Thank you, Mr. Chair. Our department is just finalizing our draft. In fairness, I have not seen it myself. We are expecting that that plan will be tabled and presented to committee or offered to committee in August, at the next sitting. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Time has expired. Next on the list is Mr. Vanthuyne.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank the Minister for what has been outlined in the Minister's statement. I appreciate the ongoing work that the Minister and the department are doing in early childhood.

However, the statement indicates a lot of good things as a relates to programming, it relates a lot of good things from age four on, but a lot of this may be for naught if we cannot invest in zero-to-three in the right way, as well. The Minister is aware that, of course, absolutely the basic needs of families and communities is to be able to take care of their children, and the Minister is aware of a circumstance in my riding that happened late last year, where a daycare closed suddenly and there were 30 families, I believe about 42 kids, who were kind of scrambling to find an alternative for daycare, but they clearly had no options. A lot of the daycare facilities within the city, brand new ones, in fact, have waiting lists of over 100 kids.

The department has stated in the past that it does not want to interfere in the private-market-driven industry of daycare, but I am here to tell you that the private market is not providing daycare spaces. Our communities are simply too small to generate a business case for the private market to invest in, and there is no return on investment; the building and fire codes are a big challenge, and so there is nobody who is going to put an investment into the market of getting into the daycare business.

Clearly, in my view, there just will not be the required daycare spaces that we need without a government commitment to new capital for infrastructure funding. I am not talking about programming anymore. I am not talking about services anymore. I am talking about the department starting to identify a need for investment in capital infrastructure. I am of the belief that, once these structures are in place, that these assets are in place, that these daycares in place, that NGOs and parent organizations can start to organize to be able to operate them, but they are not going to put the investment into the bricks and mortar.

We know that, for sure, there is a dire need for infrastructure. We know that there are big waiting lists. We know that there are 11 communities without daycares. We know that this is also driving families or parents to have to take kids to unlicensed daycares, and, of course, we do not want to see that. We are a government that puts hundreds of millions of dollars into our healthcare infrastructure. We have done a lot of that in recent years. We are putting a lot of money into junior kindergarten as well as schools and Aurora College for our education infrastructure. However, we have seemingly no vision, much less commitment to capital investment, in daycare infrastructure.

The Minister is well aware of a recent request. We are grateful for the support on that request. That shows that little pockets of money can go to improving an existing asset to help get that asset up to code so that we can turn it or convert it into a daycare. That can happen in many of the communities. The Housing Corporation in fact owns a lot of assets in communities that are borderline boarded up, not because they are necessarily derelict, but because maybe they do not have enough people to fulfill programming, so maybe that could be a building that could be considered to be converted over into daycare.

Essentially what I would like to do is just simply ask the Minister what her views are around this and does she recognize that this actually is a dire situation that we have as it relates to supporting daycares? Will the Minister start to have discussions with her department, with stakeholders, with parents and others about what the department and what the Government of the Northwest Territories might be able to do to start investing in daycare infrastructure, similar to schools, similar to healthcare facilities? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will start by saying, definitely, there is a need for infrastructure for daycares. It is not in our program mandates at this time. I think it is something that we need to look at in the next Assembly. It's the end of this one. It's a couple of months left. However, I think it's bigger than that. I mean, thinking in the box says: give me a building, and I can make a daycare. However, I want to challenge it a little bit.

When I first took over the position of Minister of Education in April last year, my issue was not just about daycares. I talked about residential schools, and I talked about the drop-outs in schools and the absentees, the issues of parents even getting their children to school, which is a huge issue in our communities, some of the smaller ones. Again, I have been accused of being a visionary, and I often say, "What's the good of a politician without a vision?"

My vision actually, and that was from April last year, was that any new build in smaller communities of schools, we should be looking at those schools as hubs, not just the literacy and numeracy, which we need, but also having a place like we did with housing, that the health department can stop in, so nurses can do immunizations, so that we can have a daycare, maybe Aboriginal Head Start, within the school, so changing the dynamic, making the schools the hubs of communities so that people who have been traumatized by the residential schools, by our own systems of schools, will break down those barriers and they will actually start looking at schools in a positive light.

What I am saying is that that's not going to happen overnight. We have 20-year plans in capital, but what I am saying is that we need to challenge our own beliefs on what daycares look like and think outside the box. We need to look at infrastructure where we can for buildings, standalone, but we also need to look, in my opinion, as schools as hubs of communities to deal with the issues, multitude of issues, that we have with helping children to succeed. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Mr. Vanthuyne.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Geez, you know, I really appreciate where the Minister went with this a little bit. There could be some means to build some infrastructure in communities or at least support communities to put some infrastructure in place like I described earlier, like maybe an existing housing unit, NWT Housing Corporation unit, could be converted, that sort of thing, those are things that could be done, say, in the next couple, handful, of years, especially in those eleven communities that have no daycares, and it would be, in the big picture, it would be nominal kind of expenditure that could go a long way.

However, why don't we have schools that have all-in inclusive from zero-to-12, like from age zero-to-three, which has built-in daycare? We are building a number of schools. We just finished the Ecole Allain St-Cyr. We are going to build a brand new J.H. Sissons. I mean why can't a parent who has a kid who's going to be from junior kindergarten on, who also might have a zero-to-three-year-old, not be able to drop the two kids off at the same facility rather than having to go to a daycare, licensed or unlicensed, somewhere across town and then having to go over here to drop their child off for school or make arrangements for the child to get onto a bus? I mean why can't schools be a multi-age, all-inclusive, daycare-to-grade-12 type vision? I don't see. Again, there might have to be certain regulations and certain zones where certain kids can go at certain times and others can't sort of thing, for safety reasons or what have you.

Is this something that you are looking towards? Is this the type of visioning that you are talking about, is that the future of schooling could be all-in, multiuse facilities for all age groups? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So, yes, my vision is all-inclusive and not just zero-to-12, but the community. I have had Aboriginal governments that have approached me and said, "Can we partner in communities so that the school is not only for children but it's our community events in the evenings and the weekends happening there, as well?" So I think more people are getting onboard to make the idea of school communities as hubs.

However, again, not one size fits all, and we have to be careful with that. We have to try it slowly as a pilot because, some communities, we might open it and say, "Great idea," and then we have one child who is one year old, and then how do you pay that worker? So these are issues that we have to look at very carefully, but I do think that we have to think outside the box and we have to address not only the daycare, but the whole idea on how people are seeing our education system.

Education is a lifelong process. It is not just JK-to-12, and, as long as we keep saying "JK-to-12," we are not even acknowledging that it's lifelong, so I think we need to change the way we talk, the way we think, and then we have to try new ideas, recognizing the flexibility in each community. Yes, that is an expansion of that answer. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister. Five seconds on the clock. Nothing further from Mr. Vanthuyne. Next, we have Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. One of the points that I think is a bit troubling for me, more than a bit troubling, in the Minister's statement was the early development instrument results of, over a three-year period, vulnerability rates actually increased from 38 percent to 42 percent. That is more than a 10-percent increase, which is probably statistically valid. What is going on? Thanks Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I remember, actually, when the first EDI was done a few years back. It was only six years ago, so I think some of that is baseline data, when you first start. I mean it's only been a couple of times that we have done this. I am hoping that it will get better. In all honestly, "what is going on" is the question we all need to be asking, so that is why we are working really closely with Health and Social Services on this issue. We are all concerned. It is not okay.

If our children went from 38 percent to 42 percent who have developmental deficiencies before they are ready for school, we need to address that. It's really difficult when a child comes into the school at JK or kindergarten and they are so far behind, so we need to bump up the services that we provide to preschool children all around. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I think I heard from the Minister that we don't know what's causing this. What are the solutions, then? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, like I said, some of that is just the testing. It might get better as we go along. There are a multitude of variables. I mean, when I have talked to schools, they say "parents." When I talk to communities, they say "schools." It's not okay. It could be a multitude of things. It could be a child was born with some concerns. It could be lack of parental nurturing with that. It could be a lack of intervention in the communities. There are a hundred different variables that assess why a child is developmentally delayed, but the key to that is not about what's happening to that child. The key is actually asking: what are we doing?

We need to focus more on the early intervention before daycares because, by the time they get to daycares, I mean sometimes, the daycares, like we just talked about the skill levels. That is why we are working closely with Health and Social Services, as well, so that, hopefully, we can get better assessments when the children are born, when they go for immunizations, when they go to daycares, all around, that we can actually have earlier diagnoses and proper supports. I do think that all of the departments recognize that, and we are trying to bump up the occupational, the assets, the skills to support daycares throughout to help with that issue.

Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I think I have really pushed the idea of midwifery in this Assembly, and I do want to compliment the Minister for making some progress on midwifery because I think that is a very important component of getting kids born into better families and making sure that we have healthier families right from the start.

Any study I have ever seen indicates that the most important period in a child's life is zero-to-three and that we can get the absolute biggest bang for our buck by spending money when a kid is zero-to-three, way better than roads, way better than roads. So how are we actually increasing our investment in early childhood zero-to-three over some of the other priorities that Cabinet has identified? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Whenever there is an issue that we approach Cabinet and we try to secure money for any new programs, et cetera, the reality is the economy is bad, we all know that, and so it's tight. We are doing our best. I mean it's not okay. We need to do that.

One thing I did not mention, and I just got a note from John MacDonald, actually, was that the other thing we are doing is because I believe that parenting courses have a lot to do with it, and it's not just parenting we have to tell people what to do; it's that social interaction that happens with that.

When I was a single mom, my first child and became a single mom, I did not know how to bathe my baby. I came from a home. I was a street kid at 13 years old. I had no idea how to bathe my baby. I was afraid of my baby. I was afraid of dropping him. I was afraid to tell anybody of anything. My child was almost four years old before I had that child assessed with Tourette syndrome. Even though I saw the visual signs, the movements, the motor ticks, et cetera, I did not want to see it. That, I do not think I am an abnormality. Especially people who have hard lives, we do not want to bring out any more things that are bad about us. We internalize enough.

So one thing I am excited that the department is doing, and it will take a few years, probably three years John has told me, is that we are looking at new classes, curriculum in schools to actually address parenting before they get out of school, because a lot of these people are young parents. I know it was a hard sell, and I may take some flack. I am okay with that. Just the same way it was important that we got sex education into schools, I think now is the time that it's important to talk about parenting in schools so that people, students, start to realize that having a baby is not just about keeping that person because I want to keep them for love. It's 20, often 30, years of serious commitment. Sorry, some of my colleagues understand the dilemma of that.

We have an obligation as society. We cannot make the assumption anymore that parents are getting that support from their grandparents, especially Indigenous children. People who have lost their parenting skills because of residential school, how can we expect them to automatically know how to parent without giving them those tools? So we have an obligation as society, and I am glad to say that education is moving towards that direction, that within a couple of years we will actually have parenting courses within schools. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. We were on Mr. O'Reilly. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I think we got off on a bit of a tangent. I am father, too. Any of the studies I have seen about early childhood development investment, the payoff is 7 to 1, 10 to 1, way better than a road, way, way, better than a road. Can the Minister tell us: have we actually increased our spending on early childhood development in the course of the 18^th Assembly? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. I think you might have stumped them, Mr. O'Reilly.