Thanks, Mr. Chair. I have a couple of questions here. I’ve been asking the Minister questions about income assistance and trying to highlight some of the inconsistencies that exist with the income assistance/income security division. In his response, as the Minister has talked about possibly making some changes, it’s not been clear

to me what sort of changes the Minister is talking about.

I’m advocating for a comprehensive review of all of our income support or income security programs. The Minister has advised that there have been some changes in 2015 already, and I’m not clear on what those changes are. We have an Anti-Poverty Action Plan which is progressing. I know that the Department of Education, Culture and Employment is working with Health and Social Services and other departments on that plan.

I’ve got a number of questions in here, but the changes that have been made, are they tied to the Anti-Poverty Action Plan, and in terms of a comprehensive review of all of income security programs, is that something that the Minister would see to happen in the 2015-16 year?

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. For that we’ll go to Mr. Heide.

Thanks to Mr. Heide. I agree, there have been some good changes, and an increase in allowances and evaluation of the old one and increasing it to make it a reasonably useful amount in the allowance has been a good thing. The other good change that I’ve noted is that some income assistance clients are being evaluated less often, and that’s a very positive step as well. I appreciate that I’ve got a handle on the changes that have been made, but in terms of the programs in general, and in terms of the contradictory nature of some of the policies and programs that exist in income support relative to other departments, is there an appetite on the part of the department or the Minister to look at doing a comprehensive review of income security any time in the near future?

Thanks to Mr. Heide. I appreciate that there’s an appetite. I appreciate that some stuff

is being looked at. But apart from conflicting policies, there still needs, in my mind, to be a review of how we provide our income security programs, all of them, whether they are in step with the rest of the country, whether they are serving our clients to the best that we can do. I think there are certainly areas where they are not. Some of them are contradictory polices, but some of them are policies which don’t conflict with anybody else but they’re just probably not up to date, and they’re probably not fair, although the Minister seems to think that everything needs to be fair.

To the question of a comprehensive review of income security programs, yes or no?

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister Lafferty first.

Mahsi, Mr. Chair. We did a comprehensive review in 2007, and since then we’ve been making changes to our Income Security Program. It’s been eight years now. Obviously, this is an area that we need to seriously look at. As I stated in this House, in 2015 we’re making changes when it comes to subsidy. We’re increasing our overall subsidy programs. It may not be comprehensive to date but this is an area that we need to discuss as a department to move forward. It could be part of the transitional document to have very comprehensive security programming. That should likely take place within the next few months, like, within the transition document.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Ms. Bisaro.

Thanks, Mr. Chair, and thanks to the Minister. It gives me some comfort that at least the department is going to look at it. I have to again say that eight years is a long time and things, particularly these days, change very rapidly. I would encourage the Minister to not wait for the 18th but to

start planning now, put the money aside now for a comprehensive review of income security programs. Thank you. That’s a comment not a question.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Encouragement noted. Continuing on with income security, I have Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I know the Minister has heard me speaking in a similar vein by suggesting examination of an alternative model that has not been well used but has a record of success where it was tested and that’s the guaranteed basic income. I appreciate the Minister’s agreement to look at that and perhaps consider something like that for a regional model if the economics worked out. I think right now we are doing not too bad a job of holding people where they’re at, but I don’t think that’s the goal of our government. We want to help them out of poverty and into employment and better

health. I appreciate the review and I hope the review really does take a close look at the guaranteed basic income.

I did have a couple of questions. The Minister’s opening comments sounded like there’s 1.7 million new dollars to look at increasing benefits for food, clothing and other incidental expenses, $150,000 for the cost of delivering the Income Assistance program. I mentioned it’s about 20 percent. Yet when I look at the numbers on the page, I don’t see that reflected. I see an increase of $1.3 million, which is substantially less than the $2.25 million of increases that the Minister mentioned. I wonder if I could get some explanation to show me where I’m going wrong with these numbers.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. For that we’ll go to Mr. Lovely.

Thank you, Mr. Lovely. Mr. Bromley.

Thank you. That explains it right there. I appreciate that. I support both of those initiatives. Updating our food basket, I know the Minister is aware of my support for that and also this transfer to the Housing Corporation. I understand that the food basket and so on is part of an increase over four years, $6.6 million planned increase, so I appreciate that very much.

Just on the income assistance housing clients being transferred to Housing, this hardly touches the need as far as I can detect from my constituents. Is this sort of a test case and is the department contemplating expanding this programming? I don’t know the degree in other communities, but I know the Minister is aware that our affordability issues have gone up 60 percent over the last five years in Yellowknife and over 1,000 families now with affordability issues in housing. Many of those are income assistance clients that are not being well served through the IA program. Is the department looking at expanding this transfer to Housing which is a specialist in that field?

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. For that we’ll go to Mr. Heide.

Thank you, Mr. Heide. Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. That is basically all I had. I think I will leave it at that with one last question, Mr. Chair.

Would the Minister commit to telling us, or getting back to us through committee, what the standards are that will dictate whether it was a success or not, whether it is working and how we can expand it if it is? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister Lafferty.

Mahsi, Mr. Chair. I will certainly commit to that. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Continuing on with income security questions, I have the Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to ask the Minister, in regards to the Income Security Program for my region, can the Minister provide a breakdown for the last year or two years as to this program? Due to the lack of oil and gas activity this year, we have seen the numbers increase and I would like to get a breakdown. When activity was happening there, oil and gas was booming, people where working, businesses were in operation and people were taking advantage of that, to now where we have a minimum, very little activity and the government is now being the main supporter, funder to our income support programs. What is the government doing at the same time to the recipients of the income support so that they are being a contributor to the North’s economy and society? Thank you.