When we initiated this Aboriginal Student Achievement Initiative, the cultural orientation was a big factor and we wanted to pursue that through the Aboriginal Student Achievement Initiative because it does cover the teachers, the students, the parents, the grandparents and the elders in the schools. Then there’s the NWT Teachers’ Association, as well, that falls under professional development. They can easily access professional development in that area, as well, but this is a specific area that we’ve highlighted and targeted with cultural orientation. We felt that it’s important for our department and the NWTTA have their own agendas and mandate, but we initiated this process as a department. Mahsi.

Thank you. No argument from me to see the importance of this orientation for the teachers coming to the Northwest Territories. My point is that the NWTTA, I’m thinking why take money out of the Aboriginal pot? I think that should

be done under the Collective Agreement in their professional development, because it’s just as important as some of the programs they have to take throughout the year to increase their skill or their ability to teach and using the computers or writing or reading or anything. You don’t see them taking money elsewhere. So I think we could have been stronger with the Professional Development Fund rather than just taking it out of the Aboriginal achievement funding. There’s always a lack of funds in that area. So I want to ask the Minister about working with the teachers. It seems like it’s too easy for me. Is this going to happen in the future again? Like he said at one time, is this one-time funding? Thank you.

This is an area that has been targeted, but the groups had the recommendation of the people of the North. They highlighted specific areas. One of them was the cultural orientation, another one was the laptops, another one was to deal with absenteeism. We gave funding to the school boards to deal with those important matters at hand. So we’ve captured different angles and this is one of them. So the students are also benefiting from this particular piece of work that’s before us, Mr. Chair. The teachers need to get to know our cultural perspective, the language and the students. The students are out there on the barren land or On-the-Land Program with the teachers as well. So directly and indirectly the students are also benefiting. The community is benefiting. The whole Northwest Territories is benefiting. Mahsi.

My point, Mr. Chair, is the funding here that’s been established, $1.6 million. My point is that this fund has been here for a couple of years, 2009-2010 was $1.4 million, we didn’t have any cultural orientations, not until we started pushing it in this House, in the communities. All of a sudden, okay, let’s do it, but where do we find the money. Now everybody thinks it’s the best thing since sliced bread. Everybody is benefitting, no doubt about it. I’m just saying why take it out of the Aboriginal achievement funding? This should have been done a long time ago. That’s what I’m pointing to.

I’ve got no question in terms of seeing the benefit in the Sahtu, but it’s like Peter taking from Paul to pay Mary sort of scenario. I mean, that’s the way you look at it, and that’s what I’m saying. The teachers should have had this in their fund in the Collective Agreement, but all of a sudden we find some money for them to take a cultural orientation but it’s out of the Aboriginal Achievement Fund. Those dollars are for the students. That’s my beef. I want to ask the Minister again, is this a one-time initiative? That’s what I heard. Now correct me if that’s not the truth.

The NWTTA has had funding in their budget to cover the orientation. Whether it be final for the fact that teachers in the Tlicho TCSA have been to the barren land almost every year, actually every year to introduce those new teachers and returning teachers to the land and the people of the land. They have done that over the years. This is nothing new.

We felt that as a department that we want to make this mandatory. The professional development available for teachers through NWTTA can be used to go to conferences and whatnot, but our vision, our goal was to establish an initiative such as the Cultural Orientation Program that will clearly highlight that it’s mandatory for Northwest Territories teachers to take those on-the-land programs and for them to be exposed. The money has been earmarked for that through Aboriginal Student Achievement Initiative because this is our initiative. It’s not an NWTTA initiative as mandatory through Cultural Orientation Program. We’ve initiated it, we’ve highlighted the money.

Next on the list I have Ms. Bisaro.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wanted to ask a few questions. I checked Hansard from yesterday and I was a little confused with the answers I received relative to the funding for the Food First Foundation and where the funding that they’re not getting is now going. I was advised that there were some concerns that were identified. The deputy minister indicated that there were some concerns identified by some of the schools relative to the previous years over this current year’s project. One of the things was that there was an increased workload placed on the schools to administer the program. But then the next thing I thought I heard, or previous to that, was that the money that is in this budget year going to First Food Foundation is now going to go directly to the schools and presumably for the same thing. I was advised that there are nutrition programs they can use it for.

I’m having a difficult time understanding that if there is nobody to administer this money for the schools and if when it was administered it created a burden on the schools, if we now just give the schools the money without anybody to help them administer it, are we not still placing a burden on the schools? I think I asked yesterday but I didn’t really hear an answer. How is it the schools are going to use the money out of this $400,000 that they get? Are they being advised that it has to be used for nutrition? Can they use it for anything that they want? Or is the intent to have this $400,000 used basically for the same purpose in 2011-2012 that it’s being used for in 2010-2011? There are three questions there, but basically I want to know from the Minister or the deputy minister what this $400,000 is going to be

used for. If it’s given off to each individual school, do they have criteria under which they have to use it or not?

Mr. Daniels.

That’s clear but I don’t think I heard that yesterday. When I asked yesterday what the $400,000 is going to be used for in the 2011-2012 budget, I thought I heard that that $400,000 was going to the schools. Could I find out what the $400,000 is going to be used for this coming budget year?

I’m struggling here. I understand that this money sunsets but there is no reduction in the ECE budget of $400,000 that I can see. In fact, my bottom line for the budget is that their dollars go up. So how is the $400,000 which is sunsetting, how is that amount of money going to be used within the ECE budget?

That’s fine. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Next I have Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanted to follow up a little bit with the alternative schooling and in particular the Phoenix School. Am I correct in gathering that their funding is decreasing by about $200,000, about 50 percent of their allocation in 2011-2012?

Mahsi, Mr. Chairman. In September 2009 the current formula was approximately $666,000 for Phoenix. The proposed is... Right now the current would be $439,000. There’s a difference of just over $200,000.

I understand from Mr. Daniels that the schools were assessed on number of graduates and so on. I believe we’ve graduated 30

students from this school and 20 are projected to be graduating this year. Was that in fact the numbers used in the analysis of this school?

Mr. Lafferty. Mr. Daniels.

Is there a category of schools that increases in funding as a result of this formula? Is it perhaps those with smaller numbers of students increasing funding? How is it that some schools are increasing and some are decreasing?

I appreciate that detail. So if costs of teachers were higher, would you get more funds or lower funding?