Thank you, Madam Chair. It sounds like a good discussion and good consideration may be on its way here for these dollars. Just picking up on the Minister’s mention of early childhood development funding, the phenomena we are dealing with extends into that; for example, paying for child care inspection services. It was obviously a routine part of this government’s responsibilities and commitment under the Auditor General’s program. So I assume that his willingness to discuss this and have significant committee input extends to all new dollars. Is that correct? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I just need clarification. As a matter of practice, we have the discussion about new money. The only reason we’re here is because of this discussion, that we did have to get agreement on this. We are going to be starting the business planning process where we will be having that renewed discussion, not only about new dollars but all existing programs. That’s a given as well. So, Madam Chair, I’m not quite clear what further assurance the Member is looking for.

Well, to be specific, early childhood development dollars, which have been found internally, some of which are being directed to inspection of child care facilities. This came out in the Auditor General’s report, where it was found that it was not doing proper inspections and not doing proper safety procedures. In fact, fire exits were blocked, and toxic chemicals were easily accessible by children and so on and demanded directive that the government respond to that. Now, somehow the new dollars we have achieved for early childhood allocation are being profiled as delivering that sort of routine government responsibility rather than being into new programs.

The dollars for energy initiatives, I don’t think there’s anything like that. The Minister said we could have a discussion on that. It’s odd that that is being parked during the summer season. So that discussion won’t take place until September, but at least there’s the grade point to be discussed there. That’s the sort of thing I was thinking of, Madam Chair.

Thank you. I would like to recognize the clock and rise and report progress, but I will allow Minister Miltenberger to first respond to this and then I will rise and report progress. Mr. Miltenberger.

Madam Chair, is it too late to make a motion that we extend to conclude the business before this House?

Yes, it is. Would you like to respond to Mr. Bromley? I am giving you an opportunity to do that.

Yes, Madam Chair. If committee is interested on energy money and wants to meet somewhere over the course of July or August, we’re more than interested to do that. In regard to the detail of how the reallocated money is going to be spent in early childhood development with Education, I’d ask, Madam Chair, with your indulgence once again, if Minister Lafferty could respond to that about some of the concerns raised by Mr. Bromley. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Miltenberger. Minister Lafferty.

Mahsi, Madam Chair. We are fully aware of the Auditor General’s recommendations that were brought to our attention. We are fully implementing the recommendation with all the action plans that will be before us. We are serious about the inspections and we are doing what we can to follow through with each and every one of them. We were given some instruction on focusing more on early childhood development, so that’s what we’re doing with our internal resources. We will be focusing on that as one of our priorities.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. I will recognize the clock. It is 6:00. I will now rise and report progress.

Thank you, colleagues. Can I have the report from the Committee of the Whole, please, Mrs. Groenewegen?

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Your committee has been considering Tabled Document 27-17(3), Supplementary Estimates (Operations Expenditures), No. 1, 2012-2013, and would like to report progress. I move that the report of Committee of the Whole be concurred with.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. A motion is on the floor. Do we have a seconder? The honourable Member for Deh Cho, Mr. Nadli.

---Carried

Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I request unanimous consent to go back to item 20.

---Unanimous consent granted

Item 20, consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters: Tabled Document 2-17(3), Commissioner’s Opening Address: Creating the Conditions for Success; Tabled Document 17-17(3),

Supplementary Estimates (Infrastructure Expenditures), No. 7, 2010-2011; Tabled Document 18-17(3), Supplementary Estimates (Operations Expenditures), No. 4, 2010-2011; Bill 1, An Act to Amend the Student Financial Assistance Act; Bill 3, An Act to Amend the Human Rights Act; Committee Report 1-17(3), Standing Committee on Government Operations Report on the Review of the 2010-2011 Annual Report of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of the Northwest Territories; Committee Report 2-17(3), Standing Committee on Government Operations Report on the Review of the 2010-2011 Northwest Territories Human Rights Commission Annual Report, with Mr. Dolynny in the chair.

Committee, I’ll call you back to order here. Mr. Miltenberger, do you have witnesses you would like to bring into the Chamber?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’ll proceed. We’re trying to see if they’re still in the building. If not, I will proceed without them.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Duly noted. Sergeant-at-Arms, if they do come in, we’ll get you to escort them in and we’ll introduce them at that time. Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just continuing on from where we left off there, my point stands. As the Minister of ECE said, these new dollars are proposed for expenditure on items we were clearly assured during business plans would be addressed through existing dollars. How could we not do our inspections on day care centres? The Minister agreed and said that would be funded. The other one was the early childhood framework. We were well along on that. That was a work in progress. Obviously, there were dollars for that. Now, these new dollars we identified for new additive work in early childhood are being re-profiled to existing programs. Obviously, nothing would hurt me more than to delete these hard fought for dollars, but that’s the issue we’re on about here, and why I think we need the Minister’s assurance that we will be having some discussion on these things for meaningful committee input. I think the phenomenon, I guess I would call it fancy footwork and we don’t want it to continue. It undermines our trust and our ability to work together effectively. That’s the assurance I’m looking for from the Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Before I allow this to proceed, your question is not involved with the supp page that

we’re on right now. I would ask that if you reframe your question in accordance with page 5 on the expenditures in question. I’ll turn it back to you, Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think the issue here is not the exact expenditure; it’s the issue that’s raised by the proposed expenditures. In the early childhood example, for example, those are a re-profiling of internal funds. The issue is the same. It’s fancy footwork that re-profiles existing programs as new programs. That’s why I thought if we could deal with it, we really should deal with it all together here.

We’ll get that question answered by Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The same conditions or approach applies to the reallocated money. There was a request made for specific things. My recollection was there were a number of very specific things agreed to. The use of internal re-profiling of money to some positions, some centres, some other work, and so I am committing to this process both for the internal reallocation of funds as well as the funds that are here before this House, that there will be an opportunity to have that discussion. I’ll ask Mr. Lafferty if he wants to speak further to that. We have been trying to come to an understanding on a way forward with the committee’s request, so I do believe there is room for that type of discussion.