Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to introduce the details of why the motion is here and the dollar amounts and the process or purpose.
So, Madam Chair, it's no surprise to my colleagues that -- I should say we were all taken by surprise of the decision by Aurora College to cut the community learning centres. Now, that said, being kept in the dark is one thing but then we find out that they want to keep the money, the over $7 million appropriated towards this. That said, the program, if I understand it correctly, is intended to run until June, and, again, if I understand that correctly. So what I did was I took one quarter of the year off, and that's the difference of how we get from $7 million to $5,250,000. And that's how we get the number.
Madam Chair, now, let's get down to the nuts and bolts.
The issue boils down to is you can't cut a program and keep the money, first of all. And the way it's being speculated right now is, well, don't worry, trust us. I mean, there's no program that I'm aware of we just give people money and just say, figure it out or talk about it. This is called business plans. We're doing budgeting. Money is attached to a purpose. I feel incredibly -- I don't know how to say it even larger than that. Like, enormously uncomfortable of leaving $5 million -- I should say $5,250,000 in the hands of "just trust us."
Now, I believe in the principles and purpose of the community learning centres. As a matter of fact, the fact is if they weren't working, I wish we'd heard more. We may have had some fantastic suggestions, some good, some less good. That's the nature of what we do. But that said, I wish we'd had a conversation rather than this outright this is being cut.
Furthermore, there's other considerations that really impact this decision to, again, unilaterally cut. Employment in that community, inspiration in those communities. The fact is it is -- it's a beacon of hope, and that's been torn out from people. I mean, back to the conversation about where was the conversation. Often again, I brought it up today, we talk about trying to work together. Where was the conversation with Members on this side of the House saying we're having a problem and this is our solution.
So without going on too long but it's key, I want community learning centres, I want some solution. And I would tell the government at any moment I would support them bringing back a costed plan and initiative, and I would certainly vote in favour of that. It's not about just trying to take the money away from the department. That's not what it's about. It's about taking away from money without a purpose, and then it will just be spent. And if anyone tries to tell us it's not being -- it won't be treated as some type of form of slush fund or special project fund or unaccountable fund, we will never see the details of this regardless of how many promises and commitments we get here today. We will hear don't worry, we'll be accountable with the money. Yes, I believe it will be used in the most bureaucratic stewardship way. In other words, I don't believe we'll be buying doughnuts with it. That said, someone will go, well, we have never been able to fund this study, we've never been able to paint the building, we've never been any -- we've never been able to do X, Y, Z, so we're going to use the money that way. The purpose of this money is intended for community learning centres. And if they're not going to use it for community learning centres, I'd say they don't need it.
And the last piece, and I want to go back to what I said earlier about this was, is the fact that I actually support them bringing forward a plan and I will vote in favour of it. Heck, I'll even move a motion for the government if they want, even though I can't move a money bill to increase. But the thing is we need to find a solution, and if they come back and say hey, we've got a $5 million solution, we've got a $6 million solution for better education in the communities, opportunities, again, beacons of hope for people. We cannot give up. We must be relentless in this. I'll be voting in favour of those things.
And to tie this back, when our government is -- if I know the round number somewhat correctly, it's about $3.2 million away from the fiscal wall. Is now a time to be giving away money that isn't directed to a specified purpose, that kind of money?
So, Madam Chair, I do look forward to some feedback from my colleagues. I will respect their positions and directions. If they have questions, I will attempt to offer some thoughts or observations about the way forward at the very end if given an opportunity.
And so I don't forget, of course, I'll be asking for a recorded vote on this particular motion. That way I don't -- that way, we don't miss the opportunity of saying who stands on this particular challenge. Thank you.
The Member for Yellowknife Centre. The Member for Range Lake. The Member for Inuvik Boot Lake. The Member for Monfwi. The Member for Great Slave. The Member for Mackenzie Delta. The Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh. The Member for Sahtu.
All those opposed, please stand.
The Member for Frame Lake. The Member for Yellowknife North. The Member for Thebacha. The Member for Yellowknife South. The Member for Kam Lake. The Member for Hay River North. The Member for Hay River South. The Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. The Member for Nunakput.
All those abstaining. Eight yes, nine no. The motion is defeated.
---Defeated.
Committee, I will now call the department summary. Education, Culture and Employment, operations expenditure, total department, 2025-2026 Main Estimates, $403,245,000. Does the committee agree?
Nay.
Member for Inuvik Boot Lake.
