In terms of psychiatry services that are offered at the emergency room, what is the protocol when somebody comes into the emergency room that needs a psychiatrist? Is there a protocol in place at the emergency room that allows those types of services to happen, or gives the medical practitioner or nurse that’s working there what they need when they deal with somebody who is mentally incompetent, or there is a mental disorder that’s in place?
Because the actual protocols in this type of situation or scenario are determined by the health centres, hospital, or emergency centre, I don’t have the actual written protocols with me here today, but I can provide that information to the Member.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Final supplementary, Mr. Moses.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think the health centres and hospitals should determine their protocols based on the Mental Health Act and what’s addressed in the Mental Health Act.
My last question for the Minister is in regard to these locums. Does the Department of Health and Social Services provide education on the Government of the Northwest Territories Mental Health Act to these locums that come into the Northwest Territories so that they know what the protocol is when they’re dealing with somebody who has a mental disorder and ends up in the emergency ward?
The locums that do work in the Northwest Territories are required to know the Mental Health Act. As far as the training that they would require to ensure that they are following the Mental Health Act, again, I do not have that information with me here.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions today are addressed to the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment. I want to ask some questions about the inclusive schooling funding formula. The Minister has heard Members talk about the problems with the inclusive schooling formula and the way that inclusive schooling is provided. Boards are underfunded, many of them, and the formula basically is not working. I think the current percentage applied across the board to our education authorities is inappropriate.
I would like to ask the Minister initially, what does the department do to evaluate how the education boards or authorities spend their inclusive schooling money? What do the boards provide to the department in terms of accountability? What do they provide to the department to account for their inclusive schooling money spending?
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. The honourable Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. The inclusive schooling is an area that is currently under review. Based on the information we’ve received from the general public, most specifically, of course, from the Northwest Territories, we need to provide or enhance our programming. Right now we spend well over $26 million in this area. In return I think we can do better. That’s the whole area where the reporting mechanism and the framework itself we are exploring through the education renewal process. Part of that includes the schooling review. There is a reporting mechanism in place for the school boards on an annual basis, but in my view, that’s not enough. It doesn’t tell us how many special needs students there are within the system. Those are areas we are continuing to explore and we want to enhance and improve in those areas.
Thanks to the Minister for that response. I’m really glad to hear that the formula is under review. I think the Minister has mentioned that a number of times last week.
Some NWT communities, especially Yellowknife, tend to attract special needs students, families with kids with special needs, and they seem to come here because we have facilities and services here that aren’t available in smaller communities. I’d like to know from the Minister how the department’s inclusive schooling funding formula recognizes the extra financial burden that is borne by magnet community schools.
The current formula funding is based on enrolment. That is the whole reason we are currently reviewing it. We want to make those changes because we have been told that it doesn’t reflect student needs or doesn’t do much in the area where we haven’t identified special needs. Based on the feedback that we’ve been receiving, and even through the early childhood development, the stakeholders, the three experts spoke to us, and in general and as well as in their research and studies and also the elders have told us that we need to re-emphasize and put that as a priority within our department and that’s what we’re doing. We are currently reviewing that actual programming and funding that’s attached to it, developing the framework itself how the reporting mechanism should be strengthened and tied to those key areas.
Thanks to the Minister for that response. I appreciate, and gather from his response, we don’t currently have anything that recognizes sort of magnet community schools and the needs that they have. I’m really pleased to hear that that is something that the department is considering.
Similar to that, some schools obviously end up with more special needs students than others. Some end up with students with much higher needs than others. That ends up putting an extra financial burden on either a board or a school.
I’d like to know from the Minister if, at this point in time, our funding formula provides any flexibility, if there is any flexibility within the formula to give more money to one board or one school over another because of their extra special high number of needs students.
Those are discussions that we’ll take into consideration as part of the overall plan once we engage the general public on the review itself. The Member is correct that there are certain schools, certain funding may not be enough. Also, there are some schools that do not have equipment, such as small communities, isolated communities. Those are the factors we need to seriously look at. Based on enrolment does capture all schools. The review is before us and we want to make those changes that will reflect on what’s been said, what’s been heard around the Northwest Territories from the parents, from the experts, even from the professionals. Those are the areas that have been stressed to us as my department and we took those into consideration as we move forward.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Final supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thanks to the Minister. I appreciate that we’re going to have all these various and sundry factors looked at. I think it is high time.
This formula hasn’t been working for quite a while. I’d like to know from the Minister if he can give us any kind of idea when the formula will be revised and when we can see an implementation of a new revised formula. Will it be at the start of the school year for 2013-2014?
As you know, the overall review of education renewal is very complex and comprehensive. We want to reach out to every single individual out there that we possibly can in the Northwest Territories to hear them out. Our target date, of course, is late fall/early winter. That is the target date right now. We are working towards that and we want it completed by then.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. The honourable Member for Deh Cho, Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Earlier today I talked about mine training opportunities in small communities. My question is to the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.
How would someone in Fort Providence currently, for example, access mine training for a job at Prairie Creek?
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. The honourable Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Part of the process is, of course, through various training initiatives within the Mine Training Society. They have reached out to certain communities and I believe they will be going to the Deh Cho riding, as well, and Prairie Creek, possibly around the Fort Simpson area and surrounding communities. They have done so with the diamond mines and surrounding communities. I believe that is the normal process where they will be visiting and meeting with the community of Fort Simpson, the largest community, then expanding out to regional communities to deliver those training programs. Opportunity will be there.
I would encourage those individuals who are interested in training to submit their application or resumes to the Mine Training Society, even to my department or the ITI department and we can forward that to the appropriate group, the standing committee that’s out there.
I know there’s been a lot of good work that the Mine Training Society has done, but why is mine training not offered in so many of our small communities where jobs are scarce and unemployment is high?
We’ve heard that when we were visiting the communities that were not impacted, there are some developments that are happening in preferably the Deh Cho riding that we have identified and we need to reach out to those communities. We are working closely with the federal government to expand the Mine Training Society into those areas. We talk about the Beaufort-Delta. How can we assist in those areas with any training that’s required? It’s been brought up in the House here. We are doing what we can to engage and also get support from the federal government on the long-term plan. That’s an ongoing discussion we are currently having. The Mine Training Society is up and running as we speak, and will be reaching out to Fort Simpson and the surrounding communities.
I’d like to thank the Minister for his response. It’s encouraging that the Minister has indicated that there is an engagement process, at least, with the communities. Will the Minister work with the communities of Fort Providence and the K’atlodeeche First Nation to establish local delivery of mine training within the near future?
The overall plan not only of the Mine Training Society but within my department, the Labour Market Development Agreement both from the federal government, we want to reach out to all communities as best as we can. Through the Mine Training Society, the Hay River Reserve and also Fort Providence, and also Kakisa and the surrounding communities, that we can definitely approach and work with the leadership and work with the educators in the communities, as well, also industries. Industries are all partners in this venue.
I will invite the Member to have a more detailed discussion on this particular area, and also with the communities, so I will definitely look forward to those visits to the communities.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Biomass Initiative has been a major significant, positive development in my region, in the South Slave region, but also expanding further north. It’s been on the radar for some time. I wanted to know what level of preparedness has the department entered into in preparing communities that will be affected by a forest management agreement with potential for a plant to be situated somewhere in Hay River? What kind of training has the department, perhaps, forecast in terms of training needs at the community level for this major project?
When we talk about training in the communities, there are certain parties involved, whether it be ENR or ITI. There are interdepartmental committees working closely with the regional groups. There is a steering committee that is established to identify those needs, whether it be the biomass, and areas of training that are required by the Deh Cho region. Definitely, those are areas that we need to identify as part of whether it be a month, two months, however the length of training program that’s required, and then identify those individuals that are interested. It is the grassroots people that we need to work with, the regional representatives, and they’re the ones who will guide us on what’s needed in the region. We will continue to update the Member on the progress itself.
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. The Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions follow up my Member’s statement earlier today and are directed to the Minister of Finance.
The budget reallocations Regular Members insist upon are our priorities and when approved become the will of the House. So how does that shake out into action through the Executive once the budget has been passed?
When I was a public servant, I’d allocate the funds to projects, keep track of my costs, and plan my work to avoid being caught with money unspent and no work to show for my time. That should pretty much be how this government runs its spending on a macro level, so how does the Finance Minister and others responsible for the performance of deputy ministers keep an eye on budgets to ensure the assigned work is actually done?
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The Minister of Finance, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This consensus government is one of the most collaborative, inclusive governments in the country, with the exception of possibly Nunavut. We collectively work together for six months to do business plans, draft the main estimates, bring a budget together that reflects the priorities of this collective Legislative Assembly, and then it is passed in this House. This is the Member’s sixth budget cycle, if my memory serves me correctly. Then the bill is assented to.
The departments all have the business plans. The Members all are aware of what’s in the main estimates. Then there is the business of government which now is to implement that budget, and it’s done through that business plan, through the strategic plans of the departments. Those priorities become the marching orders for the various departments. There are things that are done. There are variance reports that are done. Our managers manage. The Ministers oversee and are responsible for their departments. We meet with committees on review of various projects and initiatives, either at the request of government or at the request of the committee, to try to track all the work that’s being done. We have a fairly comprehensive program in terms of putting the wishes of this Assembly into practice.
The Minister’s pretty good at putting the theory out there, but I didn’t hear an answer to my question. The government’s priorities are clear. Mineral strategy? We’ll get right on it. Fracking? Clear the decks. It’s clear what the Member’s priorities are too. Early childhood development? Talk to me in November. Renewable energy? We hope to get to it.
Can the Minister tell us, given that Members demand some modest dollars to be focused on their priorities and it becomes approved through the will of the House, how is it possible that a file lies dead for six months until November?
This document here that we’re debating in this House – this is the priorities of this Assembly, and these Members and this government – is $1.6 billion worth of priorities. We take our job very, very seriously. It is filled with dollars, over 60 cents of every dollar going into social programs. We are taking a very careful look at things that are very difficult, things like fracking. We have put together a business plan that reflects the times we live in. We have reflected the input of the Members. This is six months of work into this document.
The Member wants to know what we’re doing with renewable energy. We’re spending millions on renewable energy. We’re going to continue to do that. We are investing 60 cents of every dollar, over 320-some million dollars into Education, Culture and Employment’s budget.
The Member is talking about what happens when we do this budget process, after all this work is done and the Members decide, in addition to all the money that they’ve agreed to here, they want to put more money in, often that puts us beyond what we’ve agreed to as targets. We’re having that discussion now. We’re engaged in that debate now.
Last year was the first year of this government. The budget was laid in the fiscal year. We acknowledged and pointed out that we would put this money into use but that we were clear that there were capacity issues of trying to get this money effectively into play. We follow the will of the House. We have the debate and we’re going to do that again this cycle.
The Minister keeps holding up this document. I’m not talking about this document. I’m talking about the current year’s budget that we’ve fallen short on. This government has failed, and when the government fails to put the funds to work and those funds can’t be spent as intended, why does the government not come back to committee for input on reallocation? Termination of program development without consulting committee defies our principles of consensus government. This year we might have said move dollars back to Inclusive Schooling until we get a meaningful start on early childhood instead of last minute wasteful expenditures.
Will the Minister work with committee to audit the administration of this current year’s budget with respect to amendments to the budget made by the House in response to priorities raised by Regular Members? I’m talking about the ’12-13 budget.
This document, I’d be happy to hold up from last year’s. It’s about as thick as this one. The same principle that I’m articulating here today applies to last year’s budget as well. There are audits done. If the Members have specific concerns that they don’t think we’ve met, then we’d be happy to come back and talk to committee. We review the main estimates. We review budgets. We are working with and at the behest of committees when they have issues they want to address.
The money the Member’s talking about is the several millions of dollars that were added late in the last budget. The vast majority of the $1.6 billion budget, a billion dollars last year and this year, will be spent as we have agreed to and has been directed by this House. If the committee will articulate the source of their aggravation, displeasure and concern, then we would be happy to have those discussions, absolutely.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Bromley.
Thanks to the Minister for that reasonable response. It wasn’t quite a commitment to the audit, but he’s willing to discuss things with committee. I think committee will take him up on that.
Our record is bad. We need to make it right. Following the passage of this budget, will the Finance Minister work with his Cabinet colleagues early in the fiscal year – by the spring session would be reasonable – to establish priority spending work plans, set up milestones, and monitor and provide regular reports to Members on the implementation of the priority programs that we add through discussion of the budget? Mahsi.
Mr. Speaker, as Finance Minister I can tell you that I think, in fact, this budget, the last budget, every budget that I have been involved in in this House is a good budget. They tend to pass unanimously. We are doing an enormous amount of good work here. There is $1.6 million being put to work and the vast majority of it is spent on programs. It’s audited every year by the Auditor General. There are all sorts of other reviews done on an ongoing basis. We, of course, will continue to work with committee and the Members to make sure that we have the best budget possible dealing with constraints that we work under and the fact that we have a plan that we’ve agreed to for the four years and in the two years coming up, we’re going to be adding money to the budget. But, yes, it is a given in this type of government that we will continue to work closely with the Members and the committees to make sure we do the best job possible for all the people we represent. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Range Lake, Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The people have been very concerned in the aftermath of the Highway No. 3 accident. They are wanting answers to their questions. I think Members are wanting answers to those very same questions such as why was the air ambulance told to stand down when it was clearly the obvious choice and proper patient triage and extraction. Another question such as why are there gaps in our emergency ground ambulance and air ambulance protocols. Keeping in my continued theme of this accident and trying to get to the bottom of what happened and what are some of our gaps, my questions today will be for the Minister of Justice.
In relationship to this most recent highway accident, will the Minister of Justice formally report to this House the full RCMP investigation that resulted in two deaths and a significant delay in patient care for the remaining victim? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. The honourable Minister of Justice, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The RCMP is investigating the accident and will determine a cause. If necessary, charges may or may not be laid. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, we have some of that recorded here. Will the Minister of Justice formally commit to a report of all communications to and from the RCMP, when the RCMP incident command officer called for medical help, and all communications involving this accident? Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, the RCMP will conduct their investigation and what can be made public will be made public. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, again, we are waiting for this RCMP incident report. I just want to make sure that that report will be shared with everyone here in the House. It appears that the Minister of Justice is willing to accommodate or at least, by his response, to a certain degree to these questions.
Will the Minister commit to a third-party audit of the event’s scene, the security of the site, the first aid responders, the responses by all respected agencies and all comments from bystanders? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the RCMP are professionals. They have professionals who took care and control of the scene. As I have indicated, they are doing an investigation and the aspects of that investigation that can be shared will be shared. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
