There is not a budget line referred to as "foster family appreciation" or "foster family gratitude," but there is specific budget within each of the regional offices of the territorial authority specific for supporting foster families, Foster Family Coalition. Within those budgets, the three authorities and the regional operations are able to support foster care appreciation activities and initiatives. So, although there is not a specific line, the dollars that they have available can be and are used to provide appreciation and gratitude to those who are doing this incredibly important work throughout the Northwest Territories.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Nahendeh.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, I would like to thank the Minister for his answers here today. I guess I am trying to understand the budgeting process and getting it out there, so can the Minister provide us information on how much money is allocated for foster caring, maybe not here today but provide it to us later on so that we can have a better understanding of the money that is put into this? Because, if we see a shortfall in it, then maybe it's something that we need to look at to help improve our foster cares out there.

As the Member knows, any time that any of the departments wish to put additional money into any of our programs and services, we have to build a business case that has evidence to suggest that it's necessary. We are always looking at our programs to see if more money is needed. To that end, we actually did significantly increase the allocation for families through the Foster Family Care Program. The per diems increased significantly about a year and a half ago. That information was brought forward in this Assembly. It was discussed. I cannot remember off the top of my head what the budget is for foster families is here in the Northwest Territories, but I will commit to getting the Member that information. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Masi. Minister of Health and Social Services.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the Member's continued commitment and dedication to this particular program and the important work that it has done in the past and the important work that we need to continue to do. I did have an opportunity to meet with the Member earlier in May, where we had an opportunity to discuss the current status. Last session, I indicated that I would direct the department to move quickly to put in a day program. They did proceed with that work, but then they came back to me after they had an opportunity to talk to the other stakeholders, and the stakeholders raised a good point, that, before we design a program, we should really talk to the clients who are utilizing the program to make sure that the program we make actually suits their needs. It's been great that Members in this House, myself included, have been talking about how important it is, but we actually hadn't had that conversation, so I withdrew from aggressively pushing it to changing the direction slightly and asking the authority and the department to work with a steering committee that has been established to reach out to the residents in Yellowknife to find out exactly what they want so that what we design meets their needs. That work is currently under way. They are reaching out to seniors throughout the community to figure out what exactly they would like an adult day program to look like. We are hoping to have all that work done and the program designed by the fall of this year.

If I understand this correctly, it was the stakeholders who told the Minister to put the brakes on this while he did an assessment of needs. Do I have that correctly?

No, that is not what I said. I said the stakeholders indicated that it would be valuable to do that work, that it would be important to actually hear what the residents say as opposed to us in this Chamber assuming we actually know without talking to the clients or to the residents. At that time, I realized that it's important that we get their voice, we get their input, we design programs to meet the needs of people as opposed to meeting the needs of the individuals in this House, and I directed them to take that new direction at that time.

The thing that I find most difficult to understand is, two and a half years after the day program closed, the Minister is now looking at an assessment of what the needs are. This, to me, does not indicate real priority to address this area. Why has it taken so long to get to the point of assessing needs?

The Member might want to go back and review Hansard for the last two and a half years. She has certainly brought this up a number of times, and it is a priority. The Member should not be blind to the fact that, based on her recommendations, her encouragement in this House, we did go for an RFP; we had no applicants. We went out for another RFP; we had no applicants. We reached out to some stakeholders; there was some indication of a desire to work together. We were going through that process when, in October or January, February of this year, the Member said we really need to make progress. I made a commitment to actually move it forward with a program at that time. At that time, when we started to move out with the program, the stakeholders said, "Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa. We really need to do this assessment." I respect what our stakeholders are telling us, and I made the direction to the department at that time to reach out to users, not just stakeholders, and get that work done, which is what we are doing. We will have it done in the fall.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife Centre.

Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. This is a botch. This assessment should have been done before the RFP went out. On what basis was the RFP issued in the first place, if not to describe the needs that the bidder was supposed to work on? I fail to understand how doing an assessment at this point is the next logical step. It should have been done years ago. Now, the Minister is saying to us not only will it be done now, the whole program will be implemented and designed within the next four months. Mr. Speaker, I have been here long enough to think that that is unlikely. What confidence can the Minister give us that that will happen? Thank you.

The Member has been involved in this for a while. There was a report done after the original program shut down. I have heard the Member in this House say that we need to duplicate that program with a few amendments that were identified in that report. That is what we moved for in the RFP. That is what the Member and others encouraged me to do. I did as the Member suggested. It didn't prove to have any value because nobody applied on the RFP. We went to some stakeholders and got a few amendments on how we thought people wanted this to go, once again potential proponents. It also bore no fruit. Then we went to other stakeholders who hadn't expressed interest, and we started to get their input. This is based on the wishes of the Member, who has continually raised this issue. We have done what the Member has asked us to do, and we will continue to make sure that this program is effective.

On the last round, I said, "We are going to move. We are going to design something." At that point, the stakeholders, our partners, the people who want to be part of the solution said, "Before we do that, we should really talk to our clients to figure out exactly what it is they want as opposed to what has been delivered in the past, which did not work," which was in the RFP which was built on a report that was prepared based on what had previously been done, which did involve some input from stakeholders. The Member obviously appears to be upset that we are not making progress. We have been responsive to the Member. I am as frustrated as she is that it is not done, but the reality is, if we are going to do it, we need to do it right, and we are getting it done, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.

Merci, Monsieur le President. Now for something completely different. Two days ago, the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources tabled an annual report under the Environmental Rights Act that covered 15 years. Can the Minister explain why this annual report covers 15 years when there is a statutory requirement to report every year to this Assembly? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Masi. Minister Environment and Natural Resources.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Member is correct. We have not tabled one since 2002-2003. This is primarily due to inactivity under the ERA. In the future, however, reports will be tabled on an annual basis regardless of whether or not there were any activities conducted under the ERA. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I want to thank the Minister for that. From my calculations, in the 28 years since the Environmental Rights Act has been passed, there have been three requests for investigations into the release or potential release of contaminants into the natural environment. Only one of the three requests for investigation was accepted, and that happened back in 1991. Can the Minister confirm those numbers on investigations under the Environmental Rights Act: three requests and only one actual investigation in 28 years?

My understanding is that there were four requests for investigations. For three of the requests, it was determined that the appropriate permits and licences were in place. Therefore, the investigations were declined. The fourth request, a full investigation was undertaken, and recommendations were made.

I would like to thank the Minister for correcting the numbers there. I was one of the two people who filed the one that was actually accepted in 1991, so I know a little bit about that. There are some other reporting requirements under the Environmental Rights Act set out in Section 8 that were not covered in the tabled report. The annual report is also supposed to cover all prosecutions commenced by individual NWT residents for environmental offences, all court actions commenced by individual NWT residents to protect the environment, and the use of any money received as a result of the court actions and all convictions for offences as a result of protecting whistle-blowers. I am not aware of any of these provisions of the Environmental Rights Act ever being used in the last 28 years. Will the Minister table a report on these matters in this House?

As required under Section 8 of the ERA, the annual report tabled May 27, 2019, stated that no applications, investigations, prosecutions, or actions had been undertaken between the reporting period 2003-2004 and 2018-2019 other than one application for an investigation in 2013-2014. As there were no prosecutions, there was no disposition of money or any convictions.

Masi. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.