Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am going to read my notes because this stuff is from all different sources. The funding is coming from two federal sources, with some additional funding from the GNWT. From CanNor we are receiving $480,000, with an additional $120,000 from the Government of the Northwest Territories funding. This is an allocation for technical and commercial work on the project. From CIRNAC we are receiving $619,950. This money will be used to support Indigenous partnership. Funding for technical questions is only sufficient to take us to the end of this fiscal year.
Thanks to the Minister for that, and I will double check to see where the $120,000 is coming from, whether it's the capital or the O and M budget. As far as I know, there are no buyers for Taltson expansion power, no secured funding other than this little drop in the bucket, and no business case. Can the Minister explain whether there is a business case for the Taltson expansion or when that might be ready and whether it will be shared with the public and this side of the House?
Yes, the funding, the GNWT source, is from the existing O and M budget, just to answer the Member's question. This project is premised on the fact that the federal support is required for the project and that it will become a driver for clean growth for the people of the Northwest Territories. A preliminary business case will be prepared for this fiscal year. Work is still under way to find high-level costs for the transmission component.
Thanks to the Minister for doing his homework there on his feet. The last estimate that I am aware of for full expansion of Taltson seems to be well over a billion dollars. Does the Minister actually have any preliminary cost estimates for this megaproject, and can he share that information with this side of the House now, full expansion, please?
As we have done a number of technical work and stuff that was done previously in the previous Assemblies on this work, that stuff is going to be part of the updated stuff that we will have to work on. The transmission system is still under study, so it would be premature to speculate what that new cost would be because it's a whole different type of system, as I have said before in this House. We are looking at the first underwater, high-voltage, direct-current line under Great Slave Lake. We are waiting for those costs to still come back, but, once we compile these types of costs, I would be glad to share with committee.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. Thanks to the Minister for that, and I hope that he can make the figure actually public. In the Minister's statement yesterday, he claims that the full expansion or some kind of expansion of Taltson hydro is going to remove up to 240,000 tonnes of greenhouse gas emissions. Yet, in the 2030 Energy Strategy, the claim is 227,000 kilotonnes of greenhouse gas emissions. So maybe hopes are growing that Taltson is going to continue to grow, but what is going on with these greenhouse gas reduction figures, and can the Minister explain the discrepancy? Which one is the right figure, and can he provide some calculations behind that?
For those of you who have read the energy strategy very, very closely, in there it clearly states that the Northwest Territories needs to reduce our GHGs by 517 kilotonnes by 2030 to meet our targets for the 2030 pan-Canadian framework that we have signed on to. Of this, 290 kilotonnes can be achieved through a variety of models, reducing diesel generation in communities, industrial efficiency, renewable heating in communities, transportation, et cetera. That leaves us a gap of 227 kilotonnes which is in there. The 240 from the Taltson Project, which it would generate, would be sufficient to meet this gap. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife Centre.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Finance. In a communique issued to the unionized work force in July of last year, he said, and I quote, "You would not be able to return to work during the strike to perform other unionized work." My question for the Minister is: why did this position change? Thank you.
Masi. Minister of Finance.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If the Member could explain a little further, I am not sure what has changed with the communique going out that, if folks wanted to return to work, then they would not be asked to do other tasks that are not within their own personal job description. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Let's fast forward now to Tuesday when the Minister said in this House, and I quote, "I think that this is one of these situations where we show due respect on both sides of the table, and we hope that would bring the temperature down." Imagine my surprise when I saw the government waiver that was handed out to unionized workers yesterday. How does that action square with his statement earlier in the week of bringing the temperature down?
Obviously, we would like to see things cool down a bit. However, providing information to employees, somebody has to provide employees with information. We have provided them with the information upon a lot of employees' requests about the waiver. If you have read the one from last week, we have encouraged them to speak to their union representatives, and this waiver is part of that process. I don't think it is inflaming anything. It doesn't really matter what we say. At the temperature things are at, nothing is going to calm it down, anyway. This is just providing information, Mr. Speaker. Somebody needs to keep the members of the public service informed.
I would like to provide the Minister of Finance with some information: it is further inflaming the situation. I don't understand what the government is thinking they are going to accomplish by handing out these forms, except to make everybody more mad. There is a sort of an impugning of intention here that the picket line is going to be aggressive and that there needs to be some kind of indemnification for the government. Does the Minister not see that, in fact, this is fanning the flames, and why would he want to do that?
The ministry is not fanning the flames. We are providing information. People want information. They need to know, to have the information to make an informed decision, and they know the consequences of the decision they are going to make. We need to give them that opportunity. This is just part of the process as we prepare for what we are hoping is not going to happen. We will do our darnedest as we are going into mediation, I told committee that the other night, to reach an agreement.
We have all seen the emails from a lot of people out there who are concerned. There are some emails saying, "Well, that is going to decide where I go on October 1st." That is fine. That is part of the process. Every four years, we hear that, but I am hearing from people who are wanting to know, "How am I going to pay my mortgage? How am I going to look after my three children?" We are going to use that as a backdrop as we go into negotiations to try to find a deal that works for them, for us, for the union, and especially for the people in the Northwest Territories. That is what we should be thinking about.
I don't believe we are fanning any flames. We are providing people with information. Members always want information. They stand up, asking me questions, "Can you provide more information?" I say, "Yes." Same situation, we are providing information.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife Centre.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Not surprisingly, the Minster and I have a difference of opinion here about providing information that undermines the union's position in ways that are completely unnecessary. They have the right to strike. The norm is for unionized people, they don't have to be on the picket line, but they are not usually welcomed back with open arms for crossing the picket line. I stand by my position that I think that this inflames an already very volatile situation. I would like to know what the purpose is of handing out these waiver forms. What is the purpose? Thank you.
Absolutely, the union has a right to strike, and they have served a strike notice. We respect their position. That doesn't mean we have to agree with it, but we respect it. People out there also have a right to go to work, and they have a right to have the proper information to help them make an informed decision. That is all we ask of each other. We want to have the right information to make an informed decision. We are giving them that opportunity. Unfortunately, it might be perceived differently by some, but we have to give people the right to choose. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Nahendeh.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, recently, actually probably ever since I have been elected, I have had a number of constituents come to me and ask questions about medical travel. I have been trying to get the information out there as best as I can. Sometimes, I may not be doing it properly. I will have some questions for the Minister of Health and Social Services. The first question I have is: there seem to be some different forms of medical travel. Can the Minister please explain how GNWT staff have a different per diem rate than non-insured residents? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Minister of Health and Social Services.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, medical travel is not an insured service under the NWT healthcare plan. The GNWT provides medical travel benefits through Medical Travel Policy to eligible residents if they have no other sources of benefits in an effort to ensure that transportation expenses are not an economic barrier to accessing ensured health services. However, the Medical Travel Policy is only one of many policies and insurance plans that provide medical travel benefits to residents throughout the Northwest Territories. When patients are eligible for benefits through an employer or third party, those benefits must take precedence over the GNWT's medical travel plans.
With respect to the GNWT employees, GNWT employees have a negotiated benefit called Medical Travel that provides terms and conditions that determine how much individuals get when they travel on medical travel. They are not covered by GNWT medical travel. They are covered by an employee benefit. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I greatly appreciate the Minister's answer. It helps to clear up a little bit more as we move forward. I have noticed, though, that the federal government medical travel differs from the GNWT medical travel. Is there a reason that ours is different than that? If there is, can the Minister explain why the differences are?
As I indicated, medical travel is not an insured service under the NWT's healthcare plan, and if an employer has a benefit, those benefits will take precedence. The federal government does have a benefit program around medical travel. Theirs will take priority over the GNWT plan. Many of our residents have access to medical travel benefits through their employer, whether it is the federal government or the GNWT, private businesses.
Employer benefits generally surpass the benefits offered under the Medical Travel Policy and are subject to different decision-making criteria, which are dictated by the employer in the plan that is in front of them, usually through the collective agreement or policy documents or purchased through third-party providers. Those employers have a program. The employees are to use those programs. If the employer doesn't have a program, then they can come to the GNWT program.
Thank you to the Minister for his answer. It is my understanding through federal employees and their families that they have to pay for their costs for their hotels, their per diem, up front for medical travel. Is there a possibility that the government can cover these costs and get reimbursed through vouchers from the federal government instead of having the families foot these costs?
Mr. Speaker, many employers such as the federal government authorize and coordinate travel from within their organization for their employees or their dependents to ensure that their benefits are applied as intended. In such cases, the Territorial Authority Medical Travel office does not have any involvement in their travel, does not process any of their authorizations, or have knowledge of their travel plans.
It is possible that a person may receive employer travel benefits but not actually qualify for coverage under our own medical travel policy. However, the NWT Health and Social Services Authority Medical Travel office does not have the authority to interpret collective agreements or administer benefits on behalf of an employer or other third-party insurers. I know some employers actually provide the opportunity to provide travel advances. We don't dictate, we don't control, we don't even approve medical travel for some of the third-party providers, so we would not be in a position to fund in advance because we have a completely different program.
The short answer on this one, Mr. Speaker, is: no, we don't.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Nahendeh.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would hope that we could be able to do something, but I understand we are dealing with different benefits there. Previously in this House the Minister has talked about the Medical Travel Policy being reviewed. Can the Minister please advise what the status of this Medical Travel Policy review is? The status of it right now. Thank you.
I met with committee last October to provide a bit of an update on the Medical Travel Policy review and to get feedback and advice from the committee members to help inform the final changes that need to be made. The feedback from committee was received in November. Thank you very much for getting that to us. We are working to revise the policies. It has already started. These policy revisions will be completed this spring in 2019 with the intent to implement the changes during the remaining months of this term. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.
Marci cho, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in my Member's statement I talked about the breaches that we have been hearing about now and then with the Health and Social Services system. I would like to ask the Minister what has been done to put safeguards in place to prevent future breaches. Thank you.
Masi. Minister of Health and Social Services.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the honourable Member from Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh and I came into this Assembly at the same time in October 27, 2007. In 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012, we received reports from the Privacy Commissioner who said this government badly needs a Health Information Act. In 2013, when the Member was the honourable Health Minister, he moved and did first and second reading of the Health Information Act, which was passed in 2014 when I was a Minister. This act is a huge step in the right direction. Prior to this act, the only time health and information breaches became public is when things happened to be faxed to media and they did not escalate to the degree that they did.
Since the Health Information Act has come in, we have an obligation and responsibility to train staff to provide indication to our residents when there are breaches, to notify those affected. We have been able to learn from each of the breaches that has occurred. We are continuing to make improvements.
In 2015, when the act went live, we came up with a health information guidance manual. Based on what we have heard and what we are learned from these breaches, we are doing a major upgrade to that progress manual, the compliance manual. We are continuing to train staff, and we will continue to do so.
I understand one of the committees recently had a meeting with the Privacy Commissioner on her report. I'm looking forward to any more recommendations that come out of that, so that we can continue to work together to strengthen our response to privacy breaches and make sure that our public is informed and breaches are not occurring. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the Health and Social Services system is huge, as we all know. There are hundreds of employees, maybe 1,500, 1,600 employees. I would like to ask the Minister if there are designated employees only who handle confidential health records.
There are specific individuals who have been targeted and highlighted as -- I'm blanking on the title of the position. I really apologize. I can't remember the name. They are designated as specific individuals responsible for information.
At the same time, we are also training all of our staff on the rights and responsibilities on privacy. Everybody in the department has been trained. In the territorial authority, we have about 70 percent trained. In Hay River, I think we are at about 40 percent. In Tlicho, we are not quite there. I think we only have about 30 percent trained, but we are working to train everybody regardless of the fact that we have some individuals dedicated with some additional responsibilities to ensure that privacy is maintained and understood when a breach has occurred.
By no means would I ever assume that any employee would breach confidentiality deliberately. I would like to ask the Minister: is there a follow-up with employees when there are breaches to health information?
When there is a privacy breach, every breach to date has been actually significantly different than the one before, except for maybe the faxes that were sent prior to the legislation existing, and which is actually one of the main reasons that we moved forward with legislation. I'm sure the Member remembers.
When an incident occurs, it is investigated. If there is employee responsibility, progressive discipline would have been applied appropriately. Additional training might be provided. Every situation is different, Mr. Speaker. We can't paint every one of them with the same brush, but where appropriate, progressive discipline may apply.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister a question on the breaches. When it is a hard copy of a thing, like the box of files, it is easy to say we have recovered them all. Is the Minister confident that information that could be digital or transmitted in various ways have all been recovered? Thank you.
I'm not 100 percent sure what the Member is asking. If the Member is asking whether or not we have been able to maintain all the files on the Simpson case, we believe we have all the files. When it comes to the USB that was lost, the USB was found. When it comes to the laptop that was stolen, it is our understanding that it wasn't encrypted, which was the problem, but also, based on the fact that the computer never connected to the network, we're not sure, we don't believe that information actually was ever public. It doesn't change our obligation or responsibility to notify our residents when there has been a breach. The laptop was never found. The memory stick was found. I'm not sure if I'm answering the question. I'm not sure I fully understood what the Member was asking. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. Earlier in my questions with the Minister of Infrastructure he talked about the 240,000-tonne reductions in greenhouse gas emissions claimed in yesterday's statement about Taltson. Can the Minister provide those calculations publicly and table them in the House for the end of this sitting? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Minister of Infrastructure.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, we can do that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thanks very much to the Minister for that commitment. I know that Alberta just went on the market to get some additional power. They spend a billion dollars to get 600 megawatts of wind energy at 3.7 cents/kilowatt hour. We are paying over 23, I think, 24 cents/kilowatt hour here in Yellowknife, so I am trying to figure out the Minister's rationale for saying that Alberta and Saskatchewan are actually going to want to buy our power. We should be actually bringing it up from Alberta. Can the Minister provide some rationale for why he thinks that Alberta and Saskatchewan will actually want to buy our power?
