Thank you, Mr. Nadli. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think the Member's vision is where we want to be. We want to be able to meet the needs of small communities, recognizing that, you know, certain communities fall under regional operations, but as a single authority we should be able to have individuals from Hay River come to Kakisa if the people from Providence aren't available. Once we're on a single information system, they won't have to and those sort of things. There are lots of opportunities.
Are we all the way there? No. No, we're not. Do we have the tools in place that will allow us to get there? Yes, and every day they're getting a little bit better and they're getting a little bit more broad, which means we will start to be able to raise those things.
I think the Member's point is really good, and I'll make sure that I share it with the chair, and I know my deputy heard it and we'll share it with the CEO, as well. That's the type of thing we want to be able to do is sort of cross over regional operations to get the services to where they need to be when they need to be there. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, other colleagues had raised the matter of the homecare services. It's pretty clear that we're trying to build upon that, but I also wanted to highlight the need to have the on-the-land program initiative continue. I think the concept behind that was, as I pointed out, to bring people out on the land to use the strength of nature to give healing and wellness to people who choose that venue to better themselves, so that concept was developed.
There have been some design issues in terms of program delivery in that we had several initiatives carried out. So the department is experienced and learned from that. I think the question that I had was: in terms of this coming fiscal year, how will the department continue or grow on-the-land programming for 2017-18? Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Member is right on all counts. The on-the-land program is incredibly valuable and important. We're hearing from our partners, the Aboriginal partners, across the Northwest Territories how valuable it is. There's no growth in this budget from the GNWT in on-the-land programming, but, at the same time, there are some federal dollars that have been made available, some of them going to the IRC and some of them will likely go through the GNWT and be distributed to our Aboriginal partners. It hasn't all been worked out. We continue to pursue other people's money as much as possible to help us expand this area. There is interest. There is real interest. So much so that, on behalf of the three territories, we are going to be holding an on-the-land summit at the end of March, middle of March, at some point in March. We are bringing stakeholders from all over the country and the North to talk about the value and how to really enhance on-the-land programming in this country. Thank you, Mr. Chair
Thank you, Minister. Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. No further questions.
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. Next, I have Mr. McNeely.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is in relation to the question on page 169. Looking at the org chart on 152, you have three authorities. I am just curious, on the HSS authority funding, in brackets there, $112,945. Is it your operational intention to divide that by three authorities to deliver the programs underneath the community health programs?
Thank you, Mr. McNeely. Minister, whenever you are ready.
Mr. Chair, I didn't fully understand the question, but I am pretty sure my deputy did, so we will go to Ms. DeLancey, who I think heard it better than I did.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I believe the Member is asking about the allocation of this authority funding. This is funding that goes through a contribution agreement to the three authorities for the delivery of community health programs. I think that is what the Member is asking. Yes, that is in fact what it is, and it goes to all three authorities. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Ms. DeLancey. Mr. McNeely.
This one is more of a comment. I am glad to see the anti-poverty fund continue. I think there is a real value in a collective approach in the opinions suggested from these anti-poverty conferences. Looking at the various community-based programs such as your Community Wellness Initiative Fund, for example, On-the-Land Healing Fund, those are programs that, now that we have clarification on your authority funding, to deliver these various programs, I am glad to see that. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. McNeely. Would the Minister like to respond?
No. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister. Next, I have Mr. Blake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a couple of questions. On page 169, On-the-Land Healing Fund, I raised a number of questions on this in the past budget, as well. I would just like the breakdown of what actually goes to the communities. I know most of it does go to the land claim groups. I know in the communities, they want to do a number of programs. There is Fort McPherson, Aklavik, Tsiigehtchic. I would just like to know the actual number that is broken down available to each community to access. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Blake. Can the Minister provide that?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the deputy will have the detail in front of her very shortly, so I will go to the deputy.
Thank you, Minister. Ms. DeLancey.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don't actually have the detail in front of me, but basically our policy allocates about $1.2 million for on-the-land healing initiatives. That is in the budget. Our policy allows regional Aboriginal governments to access $125,000 a year. It allows community Aboriginal governments to access up to $30,000 a year. We do set aside $100,000 a year out of this budget to go towards our on-the-land funding collaborative, which is a partnership with Tides Canada, where we put some money in, which then antes up matching funding from philanthropic organizations and other partners, like the diamond mines. This funding does go directly to Aboriginal governments, except for the part that goes to the on-the-land funding collaborative. It is through an application-based process. In most cases, we enter into multiyear agreements with those Aboriginal governments. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Ms. DeLancey. Mr. Blake.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Next, under the seniors’ fund, $205,000 available funding to support eligible applicants in their activities towards promoting the independent and well-being of seniors and elders in the NWT. As the Minister and deputy may know, in my riding, a number of elders still live on the land, whether it is at 8-miles or down the Husky River or along the Peel, throughout the Delta. Would they be available to access this program? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Blake. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chair, the $205,000 on this page is of dollars that flow to the NWT Seniors' Society for their programming and their operations. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. Blake.
Under the current funding here, it should be available to all seniors. It seems pretty specific to one area whereas, say in the Delta, we don't have much for NGOs up in the Beaufort Delta region; there are very limited programs that elders up in that area can access. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Blake. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I hear the Member. These dollars here, this seniors fund is funding to support elder applicants in their activities towards promoting the independence and well-being of seniors and elders in the NWT. The NWT Seniors' Society, who is the recipient of these funds, are a territorial organization.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. Blake.
Under the definition here, maybe it should be specified for specific to that organization because, under this heading here, it should be almost proposal-driven, the way this is labelled here. When you read this here, it seems like anyone can access this. Maybe you should be more specific in the future. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Blake. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Point taken. The Member is 100 per cent correct. We will fix it in the future main estimates and business plans. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Next, I have Mr. O'Reilly. If I could just ask each Member, when you are discussing a page, just name that particular page so everyone knows where to find that item. Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I am looking at page 168, the anti-poverty fund that is listed on this page. I am just wondering if I could confirm with the Minister that he is of the view that the money that is given out through this program is generally to NGOs and that NGOs make good use of this money and that we are getting really good value for the money that is spent there. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Member will notice that there is $650,000, and $75,000 goes to YK for day shelter and $35,000 goes to Inuvik for day shelter, and that was a decision made in previous governments that we have continued to abide by. The other $500,000 is distributed based on proposals submitted by different NGOs and other bodies across the Northwest Territories. In order to allocate those funds we put together an advisory committee who reviews all the applications for us and makes recommendations, which I share with committee before approving them. I am confident that the dollars are going out to the NGOs and to the applicants who are successful, but we need to do a better job of determining whether or not we are getting a big bang for our buck.
We have all talked about evaluation frameworks and making sure that we are seeing results. At the last antipoverty meeting, we shared some possible evaluation indicators. There were a lot of suggestions for more, and there were some suggestions to take some of them off. We need to do a better job of identifying those indicators so that I can answer that question. I feel confident they are spending the money. I feel that each organization is certainly getting benefits. From a big picture point of view, it is hard to say without some indicators or evaluation mechanisms. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I think I heard him say in there that there was value for money, but it was sort of a little bit longer answer than I had expected. Can the Minister tell me how oversubscribed this fund is in terms of the applications that are received? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The first year, we were pretty close to being almost exactly what was allocated, but since then we have been quite a bit lower. I think it is been about $1.8 million on a $500,000 package. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. So we get $1.8 million in applications for a fund that is $500,000. That, to me, sounds like a pretty good case for why we should increase the pot of money. I understand the Minister wants to develop some sort of an evaluation framework, but I understood this evaluation framework was much broader than just looking at the value for this money that is invested. I had understood that the evaluation framework was really looking at: are we making progress towards eliminating poverty? Maybe the Minister can help me understand this. Thanks.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Can the Minister clarify?
Thank you. No, the evaluation framework is intended to help us identify whether or not we are making progress in poverty. It is not just the $500,000, absolutely not. We are doing things through income support, through housing. There are five main pillars that we are trying to address under poverty, so it is not just this fund.
You know, we have some criteria that we ask for to ensure that the groups that are getting the money are spending the money, but I take your point. We put this out, and there is growing interest, and we will continue to release the dollars. The $500,000 was always intended to help people leverage more money, and in many cases it has helped individuals leverage more money.
I have had some individuals; Ms. Green is an example, say we have to look differently at how we are allocating these monies. Maybe we should block-fund some of the pillars or guarantee certain parts as larger sums and smaller sums. I have committed to looking at that; probably not for this goaround, because we have already issued the call with the parameters.
I am going to ask the advisory committee to provide me with some insight on how to distribute these monies in the future before we do a future call, based on the types of things that Ms. Green has mentioned to me in the past. It is a great fund, and it is certainly wellsubscribed, as are many of the programs available through the GNWT. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, we've got an oversubscribed fund. It is doing great things. We are going to be developing a broader evaluation system for whether we are making progress on poverty overall, not just money invested into this fund. I think I have made the case and the Minister has helped me make the case for putting more money into the fund, period. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister, would you like to respond?
