Debates of June 6, 2006 (day 6)

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Supplementary, Mr. Villeneuve.

Supplementary To Question 67-15(5): Public Service Performance Review

Mr. Speaker, affirmative action, employment equity, it’s all the same to me, but in the Human Resources Services Agreement that was drafted up in 2004 there’s continuous improvement where review teams will be established on a regular basis with the goal of reviewing the service performance and identifying opportunities for process and improvement, and the membership on the review teams will be fluid to reflect the issues of current interest or concerns, Mr. Speaker. I think that’s one of the most important aspects of this whole human resource amalgamation, is to make sure that, you know, we’re spending a lot of money on this amalgamation, you know. I want to ensure that it’s actually improving things in the government workforce and in the NWT economy as a whole. You know, if we’re spending $1 million on the review of the amalgamation, I want to see these review teams put in place, and is the Minister going to ensure the northern residents that, yes, we do have review teams that are looking at their human resource amalgamation and employment equity or affirmative action policies to ensure that there is some reviews done on an annual basis? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 67-15(5): Public Service Performance Review

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we are tracking the work that has been done as a result of the amalgamation and, as well, looking at further process that we operate under and are working to improve them. That’s one of the reasons why we have the contract with the Hackett Group, is to further look at our processes and how we’ve aligned ourselves, how we’re using our computer environment to ensure we’re being most efficient in what we do, and there are changes coming about. I will be tabling information on the work around the human resources in this House later in the session. Thank you.

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

Supplementary To Question 67-15(5): Public Service Performance Review

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You know, $450,000 for the review is pretty expensive. That’s a lot of public money. I just want to ask the Minister, the membership on these review teams, are they going to be independent members that ensure that there’s some objectivity and non-biasness, or are they just going to consist of FMBS employees and department employees of FMBS, because if they do, then what’s the use of even having these review teams in place, Mr. Speaker? Is the Minister going to create an independent arm's length body to do the reviews for the government? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 67-15(5): Public Service Performance Review

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I’ll have to get information on the actual makeup of how we’re going to form these review committees. Initially, my understanding is that we’re going to look at doing it from within our own forces. If we have to hire outside help to help us in that review, we will do so, much as we’ve done to date, but I will get further information on that piece. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final, short supplementary, Mr. Villeneuve.

Supplementary To Question 67-15(5): Public Service Performance Review

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess I’m sure a lot of the other Members here would agree, I couldn’t stress the importance more of having an independent, objective review committee in place to do this whole human resource amalgamation review, to do a review of the Employment Equity Program, to do a review of the Affirmative Action Program. I think that would be something that this government has got to prioritize and ensure northerners that the review committee is going to be at arm's length from this government to ensure there is objectivity, and I don’t think northerners are going to accept anything of the lesser. Can the Minister commit to that? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Villeneuve. Mr. Roland.

Further Return To Question 67-15(5): Public Service Performance Review

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, at this time I will not commit to looking at an independent review process. We’ve got a lot of work to do within the amalgamation to complete it before we can do a final review. But at stages, as we are in this case with the Hackett Group, looking at the processes we have, the operating environment and seeing where we need to improve on that, and once we have that established would look at the next phase of how we go about this. But as I said, throughout the amalgamation process and the work we’re achieving, I would be happy to continue to inform Members of how that work is progressing. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for the Minister of Housing Corporation. It’s in regards to the number of questions that I have been raising about Novel housing. Mr. Speaker, I know that the questions and the statements I’m making on this issue are working to improve this project if anything, and anything I can do to improve this project, if this is going to happen, I’d be prepared to take full credit when this is done. So I’m going to continue to ask these questions also, because I’m motivated by lots of calls and e-mails I’m receiving from communities who are concerned about this project as well.

Mr. Speaker, the last time we spoke on last Friday, when the Minister was answering questions on this, he suggested that this project will give him and the government a 40 percent advantage. But the problem with this math is, Mr. Speaker, that the Minister refuses to compare this Novel housing project in a equal footing. He has to start comparing apples to apples, not apples with oranges. So the only reasonable comparison to make is a comparison between new mobile homes with Novel housing, which is used, converted and almost new product. So where is the advantage? How could he come up with 40 percent, because that’s a comparison with the new stick-built housing? So where do you start making comparison in a fair way? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Return To Question 68-15(5): Comparative Analysis Of The Novel Housing Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, if we are able to put someone into a homeownership package for $130,000 and someone is buying a home here in Yellowknife for $330,000, I think that alone should tell the people then what they’re paying here in Yellowknife. Thank you.

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

Supplementary To Question 68-15(5): Comparative Analysis Of The Novel Housing Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would certainly expect that when he has created an ADM position -- and I know he’s got people working a lot on this project -- then I would expect better comparison and better analysis and better numbers than going by anecdotal evidence. Mr. Speaker, what evidence, what has he done to compare the advantage and I want to be shown the advantage? I’m prepared to support this as long as there’s an advantage that he says there is. So I would like to know is he prepared. When would he do a comparison between this Novel housing with what’s in the market in a comparable way with another manufacturing home setting? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Krutko.

Further Return To Question 68-15(5): Comparative Analysis Of The Novel Housing Project

Mr. Speaker, I’ve gone to committee time and time again, which the Member is a chair of, which basically made presentations which show them the difference between what it costed for stick built, which is roughly about $195 a square foot compared to about $100 a square foot for Novel, which is 1,400 square foot home in regards to what it’s costing with stick built. We’ve given that presentation to committee and basically have updated committee every time there’s been a change, basically new information being provided. Mr. Speaker, at the end of the day this is a project that’s moving forward with the endorsement of CMHC, which is a federal agency for housing in Canada, and also FMBS is basically the responsibility for financial accounting of this government who, again, are proceeding on the basis that the information that we provide to committee is as up to date and as current as possible. So if the Member is missing something, I think that at the end of the day, this project, we will continue on on the basis of negotiating the best deal that we can and also knowing at the end of the day there is a project for this to happen. Without a pipeline, without federal dollars and also with our assurance that this is not economically viable, it will not proceed. Thank you.

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

Supplementary To Question 68-15(5): Comparative Analysis Of The Novel Housing Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to thank the Minister for that non-answer and if he wishes, I’d be happy to make all the information that we’re getting, we have been getting in the committee for public consumption, because, as far as I’m concerned, there’s nothing in there that is anything other than a big song and dance on behalf of the project. The Housing Corporation is so enamoured with this project they are failing to do the due diligence on a project as big as $200 million.

Hear! Hear!

It’s scandalous for any government to go with a project that big and not do any analysis. So I ask the Minister again, why would he not do an independent analysis, hire somebody and do a real comparison? Because if he wants help, I can tell you, Mr. Speaker, that the best number he has shown us in committee is that Novel housing will cost about $117 per square foot and I think he owes it to the people of the Territories and the potential owners of these homes that he asked industry what could they come up with, something close to that number with mobile homes. I’m not talking stick built, we’re not talking stick built anymore and I accept that, but for new and things that don’t need to be converted and transported and all that, why would he not ask industry how better they can do?

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Krutko.

Further Return To Question 68-15(5): Comparative Analysis Of The Novel Housing Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the thing I am afraid of is unless we find a new mechanism to deliver housing in the Northwest Territories over the next 10 years, we will always have a housing crisis that basically people in our communities will be crying for more housing. I think it’s responsible for ourselves as government to ensure that we are finding new ways and new arrangements of putting houses on the ground in the future and this is one of them. I think that CMHC and ourselves as a Government of the Northwest Territories are looking at alternatives. This is not unique only to the Northwest Territories. There’s groups in northern Quebec, Manitoba, aboriginal communities are looking at this initiative to improve housing in aboriginal communities. So, Mr. Speaker, if that’s not good enough for the Member, I don’t know what will be good enough for that Member.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Your final supplementary, Ms. Lee.

Supplementary To Question 68-15(5): Comparative Analysis Of The Novel Housing Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The things that I’m afraid of is that we’re the guinea pig in the front line of this massive project that would only, as far as I could see it, benefit the company. They’re doing a fine job, but the Minister has other obligations and that I don’t want to see $200 million desperately needed housing money going down the drain because this Minister and this government refuses to do the necessary due diligence. So I’d like to ask the Minister, Mr. Speaker, and I’d like to know if he’s so confident about this project and if he’s so committed to the needs of people who need social housing, why would he not get somebody to look at this project and see how they compare to other comparable products?

Thank you for your question, Ms. Lee. Mr. Krutko.

Further Return To Question 68-15(5): Comparative Analysis Of The Novel Housing Project

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we are basically working to ensure that we are putting housing on the ground with the dollars we can afford. I think the Member is basically not really revealing the facts. We are not paying any company $200 million. The $200 million investment that the federal government and ourselves is going to make is get these units after the pipeline is concluded, move them into the communities where there’s a cost associated with that, have the individual communities do the conversion and the dollars will remain in the Northwest Territories for those communities and our northern economy; $150 million will be there. We’re not buying these off of any company. We’re basically negotiating with the pipeline company to ensure us that we have access to these units once the pipeline is concluded at no cost. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions today are for the Honourable Charles Dent, Minister of Education, and it’s to do with the student financial assistance. I’d like to ask the Minister how the department comes up with the figures for student financial assistance, because a student that’s going to school in Montreal or Toronto, Edmonton, would get the same amount as a student going to school in Yellowknife or Inuvik. So I’d like to ask him how they come up with the figures and are these reviewed every year? Thank you.

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

Return To Question 69-15(5): Student Financial Assistance Amounts

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The amounts are looked at on a regular basis. It’s not a formal review every year. There hasn’t been a formal review of the amounts since I think the year 2000 when we had a commission that did a study and made some recommendations that the government-of-the-day acted on. This year, for instance, we will be increasing the amount of support for tuition; we’ll be increasing the amount of support for books. So it is an area of support that the department looks to whenever we can make the argument successfully for new funds that we add to the program. The cost of going to school in a high cost centre like Toronto is probably even higher than it is in Inuvik, believe it or not, and the Member is right, though, that we have not reflected the cost of living throughout the various areas that a student might be attending school. It is the same amount all across Canada. Thank you.

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

Supplementary To Question 69-15(5): Student Financial Assistance Amounts

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I’ll thank the Minister for that response. He mentioned a full-blown review hadn’t been done since 2000. Would the Minister commit to doing a review and finding out how much it’s costing nowadays? Like, the tuition and that, the government does a good job, as far as I’m concerned, in helping with the tuition and the books and everything. My question is regarding the allowance that these students get. So would the Minister commit to doing another review of the assistance plan? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 69-15(5): Student Financial Assistance Amounts

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’m not prepared to commit to a full-blown committee to go out and conduct hearings to hear what people think we should be doing with student financial assistance. I’d rather put the money into the program if we could afford that kind of thing. What I will commit to is the Member has raised a good point and that is that we should make sure we are encouraging people to attend our northern college. We have a real investment in the northern campuses and we need to make sure that we are supporting people to go there. I have already directed the department that over the course of the next year, that we take a look at whether or not it wouldn’t make sense to ensure that the levels of support do, in fact, encourage northerners to attend the northern college where we offer the programs. Thank you.

Thank you. Supplementary, Mr. McLeod.

Supplementary To Question 69-15(5): Student Financial Assistance Amounts

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the intent of the program, from my understanding, was to help with a lot of single students going to school. The Minister was up in Inuvik with us attending the convocation of Aurora College. I think he noticed that there was a lot of graduates there who were raising families. Is the size of families and the extra support they have to pay factored into the figures the department comes up with? That’s why I say we need to have another review. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 69-15(5): Student Financial Assistance Amounts

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, on the needs assessed loans, the answer is yes. On the regular grants, no, the size of the family isn’t always factored in. Again, the Member has raised a good point and it is an area that I have also suggested that we need to take a look at ensuring, particularly for northern students, that we are encouraging those students to attend the college. I think we do need to recognize the higher cost for single parents. I have already asked that we take a look at doing that. I don’t think we need a full-blown commission to do it. I think we have enough expertise within the department and within our colleagues at the college to help us understand that needs to happen, and that’s the direction that I have provided. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in my last round of oral questions, I heard the Minister of ECE reference that there was some old federal commitments for cash for childcare. I am wondering if the Minister could elaborate on that and let me know exactly how much cash we are talking about here. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Minister of Education, Culture and Employment, Mr. Dent.

Return To Question 70-15(5): Funding Support For Day Care

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The amount of money we are proposing to include in the supplementary appropriation is based on the contribution we got from the federal government last year and that is some $940,000. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Dent. Supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Supplementary To Question 70-15(5): Funding Support For Day Care

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like the Minister to provide a breakdown of how that $940,000 is going to be spent on childcare initiatives. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Mr. Dent.

Further Return To Question 70-15(5): Funding Support For Day Care

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The department is proposing that we put $200,000 of that money into the Language Nest Program. That program was started as a three-year pilot project and when we brought it forward three years ago, we proposed that the funding would decrease over time because we believed that the operators would find economies of scale and there wouldn’t need to be as much training each year and the cost would go down. As it’s turned out, almost all of the operators are using the funding to pay salaries. So the reduction, which is about $200,000 this year, is something that would impact on the delivery of the program. So we are proposing for this year to put $200,000 of that money into the program to bring it up to its former level.

We are proposing that there be a $500,000 program of grants to existing operators to help them with minor capital, whether that’s safety improvements or for toys or other needs for the programs to help them improve the program delivery. We are going to take $240,000 and use that for training for operators of licensed day care operations. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.