Thank you very much, Mr. McLeod. Next on my list I have Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe that the corporation realizes we can’t do everything. I think it’s critical that we do formulate partnerships, especially for communities that are trying to find unique ways to deal with the housing crises in our communities. Also trying to work with the clients to work around some of the situations. I think it’s through those partnerships that we are going to have to develop a way.
A good example is the liaison positions that were put into communities. It was a $20,000 investment and for that investment that was made, it really improved the communications between the community clients, the political organizations in the community, and the people at the regional level and headquarters. You had a means of communicating. You had people on the ground that were local and really realized the importance of housing programs and services to our communities. I think for that $20,000 investment versus having somebody that’s hired full time and having them in headquarters and having to put them up in government offices, that the savings were huge compared to the practice of today.
I think it’s important that we sometimes have to take a look at where the highest needs are. I know you just put out your report and it looks like there’s been some major increases in housing upwards of 10 percent from the previous survey. It would be interesting to see what the previous survey was compared to the one presented in the House here yesterday.
Again, I think it’s critical that this government and the Housing Corporation build on those relationships, because I think, like you say, we do realize that we’re going to have some challenges going forward. But, I think, if we can find unique ways to deliver services maybe a little cheaper, a little more unique ways of doing it, that we can save ourselves money in the long term.
The other issue that I’d like to reflect is in regard to the whole area of single housing. I mentioned earlier in regard to dealing with single dwellings to family units to aging populations by way of elder care and, more importantly, realizing that we do have to have different types of housing units to meet the different segments of our population. I think it’s important to realize that we look at our programs by way of need. I know the frustration from a lot of community members that we have a lot of units in our communities and yet we still see the percentages going up by need in regard to core need, but yet the Housing Corporation has a couple hundred units on the ground, boarded up, not being used. I think if you got those units up and ready to go or simply getting rid of them and giving them to individuals, that it will reduce the core needs in a lot of our communities. I think it’s important that we do look at that.
I would just like to leave it at that and let the Minister respond to my questions. I may have a few more later. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think the Member said it very well when he first started, when he said the Housing Corporation can’t do everything. That’s a very important comment, especially with the challenges we face right now. We do continue to work with the communities. We’re trying to have community-based decisions. We work with communities with lease commitments. We have communities where we’re leasing space from them. In some communities, a small community might be one building that we’re leasing from them and being rented out. The housing for staff was another one where there was a good example of the Housing Corporation working in partnership with the communities, the dev corps, the community corps. There’s been a great deal of interest in that. So we’re working with them.
The single dwellings, that again it goes back to another challenge we’re facing with declining funding. We’ll have to have a look at how we do our infrastructure. If it’s more economical to do multi-family type buildings then that’s the direction we may have to go. We see some of our biggest need being single and one-bedroom units. I think that’s some of our highest needs. The elders, we continue and we will work with Health and Social Services to come up with a plan. If we can form a partnership then we’d be able to put the infrastructure up. So it is a growing concern, especially with the changing demographics and more people getting, I don’t want to say older, but getting more experienced.
Then the vacant units, I did quote some numbers before. We do have a number of vacant units across the Territories and we are trying to find solutions for some of the homeownership. The public housing ones are some of the numbers that I quoted where there is work being done to approximately 150 units. Once that work gets completed, and this year with the huge influx of money from the feds we’re able to do a lot of major M and I’s, and that could be one of the reasons we have so many vacant units. I can commit to this Assembly and to all Members that it will be our goal in the coming year, in the coming fiscal year, to try and knock all those vacant units off so when the Housing Corporation reports back to this Assembly this time next year, I’m hoping that our numbers are way down and there’s not so many vacant units. As the Member said, it does affect our overall core need, so if we can get these 150 units on the ground then that will go a long way into meeting the core need, and I think that’s going to be a goal of ours. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
One of the other areas that we do, as a corporation, have to look at is that we are going to be taking back the rent supp program from housing. I noted that that money is still in the ECE budget but again, it has to come over. So there is going to be a transitional period.
I know that we were looking at some alternatives in regard to challenges we’re facing as the Housing Corporation such as land development. I know we have put land officers in place in different areas to assist in that area, but I think with the decline of the different programs, we may have to see where we can fit those positions moving forward or finding ways of…because we are looking at transitional process before we have some major construction by way of the 500 units under the Affordable Housing Initiative.
Now, most of the money that we’re looking at coming forward is more dealing with retrofits. So I think because we’re shifting our focus in regard to actually physically finding land for housing now, actually moving to bring our houses up to certain standards by retrofits, that we now have a different group of delivery agencies that we’re going to have to look at in regard to those services. I’m just wondering where are we in regard to making the transition from actually physically building housing to renovating units.
We are working with MACA on a land development strategy, but we have made significant progress in the last little while. Communities where there was some land tied up are starting to make more and more land available to the Housing Corp, because they realize too that it’s beneficial to them. We’ve seen a couple of good examples of that. If that partnership continues to flourish then I think we’re going to see that we’ll be able to have more and more access to land. As the Member knows, there’s lots of band land in some of the communities. That’s an ongoing process and it’s one that we’re quite pleased with. We’re making some progress with that and the more we work with the communities and they realize that it would be good for them because it would allow more houses to get on the ground, and that’s something we’re working on.
I think the Member’s second point was on the transition from public housing to private housing. With that, we continue to try and get our ownership programs out there. The renovation money for homeowners has gone up quite a bit. There’s been a huge investment in major M and I’s and the public housing stock. With the money that we receive from the feds and matched by this government, we’re hoping to make huge progress in the quality of the units in the communities. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Committee, we’re on page 5-47, information item. Mr. Krutko.
Just in regard to one of the items that you have on this page, this talks about research. I know that we had a pilot project a number of years ago called the log housing initiative program and I think that a lot of good work was done under that where you actually had people trained and you brought people in that were professionals on building logs houses. I’d just like to know exactly where is that program by way of moving forward. I think that a lot of communities are still requesting that we have such an initiative by way of log housing initiatives. We’ve built houses in communities. Basically, the individuals went out, got the logs, they brought the logs in, they worked on them, they brought a professional in to show them how to build a log house, constructed, people were trained. For me, I think that alone has the potential of generating jobs and putting money back into the economy and, more importantly, making communities more independent when it comes to constructing houses. So I’d just like to know, is this department looking at implementing such a program going forward in regard to research and development?
I mean, obviously, we’re always interested in doing some research. I mean, you obviously have to try to get the best product on the ground. One of the drawbacks to this particular one was good that people were able to get trained. One of the big drawbacks is you have to make a business case for everything and if it’s too expensive to build, then it is something that we have to take into consideration. If you can get more stick built units on the ground as opposed to log homes, then that is something you have to be aware of. We are always looking for ways to improve the quality of our products on the ground. It is communities’ desire in some cases to go with log homes. If it was economically feasible, it met all the energy standards, then it is something that we would be quite willing to do, because we are always about supporting community development, community economic development. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I think one of the most accessible programs that we delivered in the Northwest Territories where we don’t have LHOs or people basically still are pretty independent was the HAP housing program where people went out of their way. They cut their logs. They took the initiative on themselves. They got a lot. They basically went out, put sweat equity into this thing. They helped build the house. At the end of the day, they owned it. Yet, there was money there to deal with electrical issues, deal with the mechanical stuff which was separate from the program. I think that, if anything, that is how we are going to have to meet those communities that don’t have LHOs, that don’t have a Housing presence. I think that a lot or most of those aboriginal communities are in the Deh Cho.
Looking at statistics, the Deh Cho is the most affected in regards to the latest survey that came out in regards to core needs and adequacy in regards to housing. I think that we have to look at programs that have worked in the past where people will actually put sweat equity into these units and make a go of it and, at the end of the day, make them successful. If you go back in the history of the Housing Corporation, that was probably the most successful program that was put in place where people actually… It was their home. They built it. They put time and effort into it. I think that, as a corporation, we have to look at the things that have worked. I think that a lot of the times government means well, but when you are telling somebody you have to go to the bank and get a mortgage for $250,000 or $300,000, a lot of people don’t fit in that bracket.
A lot of people in our communities, all they want is a simple dwelling in regards to having a wood stove and maybe a fridge and basically have simple necessities of life to maintain a household. I think sometimes the simple stuff are the most practical things for a lot of people. I would just like to know in regards to going forward as a corporation that we look at some of these initiatives that have worked in communities where people are independent, where they are self-reliant and, more importantly, they are still people in the communities who are very proud of that program. I would just like to suggest that that be something that you look at. Because you look at the statistics in regards to the needs survey, you can see where the biggest needs still are and biggest needs from what you look at in some of the Sahtu and the Nahendeh riding. You can tell a lot of those communities you are talking about don’t have LHOs. Look at Colville Lake at 95 percent. That is unacceptable.
I am very familiar with the SHAG program where people harvested their own logs. At that time, the package I think was only $30,000 and that got you your windows, doors and everything else, but the bulk of the work and I know people that did all the work. The Member I think was also referring to the HAP program, which was a very successful program where materials were provided to individuals that qualified and then they supplied the labour. It started going to where everything was being supplied, but it was a very successful program.
One of the things that we are seeing today through the CARE homeowners home repair program is a lot of the people that had the HAP program are now applying for the repair program because most of these units are older. These were programs that work in the communities. If someone wanted to build a log home and they qualified for one of the programs, then they can have up to $125,000 to do this and then anything above and beyond that would obviously have to go to a mortgage or there would be a retainment plan. This is one of the things, and I have made the offer to sit with committee and seek their input as we try and develop a basic unit strategy.
One thing we have to be careful of when we get into that discussion -- and we will be able to have a discussion hopefully before the end of session -- is that there are some folks who still want the plumbing. I am not sure if we can not include that. This is a discussion that I think we need to have with committee. I have made that offer, because I would be very interested in getting committee’s opinion on what they see as a basic housing design concept and then we can take it from there and see if it is something that will work. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Next on my list is Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I had an opportunity today to brief the review, the 2009 Housing Needs Survey. As indicated in the Member’s statement or indicated in my discussion making some remarks on the budget, one of those two places yesterday, I talked about the increase in the core need across the Territory. Now it is kind of an interesting situation, because we can’t just look at the increase overall because the actual true reflection of what has happened in the small communities is actually greater than what the actual increase of the core needs in the needs survey is because of the decrease in Yellowknife, because Yellowknife has about half of the households. If Yellowknife has 60 percent of the households and Yellowknife decreases by a certain number, then you have to take the rest of the Territories, look at the overall increase plus the increase in that is the opposite effect of Yellowknife. It is like a seesaw. When the overall Territory increases by 3 percent but yet Yellowknife decreases by a certain amount of percentage and that is half of the households in the Territories, that means the increase in the small communities is greater than the average of 3 percent. That is what my point is.
It is very difficult to pinpoint exactly what the issue is. However, I think one of the issues is programs and policies that are being delivered by the Housing Corporation. I don’t see a real logical reason for eliminating programs and reducing programs and rolling programs into other programs and consolidating programs if the effect is going to be a decrease in core needs. You have the NWT Housing Corporation who has various programs, some targeted to seniors, some targeted to seniors and disabled, so on and so forth. Some actually is targeted to singles and the majority targeted to families. You have that type of regime and your core need in the Territories is going down. The Housing Corporation decides that they are going to change that. They consolidate all of the programs into essentially four programs and then the core need goes up. Is it not incumbent upon the Housing Corporation to work towards decreasing core needs?
This is going to be my first question. Why is it that when places like Norman Wells, Yellowknife and other communities, which had a core need below the territorial average, went down further when the core needs that were already above the territorial average, above 16 percent in 2004, went up? Could I get the Minister to maybe explain that first? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Minister of Housing.
I think I’m going to let you try to explain this. Mr. Chair, the Member is throwing a lot of numbers out there. So I think what I’m going to do, and I couldn’t quite understand it and I’m not going to pretend that I did.
You know, my line is that we’re trying to use the core needs survey to identify where we can put units on the ground in the ‘11-12 budget. Obviously the Member feels that there is some issue with the way the numbers are and we just looked in some of the communities… I mean, core need is also affordability and with the economic downturn obviously that has a huge effect on the core need, the suitability, the adequacy and then that’s something that through the major M and I and the $14 million that we’re investing in that area we’re trying to address that. So that should affect the core need when you’re talking about adequacy and then affordability, you know, once the economy picks up again I’m quite confident it will, and I think that’s going to affect the core need too. But the numbers that the Member was referring to, I might have to sit down, I think, with the Member and get an explanation and just have a discussion as to those numbers. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Okay, I guess in simple terms, my question is the Housing Corporation has programs in play that are doing their job, right? It’s taking the core need in the Northwest Territories and taking the core need down in all the appropriate communities where core need is highest, which in effect is bringing the overall core need down. So if we just divide the amount of units in the Territories in half, half is in Yellowknife, half is outside of Yellowknife. If the overall core need goes up, right? It’s simple math. If the overall core need goes up but the core need in Yellowknife goes down, that means that the actual core need outside of Yellowknife has gone up greater than the average core need. Okay, 3 percent, that’s all I’m saying. But I don’t even want to go there because I guess I’d have to have a white board to try and explain what I’m saying. It’s just that I’m good at numbers and I know all these things in my head.
Now, what I am asking is if you have programs that are effective, going down, taking the core need going down in the appropriate places in the communities that have the highest core needs, there’s no problem, no problem. All of a sudden the corporation comes in, takes all those programs and replaces them with four programs, essentially the story is that all the other 14 programs that were there are still rolled up into these four programs. Yet, after a few years of that application the overall core need has gone up. I know that M and I is protecting assets of the Housing Corporation, but it doesn’t take people out of core need, okay? People in public housing are protected from being in core need except for the affordability aspect of it, and, in essence, a guy that’s in public housing pays according to income, he’s supposed to be allocated a suitable unit and the NWT Housing Corporation’s LHOs’ maintenance employees essentially ensure that they don’t have an adequacy need. So that’s okay and it’s good that the Housing Corporation spends money on M and I and fixes up public housing units. It does help the overall stock and operating costs and everything, but I guess I’ll just bring it down to a question.
I recognize that this is not the Minister that took these programs on also, but the consolidation of these programs hasn’t worked. Is the Minister prepared to look at, like you just indicated, Mr. Chairman, a HAP program, look at other programs and address other ways of taking core need down? If we’re doing the same thing over and over again and expecting it to work, I think that that’s a definition of something. Now, that is something we shouldn’t continue to do. Will the Minister look at reincorporating programs that used to work to address core need? Thank you.
Good question. Minister of Housing.
---Laughter
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Member raised a few points there. I think he’s saying that because of these four programs it’s his opinion that our core need went up based on…(inaudible)…and the four programs cover just about everything. Even the overall houses that need repair affect our core need. That’s factored into our core need, public housing units. So that’s factored in and I think we’ve talked about the number of units that are under repair. That would obviously affect our core need.
I think in response to Mr. Krutko’s question before, or Mr. Bromley, we have 150 units that are under repair now that are vacant. That affects our core need and this is the instruction that I’ve given to the Housing Corporation is exactly what the Member is referring to, is Members still feel like there’s some gaps in some of the programs and as the Minister I’ve heard it and I’ve raised the issue on numerous occasions. Some of the homeownership issues, there’s some gaps in there that have been brought to my attention and I’d like to work with the corporation to try and address some of these gaps if it means, you know, we’re not stuck on four, if it means adding another one where it will address some of the gaps that are there, then, you know, we’d be willing to have that discussion. But I think before there was I think 14 and it did get quite confusing for some people. Which one do I fit under? I think the four that we have now basically covers a wide range of people, pretty well all people. But, like I said, we’re not stuck on four and I’m looking forward to having a discussion with committee on some of the future direction that the Housing Corporation needs to go, but it is very important to me and to Members that we find a way to address some of the gaps, especially the homeownership gaps. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Before I move on I’d just like to recognize some people in the gallery and thank you for coming today as we take part in the procedures. Welcome to the House.
---Applause
We’re on page 5-47, executive, operations expenditure summary. Any questions? Agreed?
Agreed.
Moving on to page 5-49, financial and infrastructure services, operations expenditure summary. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I note land acquisition and planning is part of this division of responsibility and the budget they have to deliver this. I want to just mention this is an important issue to my constituents, especially in the communities of Ndilo and Dettah. They’re particularly challenging issues because of where the land situation is right now and it’s required to be resolved with respect to establishing a land tenure in order to get the needed housing in place. Really at this time I want to mention that the North Slave office of the Housing Corporation has made considerable progress in recent months and is working hard to catch up on that in both of these communities; some exciting opportunities developing for getting that much needed housing in place this summer. I want to give a little tip of the hat to the Minister and his staff for getting that done. I would just ask, you know, I don’t know if this was a one-off or if we have semi-permanently resolved the land issues for now until they get resolved in a more permanent sense through some claims resolutions.
Minister of Housing.
I appreciate the Member’s tip of the hat. It was some good work done on North Slave’s part to work with his communities to come to a resolution. It’s not something we consider one-off. It’s something that we’d like to do on a regular basis now and I think communities will realize that it’s beneficial to them, too, to work with the corporation and identify land and maybe make land available for units. I think this is going to be an ongoing piece of collaboration between communities and the Housing Corporation. It will be beneficial to both because we want to put the product on the ground and the communities want the product on the ground. This will be beneficial and I think this is going to be a good partnership. It’s something that we’d like to do on a permanent basis.
That’s all I really had. I have had the opportunity to interact with some of the staff working on this. I learned a lot and I thank the Minister for that opportunity. I can’t claim that I still understand it all because the land issue is so complex, but I appreciate learning about it and the efforts being taken to get that resolved. Just a comment.
Thank you. Next on the list is Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have a couple of questions here. I noted when we discussed the business plan in the fall that there was a deletion of the funding that was intended for housing for staff. I understand that it’s been moved to another department. I wonder if I can get confirmation of that. Does Housing have any idea of what this other department is going to do with that funding?
Minister of Housing.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This particular figure is not with another department. It was one-time funding for the Housing Corporation. It’s still in our department. We are working with communities, some of the development corporations and that, and I think we had that discussion during the briefing. The money was a one-time figure and it’s declining now and not part of this budget.
Thanks to the Minister for that. I guess it begs the question, what activities are ongoing to create housing for staff in small communities?
I was rushing there. Just a second here. We have had very good uptake from a lot of the communities, the development corporations, the community corporations, the folks out in the community that there was an incentive for them to provide housing for staff. I do have some figures and information that I would be more than willing to share with the Member.
We’ve got presently 16 signed agreements. We have 16 signed agreements. We still have some communities that we’re working with. Some are in progress while some are just putting some plans together. We’ve held the money because they’ve asked us to hold the money as they would like to come up with a plan. But we do have 16 signed agreements and I think this is one that the communities are buying into because they would be able to provide the housing for staff and then they would see the revenue from it.
Thanks to the Minister for that. That’s really encouraging. That’s an area that requires some activity and it’s great to see that the communities are taking an interest and are taking over the responsibility for that kind of housing. My concern is what there is going to be ongoing. If this is going to be one-time funding and there’s no funding in this next 2010-2011 budget for housing for staff, how does the Minister expect that this initiative will be kept alive and that we will be able to involve other communities beyond the 16 that are currently involved?
The 16 that I referred to are 16 signed agreements that we have in place right now. There are still a few more that are working on finalizing their plans and then we’ll sign an agreement with them and that will be part of that $1.5 million. This is the program that requires continued funding. We would have to add that into our budget for the coming year or make monies available, because there does seem to be a great interest in this particular initiative. I can commit to the Member that if the interest is out there and the communities are still involved, we’re always willing to do what we can to be able to fund it, so it is on an ongoing basis.
So to put words in the Minister’s mouth, there is going to be money available if people need it. I’m just kidding.
The other question I had related to arrears and debts and mortgage collections by housing authorities, we discussed this, as well, at business plan time. We were advised that things were improving at that point. The corporation is giving a certain amount of leeway to the local housing organizations and letting them collect as much as possible and then things get turned over to the corporation to kind of go a little further. I’m just wondering if I can get an update from the Minister on how things are going in terms of debt collection and mortgage collection and arrears and so on.
The Member raises a good point. It’s always beneficial if we discuss the arrears and get the message out there, that there are a lot of people that have been coming to the LHOs and making arrangements to start working on their arrears. In most cases with the LHOs it could be as low... I mean, anything that they can pay a month is usually welcome. We’ve seen cases where folks have started a repayment plan, they’ve honoured their commitment, they still are in some arrears but because they’ve honoured their commitment, they’ve been put back on the waiting list and a few of them have actually got back into public housing and are some of our best tenants now. I think there’s been great improvement here in our arrears and people willing to make the commitment to start paying it off. It’s still a challenge, obviously, but I think more and more we’re seeing out there that folks are serious about trying to write off their arrears, because they realize that it does prevent them in some cases from accessing some programs or getting back into public housing. I think they’ve come to realize that this is a commitment that they need to make. It has improved and we’re looking forward again to the coming year where we can see more of an improvement in the collection of arrears, rental arrears.
Mortgage arrears is still one we’re trying to work with the clients especially, because that is a huge concern when you’re $10 million in mortgage arrears. So we want to work with the clients. The LHOs and Housing Corporation are usually very flexible when people start wanting to make repayment plans. As long as they honour their commitment, then things will usually start falling into place for them. But there has been a great improvement and we’re looking forward to a bigger improvement in the coming year.
Just one last comment. I guess, then, that the Minister would say that this approach, this process is successful and he expects that it will be further successful in this coming year. Is that correct?
That is correct. We’re looking to make great improvement this year. As I mentioned before, we’re hiring some mortgage collection people. That should help. We’re having more and more people approaching us now to work out repayment plans and the message is getting out there that if you want to qualify for some of the programs, then it’s to your best interest to address your arrears issue and you’re usually able to qualify for some of the programs afterwards. So we are looking forward to a big improvement in the coming year and when the Housing Corporation is before this committee again next year I’m hoping that we have some real good solid numbers to report.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Next on my list I have Mr. Yakeleya.
Tell him ‘yes’ would have done it.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The land requirements. Some of the issues that we have with land requirements in some of our communities and because it’s quite complex and sometimes we don’t get the houses we want built for that year because of the issue with the municipal or, as in our case, with the Sahtu municipal lands there are certain agreements that need to be put in place before the Housing Corporation puts houses in the communities. Sometimes when these agreements don’t come in time because of the schedule, sometimes we’re told that if you don’t get your land, it’s too bad, you can’t have a house in your community, and it goes to another community or doesn’t happen.
I want to ask the Minister about the type of work that’s been done with his corporation on the land acquisition issues in the communities, working closely with the Minister of MACA on how that issue is being handled in that we want houses built in our communities. However, we’re not going to give land away for free to the Housing Corporation or anything like that. We’ve got to come to some kind of agreement to see where those houses can be built in our community. People don’t want to give land away for free, but they also recognize the need to have houses in our communities. It’s a double-edged sword. Is that something this Minister is aware of in the Sahtu region for getting houses?
I hear one of the complaints is that with Housing sometimes they don’t have the land so they can’t build houses in the communities. It doesn’t go too well with our leaders in the community. I want to ask the Minister on that.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. McLeod.
Yes, I’ll have a discussion with the MACA Minister. It is an area we’ve seen a great improvement and I was responding to Mr. Bromley before when I mentioned that there were some issues worked out between his communities and the Housing Corporation to making land available. We were having good discussions with one of the Member’s communities where they’re thinking about making land available. As I said before, putting houses on the ground is something that we do. Land tenure is something we continue to work on. Communities are starting to realize now that it is to their benefit to have land available. We’re not unreasonable. We don’t expect anything for free. Housing never gets anything for free, but we’re willing to work with the communities and try to identify lands so that if they’re allocated houses, there will be no saying that we don’t have the land, we can’t build the house. We never want to get into that situation. So it’s beneficial to both parties to make sure the land is available and we’re making good progress in our dealings with some of the communities that have band lands and other lands of those type.
Mr. Chair, could I then dare say that if these issues are not resolved in terms of the land tenure issues for housing that’s allocated for a community and they’re still working on a land issue here, that this community, any communities, you know, would they lose their unit? Would it go to another community outside the region, within the region because the units are there? I think sometimes that’s under the impression of the leadership, that if we don’t get this unit, and because we know the urgency and the need for housing, that would make a, what do they call it, a time compressor, compressing time to be a quick decision. Sometimes it’s not good. That’s what I want to clear up.
The other one is that there are long outstanding issues with the community in terms of when the community is just coming to a settlement, and this goes back to some days when they just built houses wherever they were going to build houses. They put their houses up and then later, in the ‘70s, Housing comes in and starts acquiring land and start building public housing units, and some of these verbal agreements that Housing didn’t go back to. So it’s still in some people’s memory in terms of land that Housing took. It’s not theirs but they took it. It’s just the way things were at. That’s why it’s hard for some of the old-timers to really understand what the program is like. Some of the old-timers say, well, we had our old house here and it got ripped down and they put us into a new public housing and we don’t have our land back here. So a lot of issues and that underlying stuff like this here.
Those are some of the things that are being looked at in our communities. I guess the one question I have is for the Minister in terms of units when they’re designated or allocated to a community. I have some information that some of the houses are not there because the land is unavailable and they’re still working out the agreements. So are they still scheduled for that community?
We still want to put the units in the community. Land tenure is a very important issue and we can’t, as the Member actually pointed out as he was speaking, we can’t go to what he said, the day was where Housing...and I don’t think Housing just took anything, but maybe they worked out some agreements with people staying on those particular lands and I think we’re seeing more and more of that today where maybe there was some misinformation or misinterpretation or misunderstanding, but those things can be worked out.
The land tenure is the most important part, because we need to make sure we have proper land tenure so there’s not a dispute down the road saying, you know, we didn’t make an agreement for this land. We thought we had an agreement so we put a house up, and we don’t want to get into a situation where they’re saying put it on skids and pull it away to another place. It’s in our best interest to make sure that the proper land tenure is there. It’s in the community’s best interest too. We’re starting to see a bit of an improvement in identifying lands for housing, so it’s something we’ll continue to work on. As far as saying that if land is not available you can’t put your unit there, that only makes sense because you can’t just put it up anywhere. We need to have those issues resolved, but we’ll do what we can to make sure they’re resolved before, as a last resort, maybe doing what the Member has alluded to. Thank you.
Thank you. I think the Minister and I are somewhat agreeing and on the same page in terms of the issue of land tenure and that whole accountability issue with the Housing Corporation. But we also have accountability to our own people, so I think we’re on the same page. I talk about the experience because of my own grandfather’s house and my mother that lived in the house, that Housing told her when they moved into a public housing unit and that house now that my grandfather has, there’s a public housing unit sitting on there right now. So why is that public housing on my grandfather’s lot? How did they get the house? My mom said...(inaudible)...leave it alone, don’t bother with it. It bothers my family when we drive by it every day in Tulita. That lot that was my grandfather’s lot, how did Housing get that? Because they told my mom a different story. So things like that in our communities in regard to housing. Those things are still in people’s memory with the Housing Corporation. Mr. Chair, I just want to, again, I’m still here, God willing, that this is an issue I’m still going to bring to the Housing Corporation to remind them that we know how things were done in those days. You can’t let them off that easy.
Mr. Chair, the other one is that I have some issues with the packaging of freight for housing. A lot of packaged supplies come into our communities with missing material and supplies. I have an issue here but I haven’t yet really talked to the Minister so it’s not fair to put this on him, but it’s a real issue in my region about missing supplies in packages. They put a long delay in construction of homes in our communities. I’ll leave that for another time, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. No question there. Moving on. Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, one of the areas you hear a lot of concerns about from the local contractors is that they’re building to take advantage of Housing Corporation contracts because the way that they design those contracts in which they don’t have the capacity to either bid or bond some of these contracts, especially the contracts which are basically supply, ship and erect. I think that a lot of them feel more comfortable dealing with the labour only aspect of contracts where the Housing Corporation provides the material, brings it into our communities and they construct them. That makes more economic sense and also it’s an easier fix for a lot of the smaller contractors who are just starting out and they can’t compete against the big boys. A lot of the other bigger contracts who do have a side business in regard to hardware supplies and whatnot, they have an advantage over these smaller contractors because they have the business. I think that the way these contracts are being struck, it very much undermines the capacity building of ourselves as government and what they’re trying to do to provide economic opportunities for our communities and develop that capacity in our communities so that they can stay there.
I think it’s also important that at one time you were able to go to the local housing authority and they have their housing materials warehouse and, basically, there was the ability for you to go there. Because if you don’t have a hardware store in the community you either have to go to the regional centres or, in most cases, Yellowknife or Whitehorse. I think that used to be the practice. I’m not too sure on the status of it these days in regard to individuals who may have a furnace problem, in regard to requiring a part that may be at the local housing authority and because it’s an emergency, it’s the middle of winter, you want to be able to get the problem solved as soon as you can. It is an emergency, but if the Housing Corporation can assist by having the part on hand, in the local warehouse for the housing authority, that they’re able to solve the problem and then the person pays back or replaces that item in regard to some sort of a billing process.
I’d just like to know on those two matters exactly where is the government on those two issues and what are we doing to ensure procurement for communities.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, a couple years ago we had an issue where we were looking for material supply, and it was a tender that was for the whole Northwest Territories. So we had some concerns from some of the district providers, so that was changed and they broke it out into districts so the districts would be able to provide quotes on it.
The supply, ship and erect, it is a concern to some of the smaller operators. The ones I know have the capacity to deal with it, but there are some that are just comfortable doing the labour part of it only because they don’t want to have the responsibility of ordering the material and having the material brought in, because that is a lengthy process and it’s quite long.
We don’t have an issue or a problem in breaking it down to labour only, if it is the wish of the Member and it makes good sense, especially if it is a lot of the smaller communities where they are able to do the labour. It is not really a big issue. We are more than willing to look at that and see if we can do that.
The Member’s second point about the LHOs helping people in the community that have furnace issues, I worked as maintenance supervisor in Aklavik for so many years. I must have cost the Housing Corporation an awful lot of money because -- I’m confessing now --
--Laughter
people would come and borrow things. A lot of times it was an emergency. We had maybe 25 percent of the people return the stuff, but we still had some problems. That would be a decision that would be made at the local level. They know the community. They know who will give back. I know for a fact that most LHOs will not leave people in a bind. If they need a piece if their furnace is out, if they are able to, they will go and fire up their furnace or give them the parts to fire up their furnace. That is something that the housing community does. If we have more and more people returning -- and it was a problem with contractors too. Contractors would come and borrow a bit of material here and a bit of material there, saying that they would bring it back. Some of it you got back and some of it you didn’t. It is usually up to the discretion of the LHOs, but they are pretty good at making sure that they don’t leave people in a bind and wanting to help out where they can. As a corporation, I wouldn’t want to overstep their authority and say you have to do it or you have to bill it because, if you start... Well, we’re not into the material sale business. Usually it is a trust thing. We will give you the part if you bring it back. It works in some communities and it doesn’t work in some.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to move a motion.
