Thank you, Madam Chair. Firstly, can I get a sense of how many people have accessed the NWT Wage Top-Up Program? Thank you.

Thank you, Member. Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I am sure I do have those numbers. I just may not have them in front of me right now. Perhaps I will turn it over to the deputy minister. He may have those numbers at his fingertips.

Deputy minister.

Thank you, deputy minister. Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Can I just get clarification: Those 390 applicants would be employers; do we have a sense of how many actual people are getting their paycheques topped up right now? Thank you.

Thank you, Member. Minister.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I did not make the effort to hunt for those documents. Let me see if the deputy minister happens to know that detail, as well. Thank you.

Deputy minister.

Thank you. Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I believe I had different numbers than that, but I will clarify if the department could get back. This is one of those budget lines that I find extremely frustrating that, in passing this budget, we are going to give all of our low wage workers, who we deemed essential, a pay cut. Many of them were making $18 an hour, and they'll go back down to $13.86, which is less than you make on income assistance. I have a number of constituents who will be getting a pay cut the minute we pass this budget. My dream would be that I flip over to ECE, and we have some sort of increase to employment subsidies. I will have those questions for the Minister tomorrow.

Can we make sure that we don't just simply give this money out and then lose the information? Is there going to be some sort of reporting at the conclusion of this about how many people accessed the money in what sectors? I think this is extremely valuable information, that there are hundreds of people in our work force who make less than $18 an hour, and we essentially decided to top up their wages and now are removing that. Is there any sort of final reporting on this that could be provided when it is concluded? Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Member. Minister.

Thank you, Madam Chair. This is money that we were fortunate to receive from the Government of Canada. It wasn't entirely an item that was able to be funded from within the GNWT's own-source revenue streams. It was a COVID-specific program introduced by the Government of Canada. To be quite honest, yes, certainly, I would say that the information that we are gathering about who is applying and which sectors they are from, I would see no reason why that would simply disappear.

One other note I would make is that it has actually been difficult to spend all of it insofar as there are not that many people making under the $18 an hour threshold. I don't know what that says to the nature of things in the Northwest Territories. It certainly does accord with the information in the economic update around our wages and income earned in the Northwest Territories generally, but the short answer is we will certainly not be getting rid of data. That's not the direction we are going in. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister. Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I am looking at the Department of Finance's website on this. It says 1,943 individuals have benefited from this program, which is the number I had in my head, which is a much more significant percentage of our work force. I believe our work force, if that's more accurate, is about 2,000 workers who make under $18 an hour, which is below living wage, which means 2,000 working people live in poverty. Can I just get a confirmation of how many people have accessed this program? I don't think it's a fair characterization to say that not many people in our territory are making under $18 an hour. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Member. Minister.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I do have the numbers here in front of me. We had 391 applications coming from 94 different businesses to just over 2,100-and-some individuals. This was for all workers 15 years and over. Somebody who is 16 is not necessarily in a situation where they need to be making a living wage if they're still living at home, and it does also include people who are working in the service sector where -- it's not a statement but simply a pro or con to this -- they may well be in a situation of making tips on top of wages.

I think the point is that there is some more analysis that could be done about which industries, which sectors, which businesses are, in fact, paying the $18 an hour wage, but it's not quite as simple as to say that the 2,100-and-some people who have benefited from this program were all not making a living wage. I think it's a little bit more of a complicated story than that. The point, though, is to go and figure out, maybe, what that story is to the extent that we're able to. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Minister. Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I recognize that, perhaps, there's a debate about whether 15-year-olds deserve a living wage. Perhaps there's a debate about whether service industry workers, when they have tips, should make less than $18 an hour, but I know there are actually thousands of people on this program, many of whom were grocery store workers, people we deemed essential, and now, with the passing of this budget, the Department of Finance has decided that they do not deserve to make $18 an hour or that it's not a priority to top up their wages.

I know ECE has a number of different wage subsidy programs kicking around. They do different things, and they cater to different labour forces. I think that this is a priority area of, essentially, the working poor. If you're on income assistance, it doesn't make sense to go and get one of these jobs right now. You just don't make that much money.

I guess that I will leave it at that, and I would like to see the Department of Finance find a way to maybe extend this program, and if that has to work with ECE, then that's okay. If we have to take servers and 15-year-olds out, that's okay, but I think that the passing of this budget in the middle of the pandemic for $4 million means that 2,000 workers were making $18 an hour, and I think this is one of the most frustrating budget lines in the whole thing. That's a comment. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Member. We will move on to Member for Great Slave.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I am just going to ask about the net fiscal benefit transfer to the Aboriginal parties. I'm probably duplicating maybe some of what my colleague was asking around the Heritage Fund, but my understanding is based on percentages of royalties that are earned from the mineral resources sector. Understandably, this is why 2019-2020 is quite a bit lower, but then, again, like everywhere else, we come back to pre-COVID estimations again. I think it's really optimistic to think that we are going to be getting the same type of royalties that we were getting pre-COVID going forward. I get the reluctance to not want to adjust budgets. However, this is a payment out to Indigenous organizations that we are now putting in the budget and putting an amount in. Maybe this is something that's always problematic, but then it states to me that we are sort of making a promise of a payment that potentially we are not going to be able to fulfill. I get that everybody understands it's based on fluctuating royalties and revenues. However, again, this is an area where I do not see why we would not have been more realistic in our budgeting. Maybe the Minister can speak to that? Thank you.

Thank you, Member. Minister.