Madam Chair, as we indicated to Mr. Dolynny, that work is being undertaken. We will be bringing it back. I will make sure that committee has involvement in development of those regulations so that we all have confidence that we have the right structures and regulatory processes in place. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. We are on page 3. Department of Finance, operations expenditures, deputy minister’s office, not previously authorized, $250,000. Total department, not previously authorized, $250,000.
Agreed.
Thank you. Page 4, Department of Municipal and Community Affairs, operations expenditures, activity, public safety, not previously authorized, $200,000. Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Madam Chair. It was a pleasure to see this amount being reinstated into the Ground Ambulance Program due to a sunset. My question, though, to the department is not so much the fact that this has been reinstated, but the fact that these monies were somewhat challenged by communities to access, whether they were complex in nature, whether the application process was not clear. Has the department made provisions to make sure that these monies are more easily available, maybe better definitions or better accessibility protocols for community-based organizations to acquire? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. The Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs, Mr. Robert McLeod.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Originally this money was slated to sunset because we thought this would just be a temporary program until we can work out the details for a full-blown ambulance service once we did all the work, but it was committee’s wish that we reinstate this money. We are still a little ways off from coming forward with another plan on providing a wider scale of service.
As far as the application process goes, the communities know the drill. They have a pretty good idea of how they can access this money. However, I will commit to the Member that I will do some research into the application process to see if we can have more communities accessing this money. We have three right now, I believe, and there’s still some money that we’re left. So I’m not sure why the other communities are not coming forward. Maybe there’s concern about the liability, but I’ll do some research and I will communicate with the Member. Thank you.
Thank you. Next I have Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Madam Chair. I think this money… I think it’s a huge opportunity to expand the guidelines and parameters around communities accessing it. I think some of the concerns I heard from the fire department in Fort Simpson that usually access this fund is that the parameters are so strict that they couldn’t find a way to utilize it. They did manage to utilize it, Madam Chair, but as we go forward with the parameters, they’re so tight that the next year they have to pretty much apply for the same program and the department says, well, you already used that for that guideline already.
So it’s a huge opportunity and I think all Members on this side know that we must continue supporting our firefighting and emergency services. So I think it’s a huge opportunity and I look forward to that dialogue where we can streamline and expand the guidelines and parameters so that all of our communities can access this funding to assist their emergency services, Madam Chair. Just rather a comment; well, actually there’s the question of when can we have that discussion.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Minister Miltenberger.
Thank you, Madam Chair. This money was put back in the budget for this year. So I’ll defer to Minister Robert C. McLeod in terms of timelines. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The earliest that we would be able to have some dialogue on this – and this would give us the summer to do some work on this – I think would probably be this fall when all Members get back together again. So if that’s acceptable to the Members, then it’s something I will work in the department to see if we can have something put together to sit down with committee in the fall time. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much. I think that if the Minister can commit to do that, then certainly going with the old guidelines and procedures it’s just probably a non-starter right now and I think the best use of this money is once we have that discussion, then we can certainly roll it out to the communities. Thanks.
Thank you for that comment, Mr. Menicoche. Next I have Mr. Bouchard.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a brief comment as well. I do support this and I’m glad to see that this amount is back in Municipal and Community Affairs. Obviously, Hay River is one of the communities that has accessed this funding in the past, and I believe we will continue to because we have an active fire department that’s interested in accessing these funds. So it is a pity that it couldn’t be more.
We do still see lots of pressures in the community of Hay River in the fire department that maybe what we see as more of a territorial issue. So the more funding that we can receive from the territorial government on ambulance and fire department and equipment would be beneficial.
I just wanted to make the fact that we are one of the communities that supported this concept and one of the communities that access this funding. So I appreciate the department putting that back in there.
Thank you, Mr. Bouchard, for that comment. Department of Municipal and Community Affairs, operations expenditures, activity, public safety, not previously authorized, $200,000, total department not previously authorized, $200,000.
Agreed.
Agreed, thank you. Page 5, Health and Social Services, operations expenditures, community health programs, not previously authorized, $1.267 million. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Madam Chair. My first question on the Healthy Families program, I see a healthy amount is budgeted for an expansion of the Healthy Families program. I believe late in the 16th Assembly, the commitment was made to expand the Healthy Families program every year and I assume that that was on the schedule to be expanded again this year. I’m happy to see that, but I’m wondering why we’re pulling this from new dollars when I think that was a plan to do it within the budget and these new dollars were to actually expand what was intended in the budget.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Aumond.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The money that the Member was referring to was actually sunsetted, much like the ground ambulance money that we spoke to earlier. So that’s why we’re having to find new money to provide funding for this program.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I assume by sunsetted Mr. Aumond means the department decided not to spend that money this year, that was GNWT dollars. Is that correct? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Miltenberger.
Sunsetted, there was a date tied to the money after which the money in that program would lapse and that’s what happened in this case. So as Mr. Aumond indicated, new money was put in as a result of the discussions in this House. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I guess my point is that it seems very inefficient to decide on priorities and start programs and expenditures and then drop them so that the next budget review you have to have the hassle of a battle to get dollars reinstated there, and they’re termed new dollars instead of existing dollars simply because they decided to drop it. So I guess I’m questioning the process here and suggesting it’s not helpful.
Thank you. Similar to the Heritage Fund contribution, this money will be going into the base and there’s no time bar, date attached to this. So it’s going to be an ongoing funding.
I’ll point out, as well, that we’re now moving into, as we conclude this session, full bore into the business planning session cycle for 2013-14 and we’ll be in a position to have the long and fulsome discussions that haven’t been available this time because we were playing catch-up with the start of a new government and we won’t have the compressed time frames. So business plan will be before committee. The capital plan will go to the committees at the end of this month and in the fall we’ll have the business plans discussions. We’ll be starting with committee to hopefully be concluded over the months leading up to February 2013. Thank you.
Thanks for the comments from the Minister. I am glad to hear that it’s part of the A base now. I assume that means that the Cabinet cannot sort of whimsically sunset it and it will be there for future years. So I appreciate that.
On the Cancer Strategy, the department is working with the Canadian Partnership, and again, it seems like this is an ongoing program and yet the same phenomenon. We assume that with ongoing programs we continue our participation and the new dollars are meant to enhance programs or new programs. Could the Minister tell me what the situation is in this case? Thank you.
This funding as well is ongoing.
Thank you. What was their funding for this program in the past?
Thank you. I don’t have that level of detail here, so I’ll commit to get that for the Member.
We don’t know if this is some fancy footwork or whether these are actually new dollars or simply old programs being re-profiled as new dollars. That’s the concern. I would appreciate that additional information that would address that concern from the Minister.
On the early childhood intervention amount, I note that we are collaborating with the Health and Economic Research Institute. Quick work to arrange that in just a few days. I appreciate that. During the 16th Assembly, Social Programs did do extensive work on the Child and Family Services Act, and in fact had three national experts working with us on the report and recommendations. Is this work following up on that, essentially taking us to the next step based on those recommendations?
I’ll defer to the Minister of Health and Social Services.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The $75,000 is to fund research into the best practices of early childhood interventions, specifically in collaboration with the Health and Economic Research Institute, to develop a best return on investment for Early Childhood Development Strategy.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Mr. Bromley.
I guess my question still stands there. I’m trying to figure out if we’re trying to reinvent the wheel or building on the costly work we’ve already done.
Trying to reinvent the wheel. No. I think this is some ongoing work and so this was part of what we’re trying to expand. Overall, all of these items were to expand the prevention and promotion that was deemed to be cut on some of the items that were sunset or transferred to another department. We’re trying to respond to committee’s request on some of these issues and this was a part of it. I don’t see this in the mains for this year and I don’t have the information from the mains for the previous year. I’m not sure if this is something that was ongoing, but I think this would be something that was new that we’re moving into.
Thanks for the Minister’s remarks there. I guess my last question is on the Minister’s forum of addictions. I’m a little bit surprised at the budget there. I know committee travelled extensively for the Wildlife Act and certainly didn’t run up a bill like that. I’m wondering if there’s an explanation for that cost.
The majority is definitely travel. We think that this is an item that is worthy of doing. We have, as part of the Minister’s forum, the department’s Mental Health and Addictions Action Plan. It’s an element within that plan. What we’re trying to do is get in to have at least all of the members of this forum to go into at least half of the communities across the territory to make sure that we are trying to spend some money on prevention, so that we spend the money in the right places so that in the future we’re deferring or we will avoid health costs. We’re saying this is an upfront investment that will pay dividends in the future. We think this is what it’s going to cost us. If it costs less, then we won’t use all the money, but at this time this is what we felt would be the appropriate amount for this kind of work.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Next I have Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Madam Chair. It’s pleasing to see that we’re moving our promotion and prevention budget from the 1.4 percent to its target, I guess, in the life of this Assembly to that magic 3 percent. I guess it’s baby steps in nature. I think the Social Programs committee is very appreciative of that.
Healthy Families, it looks like there’s going to be a breakdown of about $250,000 or a quarter million dollars. Can I get some more explanation? Is this proposed budget going to be mostly going into small communities more so in the Sahtu? Is this where only this money is going to be beneficial, is into the Sahtu area?
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. For the record, Mr. Miltenberger, could you just put on the record that you’re going to refer the question to the Minister and then we’ll start another sequence of questions? Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I apologize. I refer this question to the Minister of Health and Social Services, please.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Madam Chair. This is the last region that doesn’t have a Healthy Families program. We have gone from the original communities, which I don’t have right now but I think are Fort Smith, Hay River, Behchoko, Yellowknife, and then we’re expanding into the Deh Cho, by having a Healthy Families program in Fort Simpson, with satellite offices or satellite programs, in Fort Providence and Fort Liard. Then we’re expanding into the Beaufort-Delta and Inuvik with a satellite program in Fort McPherson. This is the only region that didn’t have a Healthy Families program, so we’re expanding into the Sahtu. However, we don’t know, we haven’t made a final decision on which communities we will be going, whether we’re going to spread it out into three communities or two communities or all in one community. We haven’t made that final determination yet. We’ll work with authorities to decide that.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Mr. Dolynny.
I do appreciate the fact that we have certain regions that don’t have all the fundamentals of the healthy families programs. You’ll see a lot of my questions here today is that I’m trying to make sure that we’re spending the right dollars in the right areas, and making sure that all communities, large and small, are benefactors of our promotion and prevention budget, and that we’re not just picking certain areas for that. Clarity is important.
My second question has to do with the Cancer Strategy, which is about $200,000 which is being added into. As the Member for Weledeh indicated, this is a partnership with the Canadian Partnership Against Cancer and Public Health Agency of Canada, as well as the University of Alberta. Can we get some clarification that this strategy is basically going to be designed more so in Fort Good Hope or Fort Resolution, or is this going to be only for the South Slave communities where this money is going to be spent?
