Thank you, Mr. Chair. I note that the adaptation plan under "Contributions" has seen a small increase. What exactly do we use that funding for? I note that it's for support planning actions by NWT communities, regional governments, and organizations. It just seems like that's a very small pot of money considering the significant need for climate change adaptation. My mind turns to our coastal communities, particularly Tuktoyaktuk which has seen a great deal of coastal erosion. I know the community there is struggling with properly understanding the problem and what's needed to solve the problem, and this seems like a very small pot of money considering many of those harbours and communities are at risk as coastal erosion continues, not to mention permafrost degradation in communities that are built atop permafrost. Is that funding adequate at this time? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Kieron Testart on Motion 30‑18(2): Tabled Document 50‑18(2) Main Estimates 2016‑2017 Environment And Natural Resources, Corporate Management Operations Expenditures (Pg. 87) Reinstatement Of Funding For Public Education Coordinator In Field Support Unit, Carried
In the Legislative Assembly on June 8th, 2016. See this statement in context.
Motion 30‑18(2): Tabled Document 50‑18(2) Main Estimates 2016‑2017 Environment And Natural Resources, Corporate Management Operations Expenditures (Pg. 87) Reinstatement Of Funding For Public Education Coordinator In Field Support Unit, Carried
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters
June 7th, 2016
See context to find out what was said next.