I hear the Member's comments. The local housing authority does act on behalf of the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation. They are our front line. When we do have housing issues, I would like the clients to be contacting the local housing authority so we would have information on how we are going to conduct and what kind of programming we are going to be offering. Also, I just wanted to elaborate on the dedicated person to be located and to be identified at the community level. Trades and apprentices are something that we are struggling with right now in trying to find that certification at the local community level and, also, the programming that is offered to keep the certification current. It does not stop the Housing Corporation from providing the service. Right now, just to inform the Member that we are working with the dedicated person that should be available at the local community level. We do have maintenance workers, but I do understand there's a stronger need for the service. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for the Minister of ITI because I know she really likes policy and procedure. Mr. Speaker, ITI's SEED Policy described market disruption as circumstances when, in the opinion of the regional superintendent, the granting of a contribution will likely adversely and significantly impact the revenue earned by another business within the region. This definition, plus the duty of the regional superintendent under Section 7.4(c), make it clear that the authority to determine market disruption falls to ITI's regional superintendents, and that this authority is discretionary. What I'm wondering, Mr. Speaker, is: will the Minister instruct her senior management team in ITI not to apply the market disruption clause for the existing NWT businesses seeking SEED funding for the 2021 fiscal year so that NWT entrepreneurs can creatively evolve and expand their businesses in response to COVID-19? Thank you.

Thank you, Member for Kam Lake. Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thought I'd have an easy answer there, and then I heard "2021," and I'm not able to make that commitment on the floor right now. As I've said, for the moment, when the SEED Policy had been retooled to accommodate and to respond to COVID-19, the market disruption clause has been waived for the current fiscal year. Mr. Speaker, I can assure the Member that we are going to be looking at that, given where we're at and if the pandemic continues to be ongoing and, in fact, continues to be fairly disruptive in the southern regions. I will certainly commit to looking at that and see if we can extend the existing change. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Can the Minister then confirm for me that no SEED applications have been denied this fiscal year due to market disruption?

It's my understanding that that is the intention. I don't have the numbers in front of me. I will make sure and get that confirmation and share it with the Member.

If the Minister does find an application within their files that has been denied because of market disruption, will the Minister have her senior management team, specifically, look at that application, re-evaluate it against their intentions for the SEED application for this fiscal year?

I can definitely commit that, if there is such an application that was denied on the basis of market disruption after such time as that announcement was made, that we will be looking at it again and ensure that it does meet the intentions as they have been stated and retooled to meet to COVID-19.

Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am satisfied with the Minister's response.

Thank you. Oral questions. Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have questions again for the Minister of Health and Social Services as to what happened this week with the mix-up with the case in Inuvik. I know that the Chief Public Health Officer had a media. She updated, and I've read the newspaper. I still have constituents asking me, "How did this happen?" With the earlier announcement that the person that was the first positive in my community of Inuvik and that they had no contacts and now we say the next case that we have was a contact of the first case, what happened in this case? Can the Minister explain? Thank you.

Thank you, Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. Minister of Health and Social Services.

Yes, thank you. I just start by saying that the CPHO is an independent office within Health and Social Services, so I don't have any information that hasn't already been made public about what happened this week. There was a communications breakdown that led to the announcement of a positive test when it wasn't positive. It was presumptive and has since been confirmed as positive. My understanding is that the first case news release talked about contacts for the travel case, and the second case news release was a household contact of that original travel case. Thank you.

Thank you to the Minister. The thing that came about, I had a lot of calls. I had some discussions with the Minister as well that day. It's just the way that the first announcement came out with the first case. It just didn't add up, so a lot of Members were very, very concerned that we weren't getting the truth out of the first case. That's what my question was: knowing that there was a household and a family isolated, why did it not come out that they were not alone, or they were with other family members?

Yes. I appreciate that there's a lot of anxiety and fear about the prospect of COVID being diagnosed in our communities, and Inuvik is no different in this case. People who are tested for COVID are entitled to their privacy. Identifying information and additional information is very tightly controlled by the CPHO. There is no reason that she would feel obliged to enumerate who else lives in the house with the infected person unless that person was also infected. When that person did test as infected, it turned out that they did live in the same house. There's no obligation to provide a complete breakdown of the family's circumstances for each positive test.

I guess what I'm saying is: when we had the first case, it was a family that arrived back, and it said one member has tested positive. The rest are at home isolating. I think that was the concern after hearing what happened in Yellowknife. My next question is: is the department looking at their policies on travellers coming into the territory and isolating at home with other family members? That way, family members know exactly what they need to be doing at home, and what they should and shouldn't be doing. That way, the public also can feel a little bit of security that they're not out in the public?

Yes. I'm well aware that the Member is a nurse and very knowledgeable as a result about how infectious COVID is. People are given advice about isolating at home, about having separate bathrooms, separate bedrooms, about good cleaning practices, good hand hygiene, wearing masks, and so on. There is nobody there checking up on them to make sure that all of that is being done. This is something that happens in the privacy of a person's home. We do recognize that there has been some household spread in this particular case. I am really interested to see what the CPHO comes up with in her revised orders to address this issue. Maybe it turns out that it's not possible to isolate at home. People will have to isolate in regional hubs because the infectiousness risk is so great that it doesn't make sense if people are all in the same house, especially if the house is limited in size and has a lot of people in it.

Thank you, Minister. Colleagues, our time for oral questions has expired. Item 8, written questions. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.

Written Question 20-19(2):
Procurement from Indigenous-Owned and -Operated Businesses

Marsi cho, Mr. Speaker. This goes back to a previous Member's statement I had on procurement. My question is for the Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment on the issue of procurement from Indigenous-owned and -operated businesses:

1. For the 2019-2020 fiscal year, what percentage of capital expenditures were spent with Indigenous-owned and -operated businesses;
2. What steps has the Government of the Northwest Territories taken to identify and remove barriers for Indigenous businesses to participate in the modern economy; and
3. What incentives or programs does the Government of the Northwest Territories have in place to provide for the purchase of goods and services from Indigenous-owned and -operated businesses?

Marsi cho, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh. Written questions. Item 9, returns to written questions. Item 10, replies to Commissioner's address. Item 11, petitions. Item 12, reports of committees on the review of bills. Item 13, reports of standing and special committees. Item 14, tabling of documents. Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.