Thank you, Mr. Heide. Ms. Bissaro.
Mr. Chair, that’s good. That’s all I have. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Continuing on page 10-29, I have Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. When it comes to income support with the federal Minister’s recent announcement about increasing the amount of insurable hours, has the department done an assessment yet? It will affect the income support of people if it’s harder for people to get on, something like that.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Minister Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. As you know, we just heard an announcement last week. It is a federal program. Income support obviously will be prepared for any impacts when it comes to EI recipients. They’ve extended longer hours, but I believe, from my understanding maybe with Minister Kenney, there is the two-phase approach, Yellowknife and then small communities on unemployment rates. Based on that, I believe it’s 8 percent hovering around Yellowknife and it’s around 20, 30 or 40 percent depending on the communities. He obviously stated that there won’t be much of an impact on the small communities, but for sure there will be some for Yellowknife.
I’m glad the Member is raising that issue because we are preparing for that and we are getting ready with income security for the individuals who will be impacted. Mahsi.
Just something to be aware of and hopefully the department tracks that. Yes, there is higher employment but that means there is low employment, meaning it will be harder for people to get jobs. I don’t see the correlation here at all. I don’t know if they can track it and maybe a year from now raise it, should it impact us negatively having more people on income support as opposed to unemployment insurance, Mr. Chair. Thanks.
That’s exactly what we’ll be doing, working with our federal counterparts. They do have their stats as well. We provide our NWT stats and information to them. So, yes, I agree with the Member that we need to closely monitor this. Mahsi.
We’re on page 10-29, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you. Just a few questions. My first question is on the Senior Citizens Supplementary Benefit Program. I know at one time – and maybe the Minister can help me out here – that some of our seniors didn’t know about the Guaranteed Income Supplementary Benefit from the federal government. They weren’t applying for it and it has to be applied for every year. Some of the senior citizens were wondering why, after one year, their income cheque was down low again. Is there something within the department where the workers notify, maybe through the service centres, to fill out these guaranteed supplementary benefits? I say this because, personally, my father at one time didn’t know about this and didn’t receive his benefit for two years. I want to know if this was being looked at to help some old-timers with this issue here.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Heide.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One of the tenets of income assistance and income security is to make sure that the clients coming to our door have access to as many other programs as possible. Part of that is looking at federal programs that an elder or anyone could be eligible to apply for. You’re quite right that the service centres may be the place for those elders who have trouble with forms and on-line services and those sorts of things. We certainly could be supportive in reminding elders of those kinds of things.
Thank you, Mr. Heide. Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Certainly I’m a fan of the service centres that we established. I think that’s something that this government has certainly done well within our communities. Speaking with people who manage that office, they love to work with the elders and the elders love to converse in their own language in these centres. That’s a good thing. As Mr. Heide was saying about a checklist from the elders, especially at the end of the year, have you done this, have you applied for this. I check this for the seniors. Sometimes we get so busy, we forget things. If you have an elder coming around this time of the year, you know their benefits are going to be cut off, you have a checklist for them and go through it so the elders know that they are keeping on top of things and will be more efficient for our government. That’s what I wanted to remind the Minister about.
The other point I want to make is with income assistance, we know that in some of our communities the employment rate is low, as the Minister stated, and to meet our goals and visions to have strong, independent Northerners, individual families, that the Income Assistance Program… Is this the type of program that we can help people go on the land or families to go on the land under this program? If you want to go on the land with your family, take your children, we have a program. Could we make it a simple matter if a family wants to go out, get their groceries, get their gas, if they aren’t doing any type of work in the community and just want to spend some time in the bush with their family? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Minister Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. This particular area obviously falls under productive choices within income security. We support individuals who want to go out on the land. We have to work with organizations as well. If they have to handle a chainsaw, a rifle or a snowmobile, those are some liabilities we have encountered in the past, but we have always worked around other organizations, whether it is the band council or hamlet council or other agencies in the community. Those are some areas we have assisted in. Perhaps it is two months of income assistance if they want to go out on the land, so we’ve done that before. We want to increase it even further. I agree with the Member that we need to encourage those individuals who are more than willing to be out on the land harvesting for their families. That is a productive choice within our income security division area. Mahsi.
The income assistance, I certainly hear the Minister will work with them to support any type of policy or regulations or assistance to get the families out to live on the land. Certainly on this page it talks about working towards a greater self-reliance. There is no greater self-reliance than having your family out on the land and relying upon each other, which also means there are risks. Families talk about those risks and talk about improving the quality of life. There is no better life than getting on the land and working, hard work but working together. I take my family out on the land seven to 10 days every spring and there are risks. It’s my responsibility. The quality of life is awesome. We rely on each other. We talk to each other. We work with each other. We solve issues with each other and sometimes we don’t agree, so we go into the bush for a walk to cool off.
So I want to tell the Minister within the department, I’m hoping some of the issues you’ve raised don’t hinder somebody who wants to go. We are going to handle chainsaws. We are going to handle gas or fire, skidoo or whatever, gas lamps and that stuff is a way of life. I want to ask the Minister if he would again look at something that people have been doing for a long, long time and we want to support them and meet the goals of a greater self-reliance, improving the quality of life for them. That’s all I’m asking for. Thank you.
I totally agree with the Member that we need to move these obstacles that are in the way. That’s why I did a Minister’s statement, as well, that we are getting rid of some red tape within our department. This is an area that works well, whether it is the two-month advance for harvesting on the land where they can bring their families. We assist them. We’ve come around with the liability issues. We’ve done that in the past and we will continue to push that forward.
Thank you, Minister Lafferty. Committee, we’re on 10-29, activity summary, income security, operations expenditure summary, $42.115 million. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Page 10-30, activity summary, income security, grants and contributions, $11.136 million. Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. A few months ago I had asked the department if they had done some type of analysis on their grants and the cost of them and the sense of opportunity costs. I don’t ever recall receiving any type of feedback on that initiative. I can go through the further detail of that if that doesn’t jog enough of their memory to what my issue was to the Minister or the staff.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. I do reflect on the Member asking that particular question. I don’t have the information here, the latest status, but I can provide that as soon as possible.
Thank you, Minister Lafferty. Committee, we are on 10-30 again. Activity summary, income security, grants and contributions, $11.136 million. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Page 10-31, information item, income security, active positions. Any questions?
Agreed.
Seeing none, 10-32, information item, Student Loan Fund. Any questions?
Agreed.
Page 10-35, information item, details of funding allocated to education authorities. Any questions? Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a question here with regard to the funding for education authorities, particularly to the two authorities within Yellowknife who, I know, are very prudent in their financial management and have managed to accumulate a bit of a surplus to help them over the requirements for extra staff in September, a program that may need an extra bit of money to carry them through to the end of the school year and so on.
My concern is that over the last week to two weeks I have twice heard the Minister reference the surplus of education authorities, and I would like to know from the Minister whether or not the department and/or the government is considering putting in place the same policy that they put in place for the health authorities a while ago in that surpluses for authorities were deemed to be government funds and they were basically, they were annexed, I guess, by the government and turned back into general revenues. I’d like to know from the Minister if that is the intent of the department and/or the government with regard to the surpluses that education authorities have.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. We are fully aware of the surpluses that have been accumulated within all schools, most of the school boards across the Northwest Territories. We’re fully aware of the policy that’s in place with the Department of Health and Social Services. We haven’t made a decision on that. There has been talk, but no decision at this point.
Thank you to the Minister for that. If you’re talking about this, I guess I’d like to get some sense of where the department is wanting to go on this, and secondly, are you in conversation with the school boards at the same time that you’re discussing it?
As I stated, this will be a discussion that we need to have with the school boards. Obviously, we want the surplus funds to go to our children in the Northwest Territories, the education programming. It’s very preliminary at this time, but the discussion will be happening with the school boards.
Just one last comment, and I suspect that the Minister and the department are well aware, but the two school boards in Yellowknife are not fully funded by the GNWT, so I would think that at least a portion of their surplus and perhaps all of their surplus has been garnered through taxation of Yellowknife residents. I just want the Minister to be well aware of that and to consider that in their conversations.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. We’ll give the Minister an opportunity to respond. Minister Lafferty.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. All those will be taken into consideration.
Thank you, Minister Lafferty. Committee, 10-35. Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On 10-35, I have a quick question, and I’m not sure it’s an easy answer. That’s what I have certain fears over. When I consider the funding of the Beau-Del at $28.5 million versus the South Slave Divisional Education Council at $24.7 million, and then Yellowknife Education District No. 1 at $23.4 million, I’m just trying to understand the spread of what’s the funding model based on and is there a short or simple answer that we can provide to that. Because I know that other municipalities don’t necessarily collect municipal taxes and forward them on to the schools, so it looks like the Beau-Del is being very well funded and I’m just trying to understand the discrepancy of what it’s based on.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. We’ll go to Minister Lafferty.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The school formula funding is the prior year September 30th student enrolment, and use prior year salaries adjusted for current year. Based on the Collective Agreement, there’s an increase. There’s also an adjustment to the cost difference due to freight, travel, cost of living and the program costs. I believe Mr. Moses alluded to that on the cost of living. Also, the block funded, some of the discussions, it’s within the funding formula that’s highlighted.
Perhaps the Minister can explain why the South Slave Divisional Education Council would be funded more than, for example, a Yellowknife school, if it’s based on freight and costs, because, of course, we all know that the costs of operating there is cheaper than it is in Yellowknife and they have fewer teachers by the number, 15 compared to the Yellowknife school district, yet they receive more money. Maybe we can get some clarity on that.
We can obviously share that detailed information with the Member, but it is based on formula, and you have to keep in mind that there are, I guess you can say, three school boards in Yellowknife versus one school board in the South Slave region. Those are just some of the discussions that we’ve been having with the formula funding. As I stated before, we are reviewing our formula funding through the education renewal and innovation, so these are the discussions that we continue to have.
I would have thought that the Commission scolaire would have been counted in the Hay River area or South Slave area as well. I would think that there would be two. In Yellowknife I would think we’d almost count four, considering we have paired off the Ndilo district, individually of course, and, of course, maybe five if you count Detah as well. That said, if the Minister and the department are willing to provide a detailed briefing note, I’ll start with that and I’ll be prepared to move on today.
But I do want to highlight one area, which is I’d like to see what taxation revenue is seen as a stream in those other authorities outside of the Yellowknife ones, and including, obviously, the Yellowknife, to ensure that it’s seen as fair, because of course, we all know that the citizens in this tax-based municipality contribute to the good running of our schools and I just want to see where this is equitably and fairly transposed off to other districts.
We’ll definitely provide the detailed breakdown of how the formula funding is based on per region, per community and DEAs, DECs.
That also includes the taxation revenue, of course?
Sorry, I forgot that part. Yes, absolutely. Mahsi.
Thank you, Minister Lafferty. Mr. Hawkins, any other questions? I am seeing none. Committee, we will continue here with 10-35, information item, details of funding allocated to education authorities. Any questions?
