Mr. Chairman, that is an ongoing issue that we wrestle with. How do we keep the politics out of trying to deliver the units, the houses and the programs that are required in communities? We haven’t looked at trying to make it more arm’s length. I think that’s going to be very difficult at this point. But we have looked at trying to find solutions where our constituents are not running on a daily basis to the MLAs, so we are introducing more training and to our staff and in the communities. We are offering more communication so the people know what the programs are, know where the deadlines are going to be and what to expect. We are also introducing an appeals mechanism so that people that feel they were hard done by through an application or a program that they didn’t qualify for or for some reason whether they felt that somebody sat on the board and didn’t like them or was related to them, we could have an arm’s-length setup. Those things we are coming forward with this coming year.
As to having the Housing Corporation completely independent, I don’t know how that would work right now. I don’t have an answer for that because there are politicians from all walks of life that contact our offices for exemptions to programs for special recognition. I think it would be very difficult. Until we can find avenues where people are satisfied that they are being heard and have an independent system or analysis of their complaints, we are going to struggle with this issue.
I just wanted to put that out there. I don’t know if it would be a better way, but there has to be some way or avenue that the Housing Corporation could go down that would allow it to collect more in terms of arrears.
Another thing, too, while I have the floor and I won’t take the full 10 minutes, but the social housing in ECE is still an issue. I just got another phone call today from someone who is in big arrears to Housing or through ECE now. The issue is with ECE. It was never an issue before. The issue, as I see it, is through ECE. Regular Members have asked time and time again, revisit that decision. There are 14 positions that the government...It was the last government that hired the 14 positions at ECE to deliver the social housing. However, it seems to me, and other Members up and down this aisle will tell you, it’s just not working. We need to revisit that decision and the sooner, the better. Government’s looking for suggestions and this is a suggestion that I’ll throw out there. It’s one that used to work in the past. Now we’re spending one and a half million dollars more on something that is not working. We haven’t seen the evidence from ECE that would justify what they’re doing and how they’re doing it. There are problems out there. I think, just a suggestion, but we’ve got to, you know, if we want to save one and a half million dollars...I mean, nobody wants to...I’m not sure what would happen with the 14 employees that we’ve hired over there at ECE but something has to be done there because of all the decisions that have been made here, that one made by the last government was a decision that ranks right up there with one of the worst ones I’ve seen. We have an opportunity to correct it. This government has an opportunity to correct it.
I can’t speak for all the other Regular Members, but we’ve moved motions. I don’t know what else we have to do to tell the government that housing was doing it, they were doing a good job at it and they should be allowed to continue. Take it away from ECE. Obviously, they’re having some trouble and some difficulty in doing it. Thank you.
I believe it’s been three years now that this initiative to blend all the subsidy programs under one roof took place. We did hear the Members raise the issue. We have heard the concerns. We had recently met with ECE and we are working towards putting together an analysis or a review of how well it’s working. ECE has provided me with some information that I had not seen before, so I’m reviewing that and we will be getting together to decide how we will do a review. We are anticipating it would be an independent body that we would hire to do an analysis of it . Right now, that’s where we’re at.
We still have a little bit of work to do between the two departments, the Housing Corporation and the department, but we anticipate we will have that process in place this year fairly quick.
I know the Housing Corporation is under the purview of the EDI committee and ECE is under the Social Programs committee, but to my recollection the work, the review that was supposed to be done that the Minister is talking about, between both departments, we were supposed to get that work I think it was back in February. A year ago. We still haven’t got it, which would suggest to me that there are some problems there. I don’t know why we haven’t got it yet. I’m not on the Social Programs committee so maybe the Social Programs committee members that are here would know if that information has come forward.
The committee meetings that I have attended, I haven’t seen that review. Like I said, it’s a year later. I hope the work’s getting done, just like the next guy, but we have to get something on the table so that the government and the Regular Members can make a decision on what to do with it. If the problem still exists, we really have to take a look at it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, it’s the first time that I’m committing to do a review. I’ve been here seven months and I was not aware that there were other commitments made. I know ECE did some work that was worked on also by the Housing Corporation, but I don’t believe it’s the same review that the Member is talking about. It was on this process but more how to tweak the system that’s in place to make it more effective. What we’re talking about is doing a complete analysis along the same lines that the Member is referring to. We’d be glad to share this information with the committee. I’m not sure where the other information went. I think it went to Social Programs.
I just got a note from one of the Social Programs committee members and they’ve got a written update from ECE suggesting there are still some problems there. I know the two reviews are different.
I just wanted to say -- and I promised I wouldn’t use my 10 minutes but I’m coming close -- but the fact remains, I just want to give the Minister and the Housing Corporation some kudos. There’s been a lot of good work done in the time I’ve been here, in the Housing Corporation. I think the management has done a good job to turn things around. We are, I believe, headed in the right direction when it comes to housing. There are some hiccups, yes, and there are some things we need to take a look at like the Social Housing Policy, but overall, Mr. Chairman, I’m quite satisfied with the management at the Housing Corporation and the Minister’s performance in that portfolio. Thank you.
I appreciate the Member’s remarks.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Next on my list is Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is something I was going to ask later on but I can’t really find a better place. I suppose this might be on the debt repayment; that might be the spot to do it. As we all know, we are dealing with a declining fund from CMHC. I’m wondering if the Housing Corporation has developed a strategy on how they’re going to address the issue of the loss of O and M dollars as the loan gets paid off. Are you going to reduce the amount of public housing? Are you going to take money from capital and put it into O and M or ask this Assembly for more money to continue to administer 2,200 to 2,400 houses? Just curious if there’s thought of a strategy, if there is a strategy or what’s going to happen with the fact that the money is declining. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Minister McLeod.
Mr. Chair, the Member raises a very good issue. It’s a real issue that we need to face right now. Our strategy has been to try to convince the federal government that they need to change their position. We’re working at the FPT table. We’ve joined forces with other jurisdictions and we’re hoping that we’re going to be successful on that front. Mr. Chairman, the reality is if we’re not successful, we’re really going to have to rethink how we do business in the social housing area. Will we be able to convert capital? I’m not sure that’s the solution. Raising rents? We are already hearing the rents are too high. The other option is, of course, to reduce our public housing stock. It’s a really tough situation that we’re in and we’re hoping that we’re going to make a convincing argument to the federal government that will allow us to continue on with social housing.
For the record, I feel the best strategy is to fix the public housing units and give them away in non-market communities and sell them in market communities, by the way. I think that is a good thing. But the best solution, of course, is to get the federal government to remain in the process of continuing to fund social housing. Just a comment. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the Member’s opinion. My personal opinion is create a better economy where we wouldn’t need as much social housing. Create a lot of jobs. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. We’re on page 5-53, debt repayment, which is an information item, operations expenditure summary. Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I know that this is probably more of an FMB question but I’m just curious from the Housing point of view, from the Housing Minister. The debt in the department of Housing is carried on the territorial overall debt, or debt wall. I’m just wondering what work, if any work, is done from the Housing Corporation point of view to see if that debt will come off our debt wall as reportable debt that the territorial government carries. As I understand it, it’s money that’s being funded directly from Canada to pay for that. To me, it’s an in and out and I’ve often wondered why we have to carry it on our debt wall. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister McLeod.
Mr. Chairman, I think as this is my second go-round as Housing Corporation Minister and I have raised it every year with the finance people of our government. The response is that we are legally obligated to recognize it in our books as a debt and we don’t have a lot of room to change that.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Has the Finance Minister changed since that original question came forward and how much work has been done from a legal/accounting perspective to see if that is actually accurate? Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I am not sure how many Finance Ministers were asked the same question, and it has been reviewed very recently and the response has not changed.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Specific to debt repayment of course, what is the actual outstanding debt that Canada is picking up for us in total? As I understand it, I think it is in the range of $80 million dollars, but I will let the Minister say it for the record, the actual debt amount. I see what we are doing as a repayment this year, but that money is funded through Canada. So if the Minister could put it on the record, I would appreciate it. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Mr. Anderson.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The total debt that we have on the books of the corporation is about $66 million. The portion that is fully funded by the federal government is about $45 million. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Anderson. Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the detail. Has the department ever sought a secondary accounting position to find out if we should be carrying that liability directly on our books? Because it is being paid separately by another agency, such as the federal government. I mean, it would seem obvious to me that we shouldn’t have to wear that liability if it is being fully funded. It was created by someone else and it is being paid off by someone else. It just seems odd that, with all due respect, our Housing Minister is just taking what our Finance Minister is saying is the truth and that is how we are proceeding. No one is sort of looking at it from a different perspective, because I don’t believe that it is appropriate that it is carried on our debt in this manner. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister McLeod.
Yes, Mr. Chairman, that has been looked at in various manners including with the Auditor General, so we totally agree that the finance recommendation is correct.
My apologies to belabour the point. What was the position that the Auditor General had, and did they have correspondence to that effect and, if so, would the Minister be able to forward on a copy of that on to my office? Thank you.
Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would have to see what kind of documents we have. The Auditor General audits our books and they feel that this is proper. The federal government will cover about $45 million. We have the rest on our books, about $23 million, and we can go back and see what kind of documents we have that would shed some light onto the question that the Member was raising.
Thank you. Would the Minister be willing to forward something on that he is able to dig up, to my office, because I have heard from accountants in the community that they are not quite sure that this is a debt that we should be shouldering, considering it is a liability we are carrying on behalf of someone else and they are also paying. I would kind of like to take a serious look at it and to get some information to compare to some information I have been told. Thank you.
Yes, Mr. Chairman, we will do a little bit of digging and find out what we have in terms of documents that could shed some light on the questions that the Member is raising. Mr. Chairman, once again, it should be clear that we only carry the balance of what the federal government is paying and what we are paying, so there is $23 million that goes against the debt wall and the rest is covered by the feds.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. We are on page 5-53, information item, debt repayment, operations expenditure summary. Agreed?
Agreed.
Moving on to page 5-55. Noting the clock, committee members, I will now rise and report progress.
Could I have a report of the Committee of the Whole, please, Mr. Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, your committee has been considering Committee Report 3-16(3), Standing Committee on Rules and Procedures Report on the Use of Laptop Computers and BlackBerry Devices in the Legislative Assembly, and Tabled Document 11-16(3), Northwest Territories Main Estimates 2009 and 2010. I would like to report progress, with three motions being adopted and that Committee Report 3-16(3) is concluded. Mr. Speaker, I move that the report of Committee of the Whole be concurred with.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. Motion is on the floor. Do we have a seconder? Honourable Member from Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
---Carried
Item 23, third reading of bills. The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek unanimous consent to return to item 20.
Thank you, committee. I would like to call Committee of the Whole back to order, and as the first order of business, let’s take a break for dinner.
---SHORT RECESS
I would like to call Committee of the Whole back to order. We are considering Tabled Document 7-16(3), Committee Report 2-16(3), Tabled Document 11-16(3), Bills 1, 3, 4, 5 and 7. What is the wish of committee? Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I would like to continue with NWT Housing Corporation as well as the Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. Does committee agree that we continue with Tabled Document 11-16(3) with the Housing Corp?
Agreed.
We left off on page 5-55, information item, programs and district operations, operations expenditure summary.
Agreed.
Agreed. Moving along to page 5-56, also an information item, programs and district operations, grants and contributions.
Agreed.
Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just to confirm, are we still page 5-54?
