Thank you, Minister Lafferty. Deputy minister.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In light of the fact that the department has over a $300 million budget it was very important that we have the right kind of financial accountabilities in place. Prior to the structural changes of corporate management, we had policy, legislation, communication and finance and capital planning all under one director and we have changed that to break it out to have finance and capital planning its stand-alone division.
Planning, research and evaluation was a division we also created, and that is predominantly in response to the Auditor General’s reports that the department could have improved its ability to evaluate programs and to set performance targets and develop management evaluation and accountability frameworks. So this division is essentially working with all the people in the department who are designing and developing new programs, but they’re also working very hard with our education partners in the development of particularly new initiatives like education renewal.
The policy, legislation and communication division is as well part of the nerve centre of the department to assist in all the Cabinet submissions and corporate communication and, as in most departments, is a stand-alone division.
Thank you, deputy minister. Mr. Dolynny.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate that response. It’s always important for us to reflect and evaluate monumental shifts or changes in leadership and, in this case here, how we are looking after our various divisions in management.
To the question of how well this has been working, I noticed that recently the graduation rate in the last year did rise slightly. I think it increased by around 8 percent.
What would have accounted for a larger increase in graduation rates? Of course, I think it’s under 65 percent, but there was something of a shift. Can we maybe get the department’s explanation why we’re seeing that slight increase in graduation rates? Thank you.
It would be wonderful if I could say it was ERI that caused the rise in the graduation rate, but that would not be truthful. I think that we are advised that there are trends over the years and this happens to be a year where the graduation rates were slightly up, but I would not want to speculate what the cause and effect relationship is of that increased trend.
Maybe it’s a pre-ERI birthday gift. Again, it’s just something to note and, again, trends are something, I know, that many Members here pick up on and I’m sure we’ll have more questions in the future.
Mr. Chair, first when we took on this job four years ago, almost four years ago, the Auditor General report tabled information regarding the Adult Learning and Basic Education. Without getting into the details of that audit report, this is a report that, literally, it was scathing to a certain degree, but there were issues in terms of how we were evaluating this program and some of the monies around it, in the performance measures. So, to the department, if I can get an update as to where we’re at now with ALBE in terms of its action plan, its performance measures and if maybe we can have an update on the accountability framework. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Minister Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. The ALBE, when we did the review, there’s been a considerable discussion with various stakeholders and we want to get the actual feedback from the people in order to make the changes to our programming within the college, other organizations that deliver this core programming. So there’s been a lot of discussion in this area. What led to that is, obviously, part of the Skills for Success is another initiative that we’ve undertaken to deal with adults and post-secondary education and skills training program supports and also Pathways. That also includes the ALBE programming and has a link. It’s a direct integration with the Skills for Success. So those are just some of the discussions that we’ve been having within my department with the stakeholders across the North. So, we are currently working with steering committee on developing the action plan. There are the 14 recommendations that we’re following through. So that’s just some of the up-to-date status on this ALBE review process.
I do appreciate the Minister’s reply to that. I’m a little bit saddened by the fact that it’s almost been four years now that we’re still working on it, and I can understand that there needs to be due process for problems of this nature. If I can maybe get some indication, will we see some sort of resolution to the ALBE saga as a result of the OAG report, in terms of its finality, during the life of the 17th Assembly? Will we see these accountability framework and performance measures in place?
We are moving this as quickly as we can. ALBE has been a challenge that was brought to our attention, even as far as Aboriginal Student Achievement Initiative when we did the actual forum, listening to the educators, the adult educators. They’ve instructed us that we need to make some changes and we have done that. Based on the recommendations, this Skills for Success obviously will play a huge role in identifying the actual needs from the communities’ perspective and delivering core programs through the institutions, through the college campuses that we have. So these will be the tools that we need to work with.
The symposium that’s coming up next week, it’s at the initial stages and collecting data and analysis of what the real needs are. We have the Sahtu needs assessment that’s part of the package we want each region to provide and then from there to deliver core programming so it meets the needs of the industry standards in the private sectors as well. We will be moving forward within the life of this Assembly and then on to the next Assembly as well.
I appreciate it. No further questions on this activity. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Committee, we’re on page 61, corporate management, operations expenditure summary, $11.967 million. Agreed?
Agreed.
Agreed. Page 62, corporate management, active positions. Questions?
Agreed.
Agreed. Page 65, education and culture, operations expenditure summary, $244.200 million. Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a big section of the department so I have a number of questions here. I just want to reiterate the comments made by Mr. Dolynny just recently about the Adult Learning and Basic Education program review. This has been something that has been in the works for a very long time. I think we have yet to see an end to this review process. It’s an area where it’s very difficult for us as a committee to evaluate whether or not the money that we’re spending on ALBE is well spent. There are learning centres in most of our communities. There are also programs at Aurora College at the various campuses, but when we look at the numbers as a committee, we have great difficulty in knowing whether or not the money we’re spending has value. This review was supposed to be looking at that. I do feel that it’s about time that we get the review finished and that committee has an opportunity to look at it before this Assembly is over. I don’t have a question there. That was just a comment.
My first question has to go to the review of funding schools, funding formulas. I mentioned it in my opening comments, particularly the review of inclusive schooling which is well overdue. I’m given to understand that the department is also reviewing the overall school funding formula. When are we going to see the results of the review of the schools formula funding which apparently now includes the inclusive schooling funding? I’d like to get confirmation that the schools funding formula includes a review of inclusive schooling funding. Secondly, when are we going to see the review results? Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Mr. Heide.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. If I can clarify, the inclusive schooling is not being reviewed with the funding formula. The overall funding formula for the schools is about 75 percent of direct funding that is flexible funding to the schools, and that is what the funding formula review is looking at. The other 25 percent within the formula is inclusive schooling and Aboriginal languages funding. Those are being looked at separately from the overall funding formula.
The funding formula review, I’m happy to say, has been concluded to the point where we all are players within the review. We had three superintendents from the school boards across the North and every finance person from across the North, Mr. Lovely and our Finance department working together, and we have reached a consensus agreement around what the funding formula should accomplish, what it should do, how we meet both our interests and the interests of the new accountability structures within the FAA. Since there is some financial impact on this moving forward, once we share it with Financial Management Board and the Minister, we will be happy to share it further.
Thanks, Mr. Heide. Ms. Bisaro.
Thanks, Mr. Chair, and thanks to Mr. Heide for that. Can I get an estimate of time? Are we talking days or weeks or months? Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Mr. Heide.
Our intent is to being able to share with the board chairs which, as you know, will make it public within the next few months.
Thank you, Mr. Heide. Ms. Bisaro.
Thanks, Mr. Chair, and thanks to Mr. Heide. I guess I just have a comment. I would hope that at the time you share it with board chairs, if it’s going to be public, you would also share it with committee.
My other question has to do with funding, with the inclusive schooling review. The education authorities are currently funded as a percentage of their budget. Many of the authorities feel that that’s not the best way to provide funding and not the best way for them to provide the services that are required to students with special needs. The other method that has been proposed is to fund per student. That may not also be the optimum way to go. It’s my understanding, though, that the department has decided to stay with the percentage option. I know committee certainly discussed it. I think it was the consensus of committee that a blended model would be far better than just the absolute of one or the other. I’d like to know from the Minister and department if I’m correct in understanding that we’re going to stay with the status quo in terms of inclusive schooling funding. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. This obviously has got a lot of attention, how we best expend our expenditure on to the school boards directly to the most in need, the students with special needs.
We did our part with the overall review. It is on our website as well. The review also told us that we should not make any changes to the general approach of inclusive schooling. There is a need to improve the accountability, the measures, increase educator training and a standardized approach of inclusive schooling practices across the NWT. This is an area that has been brought to our attention. We do have an expert doing the overall review of the directive and also eventually dealing with the funding formula.
I just want to make it clear that I have no intention of reducing funding in inclusive schooling in any way, but there is accountability that we must look at. Through that venue, we are developing, monitoring and evaluating accountability aspects to it.
The review is with an expert right now, the director. That will be available at the end of March. That is my understanding. If I missed out on key points, maybe my deputy can elaborate a bit more.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. I will go to the deputy minister, please.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, as the Minister said, no decision has been made as to what formula to deploy to divide up the inclusive schooling funding pie. We have hired an expert to assist us. We’ve had the involvement of some of the specialists that work for our schools to give us advice. Before we take it any further, we want to make sure that we’re discussing any new approaches with our education authorities, and hopefully we can develop a common voice in terms of what’s the best way to divide the inclusive schooling funding amongst our education authorities. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, deputy minister. Ms. Bisaro.
Thanks, Mr. Chair, and thanks to the Minister and the DM for that information. I want to reiterate that I think, from my understanding of what’s going on with education authorities at the moment, the percentage funding is not the way to go. I appreciate the Minister’s commitment that there’s not going to be a reduction in inclusive schooling funding, but I think there needs to be a serious look at changing the method that we fund in order to make sure that magnet schools and magnet communities, such as Yellowknife and Hay River, and Inuvik as well, that they get the funding needed to provide the services that the special needs kids that go to the magnet communities need, and I don’t think a percentage funding does that.
My question here before I run out of time has to do with the Alberta Achievement Tests. They’ve been mentioned a couple of times in opening comments. My question to the department is whether or not we’re still using the Alberta Achievement Tests. My understanding was that we were not going to be using them. I thought they were going to be phased out. I don’t know if it was last year or this year. I appreciate confirmation on whether or not we are still using Alberta Achievement Tests. Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister Lafferty.
Mahsi, Mr. Chair. There have been some changes within the Alberta educational system. As you know, we follow their curriculum and also the AATs. NWT has used grades 3, 6 and 9 AATs as a large-scale assessment since 2007. Alberta is embarking on their own educational renewal process. Obviously, they’re making some changes to the focus on student assessment. Because NWT is using AATs that are being phased out, we also need to decide whether we want to follow Alberta or have our own northern tool that we can use. We are still currently using AATs, I believe, in the Grade 3 area. This eventually will phase out but we need to identify what is the best tool that we can use to assist those individual students, whether it be grades 3, 6 and 9, that we’ve done since 2007 with the AATs, but we are currently exploring what Alberta is moving to and possibly have our own system as well.
Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Next on my list is Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to report progress.
---Carried
I will rise and report progress. Thank you, Minister Lafferty. Thank you, witnesses. Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the witnesses out of the Chamber.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Your committee has been considering Bill 47, Deline Final Self-Government Agreement Act; and Tabled Document 188-17(5), Northwest Territories Main Estimates 2015-2016, and would like to report progress and that Bill 46, Deline Final Self-Government Agreement Act, is ready for third reading. I move that the report of Committee of the Whole be concurred with. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bouchard. Do I have a seconder? Mr. Yakeleya.
---Carried
Item 22, third reading of bills. The honourable Premier, Mr. McLeod.
Mr. Speaker, I seek consent to proceed with third reading of Bill 46, Deline Self-Government Agreement Act.
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Sahtu, that Bill 46, Deline Final Self-Government Agreement Act, be read for the third time, and request a recorded vote on this historic occasion.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. This is a recorded vote. Mr. Premier.
Mr. Speaker, I’d like to recognize and congratulate the people of Deline for their success in developing an agreement that will not only serve the people of Deline but will also provide a model for other communities in the Northwest Territories and throughout Canada to consider.
This agreement is a made-in-the-Northwest Territories model for implementing the inherent right of self-government that follows the vision that the elders and leaders of Deline have held to for many years. This agreement could not have been possible without the hard work of many people, and I would like to take a few moments to recognize the Deline negotiating team.
Their team, led by chief negotiator Danny Gaudet, has worked tirelessly for years. What they have accomplished has never been done before. They had to break new ground and set a new trail over unexplored terrain. They did this with guidance from their elders and from the community.
Impressively, they worked with our government and Canada, always well prepared, explaining their community’s vision, and always willing to offer and consider new ideas. We can all learn from the extraordinary commitment of this community and the dedication of its negotiation team. They worked hard to represent not just their community’s interests at the negotiation table but also to reflect the strong traditions and values of the people of Deline.
This was a negotiation process notable for its atmosphere of respect and, again, is something we can all learn from. Based on this experience, we can be confident that the Deline Got’ine Government, when established, will be a solid partner as we work for the people of the Northwest Territories.
I would also like to recognize our officials who have worked on this agreement on behalf of the Government of the Northwest Territories. There is a long list of officials from virtually every GNWT department who at various times over the last 18 years have contributed to this agreement. Many have had the good fortune to work with and build strong relationships to the community of Deline. Most recently, our chief negotiator has been Fred Talen, and previous negotiators for the GNWT have been James Fulford, Doris Eggers and Sheila Bassi-Kellett.
---Applause
These negotiators were also supported by dedicated team members. Work on the ratification and implementation of this agreement has also been supported by the efforts of officials led most recently by Sue Bowie and her team. We must also extend our gratitude to these officials and to those from the Government of Canada who have also invested considerable time and effort to help fulfill the promise of self-government for the people of Deline.
Today is a historic day not just because so many have worked so hard for so long to see it happen, today is historic because passage of this bill will mark the ratification of the Deline Final Self-Government Agreement by the Government of the Northwest Territories, taking us a critical step closer to the establishment of the Deline Got’ine Government in 2016. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
---Applause
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. To the motion. Mrs. Groenewegen.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I will be very brief. I did not speak to this bill at first or second reading, and being chair today of Committee of the Whole, I did not speak to it when the bill was before Committee of the Whole. So, as I said, I would like to take a brief opportunity at this moment to add my congratulations to the people of Deline, to all the people who worked on this.
I’m one of the Members who have been here since this all started. Not that I can take any credit whatsoever for the work that’s been done, but I do want to recognize this history in the making. I think only in the Northwest Territories we can still, as legislators, be involved in such significant things that are history in the making. Historic, unique in Canada, not just the Northwest Territories.
I also wanted to say that we’ve talked a lot about looking back from this day to all the work that’s gone into this agreement, that I think the real significance of this agreement will be in the years, the decades and the generations ahead that will look back and see this and will be amazed at what has been accomplished.
We wish you all the best with your new self-government mandate and everything you will do with it. Thank you.
Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. To the motion. Mr. Dolynny.
