Thank you. I don't think that a for-profit business can call themselves a nonprofit and then, you know, access funding as if they were a nonprofit. So that's not legal advice to the Member but that's my very basic understanding of it. Perhaps for some more information on this and how those two types of organizations are differentiated, I'll hand it to the deputy minister. Thank you.

Thank you. Deputy minister MacDonald.

Thank you. Member for Kam Lake.

Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. I wanted to move on to the infrastructure fund. And given that the goal of ECE is to increase spaces by 300 children in the life of the federal agreement, I'm wondering why we're not seeing an increase to this fund given that especially what we're seeing from lessons learned from Quebec was an urge to increase capacity upfront. Thank you.

Thank you. Minister of ECE.

Thank you. We have a limited budget, and you can only cut it so many ways. I would love to see that fund increased. I think going forward that is -- may have to happen. We are at a point now where we have been receiving proposals for this fund, and those proposals have resulted in grants to the organization and then new spaces being created. We've seen it across the territory. A lot of the organizations who were on that path to, you know, or thinking about developing child care centres have already accessed this funding and so now we're finding that there's not as many organizations out there that have as well-defined plans. Because it's not just an application to build a child care centre. You also need a plan to operate a child care centre. So that is one of the criteria. So we are trying to figure out now how do we best use these funds to support groups that want to build something, and it might not -- they might not be at the point where they're ready to build; they might need a different type of assistance. Thank you.

Thank you. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. My -- I probably only have time for one last question. So the supporting child inclusion and participation, it says contributions to target the needs of children who are vulnerable, at risk, or who have specific needs. I'm assuming that this is largely used more in kind of an inclusive for kids with disabilities within a daycare or day home setting. I'm also wondering if given that children of teen parents might fall into a vulnerable or at risk category, if this would also be an avenue to access funding for teen parents? Thank you.

Thank you. Minister of ECE.

Thank you. I'll hand it to the deputy minister.

Thank you. Deputy minister MacDonald.

Thank you. Member for Great Slave.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I won't get into the debate about what I feel about the comment of, like -- of the for-profit being the designation between helping and not helping. I would actually want to re-term that as the, you know, for barely-profit or barely-for-profit would be more accurate, I think.

My question, though, is when this money was announced, you know, I had hoped that we would be able to look into putting money into small communities to pay relatives, etcetera, that take care of grandchildren or nieces and nephews and such. And then upon my conversations and my many conversations with day home providers, it's my understanding that in order to do that there would need to be a subclass or sublicense created around a relative caring for kids. And I just want to know if the department is looking at that?

I mean, when I look at this again -- and I mean, go against the grain. I am a Yellowknife MLA however this is only benefitting large regional centres in Yellowknife. It's not benefitting people in small communities where we need people to be able to get out and be employed and be -- we all know being employed leads to better well-being and mental health because you have a reason to get up, you have a point of pride, you could take care of your family. So can the Minister or the department speak to how does this help get money into the hands of the people in small communities that need child care? Thank you.

Thank you. Minister of ECE.

Thank you. So in many small communities, there is child care that's provided often by the Indigenous government, and it is often provided free of charge unlike the larger centres. And we are aware of that then we want to support those organizations as well. So a portion of this funding is available to those centres to help them with -- yes, stabilization funding and as well we have our other streams of funding.

In terms of, you know, providing funding directly to, say, grandparents who are looking after their grandkids, we are bound by the terms of the agreement with the Government of Canada. There is a real focus on licensed child care centres. Perhaps I can ask the deputy minister to get into some more of the details around that. Thank you.

Thank you. Deputy minister MacDonald.

Thank you. Member for Great Slave.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Yeah, I'm well aware; I've heard this department cite many times that it's the feds, it's the feds, it's the feds. Well, then I look at this again as another failure from our Cabinet and our leadership to properly advocate on behalf of the people of our territory. I think all of us in the discussion around child care are well aware that we are not Vancouver, we are not Toronto, we're not even Edmonton. So all I can say is I'm tired of hearing as this as the rationale. We have things in our upcoming bill that aren't even around the funding so I find this to be just a bit of a very easy thing to say rather than actually looking at what people in this community -- or this committee and this group are saying. The day home providers are not making money, and they are educated. They have master's degrees and 30 years of experience and a whole whack of investment into their homes. And the way that they've been treated through all of this is disappointing. And I have realized that the way that this department gets around it is by talking about day cares and supports to day cares, which is not day home providers which I only realized yesterday. And that's where a lot of that confusion has been in the media.

So, Madam Chair, I think this is has been a total failure of a rollout in this funding, and I don't really have any further questions because I'm tired of just hearing it's because of the feds. Thank you.

Thank you. Are there any further questions under early learning and child care? Member for Frame Lake.

Thanks, Madam Chair. So over on page 44, the contributions, the last item supporting childhood inclusion -- child inclusion and participation, and it shows $1.7 million. I just want to verify what the uptake for that program is and whether it's actually oversubscribed in any way. Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Minister of ECE.