Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So the idea of having direct payments made for food, fuel, day care, these all come about as a person who would self-identify as needing that kind of help to ensure that their bills are paid. It would be totally on a basis of self-identifying. This is not something that would ever be imposed on a client should the caseworker find out that this person was having a hard time directing the funds to the appropriate thing the funds were intended for. Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This kind of direct payment could be imposed. We would have to have good reason. There would have to be some evidence that it was required. I guess our workers expect that in the first instance when they are seeing somebody, that they are coming in and prepared to take some responsibility for themselves. Particularly if you have somebody who has embarked on a training program, in order to be able to get a job you would expect that there is enough responsibility there to ensure that the payments are going through. So the first instance, yes, the expectation is you are dealing with somebody who will make the payments. If that proves to be wrong, that can be changed and can be imposed, but we would have to see the evidence of it needing to be imposed.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wanted to also ask, people who are on income support are required on a monthly basis to identify and prove that they have a need, but there are no people who are automatically paid except for persons with disabilities who receive support. Every other person on income support doesn't automatically receive it without some kind of an assessment process occurring on a monthly basis. Is that correct?

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, this is on a case-by-case basis that the decision is made. It's most common for most income support recipients to be seen on a monthly basis, but we have some whose situations are stable, whether they are persons with disabilities or seniors, where we know that there isn't going to be a lot of change. They may not be seen more than twice a year or even less. For most recipients, they are seen on a month-to-month basis. One of the reasons for that is the vast majority of income support recipients cycle on and off income support. They are not on year-round. Almost all of them are off income support at some point during the year because they have enough income that for one, two or three months they don't need income support. So we tend to have people who come in whose situations vary. They may have $400 in income one month and have $1,000 of income in another month and $200 the next. Because their situations change, we need to see them on a monthly basis to assess what sort of support they are entitled to.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It sounds like there could be room for an element, a certain sector of people on income support that you don't expect there is going to be any change. Let's put it this way, I know people in Hay River who have been on income support since I met them when they came to Hay River and they are still on income support. Now I don't know how long ago your policy changed where you have to identify your need and your need has to be assessed on a monthly basis, but I think the Minister could admit there are people who have been on income support for years

and years and have not cycled off or on. They have just been on income support. For whatever reason, it is generally accepted that the prospects of them getting off income support are not very likely. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I never meant to imply that that wasn't possible. Certainly there could be some people who have been on for years. In fact, we know there are some people who have been on for years and whose situation isn't likely to change, yes.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Next on the list I have Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are a couple of points I would like to make and I have a couple of questions on some of the numbers that are before us. Listening to my two colleagues talk about the housing issue and the income support issue, the housing issue is something that I have been speaking to since it happened; the transfer. I had many cases before the October session where I had concerns brought to me by constituents, by focus groups, with the problems they were running into and how they thought it wasn't working for them.

Lately, I have been seeing and hearing less and less, but I don't think it's because they are happy with it. I think it's because they think nobody is listening to them. They are just not going to do anything, so why bother? I think that's unfortunate. I wanted to make that point because it was a concern, it is a concern, but I have been hearing less and less and I think they believe we are not listening to them, so why bother wasting their breath talking to us.

The second point I want to make is on the income support. Now my understanding is that the income support funds used to be distributed by the social worker. Talking to a couple of veteran social workers who have been around for 25 or 30 years, know what they are doing, they used to administer the income support payments and they would monitor, not just give them a cheque and have them walk out the door and out of sight, out of mind. They would monitor, they would see them at the store, make sure they were buying the right type of groceries. That has been taken away from them and the funds are now administered by an income support worker who doesn't really monitor. They are just there to punch a cheque and out you go.

So if you are going to do an income review, something you should seriously look at is monitoring them. There are plenty of people out there, there are some people out there who generally need the income support and I am all for it. There are people with disabilities, especially the elders. I am going to pose a written question to the Minister tomorrow on the amount of clients between the ages of 18 and 30 who are on income support, their gender and their level of education. I always recall a story I heard a couple of years ago about a guy who was offered a summer job supervising students in one of the communities. He said, no, I am not gong to take it because I am doing better on income support. So there are people who genuinely need it and those are the ones we should be helping. I also believe that we've spoiled people; we've made people lazy. I think we have to monitor them, give them the productive choices they are supposed to be making. We talk about a highway down the valley. Have them clear brush. Get it started. That's a productive choice.

Those are just a couple of points I wanted to make on some of the comments following up on some of the comments of my colleagues. Two questions I do have on the numbers, Mr. Chairman, are the contract services, $32.876 million. I am curious as to what that's for. Is that for the Housing Corporation?

The other number is the $19.516 million. I am curious about that number, too. I would like to know where those two numbers are, because I think I see further on the money going to public housing rental subsidies of $33 million, but this is a $32 million figure. Perhaps if the Minister could give me where these two amounts are going. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The $32.184 million is the contract with the NWT Housing Corporation. I'm sorry; could I get the second part of the question from the Member again, please?

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. McLeod.

The second part of the question was the $19.516 million in fees and payments.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The two biggest parts in that are student financial assistance and income support.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Minister, for that. I am glad he brought up the student financial assistance because that's also another concern of mine. Are there any plans to start distributing the student financial assistance based on where they live, cost of living? I think I understand that students down south are getting the same as a student in Inuvik, even though the cost of living could be 25, 30, 40 percent higher. So if there is something we can do to adjust those numbers to suit the location, I think that would be a big help. I have heard of a couple of students who have left school because it was just too expensive to try to live in Inuvik with a couple of kids and attend school at the same time. So if we could do something with that, I think it would be much appreciated by the students, because you see a lot of mature students now with families starting to go back to school, so they can make some good decisions and some good money and not have to rely on income support. Like I said, I was dealing with the Minister on the issue and I think we came to a successful conclusion and that's the type of people that these programs are designed for. So the more we can do to give them a helping hand, I will support fully.

Now, $32 million for contract services. Is that the contract with the NWT Housing Corporation, or is that money paid to the Housing Corp for rent subsidies? It seems to be two different figures; $32 million here and housing subsidies, $33 million.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The numbers may not be exactly the same with contract services and the total amount that we are paying in public housing subsidies, but that is what all of the $33 million is for.

In terms of student financial assistance, we are examining what other provinces are doing in terms of indexing to see if we can get some ideas for how we might take a look at indexing the student financial assistance that we provide in the Territories, I would hope that we would be able to move forward with that.