Thank you, Madame Chair.
What the department has tried to do to provide more clarity with regard to the supplementary estimates is to prepare this PowerPoint presentation to address potential anticipated questions.
What we have in front of us, moving to page 2, is essentially how much we have been given by Parliament to date in terms of authorities, and then what the supplementary estimates provide us with. So what you will see on page 2 is essentially that, net of transfers and other adjustments. We are seeking parliamentary authority for an additional $92 million, to take us to the $9.5 billion amount.
Page 3 essentially breaks down, in a summary way, the amounts that we are requesting by key initiative, and it also tries to provide you with how that relates by vote. As the minister noted in her remarks, vote 1 is for certain purposes vis-à-vis vote 10. Vote 10, as you know, is for grants and contributions for recipients, versus vote 1, which is for salaries and operating dollars.
Page 4 is an attempt to try to deal with questions that were posed by members on the rationale for the $56 million in additional emergency-related costs beyond what we have in the department's existing reference levels. The minister cited a number of examples of events for which we had already issued a reimbursement. Now we are seeking parliamentary authority for reimbursement to cover those costs from a departmental basis, and to ensure that we're within the authorities granted to us by the parliament.
Page 5 just tries to provide you with a bit of a picture of some of those costs that are being reimbursed. This is an example of the effort to try to build back Kashechewan after the flooding, showing some of the homes. You will note that it is an example of a home without a basement, thus dealing with the reality of the ground there, whereas the ones that were in Kashechewan before the flood all had basements and, therefore, suffered from the flooding.
Page 6 is our request for additional funds related to the operation return home project. This is a multi-year engagement to ensure that we repair, rebuild, and re-establish the four Manitoba first nations that, unfortunately, were significantly impacted by severe flooding in 2011. We are anticipating a return of all the evacuees to the four first nations communities by 2018-19.
What you have then, following page 6, are photographs of the progress being made across those four first nations communities. We are providing the necessary infrastructure so that when the evacuees do return, they will have their homes, their roads, their water treatment plants, and sewage systems consistent with the community, and to ensure that it's functioning.
Page 8 is essentially a request for $10 million to ensure the continued negotiations between Canada, the Province of Ontario, and seven Williams Treaty first nations. This is essentially consistent with the minister's direction not to litigate but to negotiate out of the Alderville litigation that was filed in 1992.
I believe that page 9 was adequately addressed based on the questions between members and the minister with regard to the purpose of the $3 million for indigenous childhood claims litigation. As the minister stated, it is essentially for research and analysis to ensure that when we do negotiate, we are dealing with appropriate class sizes, and that we rectify appropriately the wrongs that were done in the past.
Page 10 is some background on what is essentially the purposes of the Arctic regional environmental studies, and you will note, on page 11, some examples of committee engagements in the past in similar areas related to environmental studies.
Finally, this is essentially the provision of languages for the 11 self-governing Yukon first nations that Mr. McLeod mentioned, and that is consistent with their self-governing agreements.
That's it for the presentation. I'm happy to address, along with my colleagues, any questions that you may have.