Once again, it is really up to the student whether they go by air or by land. Airfare travel is based on the cost from the student's home community to the nearest approved institution offering that same program. If they decide to go to post-secondary by land, then land travel is reimbursed based on mileage only.

I thank the Minister for his help clarifying some of this confusion out there. Again, it is new for some of these new students and, again, some parents who have not had children move out of home, I guess. Can the Minister explain how many trips a student is entitled to during the school year and when these trips are being scheduled?

The students who are eligible for the basic grant are entitled up to two return trips per academic year. Once students get an understanding of the program itself, if they are having problems kind of navigating around what the program offers, I really do encourage them to go and speak to their student service officers, as well as their guidance counsellors in the schools, but as I mentioned, two return trips if you're eligible under the basic grant.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the Minister for that answer. What I will be doing with these answers is I will actually be putting them in my newsletter and sharing them with the communities out there so that people are better informed. I am not saying that they are not informed from the staff out there, because they are doing a good job, but just sometimes communications get lost in the woodwork.

In looking at students' travel, is the department staff given some flexibility to work with students to help them get down to their chosen school as long as it's within the budget log? In other words, if a student wants to go from Nahanni Butte to Calgary instead of Edmonton for the program, is there some flexibility to get the mileage within that budget? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Our Student Financial Assistance Program must abide by the act and regulations when determining a student's eligibility. We also strive to treat all students fairly and consistently, and decisions must be made in accordance with the regulations. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Marci cho, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, yesterday in the Minister of Health and Social Services' statement, he spoke of a shortfall of 258 long-term beds. I would like to ask the Minister if this number takes into account all of the work that is happening in home care to keep people at home. Thank you.

Masi. Minister of Health and Social Services.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in this government's mandate, one of the priorities that we have is to support aging in place. As a result, we have moved forward with the Continuing Care Action Plan which has been shared with committee. The number 258 was identified in the long-term care review, and that actually contemplates doing more work with NWT residents to support them to stay in their homes for as long as possible.

We know that seniors benefit and want to live in their homes as long as possible. If they cannot live in their homes, they would like to stay in their regions; but, unfortunately, there will be those situations where individuals do need the additional support that is provided through long-term care. In short, Mr. Speaker, yes, the number 258 certainly takes into consideration this government meeting its mandate in doing more to support residents to age in place. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to ask the Minister if there is some sort of a contingency plan in the event that there are construction delays in any of the new long-term care beds that are being contemplated. In this contingency plan, if there is one, is there a plan to have more money going into supporting aging in place?

As I have indicated, we have come forward with an aging in place or a continuing care action plan that talks about supporting and enhancing home care. We are talking about family or community caregivers who are providing supports to help people age in place. The Housing Corporation has moved forward with the construction of independent living units at a regional level, at a community level, to support people to stay in their communities if they are not able to stay in their homes. At the end of the day, we also know we need long-term care beds. The evidence is there. The numbers are there to support that. We need beds.

We do not have a contingency plan. We are moving full steam ahead to get those beds, but that does not in any way, shape, or form minimize or downplay the importance of aging in place and the important work we are doing to support people to stay in their homes, to stay in their communities, to stay in their regions for as long as possible. The evidence says that people who stay in their homes or in their regions have better health outcomes, are healthier, and have better connection to their family and friends. That is a priority for this government. We are going to continue to move forward with aging in place, but we will certainly not to take our eye off long-term care at the same time.

In between the time when the need for long-term care beds was identified, there was some discussion on family caregivers being paid to take care of their own elders as they age in place in their own homes. I was wondering if that specific initiative has been also factored into the 258 beds.

The concept of a family or a community caregiver was highlighted in the Continuing Care Action Plan. It is certainly something that we are excited about and certainly something we are pursuing. We believe all the actions we are taking, whether it is enhancing home care, working with community and/or family caregivers, working with the Housing Corp to put independent living units in throughout the Northwest Territories, or all the other actions that are clearly articulated in the continuing action plan, all build to supporting an environment where we can help individuals stay in their homes and their communities. It is all tied together, and the long-term care review and the long-term care beds are part of the continuum of care that is necessary to support our seniors as they age.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, one of the things that often prevents seniors from aging in place in their own homes and their own communities has been cost. One of the big costs now is the lease cost of land, potentially because it is not covered 100 per cent like a tax relief. It is a 50 per cent thing. Some seniors could end up paying $2,000, $6,000 for land lease.

Will the Department of Health commit to, or this Minister commit to, working with other Ministers to look at those type of costs as those costs are being passed on to the homeowners? Will the Department of Health look at some further subsidies for those costs by working with other Ministers? Thank you.

That responsibility would fall under the Department of Lands, but I do hear the Member. I would like to sit down with the Member and have him explain to me in more detail the exact issue, and I am happy to engage with the Minister of Lands to see what, if anything, can be done. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.

Merci, Monsieur le President. My questions are for the Minister of Education. At the very strong urging of this Assembly and a petition, the Minister committed to fully fund the introduction of junior kindergarten. The Minister tabled a reply to my written question earlier this week regarding the full cost of including JK students in the funding formulae for district education authorities. Is it really the intention of the Minister to fully fund the district education authorities for JK implication and make up this $1.7 million shortfall for 2017-2018? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, I just wanted to clarify that when the Member says that I finally tabled the response to his written questions on September 19th, protocol does state, just for the public's record, that we table responses at the earliest convenience, which was September 19th and first day of this sitting, and does not have a reflection on myself or the staff.

Now, education authorities have been provided their 2017-2018 funding targets and have prepared their operational plans based on that figure. There is no shortfall in funding. Using the 12:1 ratio that we said we were going to use to staff JK teachers instead of the K-to-9 teaching staffing table, there is an additional $1.8 million to education authorities for the 2017-2018 school year, which is more than the $1.6 million that they received under the old formula. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the Minister for his response. I do acknowledge that he tabled the information that I requested at his earliest convenience, but often Ministers will provide it to Members ahead of time. That did not happen in this case. If he has different figures that he wants to quote than the reply to my written question, I would be happy to look at them, but after a lot of wrangling to try to ensure that we have truly fully funded JK, the answers have been evasive at best. We will be reviewing the 2018-2019 business plans beginning in November of this year. Will the Minister commit that full funding of that fiscal year's cost for JK will be included in those business plans?

During the first year of the territorial implementation of JK, which has just started this school year, specific needs for children with exceptionalities are unknown. After the first full year of territorial JK, ECE will review the needs of the children who are in attendance so we will have a better understanding.

Now, should enrolments increase this year, the education authorities are eligible for additional funds through an extraordinary enrolment formula. We will ensure that a 12:1 staffing ratio exists for junior kindergarten students. As we roll out junior kindergarten, we will have a better understanding and have a better idea of what is needed.

Thanks again to the Minister. I think that was two no's in a row, now. We are not going to make up the shortfall for this year, and it does not look like we are going to get it for 2018-2019. I think our government really needs to make good on this $1.7 million gap for 2017-2018. The Minister's May 25th reply to the petition committed to "fully funding the ongoing costs of JK implementation, beginning in the 2017-2018 school year and into the future." Will the Minister commit to changing the district education authorities' funding formulae to fully account for JK students to avoid future shortfalls?