Debates of August 17, 2007 (day 12)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in terms of level I communities, the amalgamation exercise that took place with the Business Development Corporation, with that and the new programs that are available, what has improved for level I communities, which is a community I represent? Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Bell.

Further Return To Question 146-15(6): BDIC Business Program Policy Changes

Mr. Speaker, the amount of our loan portfolio continues to grow. I don’t have a specific number here, but I believe the portfolio under the BDIC is in the $40 million range. That is up significantly, so we are getting more money out to our communities. The Member, in her statement, talked about the personal limits set now at $2 million for any one business or ownership group. We’ve had a lot of discussion around that. Our concern is we want to be sufficiently diversified. If one business runs into financial difficulty and we have a loan default, we want to make sure that that isn’t such a large part or portion of our loan portfolio that it has a devastating effect.

So we are discussing, and we will continue to review, those loan limits. But the best information I can give to the Member is our portfolio continues to grow; we continue to get more money out into our communities; we continue to work to improve the provision of service as well, related to our programming and the work the staff are doing in the regions. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Final supplementary, Mrs. Groenewegen.

Supplementary To Question 146-15(6): BDIC Business Program Policy Changes

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister if they had ever considered a two-tiered lending program where the cap could be larger for existing businesses that are expanding and have a proven track record as opposed to the higher risk businesses that are fledgling, new and just being tested out for the first time? Perhaps a different cap for businesses that have already been operating for awhile and offer some history or track record that would give some level of comfort. Also has there been any more thought given to the patient capital program that was discussed? Has anyone tried to access it? Where are we at with that? Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Bell.

Further Return To Question 146-15(6): BDIC Business Program Policy Changes

Several questions there, Mr. Speaker. I hope that I can keep track and remember them all, but in terms of the patient capital, this is one of the new programs proposed by BDIC. They are out actively consulting. They are around communities in the North. I hope Members are being advised and apprised that they are in their communities looking to consult with stakeholders on this. I think that can be a successful and new program for the BDIC. So these discussions are underway.

We are also looking at creating some differential rates, loan rates, depending on the level of risk to the business. We may have prime plus one, two, three, depending on the level of risk of the business is another thing that we had looked at, the BDIC is proposing. We were looking to put that into regulation.

Increased cap -- thank you very much to the Member -- there has been some discussion around this and I think our preference at this point would be to see those businesses that have a track record and are bankable, that we would get those loans out from under the realm of the BDIC and into the realm of the chartered banks. They don’t really need the BDIC support and we can move them off into the chartered banks. That’s what we would like to do and free up more money under our portfolio for new businesses. So there are some things we are looking at. If that isn’t really viable, then maybe this is something that we do need to look at and that would be a couple of different tiers of lending. So these issues are very much in a state of discussion and we continue the consultation on these initiatives.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions this morning are for Mr. Roland, Minister of Finance. It relates to the situation or the increasingly desperate situation that our non-government organizations, especially in the social service sector, find themselves because of financial constraints. Mr. Speaker, in summarizing the overall findings of a recent study of staffing, the author of the report on behalf of several organizations states that unless there is a major rethinking over the next few years, the agencies that are now contracted to handle this kind of thing will not be able to continue to remain a viable economic alternative for government to turn to for support. They are seeking a rethinking of our overall approach to the incredibly effective and extremely good value for money agreements and arrangements that we’ve had for these organizations, but it is no longer sustainable until we change our approach. Mr. Speaker, are we rethinking our approach on funding these NGOs?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Honourable Minister of Finance, Mr. Roland.

Return To Question 147-15(6): Funding For Non-Government Organizations

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think the fact is, as a government, we’ve heard the concerns about funding to NGOs. The study that was done was initiated through Yellowknife Health and Social Services with the organization partly to look at how they could seek funding from other sources and, as well, for Yellowknife Health and Social Services to address how it would put forward its submission to the department on forced growth. The government, overall, has heard this concern through our business planning process and we’ve looked at it and looked at the categories of NGOs and how they work with us in delivering programs on our behalf and we’ve established a number of categories. In fact, category A groups now qualify for forced growth submissions through the business planning process. So we have taken some initial steps in this area. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Supplementary To Question 147-15(6): Funding For Non-Government Organizations

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am pleased to see that we are making some progress here, but I don’t know that I would say that allowing organizations to allow for forced growth really amounts to rethinking a partnership that we should engage in. Let’s connect the dots here, Mr. Speaker. There are homelessness issues, family violence and dysfunction, and mental health issues grow in our communities and become more sophisticated. We rely very heavily on these organizations to be the frontline, go-to places to manage this for us. But even as these issues increase in our communities, we are disabling the organizations that we rely on to do this for us. Mr. Speaker, the report makes, among others, a very clear recommendation and clear benchmark that what we need to do is bring the pay and benefit package for these employees to within 80 percent of what the GNWT offers. Is that going to be a recommendation for the business planners in the coming fiscal year, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 147-15(6): Funding For Non-Government Organizations

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think one of the things we have to do is there are recommendations. In viewing that report and what it's looked at and recommendations it comes out with, first we have to compare apples to apples. The NGOs in this territory, if we are going to do a comparison, should be compared to other NGOs in other jurisdictions and then look at an adjustment going forward for the cost of doing business in the Northwest Territories. If we are going to connect the dots, we should go a long way back to see how some of these organizations were established. Some of these were as organizations brought concerns to the table and governments-of-the-day agreed to try to come up with a program and initiated contracts. I think that’s another thing, Mr. Speaker, is there are contracts in place and can be negotiated when we go out for renewals of those. Ultimately, as a government, we have to look at the cost of delivering that service. If we are going to look at getting close to matching the GNWT, then the question has to be is it something the government is mandated to carry out. If it is, then maybe a review should be should the government be doing that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Supplementary To Question 147-15(6): Funding For Non-Government Organizations

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Minister just told us that ultimately it’s the cost that this Assembly has to consider. Mr. Speaker, is the Minister at all considering the need that the people of the Northwest Territories have for the service? Isn’t that really our primary job here?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 147-15(6): Funding For Non-Government Organizations

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I think this government can speak by action and the fact that if you look at our budget, what we have done in our term to address those costs in the Northwest Territories, establish programs; for example, the Income Support Reform Program and a number of other areas. We have invested a lot of money in that area, so I think our record speaks for itself that we have become more involved. When you look at the total cost of spending on social programs by the government, we have done and carried a fair bit of weight in trying to address those concerns in the Northwest Territories.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Short supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Supplementary To Question 147-15(6): Funding For Non-Government Organizations

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we shouldn’t allow this to get into such a bureaucratic argument at this stage. I am disappointed to hear that the Minister says we should compare ourselves to other jurisdictions. We should compare ourselves to the contracts and things that are in place. Mr. Speaker, we really need to look forward in a much more progressive and collaborative way and rethink this. I will ask once again, is the government going to instruct the business planners to really rethink the way we set up our partnerships and our long-term business with these organizations?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 147-15(6): Funding For Non-Government Organizations

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the fact is, as a government, we have made decisions on the political level to accept that we needed some change and we have put that into place. The business plan process that we have entered into is, one, prepping the information. We have made suggestions, but ultimately the 16th Assembly is going to have to either accept or change that and relook if it wants to relook at the philosophy of government and how it supplies its programs. That opportunity will exist, but as we prepare this Assembly and have done so far a preparation, we have looked at some of the growth areas and we have accepted, as I have stated earlier, categories of forced growth that we can proceed and go forward with.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment. It goes back to the transfer from the Housing Corporation to ECE for tenant assessments and the paying of rent. I would like to ask the Minister, this has been something that has been going on for a while now. Has the department done an assessment of the whole transfer and is it working? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Minister responsible for Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Dent.

Return To Question 148-15(6): Assessment Of Social Housing Subsidy Program

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I have said several times in this House, the assessment of how the program is working is done on a continual basis. The senior management get together regularly. The deputies from the departments get together regularly. The Minister of the Housing Corporation and I discuss issues as they arise, as well. So we are satisfied that we have found ways to deal with all of the issues that have come up, up to this point. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Supplementary, Mr. McLeod.

Supplementary To Question 148-15(6): Assessment Of Social Housing Subsidy Program

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the list of people that the Minister mentioned that he spoke to, the deputy minister, all senior administration, but they are not the people that are being assessed. Have they spoken to tenants and are tenants telling them that this is a program that is working? These are the people that this program is designed for. We are speaking to everybody else but the tenants. Have they spoken to the tenants and got their opinion on the way things are working? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 148-15(6): Assessment Of Social Housing Subsidy Program

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In fact, we do deal with local housing authorities and LHOs. We bring people together who are working on the front line to tell us the problems they are running into. The numbers of complaints that we are hearing have diminished tremendously. We are not getting very many complaints at all. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Supplementary, Mr. McLeod.

Supplementary To Question 148-15(6): Assessment Of Social Housing Subsidy Program

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I sometimes wonder if there are 84,000 people in the Northwest Territories: 42,000 that they speak to and the other 42,000 that we speak to, because we are getting complaints from tenants that this is not working. The Minister says that he is getting no complaints. We are getting complaints, Mr. Speaker, that this is not working. Is there an option of transferring the responsibility back to the NWT Housing Corporation who was doing a good job of looking after it in the first place? Is that an option? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 148-15(6): Assessment Of Social Housing Subsidy Program

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the reason we did this is, as Members in this House know, we have $120 million that goes out every year as direct subsidies to people in the Northwest Territories. That is before we add the $6 million that we are putting into the Income Support Program next year. We were in a situation where we had 17 programs run by seven different departments that did not mesh. We had situations where a person would earn, or a family would earn, an extra dollar and have $200 clawed back by either the housing authority or by income support. We need to find a way to make sure that our programs work better together. We have families living side by side who are getting different levels of support right now because one family went to the housing authority and one family went to income support. It is not reasonable that governments provide two levels of support to two families in exactly the same circumstances. But that is what has happened because we haven’t had programs that are coordinated and designed to help people effectively, efficiently and fairly. We need to make sure that we are properly targeting the people who need government assistance the most and that we are doing it in the right way. We think that the best way to do that is to ensure that we have a comprehensive and cohesive program. You can’t do that if all of our subsidy programs are divided up among different departments. So we think that we have taken the best approach here. We know that we have resolved issues. We think that putting the subsidies together into one department will eventually mean that we will have a much better articulated program and one that is more supportive for all Members in this House. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Final supplementary, Mr. McLeod.

Supplementary To Question 148-15(6): Assessment Of Social Housing Subsidy Program

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, it is interesting we hear what everybody else has to say and I still go back to the fact that we are hearing from tenants that this is a program that is not working. The assessments are coming in late, termination notices are given out more than they ever have been before. I know it because I have people coming to me who have been terminated and because of policy, there is nothing we can do about it. We can go and ask the questions, but it is just not working out for them. We are hearing from people who are getting termination notices. We talk about one-stop shopping. It is not about one-stop shopping. Is contracting out to the local housing authorities the assessment forms an option? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 148-15(6): Assessment Of Social Housing Subsidy Program

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. No. Before the transfer of the subsidy, I can’t tell you how many times, in my 16 years in this House, I have heard Members stand up opposite and go after the Minister of Housing for problems with assessments. So it isn’t something that is new. There are always going to be people who are having difficulty with how their assessments are done or how they are dealt with, but what we have now is a process where we are moving towards more consistency in how our program is being applied across the Northwest Territories. After the transfer, we discovered all sorts of different inconsistencies. Now we are making sure that people across the Territories are receiving fair and equitable supports. Yes, it has meant a change. Yes, people resist change, but in the long run, this is going to be a better program because of this change. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have one question or maybe two. It depends on how the Minister responds. I have a question for the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources around the implementation and the question on the traditional knowledge policy. I have written the Minister a letter. I asked the Minister if he would consider some options. I want to ask the Minister on the traditional knowledge policy how it is being monitored. Is it a policy that is being used by other departments in regards to this traditional knowledge policy?

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Minister responsible for Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. McLeod.

Return To Question 149-15(6): Traditional Knowledge Policy

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Department of Environment and Natural Resources delayed the department in ensuring that traditional knowledge is utilized in all the different departments in the government. It is something that we continually remind the Ministers and departments to ensure that that happens.

Our policy, I believe, is hitting the 10 year mark. We recently had some discussion over the whole policy and how effective it is, and whether it needs to be revamped, at a recent conference in the community of the Hay River Reserve. It is something that we are going to undertake to do, is revisit the policy and do some consultations with the community as well. It is still a valid document that can still work or we need to make some adjustments to it, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.

Supplementary To Question 149-15(6): Traditional Knowledge Policy

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I am very interested in what the Minister said. It will be utilized in all departments of the Government of the Northwest Territories. It is hitting a 10 year mark. I am looking at how effective it is and look at some revisions based on the Hay River conference. Mr. Speaker, I have asked the Minister, would he look at the process of consultation in our communities? We have just come out of Kelly Lake in the Sahtu and TK workshop with the elders and it seems like we need to do some serious consultation with our people to get their knowledge implemented into this government in terms of the knowledge that they possess in our communities. Would the Minister get a commitment on some serious discussions with our people on this policy? This is their life. These are their thoughts here to go into operation of this government. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. McLeod.

Further Return To Question 149-15(6): Traditional Knowledge Policy

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We would certainly commit to doing consultation with all of the different aboriginal governments in the Northwest Territories when we do a review. We would like to hear from the communities and from the different people in the community on how they feel this could be improved.

We have a number of programs or a number of initiatives that we could point to that show that we have a lot of success in this area. But, of course, there is always room for improvement. We would like to make sure that this program continues to grow and is a benefit to the community. So we will certainly undertake to talk to the people in the Member’s riding and all the other different ridings in the North.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.

Supplementary To Question 149-15(6): Traditional Knowledge Policy

Thank you. I look forward to those discussions across the North here and especially in my riding. Mr. Speaker, would the Minister then also commit to some of the department senior bureaucrats to be at this type of discussion with our people to come there with an attitude of listening to see how important these traditional knowledge experiences and wisdom are implemented to the government departments? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. McLeod.

Further Return To Question 149-15(6): Traditional Knowledge Policy