Debates of February 24, 2005 (day 43)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Member makes a very good point. There are companies that can build stick-built homes in the Northwest Territories and we could have chosen that approach, but it would have been very difficult. You wouldn’t get stick-built homes for $130,000 in communities. So if it cost $300,000 to put a stick-built home in a community and you need to, on a cost-recovery basis, get the money back for these 22 homes, you would have been charging a rent…We already know $1,300 is difficult. I can’t imagine the teachers and nurses and professionals in the communities coming up with $2,000 plus for rent and that’s what would have happened, I believe, with stick-built homes. Can mobile homes be manufactured in the North in the future? I believe they can. I am hoping our government will work with anybody who is interested in looking at this business.

We do have to make sure that it’s a viable one, but we are certainly willing to consider business plans and work with anybody who has this in mind. I certainly think that would be a positive step going forward. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. Supplementary, Ms. Lee.

Supplementary To Question 480-15(3): Business Incentive Policy Application

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I must say I am very impressed with how the words roll out so well from the Minister, Mr. Speaker. I wonder if all his intentions are dreamed up and practiced in his sleep.

---Laughter

Mr. Speaker, as long as this government brings up this urgent policy at the last second and says unless we order these homes, we aren’t going to have housing for the seniors and we have to go as cheap as possible. How is that going to create an industry? Why is it okay for the Minister to provide all sorts of subsidies for all sorts of industries in the North because we want to create jobs and why would he not look at home manufacturing businesses in the North that creates jobs in the North? Has he looked at that in the last two months? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Bell.

Further Return To Question 480-15(3): Business Incentive Policy Application

Mr. Speaker, I am not quite clear. I did say we would look at proposals to construct mobile homes in the North. The debate over stick-built over mobile homes was one that was taken. The Housing Corporation looked on a cost-recovery basis of what they could do in communities. They determined that stick-built constructed homes would be in the neighbourhood of $200,000, mobile homes at $133,000. It was quite clear that if they wanted a program based on cost recovery, this was what they had determined was the best way to go. So if somebody approaches us and wants to look at construction of mobile homes and a factory due to that in one of the communities, we will certainly take a look at that. We may get back to stick built. This is a balance between creating employment and putting the most economic type of housing on the ground. That’s a policy decision to be taken, and those decisions, at this point, lie with the Housing Corporation. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a quick question for the Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation with regard to the use of trailers as opposed to stick-built units in the communities. In my community, in Deninu Kue, we have five trailers situated there at a cost of $130,000 per unit. If there was some preplanning done before this whole market initiative was rolled out last year with the ordering of 20 trailer units, I think there would have been better response from community members in both my communities if this government had invested the $650,000 and built a stick-built apartment building. We would have had a 10-unit apartment building for $650,000 that would ease up the whole market housing clog that we have in our communities. Now we are stuck with five empty trailers that nobody wants.

Shame, shame.

I think the stick-built approach would have been something better to look at in the long term and invest into with regard to this…

Do you have a question, Mr. Villeneuve?

Oh, a question…

---Laughter

There are 22 units on the books here for this year. I am just wondering if the government would consider looking at the cost of those units with regard to the cost of having a stick-built one-bedroom apartment complex in these communities as opposed to two trailers. Thank you.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. The honourable Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation, Mr. Krutko.

Return To Question 481-15(3): Alternative Housing Options

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, again, this was an initiative that was done trying to ensure that we meet the needs of our communities and looking at the long-term initiative. The first phase was to try to accommodate the professionals in communities. We heard from the DEAs and the education councils. They said there was a need for housing in those communities. By the time these units were in place in those communities, a lot of people…Right now, we have Fort Res residents approaching the Housing Corporation to purchase these units. In Fort Res, those units came in at a cost of about $190,000.

Right now, we are open to looking at buyers in those communities. We know there is a major housing crisis in Fort Resolution. In order to accommodate that, we have offered these to professionals. If they are not available, we will consider looking at other tenants.

In Fort Resolution, you have units you didn’t have on the ground a year ago. They are available, they are there for sale and we do have individuals interested in purchasing these units in Fort Resolution.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Time for oral questions has expired, but I will allow you to finish with a short supplementary question, Mr. Villeneuve.

Supplementary To Question 481-15(3): Alternative Housing Options

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don’t know if the department looks at long-term, but a 20-year life on trailers is not really looking long term as far as I am concerned with the housing initiative. When we are thinking long term, we have to look at least 50 years down the road. At a cost of $190,000 per unit, we are looking at almost $1 million spent in one community and they haven’t been utilized for a year now. The $1 million could have gotten a good size one-bedroom apartment complex, or maybe two. With the second phase of this new market housing initiative that’s going to be rolled out this next year and the new trailers and the redesign of the trailers, with the people who are now going to purchase these other units in Lutselk’e and other communities that these whole units went to, how is that going to offset the real market demand of low income families who demand market housing? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. Mr. Krutko.

Further Return To Question 481-15(3): Alternative Housing Options

Mr. Speaker, we do have programs through the Housing Corporation, such as the EDAP program or the IHP program. They are programs to assist from social housing into homeownership. What we have done is amortized this over 25 years. So by extending it by an extra five years, it brings down your mortgage costs and will make it more affordable for clients. We are working with clients in communities to ensure that they make that transition. I think because of lifting the moratorium, we are working with clients in all the different communities and counselling them to see if they are interested in getting into these programs. So we are working with existing programs and we have programs in place to assist people getting into homeownership. We want to get people in social housing who are paying high rents to get them into homeownership and this is one of the ways we can do that.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Short supplementary, Mr. Villeneuve.

Supplementary To Question 481-15(3): Alternative Housing Options

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess with reference to some of these programs that are going to help these people get into homeownership, with reference to some of the programs the Housing Corporation used to run, the HAP program, from the feedback I have been getting from Housing is that that was a very successful program, but that was sunsetted a few years back. The good part of that program is people were able to at least assist in building their own houses. Sweat equity was a big consideration in that program. I think a lot of people took a lot of pride in participating in constructing their own house. What consideration would the Minister give to developing a program that is similar to some of these older programs that were quite successful? It seems that this government always sunsets programs that are successful and I just don’t think that’s good governance. I hope people’s feedback, with these good programs, are taken seriously. Would the Minister consider a program of similar nature for housing clients?

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. Mr. Krutko.

Further Return To Question 481-15(3): Alternative Housing Options

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We do have such a program, but people aren’t really made aware of it. We do have a log housing initiative that is in place. Individuals who want to go out who want to harvest their own logs, peel their logs and bring them back into town, can have them ready on the site. There is a program to assist those people by way of getting a package from the corporation for the electrical and materials to finish off the unit. Because of the log housing initiative that has happened such as HAP, we ran into problems. The new initiative is based on single, one-storey units. Sweat equity is the whole idea of this program. It’s a log housing initiative where the client goes out, cuts the logs, brings his logs into town, peels them and has them on the site. Then they will be assisted through this program. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

WHEREAS the governments of Canada, the Northwest Territories, the Yukon and Nunavut jointly released the document "Nation Building: Framework for a Northern Strategy," on December 14, 2004;

AND WHEREAS all four governments have agreed to use this document as a basis for further consultation with all northerners leading up to the finalization of a Northern Strategy;

AND WHEREAS all four governments have committed to involving aboriginal governments and organizations in the consultation process;

AND WHEREAS the Government of the Northwest Territories will be consulting with the Northwest Territories aboriginal governments and organizations on this matter at the second Circle of Northern Leaders meeting scheduled for April 2005 in Inuvik;

AND WHEREAS it is crucial that the Government of the Northwest Territories obtain the input of all Members of the Legislative Assembly as part of the overall consultation process;

NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the honourable Member for Inuvik Boot Lake, that Tabled Document 108-15(3), Nation Building: Framework for a Northern Strategy, be moved into Committee of the Whole for discussion.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. The motion is on the floor. To the motion.

Question.

Question is being called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

WHEREAS the 15th Legislative Assembly vision statement sets a goal of adequate, affordable and accessible housing;

AND WHEREAS current policies on housing programs for seniors and disabled persons are uncoordinated and there is a clear need to improve the level of services so that individuals are able to live independently and with dignity;

AND WHEREAS there is significant housing infrastructure that is underused because it was built without ensuring it met client or community needs;

AND WHEREAS the $33.2 million annual contribution for public housing from the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation will be reduced over the next 34 years and will sunset completely by the year 2038;

AND WHEREAS nearly one year has passed since the Premier advised this House on March 29, 2004, that the government had initiated steps toward development of a comprehensive, coordinated, interdepartmental strategy for addressing homelessness in the Northwest Territories;

NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the honourable Member for Nahendeh, that the government develop a coordinated housing program for those in need, including an assisted living program for seniors and disabled persons, which allows individuals who wish to stay in their home community or region to do so wherever possible;

AND FURTHER that the government continue to pursue initiatives with national aboriginal organizations, the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation to secure additional funding to address aboriginal housing needs;

AND FURTHERMORE that the government ensure there is community support and a client base for infrastructure before making capital investments;

AND FURTHERMORE that the government bring to this House by October 2005 a detailed plan including fiscal forecasts and timelines on how to replace the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation funding which is due to be reduced over the next 34 years and sunsets completely by the year 2038;

AND FURTHERMORE that the government accelerate development of a comprehensive strategy on homelessness.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. The motion is on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. Braden.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The development of the Assembly’s position on housing is one that is very high up on the radar screen, very close to all of our constituents, no matter what riding we are from. We are addressing these needs, Mr. Speaker, through our voices here in the Assembly, through our research, through our participation in forums, in housing seminars, in meetings and workshops with our constituents and with the non-government organizations, Mr. Speaker, which are so incredibly valuable to the delivery of housing programs for those in need, for the homeless, for the disadvantaged. Mr. Speaker, there are aspects of this that really must be recognized. It is something we have to remind ourselves of.

Sixty percent of the entire budget of this government -- that is about $600 million -- is delivered through non-governmental organizations and boards and authorities. Now when we are looking at something as all-encompassing as housing in our society, this is something that touches on many different organizations. It is through the dedication and commitment and passion of those volunteer-lead organizations like the YWCA, the Salvation Army here in Yellowknife and housing authorities, that we’re taking our queues and getting our signals and bringing the attention, bringing the focus, bringing the momentum and the urgency, Mr. Speaker, for the needs that are outlined in this motion. In fact, when we were drafting this, we went from single line furthermores and therefores, Mr. Speaker, to almost two pages, trying to decide how we are going to help keep this message at the top of the radar screen. How are we going to get it through, how are we going to do something that is going to get action and results? We honed this down, Mr. Speaker, to five different areas that we feel are at the very top of the radar screen, and this is what our motion addresses. So to the motion, Mr. Speaker, a coordinated housing program for seniors and disabled persons.

I have attended a number of different workshops and forums in the five years that I’ve been an MLA, Mr. Speaker. I’ve seen that we are, as a relatively young jurisdiction, developing our social safety net. We’re not doing too bad a job in terms of the policy side. We’re listening. We are growing and maturing as a government, in realizing and doing what we can to deliver these kinds of services. But we do have a long way to go in terms of coordinating and really delivering, in as many communities as possible, what the disabled and senior people really have come to so rightfully deserve in other parts of Canada. We’re getting there, but we cannot stop at the basis of a piece of paper and policy.

Mr. Speaker, our motion also calls on the government to pursue initiatives with aboriginal organizations, DIAND, and CMHC, to secure additional funding to address aboriginal housing needs. This is where during question period I spoke to the potential of a very powerful partner to be brought into this. This is the weight and strength financially and, of course, to the communities, to the people of the aboriginal development corporations and First Nations. I think there is a natural fit here if we, as a government, can think outside that box and look for really innovative ways to involve other people in arriving at these solutions.

Mr. Speaker, we also heard considerable traffic about the need for government to make sure that when we’re going to make an investment or a move into a community, that we do so with the basis of some research and knowledge and confidence about what is going on in a particular community. The market housing initiative, whatever you want to call it, is a prime example of that. In fact, it’s almost a contradiction in terms that we’re trying to introduce in non-market communities or those that don’t have a viable private sector market of their own, we’re trying to inject or impose the idea that there can be conventional market housing. If this was possible, Mr. Speaker, doesn’t it make sense that there would already be something there? Why are we trying to jam something into a community that is contrived or artificial or really has no basis of success or sustainability from that community’s point of view?

The Minister has made a very strong point and, in fact, it was at least in part at the urging of Members on this side of the House that we wanted to have housing solutions delivered to those small communities so they could stand at least that much more of an opportunity, more of a chance to keep their essential workers, their health workers, their teachers, the social service workers, so that at least we wouldn’t have the excuse or reason or cause of poor or inadequate housing as the reason these communities can’t keep these people. We continue to endorse it, we need to have that. The way our government is delivering that service has certainly brought this into question and that was the reason, Mr. Speaker, for that particular part of this motion.

I have focused on the need for what I think is an extremely serious long-term problem for this government, and that would be the loss over the next 30 or so years. It might seem like a long time, but it has happened to us every year. We’re losing, bit by bit, tens of millions of dollars that the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation was injecting into the Northwest Territories. The opportunities that we have to replace that with our own devices, I would say we’re kidding ourselves, Mr. Speaker, if we think we can do this from our own resources and with the conventional ways of thinking that we have always brought to bear on this. We’ve got to get going on this one. It will become a much more serious issue not only on our revenue side, but on our expenditures side. Certainly, Mr. Speaker, from the point of view of the health and wellbeing and the wellness of our communities and families, we have to attack this.

Homelessness is another one of those situations, Mr. Speaker, when good times, boom times come, there are inevitably people who are forced out of that stream of wealth and prosperity and really fall into the cracks. It’s been something that really hasn’t been that much of an issue. It really is not that large and has not been a chronic situation, I think, until in very recent years. Mr. Speaker, especially in our larger communities now where the wealth and the attraction is coming, we’re finding that those people, the truly homeless, are becoming much more evident on our streets and businesses, in back alleys and homes. Here in Yellowknife one signal of this is the amount of crime, Mr. Speaker, that is happening in our businesses and in our suburbs. This is at least one sign that homelessness really is here. It is here to stay and we have to do things to deal with it.

Mr. Speaker, those are my general comments in support of this motion. We covered here how many different departments? We covered the Housing Corporation, of course; we covered Finance; I suppose we could also say that somewhere in here was the Minister responsible for homelessness. But I would conclude, Mr. Speaker, by saying that each and every one of our Ministers and the Premier within our portfolios has got a very direct and a very large mandate and responsibility for the state of housing and homes in the Northwest Territories. None of our departments and none of our Ministers can dodge this one and I hope that we can engage them all in this very critical government-wide, territory-wide, society-wide issue. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Braden. To the motion. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I, too, rise in support of this motion and just wanted to point out that a lot of the issues that I face as an MLA, about 80 percent of it is housing. I travel to the communities and that’s one of the first things that people point out to me, is that we have to keep addressing our needs. So that’s what I’ve been trying to do. I’ve been urging, I’ve been working with the Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation to try to find solutions in the Nahendeh.

In my Member’s statement today I spoke about single housing. That’s one of the biggest needs that’s coming up right now. We don’t specifically speak to it in the motion, Mr. Speaker, but that’s one of the growing needs that’s happening already.

But in terms of the motion; yes, the people do want social housing. I don’t know how or when or why our government is moving away from social housing, Mr. Speaker. In fact, I don’t know when they’re changing the mandate or who gave them the authority to change their mandate. I think we give them the mandate and I think the people give the government a mandate. People still want social housing. In terms of that, once again I’d like to urge government to take the cotton balls out of their ears and say hey, we want social housing. Let’s move in that direction again.

There are people out there who want to build houses, they need some help, they want assistance in building their houses. They don’t want people to do it for them. But we don’t have a program for that anymore. It used to be called the HAP program, and people were proud to be building their own homes. But we’re not allowing that to happen anymore, Mr. Speaker. They think it should, and I think it should, and I believe our government should make it happen that way.

As well, in terms of disabled housing, there’s a little bit of mixture because it is part of Health and Social Services' responsibility to help the disabled modify their houses, as well as the Housing Corporation does have a bit of a program. So there has to be better coordination and efforts in making our houses more disabled friendly.

But to confuse the people out there by sending them from one department to another department, just doesn’t work. It just frustrates people, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to see a more coordinated effort or perhaps another transfer of responsibilities and say, okay, one guy will handle this segment.

Just with that, Mr. Speaker, I think that we have a whole new pot of money set aside in the federal government that was announced yesterday. It’s still not clear, but I think that our Minister should go to Ottawa and not come back until he has answers for us.

---Laughter

---Applause

I think the Minister should go to Ottawa and not come back until he’s got us positive answers to social housing.

---Laughter

---Applause

With that, Mr. Speaker, I once again speak in favour of this motion. It’s, indeed, my way of getting the government to listen to us to bring housing more in the forefront to this Assembly and the NWT as a whole. Mahsi cho.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. To the motion.

Question.

Question has been called. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I won’t be long; however, I have to stress I was very pleased, at the very end of question period, with Mr. Krutko’s willingness to work toward developing possible policies. His willingness is much appreciated on this side of the House, at least from my perspective.

Mr. Speaker, I spoke very clearly about the concerns we have in parts of my riding, and I’m sure they apply to many other ridings, that our seniors are really struggling to live in an environment that shows them dignity. We have people in our communities who have disabilities, who have trouble simply reaching their cabinets. They can’t get into their showers. There are an endless amount of problems, Mr. Speaker. I have to reaffirm that this policy speaks clearly to some of the needs I’ve brought up.

I’m really pleased, quite honestly, that we’re having a housing Minister listening to some of the needs in our disabled community. It’s nice to see a couple of Ministers are out there who are listening, and I hope the other Ministers who are not listening will take note. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. To the motion.

Question.

Question has been called. To the motion. The honourable Member for Range Lake, Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you, colleagues, for giving me the opportunity to speak. I’d like to rise and speak in favour of the motion. Mr. Speaker, I think there is a lot in this motion and it reflects the frustration on the part of the Members in terms of the government’s inability to meet the needs of housing in the North. It also speaks to the desire on the part of the Members to improve the situation as much as we can.

Mr. Speaker, I think there is a need to review the mandate and the work of the Housing Corporation in light of the fact that there are so many needs there and that we didn’t see in the federal budget any additional funding to meet these needs. I know there are lots of programs in the Housing Corporation that meet the needs here and there in patchwork, but I think it is time for us to review this comprehensively and really have a discussion about where we are going from here.

Mr. Speaker, in this year’s budget, there is about $35 million allocated for the Housing Corporation, and surely it is incumbent on us to do a better job with that money to make sure we create more housing for the people. We cannot continue to have the corporation introduce a policy like the market housing initiative. That was really poorly thought out, I must tell you, Mr. Speaker. I think even the officials and the Minister, in their private moments, would admit that the rollout of that was not as good as it could have been. It’s hard to believe that I’m standing here exactly a year after all the debate we had in the House last year, and that there has been no work done to really change and answer to so many questions that were asked about why we are waiving the BIP, why we are ordering mobile homes instead of doing more long-term thinking and see how we can really provide housing in communities. There is no real long-term view given to how we support and cooperate with the northern manufacturing industry.

Mr. Speaker, regardless of what the Ministers are saying, I can tell you there are businesses in Yellowknife and in Hay River, and I’m sure in Inuvik, there are lots of businesses in the North that would be interested in working with the government and becoming a partner in using what little dollars we have to build housing that meets the needs of northerners, that meets the needs of northern climates, that meets the needs of income situations in our communities. There could be partnerships with the band corporations. There are all sorts of creative ways in which the government should be looking at it, and this government had promised to look at that last year.

The previous Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation, the Honourable Michael McLeod, put it in writing that they would look at things differently and that they would not be coming here and asking us for a rush job because they had to meet the barge and whatever external circumstances that they couldn’t control. A year later we’re operating under exactly the same conditions and I’m just really tired of us sitting here, standing here, being asked to do the same dumb thing over and over again, Mr. Speaker. Sorry; less than intelligent things. Sorry; my apologies for that bad word.

Mr. Speaker, I’ve already made a lengthy, heated statement about what I think of the market housing initiative as one of the policies that did not work out so well in terms of addressing housing needs.

I am in support of the overall motion. I intend to pursue these issues that I have brought up further for the remainder of the Assembly during this session, because I believe these are really crucial issues that we need to discuss. If the federal government is not doing anything about our housing, it is incumbent on us to do what we can and do a lot more to address our housing needs. Coming up with willy-nilly, temporary, poorly-thought-out policies like the market housing initiative without doing all the homework is not the way to do that. Mr. Speaker, I will be voting in favour of this motion. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. To the motion.

Question.

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

---Applause

Okay, I call Committee of the Whole to order. We have a number of items on our agenda today. When we left off yesterday we were on the Department of Education, Culture and Employment general comments. What is the wish of the committee today? Mr. Menicoche.

Thank you, Madam Chair. The committee wishes to consider Bill 19, Appropriation Act, 2005-2006, with Education, Culture and Employment. Thank you.