Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, with respect to the income disruption support payment, that was the first one that was provided and that was really meant to be an opportunity, really, just to acknowledge the fact that individuals who had been evacuated at that time may be in situations where they didn't have anything to provide some of their day-to-day costs and to sort of mitigate some of those day-to-day costs. $750 was -- we were looking at -- we certainly did do a jurisdictional scan of what was going offered elsewhere. It was very clear at that time that very few jurisdictions, indeed I think perhaps at that time initially only one, were providing any kind of direct payments to residents. As the summer wore on and other jurisdictions faced similar challenges of evacuations, there was at least one jurisdiction, if I'm not mistaken, that did ultimately provide a payment, and we tried to ensure that ours was not too far off of what was being offered, noting that, of course, there were some differences in how they were being allotted and who was eligible. And at that time, the evacuation travel support payment was introduced to try to further offset some of the costs that were being incurred for individuals knowing that accommodations and some fuel and food were available for those who were registered through the other evacuation programs that were available. Thank you.
Caroline Wawzonek on Question 10-20(1): Evacuation Travel Support Program
In the Legislative Assembly on February 6th, 2024. See this statement in context.
Question 10-20(1): Evacuation Travel Support Program
Oral Questions
February 6th, 2024
Page 26
See context to find out what was said next.