Masi. Members' statements. Item 4, returns to oral questions. Item 5, recognition of visitors in the gallery. Item 6, acknowledgements. Item 7, oral questions. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Masi. Minister of Education, Culture, and Employment.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We'll have to look at the promise that was made by the previous finance Minister. We are in a new government in the 18thLegislative Assembly, so we'll have to take a look at that, but the benefits and the increases in the changes that we've made to our Income Assistance program is actually benefiting families a lot more than what was in the previous year and even in the previous government. As I mentioned last week in the House, families are going to receive up to about $740,000 to $750,000 this fiscal year, in the fiscal year since we've made these improvements, but we'll have to take a look at the promise made by the previous Finance Minister. We do have a new Finance Minister now, and I will commit to sitting down and chatting with the Finance Minister to see what those previous promises were. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

While the Minister is chatting with the Finance Minister about whether to uphold that promise from last year, I would just urge him to consider that every other per diem and allowance that any of us receive who are associated with the government rises over time, and that the price of food isn't going down. So I wonder if he could give me a rationale for not continuing to raise the level of income assistance for food?

I believe in 2015-2016 we had about just over $18 million on income assistance that this government provided. In 2016-2017, it went over $20 million, and the odd time we come back to this House asking for a supplementary appropriation. As everybody knows, the economy is in a downturn, so we are seeing more families on income assistance in some of the regions, and from time to time we will come back to the House to seek a supplementary appropriation to provide income assistance to those that are in need.

There are a lot of things that we take into consideration; how big the family is, the net income for that family in the house, as well as the age of the children. I think we're doing a great job in providing those services to residents of the Northwest Territories, and we will continue to do so as we continue to make further income assistance changes. As well, this whole government, all departments, provide a lot of good programs for low income families, and we'll continue to do that job.

Of course, the Minister knows that income assistance is a last resort. The criteria for receiving income assistance is that you have used every one of your resources, including your savings, selling your house, selling your car, that you have nothing left. That's the premise for applying for income assistance. So I want to ask, again, whether the Minister will ensure that this promise to increase food levels will, in fact, be part of this government's agenda as well?

I believe in 2015 this government did put an increase on food allowances. The Northern Food Basket was what we looked at in terms of how we provided an income for food in the Northwest Territories. Obviously, there's one federally, and we wanted to make one for the North so we developed our own Northern Food Basket. As a result, we did put an increase in 2015. There is no index for income assistance. We don't index it to anything. So we feel that what we offer in income assistance is sufficient for families and individuals that need income assistance in the Northwest Territories.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the Minister's answer. But if the funds were sufficient, why would we have food banks? Why would we have soup kitchens? Why would we have all these organizations, not only here in Yellowknife but in Hay River and Inuvik, and even in smaller places like Tuktoyaktuk that give food to people every single day? Food security is a huge issue in the Northwest Territories, and I would like the Minister's commitment that he's going to be part of the solution, not part of the problem. Thank you.

First of all, I just want to thank all the organizations that do set up food banks and provide services in our communities, even our smallest communities. As the Member has said, without their help, we wouldn't be able to get some of these other families that might fall off income assistance based on some of the, I guess, regulations that we impose for people that want to take down income assistance.

But we are doing our job, Mr. Speaker. The changes that we just made to the income assistance and the Canada Child Benefit, as I mentioned earlier, families are going to get an increase of up to $750,000 annually. Once we make the changes to the NWT Income Tax Act, families are going to get even more money. We just have to go through the process to get that done, and in 2017, August, we're going to see those changes come into effect and we're going to see more families getting more money so that they can put more food on the table, more clothes on their backs. I do believe our department and our government are doing a good job in addressing those issues.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.

Merci, monsieur le President. My questions are for the Premier. It appears that our departments work in completely isolated silos when it comes to caribou and roads. Will the Premier tell this House and the public why caribou are not considered in designing and developing roads into the Slave Geological Province? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Honourable Premier.

Our Ministers work closely together. I'll redirect the question to the Minister responsible for Environment and Natural Resources. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Minister of Environment and Natural Resources.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, caribou is not an afterthought with this Cabinet or people in the Northwest Territories. We are working closely with Transportation. Just to be clear, this is proposed corridor through the Slave Geological Province, and my understanding is that, if this project were to go ahead, they would go through an environmental assessment process that would talk about the possible effects to the caribou, and then we would take the necessary mitigation steps if we get to that stage in the project.

But the fact is there's no recovery strategy or plan for the Bathurst caribou herd. Not one square metre of critical habitat has been protected, and there are no caribou protection measures in place for land users. Will the Premier tell this House why Cabinet is pushing ahead with a plan for a road into the Slave Geological Province in range of the Bathurst caribou herd in the absence of a recovery strategy or plan for that herd, and at a time when the herd is in a desperate situation?

I share the Member's concern. I've seen the numbers from as far back as 1986, so I share his concern. With the proposed Slave Geological Province, there's a lot of work that needs to be done yet. We're not even sure if this project is going to go ahead. There's still the funding that we have to work with, and then the EA process that we need to go through. But in the meantime, we're continuing our work on the Bathurst caribou range plan. We're working with Aboriginal governments and all stakeholders, and we are putting a Bathurst caribou range plan together, and we're hoping to have this completed by March 2018.

So we may have a plan, then, for the Bathurst caribou in about a year and a half from now, but what is this government doing now other than imposing harvesting restrictions on people when it comes to the Bathurst caribou herd? I'd like to know how our government develops a route for a road into the range of the Bathurst caribou herd without any consideration for their habitat, its use, and the current desperate state of the herd.

I commend some of the Aboriginal governments out there on their desire to try and preserve the herd. To me, that shows a great deal of leadership because they recognize the desperate situation of this particular herd, and I share their concern. As far as the proposed route goes, there may be a couple of possibilities that the Department of Transportation is looking at for a proposed road. Again, it would need to go through an environmental assessment process where they'd be able to hear concerns, especially from those that are quite concerned about the survival of the Bathurst caribou herd.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. I'm still getting some mixed messages, I think, from the other side of the House in terms of which departments are working on this and so on. In the absence of a recovery plan and continued low numbers of

caribou our government continues to push ahead with development that will have a significant adverse effect on the Bathurst caribou herd. At what point would Cabinet decide it is not in the best interest of caribou to pursue this road? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, as I said before we are working on a strategy, and as far as mixed messaging goes I think our Premier said it right when he said that all departments on this side are working together on a plan because we do recognize the seriousness of the Bathurst caribou herd and the effect it might have if there was a corridor that was built through there. I can assure the Member and all Members and the public, that the Government of the Northwest Territories is going to take all necessary steps to protect the Bathurst caribou herd, because to go from 476,000 animals in 1986 to just over 38,000 now that points out a problem and we need to try to find ways to mitigate that problem. I've even talked to my officials. I believe there was a caribou summit that was held in 2007 up in Inuvik, and I've even entertained the thought of having another caribou summit where we can hear from all people, including the public.