Thank you, Mr. Blake. Minister McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, this is just our contribution through ENR to help do some of the FireSmarting. There are other pots of funding that they are able to access to complete the work, I believe through MACA. They get some funding through MACA, and then I believe through the small community employment fund that there are some opportunities there that have been identified by some of the smaller communities as a good way that they could use that fund. This is just ENR's contribution to the FireSmarting program. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Blake.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Maybe you could correct me if I am wrong, but, in the past, wasn't ENR pretty much taking care of the whole cost of firebreaks? This might have been 15 or 20 years ago, but I know, when Tsiigehtchic did it, at the time, I believe ENR pretty much took care of the total cost. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Blake. Minister McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would have to do some research into that, but, as the Member pointed out, in 2007 a new deal came in where a lot of the capital money went to the communities, and that may have replaced some of the money that ENR was contributing towards this. I am sure, if we did not have the new deal, then you would see the appropriation for ENR probably still at historical levels. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Blake.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Maybe just on that note, are there communities that are making use of this $75,000? Because I know Tsiigehtchic and Fort McPherson would like to redo their firebreaks, and I am sure you will be seeing a proposal in the next month or so here. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Blake. Minister McLeod.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, my understanding of this is that this is application-based, and it has been fully subscribed to the last few years. So, if the Member's communities come forward with a proposal, then I am sure it is one that we will look at, and, if there is funding available, we will put some funding toward it. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Blake. Mr. Testart.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. On page 83, under "grants," we see "fire damage compensation." I am just wondering, in the 2017-2018 fiscal year, how much of this money was spent? I am just wondering about the overall level of subscription. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Testart. Minister McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. In 2017-2018, there was $30,000 spent of this money. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Testart.

My apologies, Mr. Chair. Can the Minister repeat the response? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Testart. Minister McLeod.

Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Testart.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, the actuals in 2016-2017 were only $10,000. What was the difference between the estimates and the actuals in 2016-2017? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Testart. Minister McLeod.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. The difference would have been $90,000 because the budget allocation is $100,000. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Testart.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I am just wondering about the department's logic behind it. I mean it seems like this is a very large appropriation based on the amount of people who are actually benefitting from the grant. Is there a reason that the appropriation is $100,000 when it seems like, for the two years that are indicated in these documents, we have $10,000 and then $30,000? How would the Minister characterize the planning that goes behind the $100,000 figure? Thank you.