we held in Yellowknife and surrounding communities. The superintendents have been involved, during the transition period of the discussion, about what kind of initiative should be undertaken by the department. One of them was junior kindergarten, the discussions that we’ve been having, and I presented to the board chairs of what our approach would be, part of the Early Childhood Development Framework, working along with Health and Social Services. The superintendents have been involved with my department, my department’s been involved with the superintendents, so there’s been conversing back and forth since last year, I believe late fall, and then the discussion of how they can be involved during the implementation stages. We have reached out to the superintendents and they provide feedback, suggestions and ideas. Instead of rolling out the PTR from Grade 10 to Grade 12, they suggested coming back to saying let’s start with kindergarten to Grade 12. So we have initiated that. We have accepted their recommendations, so they have been involved. This is an area that we work closely with the school boards and we have taken their recommendations, made those changes, so it does reflect on the numbers that I highlighted earlier. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My earlier oral questions to the Minister of Health and Social Services were on the independent unit in Fort Good Hope. I want to ask, I guess, the Minister of Health and Social Services about the positions that are going to be funded in regards to this unit.
What types of positions are going to be aligned with this new seniors unit in Fort Good Hope in regards to the facility itself?
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Minister of Health and Social Services, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I indicated previously, at this time we don’t actually have any indication whether new positions are going to be required. The Sahtu Health and Social Services Authority is working with the department to figure out what programs to go in there. The NWT Housing Corp is designed to build it so it has a wonderful space where programs can be delivered out of and that would be where we deliver programs. Once we figure out what programs and services are going to be in there, we’ll have a better idea if it’s going to require positions.
We certainly have positions in the community that we hope will be able to work out of there to provide support to those independent living seniors. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I would clarify my question to the Minister. I know the building is going to be built; there is a schedule there. I want to know within… Maybe the Minister won’t be able to answer this question here. Once the building is there, is there a position from the government that’s going to go with the building in terms of how that building is going to be taken care of and the positions with that building? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, it’s going to be an NWT Housing Corp building, so I don’t know if there are any plans for them to have any staff in particular. But from a Health and Social Services point of view, there is a space dedicated in that building for programming and we will have our staff that are in the community now utilize that space to help deliver programs. Whether they are permanently located in there or not, that is still a question for consideration with the Sahtu Health and Social Services Authority and the department.
As I indicated, once they’ve done that analysis, we will be in a far better position to give the Member an update on that and if additional resources are required, we’ll certainly come through the normal business planning process for that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to direct my questions now to the Minister of the Housing Corporation on the seniors facility that is going to be built in Fort Good Hope. I would ask the Minister, for the purpose of this session here, to inform the public, people in Fort Good Hope, on the scheduling of this new facility that’s going to be built in that community and opening for the spring of 2015.
Are we on schedule, where are we on schedule and how are the plans coming together to start the building of this facility? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Minister of Housing, Mr. R.C. McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The building in Fort Good Hope is on schedule and we’re hoping to have construction starting this summer. So as far as we know, the building is still on schedule and will be completed in a timely manner. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I appreciate that and the Minister’s confidence that it will be on schedule and it will be built in Fort Good Hope and on schedule.
I want to ask the Minister if there are going to be any positions associated to that building in regards to the overall maintenance and care of that facility. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, the maintenance will be done by the local housing organization in Fort Good Hope. I believe there is a caretaker that may be required for it. Again, that would be a decision of the local housing authority in Fort Good Hope. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, will the local housing authority also receive additional funding for that position?
Mr. Speaker, we have a partnership agreement with the local housing authority and they will receive their funding. As far as the extra position goes, that will be a decision that they would make. However, I can tell the Member and Members of this House that we are reviewing how we are funding all our local housing organizations and we take all of these into consideration. That work is ongoing right now. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to follow up with the Minister of Education and ask a few more questions with regards to the funding for junior kindergarten and the written response, or the response to the written question.
I asked the Minister when the boards, the board chairs, the superintendents had been advised of the reductions in their funding for the ‘14-15 year. I don’t believe I heard an answer.
I would like to ask again, to the Minister, I appreciate that the boards and the chairs and the superintendents have been involved all along, but when were they advised of the reduction in their funding allotments for ‘14-15? Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. I don’t have the specific detail of date that we met with the board chairs. I met with the board chairs to introduce the Early Childhood Development Framework and along with that was introducing junior kindergarten, but I can provide the Member with the exact dates of when that occurred, along with other engagements that we have initiated with the board chairs, the superintendents. Later on today I will be tabling the document of engagement. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thanks to the Minister. I’m not so worried about the engagement. I know that the superintendents and the board chairs and the boards have been involved all along and that they have known about this initiative. My question is: When were they advised that their funding was going to be reduced for the ‘14-15 budget year? If the Minister doesn’t have that information, that’s fine, I can appreciate that, but it’s my understanding that it wasn’t very long ago; that they were not advised of the funding at the time the project was put forward.
The Minister mentioned that the superintendents had suggested that the pupil-teacher ratio be reduced and implemented through kindergarten to Grade 12. I wonder if he could explain to me what that means; I don’t quite understand. I had understood that it was the high school PTR that was being changed. Are we changing the PTR for all grades? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, when we first introduced that the PTR be adjusted, the formula, to the superintendents, it came out with various numbers for the school boards during the three-year phases. The school boards, the superintendents did come back and recommended that we seriously consider having a PTR discussion pertaining to kindergarten through Grade 12, so those are the discussions that we’ve had with them, taking those into consideration, to make some make some modifications to the actual numbers from the original intent to what we have with the numbers now. So I made some changes over time. So, based on their recommendations, we went forward. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
