Thank you. The Minister, did you want to respond?

Thanks, Mr. Chair. So the evacuation travel support was only -- was quite narrow actually in its application. It was -- so only four -- there was $400 available by vehicle for folks who had been evacuated and were able to stay within the territory and stay at evacuation centres within the territory. Up to $750 per vehicle for those who had to travel south upon evacuation. And, you know and, again, I can certainly go through some of the rationale behind that with respect to the availabilities of accommodations and food at centres and flights. And I'm well aware that not everyone was able to make -- avail themselves of those -- the free services that were available. But this was really just meant as a gap filling exercise and not a complete gap filling exercise. So, again, I'll look into what information I can break it down further by the 9,500 residents -- 9,515, and exactly who applied from where. Thank you.

Thank you. Members, time has run up. Is there any further questions? I'm going to go to the Member from the Mackenzie Delta.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have one question in regards to the travel support program. There was patients from my region would have been misplaced and were located in Calgary about a week later. Would they qualify for this program, or is it still active? Thank you.

Thank you. I'm going to go to the Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So the travel support was really just for people who were not able to access the flights that were made available for people. Those who drove a vehicle, then, by -- drove their own vehicles received this. So if it was an individual who was a patient, if they were evacuated by Health and Social Services or another associated agency or -- then they likely wouldn't qualify. But I'd be happy to follow up directly with the Member just to see if -- you know, if there's anything else that can be provided to support those residents. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm going to go back to the Member from Mackenzie Delta.

Okay, thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah, that information would be helpful in addressing this with constituents who were placed on medical travel and ended up in Calgary or elsewhere. That information will be helpful. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Okay, thank you. Is there any further comments from the Member from Mackenzie Delta? No, okay, thank you. Mahsi. Is there any further questions? Don't see any.

Okay, I'm going to go to Supplementary Estimates (Operations Expenditures), No. 4, 2023-2024, Department of Finance, directorate, not previously authorized $6 million. Does the committee agree?

Thank you. Supplementary Estimates (Operations Expenditures), No. 4, 2023-2024, Department of Finance, Office of the Comptroller General, not previously authorized $26 million. Is there any questions? I'm going to go to the Member from Range Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the $18 million related to public debt, what is the reason for the increase in expenditure? Thank you.

Thank you. I'm going to go to the Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So this is required to meet debt servicing or, colloquially, the interest costs on debt. So a couple of different reasons have contributed to this being higher than what was projected in the original budget. One is there's a component under the Deh Cho Bridge Bond for CPI and, of course, CPI has remained fairly volatile and much higher than what many experts across Canada continue to predict. So that bond, as a result, has been paying out much higher than what we might have projected and certainly would have hoped. Notwithstanding, in addition to that, there is a much higher amount of short-term debt being used as a result of having to carry the initial costs for the low water events both -- for example, with NTPC, there was additional funding with the impacts on MTS, evacuations, the wildfire suppression costs, some of which we're seeing here. Some of that before it was covered, for example the $84 million before we got that in from the federal government, the Government of the Northwest Territories was covering those costs and so that is contributing to a significantly higher short-term debt amount than what we would have otherwise had. That requires paying interest on that much higher amount, and so that brings us to where we are now. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm going to go back to the Member from Range Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. And this is related to fiscal year 2023-2024? I'm seeing nodding of heads.

So the next question is on medical travel benefits provided to the public service. It's $8 million. Can we get some additional explanation on this increase?

Thank you. I'll go to the Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, it's not an increase per se to the benefit itself. Just to be clear. It's an increase to the amount that's required to cover the medical travel benefits. So medical travel assistance, it's a benefit that a number of corporations and companies and businesses provide to employees. It's one that the Government of the Northwest Territories provides to our employees, to public servants. It is part of the collective agreement with the Union of Northern Workers as well as with NWTTA and is provided as well for excluded employees, senior managers. As such, when there are increases in the number of medical travel -- I was going to say medical travel events, or in the nature of what it is, then the costs go up. It's a demand driven exercise, and in this case those -- that demand has been much higher than anticipated. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm going to go to the Member from Range Lake.

Thank you. So is this -- and is this meeting trends? Like, trends over the last couple fiscal years, or is this kind of an unanticipated increase -- yes, unanticipated usage rate that has resulted in the need for a supplementary appropriation? Thank you.

Thank you. I'm going to go to the Minister of Finance.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, we certainly do have the trends tracked since 2019-2020. I can share that with the Members if that's of interest.

There is a significant growth in the last couple of years, and I would say that that does track with what's being seen, I believe, over in the Department of Health and Social Services as well. One of the most significant impacts we've seen has been as a result of dental appointments which post-COVID -- so, again, looking at the last two years and it's post-COVID -- is the dental services in communities and regions have not been reestablished, and that has been 450 percent increase for that type of travel. Thank you.

Thank you. I'm going to go back to the Member for Range Lake.

My colleague from Boot Lake just said we could build a very nice dental clinic for $8 million. So there's clearly a problem here. How -- it's not this Minister's job to solve it but when you're assessing these kind of applications in terms of an overall fiscal sustainability, does the department have a perspective that we need to solve this at a fundamental level rather than just throw more money into the medical travel program? Thank you.