Thank you, Premier Handley. Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the information. In terms of percentage, the Premier indicated that $15,000 was included in the Status of Women Council's contribution. Is there a direct correlation there to an increase or increment in salaries and benefits? If so, how much are we adding to the pay package there, Madam Chair?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Premier Handley.

Madam Chair, yes, there is a direct relationship. This is a three percent increase for the Status of Women and for the Native Women's Association. This represents the same increase in pay package as government employees receive as part of the Collective Agreement. Thank you.

Thank you, Premier Handley. Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Are there any other agencies or organizations, Madam Chair, that the Executive does rely on to deliver any services and, if so, are there any built-in measurements for increasing their salary components as we recognize with the two women's organizations, Madam Chair?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Premier.

Madam Chair, these are the only two organizations within the Executive that qualify as category one. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Premier. Mr. Braden.

Madam Chair, perhaps I am asking an opinion here. Check me if I am, but would the Minister agree that, with the Executive's oversight responsibility for all departments, does the Executive then have a lead for deciding whether the department organizations that we do have business with...The departments of Health and Education are two departments that especially utilize arm's length organizations to deliver our services. Is it up to the Executive to set that policy and decide whether or not we are going to make those increments available, Madam Chair?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Premier.

Thank you, Madam Chair. The study that was done on whether organizations qualified as category one, basically statutory creations, or category two which would be simply non-government organizations, was a study that was done by the Financial Management Board Secretariat. Madam Chair, we would continue to take advice from the Financial Management Board Secretariat in similar kinds of studies in the future.

Thank you, Mr. Premier. Mr. Braden. Thank you. Next on the list I have Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to speak in support of the issues being brought up here about the need for NGOs to have in consideration of their funding for some kind of a built-in forced growth mechanism. Madam Chair, I appreciate that the Status Council and the Native Women's Association might be different agents and they are not technically NGOs. Good on them for being able to achieve a three percent increase which is not a large amount, and which is in line with automatic forced growth increased spending that we get in front of us to approve with respect to our government employees every year. These forced growth, whether they arise out of the Collective Agreement or whatever, those are even questioned. We automatically approve those every year in the budget. I would like to ask the Premier to give the idea of building in some forced growth increase for some of the major NGOs a serious thought and if he could take it to FMBS to review that.

I think what we should remember here is that some of these key NGOs, and they are everywhere. They are in many places. Some of them are very well established. Some of them provide services that I think the government feels are best left with these groups, but they do provide essential frontline services that are integral to running of our communities and allowing the people to access these valuable programs, whether they be -- I could only think of Yellowknife examples -- but whether it be YWCA or the Seniors' Association or women's centre. There are lots of organizations that are actually delivering some real key programs that would cost a lot more for the GNWT to deliver if they had to do it themselves. They have to compete for the same workforce. They could only hire and keep some of these key personnel at a low cost for so long. I do appreciate that. There might be questions raised about how far do we go? Do we start funding increments for the NWT Darts Association or something? I don't want to pick on the Darts Association, but we will need to do some category and analyzing about some of where do we fit in these categories. I think that this is an important issue that should have the attention of the Premier and this government to see how where do we go from here if we continue to cap the funding of some of these key organizations that provide essential services in our communities. Unless we do something as a government, we might find ourselves having these programs transferred back to the GNWT. I don't think that is where we want to head to when we are talking always about empowering our communities, supporting our NGOs and in so many ways they are real important partners to delivering public programs and services.

I tell you, this is right up there. It is a very important issue in all communities that we visited. It is an issue that

Minister Miltenberger and other Ministers have committed to in terms of looking at multi-year funding and looking at some sort of built-in mechanism for forced growth funding possibilities. I want to look at this Status of Women Council and the NWT Native Women's Association funding increased as a positive step. It is good on them that they got that. I think that we should look at the second tier of organizations out there who provide similar services that they be looked at for forced growth increases. I think this is a very dire situation that needs the attention of the Premier and this government.

I just want to state that in support of what is being spoken about here and ask the Premier if he would look at looking at this further and see if we can build up a second category of organizations that could come under this umbrella. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, I would be happy to review with the Members at some point at their leisure, the report that was done by the Financial Management Board Secretariat which identified those that were eligible through statutory obligations for forced growth increases and those that were NGOs that were not. Madam Chair, we certainly don't want to destroy the viability of some of the NGOs who provide good service, but there are some NGOs that we work with and receive good service from who are quite large. If we were to simply provide all of the NGOs that we work with with forced growth increases, it could be very expensive. Madam Chair, I would be happy to sit down with the committee and go through that review again. If there are some that Members feel we should reconsider, then I am open to reconsidering them. Thank you.

Thank you, Premier Handley. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Perhaps we can put that on the AOC agenda to review the report, but I just want to put on the record that I think that that is not to say that I accept the boundaries being set and looking at this issue from the point of view of who is technically NGO and who is not and thereby excluding or making just those two organizations that we are looking at here as the only ones that are eligible.

I think we do the same for many...We provide funding for many different governments and organizations, NGOs and all sorts of issues. I think that it is inadequate for us that we don't have a set policy right now on how do we show that we value the work that the NGOs provide and that we understand that they have to contend with everyday cost of living and inflation area pressures. It is not to say that we have to keep on increasing the funding, but it is simply saying...and I think there should be a government policy that recognizes the reality of cost of doing business that keeps going up. If we do value some of the programs that these NGOs are delivering on our behalf, some of them are very essential to the well being of our residents in all communities, then we have to step up to the plate and see what kinds of things we can do to help them with that, rather than trying to say that, on the basis of this study or that study, we have found a way to distinguish them from those who are able to get incremental increases from this government. As long as the Premier and the government is willing to approach this issue with the attitude of trying to fix it rather than trying to defend what is in place now, then I would be happy to work with the AOC committee to see how we could come to improve this situation as we haven't now. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Madam Chair. The study that I am referring to that lays out which organizations we provide core funding to and so on is included what we call the third-party accountability framework. That does, in effect, create a policy, but I am certainly open to reviewing, if you feel there are some inadequacies in that framework, but that is currently our policy. That is one that we developed about a year ago, I believe. I would be happy to sit down with AOC and review it. Thank you.

Thank you, Premier Handley. For the benefit of those Members joining us, we are on page 2-23, Ministers' offices. Next on the list I have Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I think I am going to follow along the same lines as my colleagues on these questions. The $28,000 in increased core funding for the Status of Women Council and Native Women's Association, I can understand that was done, as the Premier put it in his opening comments, to be consistent with those offered to the public service, but I have been here for...This is the third budget I have gone through. I don't remember there being an increase even though there were increases to the UNW's Collective Agreement. Each year for the past three years, I don't ever remember an increase in the funding to these two organizations until this year. Is that a direct result of that third-party accountability framework that the Premier speaks of? If that is the case, are we going to be for an increase every year hereafter? What type of precedent are we setting by doing this? I think that there might be a number of NGOs lining up on our doorstep to try to get some funding that they have been demanding from the government as long as I can remember. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I think the Member has a good point. That is exactly why we did the third-party accountability framework, so we would have some control, some policy direction in terms of which organizations we would fund and which we would not. So, Madam Chair, I think it would be bordering on irresponsible for us to create an organization through statutes and then not provide it with the funding to be able to continue to provide a reasonable level of service. That is the issue that we had to face. Madam Chair, I think the third-party accountability framework will give us the kind of controls that the Member is referring to.

Before we had the third-party accountability framework, we really didn't have any guidelines. Any increases, if there were increases to the organizations, we funded them from within. Eventually, we ran out of the capacity to be able to continue to do that in a fair way. So, Madam Chair, I am very comfortable, now that we have a framework, we have a policy, we have a way of controlling this. Thank you.