Thank you. Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.

Thank you very much. It comes out of finance.

Thank you. Member for Range Lake.

Okay, well, then I'll stop. For -- apart from saying it's a great thing and we should be lifting the income ceiling, maybe it doesn't go to everyone as generous as the child -- as the Canada child benefit, but certainly, it could make a huge difference in Northerners across the territory and is exactly the kind of thing that people are looking forward as they face an uncertain future with costs predicted to increase any day now when 25 percent tariffs are imposed on our country unless another stay of execution or reprieve, temporary reprieve can be negotiated. I know the Premier's on that, and hopefully Team Canada wins out. But if it doesn't, we need to be able to do something as a territory. We can't just wait for the world to bail us out because they won't be, and that's when we're going to have to look at investing our own resources in our own people and putting Northerners first because if we have to start paying our own NATO defence bill, we're going to have very little money for highways and benefits and entitlements and things like that. So if we're going to do it, let's do it now.

Speaking of student financial assistance, so the northern bonus program was cut out of the last budget. We missed it, I think, or many Members did miss it when we were looking over it. So just to be clear, are there any changes to student financial assistance that are being proposed in this budget that would reduce the amount of money that's going to our kids? Thank you.

Thank you. Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you for the question. So in regards to the student financial assistance northern bonus program, the changes that you see within this budget are still reflective of that. The reason being is that we passed the previous year's budget in May/June, so it was different from how we normally do it. And so because the northern bonus program had already had an intake in April of last year, it meant that we had already spent that money. So we were able to reduce the northern bonus program in 2024-2025 by $360,000, and the remaining amount, the $240,000 needed to be reduced in this budget. So that's where you'll see it. It doesn't reduce the program any more than what we had committed to reducing it. And so -- but it just had to be broken out into two different main estimates because of where the intakes landed. They landed in April, and then the second one in October.

Thank you. Member for Range Lake.

So just clarification, this isn't a reduction. It's an elimination of the program; is that not correct? Thank you.

Thank you. Minister.

The Member is correct. Thank you.

Member for Range Lake.

Thank you. Has the Minister received feedback from beneficiaries of the program or recipients? I don't know what language we're using, but from clients who use the program after its elimination, and can she share some of that feedback if it exists. Thank you.

Thank you. Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. So, Madam Chair, this was $600,000 that was previously going to people who had completed their post-secondary education and if they returned to the North and they had remissible loans, they were able to remiss those loans quicker, and if they had repayable loans, they were also able to apply for that bonus up to a maximum for both instances of $10,000 within their lifetime. So for people who had remissible loans, the indication there was that the expectation was they stay and live in the North longer, and people who have repayable loans were expected to then repay that back. In both instances, people who had remissible and repayable, I certainly did hear from Northerners who were not happy to see that program go. Thank you.

Thank you. Member for Range Lake.

Thank you. So how many -- I guess I'm pleased to hear that there was some feedback provided. So given that there are people unhappy with this and that it might affect their choices about whether to stay in the North or seek employment in the North or whatever it happens to be, is there an appetite to reconsider this decision? Thank you.

Thank you. To the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. So, Madam Chair, the reason that this program was certainly implemented back in the day was in hopes of seeing more students return to the North in hopes of ultimately seeing our population numbers grow. It was part of the strategy for population growth. We did not see, as everybody knows, our population grow as a result of this program. Certainly, if the intent was to see this program returned to the budgets of the Legislative Assembly, I would not have the authority to just start doing it again. I would have to go to -- through regular budgetary processes in order to propose a program like this, fight for the allocation of funding, and then that would be appropriated through the natural processes of this House. Thank you.

Thank you. Member for Range Lake.

Yeah, and thank you. And thank you for the description of our budgeting process. But, I mean, I think the -- the question was more if there's a need or if students are saying they miss this program and they noticed, like, a material difference in their circumstances since it's been eliminated, is that enough to convince the department to reconsider the decision and bring it forward in a future budget? Is the level of feedback from students such that there's a need to reconsider this? Thank you.

Thank you. I'll go to the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, one of the things that has happened that has come into play right now is that the student financial assistance program was also improved in the last Assembly at the same time that the income assistance review happened and the income support review. So through -- and the way that the changes happened were increases to basic grants, monthly living allowances, and that also expanded the remissible loan for all residents of the Northwest Territories, and that is a key difference here. Before it was only for students schooled in the Northwest Territories. So unless a change was going to somehow be retroactive, it wouldn't cover people who have repayable loans, or any future change wouldn't cover people who have repayable loans and are expected to repay them to the GNWT because they took them out separately. Thank you.

Thank you. Next, I will have the Member for Mackenzie Delta.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd just like to get some further clarification. We're putting our young students, young adults in a very bad situation. First of all, the education system is failing them. They have no place to go then to finish high school. It looks like they wouldn't be able to go to any upgrading for -- that's in their communities, so they'll have to move, and I think these young adults don't have -- haven't been out of their communities, and if they do find work, then they'll be clawed back by housing, so it's just a no-win situation. Is there any update on how the GNWT is ensuring that youth are not accessing income security as a first option following graduation?