In the event that there is someone who is on the edge and is put on one of those queues, but feels that they need the treatment, and they seek, under their own initiative, to go and obtain treatment, does the government have any policies to assist those people with any financial costs incurred if their case would have fallen under the healthcare and they simply could not wait in the queue any longer?

All of the programs and services, counselling and treatment services, that we provide are based on a referral. They would need a referral for us to provide them with financial supports and coverage.

Many insurance providers don't need our same-level referral. They can always approach their own insurance provider if they have it, recognizing that not everybody has it, but typically, no, if someone seeks treatment outside of our system, we wouldn't cover their costs.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Recently, the Minister spoke of new on-the-land healing programs that would address some of this backlog by providing more local options. There is around $5 million from the federal government to support this. This government itself has been budgeting $1.23 million for several years now.

With the eight contribution agreements that have been signed that the Minister spoke of recently in the House, how many real, actual programs that people can access to get these kind of services and avoid wait lists has this money created? Thank you.

I know that the Member is aware, but just before I answer the on-the-land question, we are doing a number of things to try and help us control and reduce the wait times. One of the things that we are doing is actually providing child and youth counsellors across the territory, which has opened up a service that really doesn't exist for many of our youth today who are using the system as a whole. We are putting more positions in, and we are trying to create more resources for people.

Mr. Speaker, we have $1.23 million. The $5 million that the Member is referring to, I think, may be referring to the wellness money that flows through the federal government, through us, to the Indigenous governments. They get to choose how to spend those dollars. We don't dictate how they spend those dollars.

We have $1.23 million available for on-the-land programming. We make $125,000 available to each of the Indigenous governments. They can ask for more, up to $30,000, on a case-by-case basis. Right now, we have a number of individual Indigenous governments who are running the programs. I could go through the list, but I think that it might just be easier to provide the Member that information in writing, because it is quite detailed. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Hay River North.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have some follow-up questions to my earlier statement about the funding framework used by Education, Culture and Employment to fund the education councils around the region. The MLA for Nahendeh had some questions earlier, and in those answers from the Minister, the Minister noted that the framework is undergoing review right now. There is a cross-jurisdictional scan.

Could the Minister please clarify if this is a full review or if it is just a jurisdictional scan? If it is a review, what is the scope of this review, and how is the department accounting for the uniqueness of the Northwest Territories, in terms of remoteness, in terms of difficulty attracting staff, and factors such as that? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. There are several questions in there. Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am glad you noted that, because I was going, "There must be at least ten questions in that one statement." I am going to try to pick one of them out of there, and then he can slam me with the other ones.

The Member had stated that we are currently undergoing this review. That is not correct. We are in the process of just looking at it. I had just returned from the Nahendeh and realized that other jurisdictions have different funding formulas, and therefore, I have made a commitment that we will begin the work towards looking at how other jurisdictions provide their funding to their school bodies. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

That is unfortunate, that they are thinking about beginning the work to look at a possible review. I was hoping that there was a little more going on than this.

Perhaps the Minister can elaborate on how they assessed the quality of the current funding formula. By the department's own admission, just because you are funded to the formula doesn't mean that you are funded adequately. How does the department assess the adequacy of the funding formula?

The last comprehensive review, actually, on the funding formula was done in March 2016, where a number of things were brought up. Like I said, we are constantly reviewing it, so it is something that always is on the template.

Some of the things that we did notice and that were changed from that review, though, were, for example, things like targeted funding, such as inclusive schooling. We had given, in my opinion, too much discretion to the education bodies, and some were using it for teachers; some were using it for all kinds of things, so we tightened up the inclusive schooling funding so that they had to use it for defined purposes. We always say in the House that we don't have enough for inclusive schooling, so we have to make sure that we provide it where it is supposed to go.

Another thing that was brought to our attention was the money for Aboriginal languages, Indigenous languages. That has to go to Indigenous languages, so we tightened that up as well.

A third factor that I found from that review was actually that, a lot of the educational bodies, I hear all the time that there is not enough money, "we need more money, we need more money," but I was shocked when I heard that education bodies had surplus funding, and I'm going, "How do people who need money have surpluses?" We tightened that up as well, Mr. Speaker, and said, "Spend it or lose it."

We gave them a certain amount to be able to keep for surplus, because surplus is good, but the rest of it needs to go back into schooling. If we need more money for students, then we need to use the money that we have on the plate at the moment.

In my statement, I said that the funding formula is too rigid, and the Minister said, "Well, we looked at the funding formula, and we made it more rigid. Those are the kinds of changes that we are making." Then she talked about the surplus. She said the schools have too much surplus. The schools have too much surplus, in her opinion, because the funding formula doesn't work, and so they need this money to accommodate things that aren't accommodated in the funding formula. I think that there is a complete disconnect between the department and what is happening on the ground, the actual needs of the schools.

The Minister talked about some of the detrimental changes that have been made that came out of the last review. Are they looking at making any changes today or currently?

It is kind of a sin to hear that schools feel threatened and that they feel that they have got to hold onto their money and have a surplus to meet their needs. My background was in the NGO world, and surpluses were a luxury that we never actually got to use. If we had seen it, we spent it as soon as we got it. I really want education bodies to know to use their money. We are not going to dry up; we are still going to provide funding.

Some of the work that is going on right now is I meet with the education bodies a couple of times a year. When I have gone to those meetings, they have all been very politically correct, and sometimes, for me, politically correct doesn't always mean that it is the right thing to do. I put it on the table and said, in the next meeting that we have with the education bodies, I want to talk about inclusive schooling. I want to hear from them firsthand what the strengths and what the issues are, and so then we can actually determine how we use that money better.

It is one thing to hear it in the House, but if the education bodies don't bring those needs to my attention, then it doesn't say it is an issue. I need to hear from those designated authorities that tell me, "These are our concerns and what we would like to see as solutions." That is one change I am making is to try to open up the communications.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Hay River North.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That makes two Ministers who say that, if they hear something in the House, it's not a concern. They need to hear it from the people directly. I'm not sure what they think our job is, as elected officials, but to be voices for the people. I have to say I'm glad to hear that the Minister is going to sit down with the authorities and actually listen to them, because my question was going to be: what happens to all those conversations that are had? Because I hear about the conversations from the authorities, and then they seem to just go into a drawer, the drawer is closed, and they're never seen again.

So what is going to come out of these conversations with the authorities? Can I get something, a deliverable, from the conversations that the Minister is going to have? What is she going to do with that information? I need something concrete. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I apologize if I was incorrect, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe that I had said that MLAs don't speak for the people. They do speak for the people, but I also need to hear directly from the education bodies. They are my partners. I fund them. They are responsible for providing the services to the students. So I need to make sure that that relationship -- the Minister before me worked hard on developing relationships. I need to carry that forward. We need to get it to a place where they actually feel comfortable to come to me as the Minister and say, "We have concerns."

Like I've done with other groups, Mr. Speaker, it's not about just hearing and ignoring. It's about: talk about the issues, talk about solutions, and then find solutions that meet the needs of all of us. That's what I have done all my life in my career as a social worker, and that's what I can commit to continuing to do, is looking for solutions that work for all partners involved, including the children. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in my Member's statement today I spoke about the continuing line-ups and long waits at the Yellowknife Airport. Mr. Speaker, in an effort to promote the airport improvement fee, the Minister said before the renovation began that the improvements would improve the experience of the travelling public and reduce waiting times, but today there is still only one line-up and the travellers are all forced to go through this bottleneck. I'd like to ask the Minister: after $300,000 in renovations, can the Minister explain how this is an improvement? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Minister of Infrastructure.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Well, I can certainly tell you about all the improvements we've done out there with the revolving fund, probably one of the best things this Assembly has done to help improve tourism, particularly in Yellowknife. We spent a lot of money out there improving the system. The Member has raised the question around the CATSA Plus system, and let's make it quite clear in this House, I am not in charge of CATSA Plus. That's a federal initiative. That's their responsibility, but we are working very closely with them to improve the visitors' and the travelling public's experience.

Now, I have a bunch of notes here that I can clearly go to, but I want to make it quite clear that, you know, I've travelled as much as anybody in this Legislative Assembly, and there are times that I've been out there and I've been frustrated, myself. There are a number of issues around the security wait times. Sometimes, it's too many flights all at once. Sometimes, it's staffing shortages at CATSA Plus. That's probably the biggest concern right now with the CATSA system, is the shortage of employees and the amount of training that needs to be taking place out there, but we have been tracking the CATSA Plus system, along with our improvements that we've done out at the Yellowknife Airport, and we've been tracking it, and it's been down by 30 percent on average of wait times. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you to the Minister for his reply, but I don't think that the public is going to find that to be too satisfactory, because, in fact, the Minister's staff, in a previous briefing to Yellowknife City Council, actually indicated and referred specifically that the installation of a CATSA Plus screening system would increase throughput of passengers. So do we have a CATSA Plus system and, if not, why not?

I can assure the Member that the system that is out there at the airport is the new CATSA Plus system.

It would be appreciated if the Minister could share some information at least with the committee, the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Environment, about what a CATSA Plus system entails so that we can get more information.

Mr. Speaker, at the same briefing, the Minister's staff told council to expect a 60 percent increase in throughput with this new system. Now, the Minister has said that it's 30 percent. Can the Minister at least describe to us how they measure it, and are they, in fact, measuring the throughput?

Yes, I did say that it has resulted in a 30 percent increase. We are working to improve it even more. Even though I say it's not our system, we are working with the CATSA Plus people to make improvements out there. The security staff right now is actually doing the monitoring and tracking of wait times, but we are moving to put in an automated system out at the airport for both security queue times and also we're going to be looking at the luggage wait times. So that's an improvement through the revolving fund that we're also going to be able to track these things and have better data for all the residents of the Northwest Territories. As I've said, the biggest problem we have out there right now with that system is staffing issues. It's not the system, it's not the new configuration that we've put into place, it's the CATSA staffing.