Debates of February 6, 2006 (day 23)

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Next I have Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So to go back to some of the questions that I asked previously, I asked the Minister specifically what they’re doing for the people who are hard to house. My question was if not social housing and if not the support of someone or an agency such as the NWT Housing Corporation, then who would be possibly taking these tenants on as clients? The Minister mentioned that they fund NGOs, and I’d like to ask the Minister are the NGOs that they fund -- and I assume he means related to housing and hard to house folks -- are any of them located outside of Yellowknife? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Krutko.

Yes, I believe we fund Turning Point out of Inuvik. I’m not too sure of anywhere else, but maybe the Minister of Health can help me out here, who is the Minister responsible for homelessness. We do, I believe, approve some $450,000 to go to NGOs for the homeless. If the Minister of Health would like to elaborate on the homelessness funding.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, there is money that’s been put aside for this winter as we continue to work on a longer-term homelessness strategy or strategy for the homeless. There’s some money that’s been identified for Yellowknife and Inuvik and some in Hay River. As well, there’s a fund of $150,000, I believe, that’s been set aside for small communities to use on a case-by-case basis should there be circumstances that arise as there has been over the last number of months. It allows us to, on a short-term emergency basis, deal with those individuals that are called absolutely homeless, meaning they have no warm place to stay. In the longer term, we’re looking at the issue of relative homelessness, but that’s what Minister Krutko is engaged in in the longer term on the issue of relative homelessness. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Now I’m confused. Whose money is it? Is it the Health and Social Services’ budget for this short-term and long-term relative homelessness, or is this money for the Housing Corporation? How much does the Housing Corporation put into hard to house, and I’ve got to tell you hard to house is not a short-term problem. Hard to house are people who have issues with their lifestyle perhaps, some have problems with mental illness, some have cognitive impairments, adults with FAS. Hard to house is not a short-term problem in the Northwest Territories, let me assure you. Who is the $450,000 from, Housing or Health? Thank you, Mr Chairman.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Minister.

The Minister of Health can take the question.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Minister Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the issue that the Member raises is a very good one; well, it’s not a good one, but it’s a very difficult, complex issue. What we have had working together is the social envelope Ministers, which are Housing; Education, Culture and Employment; Health and Social Services; Justice; and Municipal and Community Affairs. We’ve put in a supplementary appropriation for this winter to deal with the issue of those folks over the course of the winter that have no place to stay periodically. I recognize that the hard to house is an ongoing problem and it is with us and it is going to continue to be with us. The concern about the funding for this winter was to make sure that we had the capacity to deal with those circumstances so that no one would freeze to death because they didn’t have a warm place to stay over the winter. In the longer term, we’re looking at expanded facilities. There’s a homeless coalition in Yellowknife; Inuvik is working on some plans up there with their facility and the relative homelessness, which are those people that are inadequately housed within the longer-term mandate of the Housing Corporation. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We also support the Salvation Army by way of a rent supp, and also we do fund the Yellowknife Women’s Centre and also homeless for basically transitional housing that is in Yellowknife. So we do fund different non-profit organizations, especially here in Yellowknife. So we do fund those organizations.

Thank you, Minister Krutko. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you. I’m still confused. Who funds those organizations; Health and Social Services or the NWT Housing Corporation? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Clarification, Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, we fund them through an interest-free loan on their mortgage. So part of their mortgage payments we deduct a certain portion. So we support them by way of funding them money towards their mortgage.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Going to my next point that I raised in my previous set, and that was emergency housing realities in view of six-month waiting periods. Now I think a lot of these obstacles I referred to earlier boil down to something, which it’s hard to integrate into government policies, and that’s common sense and some discretionary latitude for LHOs to use their own discretion to assess what is an emergency, what is a real need, what is something that needs to be responded to in terms of a housing need. It doesn’t matter whether you’re talking about people who are hard to house, or people who need emergency housing or people who, you know, it’s just not a perfect science. There’s unusual circumstances surrounding this from time to time. There’s things going on in people’s lives, there’s family break-ups, people try things, they may even move south, they want to come back, things don’t work out. Sometimes there needs to be some discretionary latitude and that’s why LHOs have boards and that’s why there are community representation on it so they can make those kinds of decisions. The Minister had mentioned before, Mr. Chairman, that they do hold houses for students, so if somebody doesn’t want to go away and upgrade their education and wants to come back to the community, but doesn’t want to go to the bottom of a waiting list again for housing, they hold it for students. Are there any other circumstances under which people could be away and get back into public housing without having to go on a six-month residency-type waiting list? Thank you.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, under special circumstances, especially for medical reasons, we will hold the person’s unit. If they have to go down south for treatment or whatnot, we will maintain those units. Again, the problem that we’re having, especially with the LHOs, is we just don’t have capacity for the number of people that are on our waiting lists. Roughly right now we have some 410 people on a waiting list to get into social housing. So because of the capacity issue, we’re not able to accommodate, but the LHOs do make the decisions in regards to working with the clients and in most cases try to work with them by way of trying to sit them down and work out a payment plan if they have arrears, or try to make them aware that they do have to work off some of those arrears where they will hire them either locally or whatnot or give them a paint brush and say here, work so many hours so that you’re able to work off your arrears. I think there’s ways that they’ve tried to work with their clients, but again, because the biggest challenge we have is just the number of people that are on waiting lists, that’s why we have such a shortage of not only houses, but also people that do get evicted or basically try to get back into the system, realize that you’re at the bottom of the list and that there’s other people ahead of you that are trying to get back into the system. So that’s the biggest challenge we are facing right now, is because of the number of people that are on waiting lists and also to try to find ways of working with the clients to work off their arrears and try to make them aware that they do have responsibilities to work with them to work out those arrangements. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mrs. Groenewegen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the Minister for not running the clock out because I know he’d be very capable of doing that if he wanted to. Mr. Chairman, one other question, it has to do with the rent scale and it has to do with seniors. I mean, I am very supportive of seniors; they’ve worked hard, they’ve contributed to our communities, I do believe they deserve a break. However, when we talk about housing in the context of a crisis in the Northwest Territories, I want to know what’s happening with the housing rent scale for seniors. Right now, as the system stands, and I do not begrudge any senior taking advantage of this program, as a matter of fact, I’m almost 50 and in 10 years I’m going to be 60 and if the government still has this program out there where anybody, regardless of income or means or pension or anything else, can get free housing with the NWT, I’m sure you’re going to see…Baby boomers are coming up, you’re going to see a lot of uptake. As a matter of fact, we do see it happening now and, like I said, these 12 seniors’ duplexes that have just come up in Hay River are very nice little two-bedroom duplexes, but you have to understand there is no means test applied. So in fact, anybody 60 years or older can apply to live in there and if they’re accepted, they get it. Now I just don’t know how we reconcile that kind of support with what we keep calling the overcrowding and the severe shortage of housing. I don’t know how we reconcile that kind of investment in seniors’ units that we give for free regardless. It doesn’t matter if you sold your house to move in there; it doesn’t matter if you’ve got a government pension; it just doesn’t matter. You are in for free housing. Now, like I said, the people who are taking it up I absolutely understand why they’re doing it. I mean, it would be seriously tempting for anybody who could get a deal like that to take it. It’s not their fault. The government is offering it; they’re just stepping into that opportunity. But how do we rationalize that with our other demands on housing? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the Member is quite right. The seniors’ subsidy for housing is almost $670,000 and I think that now has been devolved to the Department of Education through the social funding transfer in which we will now look at all social funds in one area and at that time, they will have to look at exactly the cost of these programs. Again, under the existing program they will have to go to the Department of Education, Culture and Employment for the subsidy, which presently we provide by way of the cost to us is $370,000. So those dollars will be coming out of the $30 million that will be transferred to Education, which will now be assessed through the Department of Education, Culture and Employment. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. I’ve got Ms. Lee next. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just a couple more questions on the Novel project. Industry contribution, once again then, could I just ask the Minister if there is any money, any amount budgeted for $297 million that would come from the ATCO in any way, because I thought for some reason that they were going to make some kind of contribution? Will they make any contribution in-kind, for example? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, there will be no industry contributions. It will come out of the sale of the units. The number we’re working from is $230 million.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, as much as I appreciate the information that was given to me through the answers to my written questions, when you read it closely it's quite surprising how little detail there is still for a project this big. I mean, we’re talking about a $297 million project that is supposed to provide over 1,400 homes and it’s a project where the Minister is stating that CMHC and Housing Canada is supposed to give $119 million and the GNWT is supposed to give $116 million. We’re talking really, really, really big money and I am surprised with the answers that the Minister gives about the fact that because this project is not going to happen until 2011, that comprehensive implementation plan and planning will take place and we have enough time to do that. I have to tell you that I do not agree with that. I cannot believe that the Minister was able to get a positive response and I don’t know what that means because we don’t have anything in writing. I cannot believe that he could get that with such little information. I would think that if a private business wanted to do a $300 million project and they’re asking the government to put in $120 million, you would think that you would need more information on the ground.

Mr. Chairman, one of the questions I asked was because the Minister stated in this House that he projected to put in 100 units a year because he thought that is how long it would take for the communities to develop the lots that are needed to put these units on. Simple math is 100 units a year, 1400 units, that would take 14 years. What would you do with these things while they are waiting around to be placed somewhere? The answer I got from the Minister is they have looked at it and now they have estimated that they could deliver 460 to 470 units per year. It just came out just like that. So I would like to give the Minister an opportunity to explain. What makes him think he could deliver 460 to 470 units per year? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, we have had quite a few people looking at this. This is not only coming from us. We have people at CMHC, the federal agency that looks at housing in Canada. We have had people from ATCO, ATCO Frontec, and also we have been working with communities to see exactly what lands are going to be available after the pipeline project is over. I believe that the Member is correct; this ain’t going to happen until 2011. We can’t make a commitment here on something that is going to happen possibly in the 17th Legislative Assembly. Because of that, the federal government can’t make a similar commitment at this time because it is future expenditures that will have to be made. So all we are doing, Mr. Chairman, is trying to find a price that we feel comfortable with, along with CMHC, so we feel we can deliver it under future program dollars once those dollars have been identified. So at this time, it’s not for me to say that we can make that commitment, because realistically we can’t.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am quoting from his answers to me on Return to Written Question 19-15(4). In the last question it says here that we…I am reading here because he did not answer my question. “We estimate that Novel home delivery and conversions will begin in 2011 and be completed by 2014.” So now we are looking at a three-year turnaround. It also states that, “We estimate delivering 460 to 470 per year.” This is an entirely new figure. Prior to this, we had been talking about the Housing Corporation possibly delivering 100 units per year and I think everyone -- and I am asking a pretty valid question here -- understands the complexities involved in finding lots. It’s not just about sending the workers out there and bulldozing down some flat lands so that trailers can go on it. Novel home, I am not supposed to call it a trailer.

There are lots of discussions from government to government to government and the relationships that have to happen. We also know about the recent example of the market housing initiative where the Housing Corporation has had difficulties delivering 24 units. If the Minister is indicating that he has had CMHC people look at it and community people look at it, can we look at it? What information does he have that gives him the confidence and the evidence to state that he can deliver 460 to 470 units per year, rather than 100 units per year? I want to give him the benefit of the doubt that his department had the information when he answered this question. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I have offered to the Member to travel to Calgary to see this for herself. The offer is out there. It still stands. If she wants to take it, it’s there. The Member also has to realize that by 2011, the project will be completed. So you will have a lot of businesses that will be looking for additional work once the pipeline project has been concluded. Logistically, that’s why we are going into communities to identify with the communities what lands have to be developed and also where they want these Novel houses put. Also, we have to deal with MACA; we have to deal with the Power Corporation; we have to deal a lot with agencies within this government to deal with such a huge project that’s going to have implications throughout the whole Northwest Territories. I, for one, feel that once we get to that point and are able to do the total assessment between now and then and identify where those units will be put, how soon we can have those lands developed and how soon we can get that infrastructure in place, at that point we can see the timelines we are talking about. Under the existing scenario we put forward, we believe that we can deliver, based on the location of where these units are in the Inuvik region, the Sahtu region and the Nahendeh region, the distance between where they are going and the communities they are going into, that will be the logistical issue we have to work out. Because of the scenarios that we have thrown around the table, we figure that’s doable with regards to the 400 units in the time frame the Member mentioned.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. For the record, I did get an invitation to see the Novel project in Calgary and I don’t believe I need to see the site to make these arguments and ask for information. I do believe this project has to stand on its own. I would also extend an invitation to the Minister to come and visit my riding where I am sure there are at least 1,400 mobile homes already. My question is not, and has never been, about mobile homes. It’s not a question about whether ATCO units are suitable. I am sure they are very beautiful and adequate. I don’t have a problem with that. I want the Minister to be able to provide evidence that makes this project stand on its own and that the government is not being used as a lobbyist for a private industry, which I don’t believe is the right way to do these things. Mr. Chairman, he has not answered questions about what makes him think he can provide 460 to 470 units per year. He said I should go down and look at it, but I think the lots are located not in Calgary but in all our communities. All the questions that I asked about what the training opportunities are, what the business involvement opportunity for NWT businesses are, the Minister answers over and over again that those details are going to come later, prior to 2011. I don’t understand how he can be lobbying for this project without that information. I would like to know when will the Minister provide that information, and would he commit to this House that he will not be signing anything on the dotted line until he presents the total package to Members of this House that he’s going to commit for $297 million for the next 20 years at least? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Minister.

I would just like to clarify the Member’s numbers. There is no $290 million. We are talking about $90 million from the Government of the Northwest Territories, $90 million from the federal government and being able to sell out a portion of those units to generate $230 million. I don’t know where the $290 million number comes from that the Member is throwing around. Again, it will have to be worked out by way of planning and good planning in order for us to be able to deliver this. The cost to the Government of the Northwest Territories is $90 million, which will be matched by the federal government. We will not take these units on until after the project has been completed. At that point, we will then take ownership of those units once we have negotiated a price that we feel that we want to be able to afford. The issue that has to be realized here is the question of affordability. For us and CMHC, we are able to deliver houses to people at a low cost which is affordable and also that we are able to have people move into these homes who can’t afford to pay the mortgage. The way it sits now, no one can afford a $300,000 modular home that is being sold in the Northwest Territories, but they can afford a $100,000 home which will be sold out of this proposal, so economically viable to the individuals who are going to move in there. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. I have Mr. McLeod next. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Like my colleagues, I have concerns with Novel, too. I think it’s a good concept, but I think the Housing Corporation should have been working with ITI and MACA trying to come up with a good plan and Housing can look after the technical part of it. However, my questions are with regard to the Supported Lease Program. I notice there is 112 units in the Minister’s opening statement towards the Supported Lease Program. I would like the Minister to explain what the program is and which group of clients it’s aimed at. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the whole idea of the Supported Lease Program is to get individuals who have been social clients for a number of years and get people into owning their first home. Through the Supported Lease Program, they lease the unit for two years and pay the costs we would have had to pay, the operational costs, and also ensuring that they are able to maintain the unit over two years. Once we’ve gone through that two-year period, we sit down with the client and work with them to go to the bank and get a mortgage through EDAP, so that we are able to get individuals into homeownership and allow them an opportunity to own a home and what responsibilities you have as a homeowner.

So the idea of the Supported Lease Program is to get people into homeownership by way of a lease arrangement and work with them to do the transition from being a lessee to being a homeowner. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Of the $32 million the Minister mentioned in his opening statement, I would like to know how much of that is going towards the 112 units. I am getting the feeling that this is starting to sound like another subsidy program. It almost appears to me like a second tier public housing type deal. I want to know from the Minister how this is affecting, or if this is affecting, the other programs that the Housing Corporation runs. I am sure they had a program called the Independent Housing Program, which was almost along the same lines. It just seems like they are duplicating and creating a second tier of social housing. What is going to happen to these clients after the two years if they have proven that they can’t look after the units? Do you bring another one in there for another two years? If they can’t maintain the unit, will they bring another one in there for another two years? All we are doing is just subsidizing again every couple of years, just like public housing does now. There were a few questions in there and I would appreciate a response from the Minister. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the idea of the program is to get people into actually paying the operational costs of those units, so they will be responsible for paying the power costs, the utility costs, and ensure they realize there is a cost associated with homeownership. That is the portion they will have to be paying for two years. Once they have gone through that process for the two years, at that point if they want to buy the unit outright, they will continue to pay the utility costs and then become homeowners. The problem we are having with the transition from moving people from social housing to access housing -- and I know the Member touched on it -- we are sort of setting these people up in social housing. We pay the monthly rent, but you don’t really understand what the cost to operate that unit is until you move into your home. A year later, you find out you just weren’t ready for the costs to operate a home. I think through the idea of a Supported Lease Program, we are hoping to be able to deliver that. We also realize that this will be an application-based program to find the clients we feel will meet that criteria and are ready to move into these programs.