WHEREAS nearly 5,000 children across the Northwest Territories arrive at school without having had a healthy breakfast;
AND WHEREAS school breakfast programs have increased attendance at many NWT schools;
AND WHEREAS it is well documented that hungry children struggle to succeed in school;
AND WHEREAS children who are fed at school also benefit from feeling welcomed and loved;
AND WHEREAS healthy eating and basic nutrition should be learned by our children, starting at a young age, first by example and augmented later by study;
AND WHEREAS in 2010-2011, the Department of Education, Culture and Employment allocated $400,000 for a breakfast and lunch program in NWT schools and contracted Food First Foundation to deliver it;
AND WHEREAS this nutrition program has been cut for the 2011-2012 fiscal year, without any formal evaluation of its effectiveness;
AND WHEREAS many educators, parents and especially children support the program, making such statements as, “it has made such a tremendous difference in our school,” and “I cannot think of another single initiative that gives so much for so little” and, “I like to eat breakfast;”
NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the honourable Member for Nunakput, that this Legislative Assembly strongly recommends that the Minister of Education, Culture and Employment reinstate the sunsetting funding for healthy eating and nutrition programs.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. To the motion. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this motion goes to the most basic of our Territory’s needs, that of supporting our people, and it goes to the heart of the philosophy that this government espouses.
According to our strategic planning document from October of 2007, we aim for healthy, educated people. We will accomplish that, we said in October 2007, by a focus on prevention by promoting healthy choices and lifestyles and the role of personal and family responsibility. A focus on prevention, like teaching kids what healthy foods are so they eat the right things and grow and develop as they should, like making sure they get to and stay in school so they learn well and easily. Promoting healthy choices and lifestyles, like teaching kids what unhealthy foods are so they choose the right foods to eat. Knowing which foods are good and which are not is important and kids must be taught the difference.
The other day I mentioned comments from NWT schools about the Healthy Food for Learning Program, Mr. Speaker. There are six pages of responses to one simple question: Can you share any specific success stories about the program? Thirty of our 49 schools sent in a response to that question. I’d say that’s an excellent indication that the program is a success. Twenty-three schools mentioned improved attendance as a result of the Healthy Foods for Learning Program. Academic achievement was mentioned 21 times as a measure of success. Eleven schools indicated that 50 percent or more of their student population comes to school hungry each morning. These are staggering statistics, Mr. Speaker, especially the last one.
Children don’t learn well, if at all, when they are hungry. They’re inattentive, not alert and are often disruptive, affecting the learning of others as well as themselves. Healthy, educated people, Mr. Speaker. The Healthy Foods for Learning Program goes a long way towards creating both healthy children and educated children. Witness a comment from one school which said this of a student: She has discovered that being in school and not missing instruction leads to school being easier. That’s what we want, Mr. Speaker, kids at school so they can learn. They sure don’t learn when they’re not in the classroom.
Both improved attendance and academic achievement are stated goals of the Aboriginal Student Achievement Initiative, a major focus of the Education, Culture and Employment department at the moment. How then can this department eliminate funding for a program that will achieve the successes desired by the Aboriginal Student Achievement Initiative? That initiative wants better attendance. Well, this program achieves that. That initiative wants academic achievement. Well, this program achieves that too.
What evaluation of the Healthy Foods for Learning Program was done prior to the decision to scrap it? It can’t have been too comprehensive. My information shows that at least 30 of 49 schools think that the program is a success. I can only attribute the elimination of this funding to a lack of foresight and big picture vision.
This Assembly has just approved a budget which includes $1.8 million for the Aboriginal Student Achievement Initiative, an increase of $500,000 from the current year budget, and much of that increase is going to staffing. In light of the success of the Healthy Foods for Learning Program, I have to say that the money would be better spent on the foods program.
We have to stop working top down, Mr. Speaker. We have to remember the basics. Educating our kids is paramount, and if the foods program helps us to get them to the school, then we should ensure that the program continues. Eliminating the funding for a successful, much needed foods program will not achieve healthy, educated people. Reduced funding will not contribute to the promotion of healthy choices and lifestyles. Another quote from a 42-year veteran of parenting and foster parenting about the needs for foods programs: I cannot think of another single initiative that gives so much for so little.
The answer to the question of whether or not to reinstate the funding for the Healthy Foods for Learning Program in the 2011-12 budget is a no brainer, Mr. Speaker. Considering the negative impacts on our children and for our Territory in the long run if we don’t reinstate the funding, the answer can only be yes. I believe in the saying where there’s a will, there’s a way, and it remains to be seen if there is a will on the part of this government to find a way to continue the funding for the Healthy Foods for Learning Program. Children are our most precious resource. They are our future. Are they not worth the money? Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. To the motion. The honourable Member for Nunakput, Mr. Jacobson.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You have heard me speak many times about the price of food in our communities. The high price of food is one reason for kids sometimes going hungry in the morning. Families don’t always have the money to buy the food. I am sad to say this happens in our Territory, Mr. Speaker. Hungry children are hard-pressed to do well in school while their minds are on their stomachs. It is hard enough to deliver a good education to our children as it is without distracting them with hunger. Educators and parents say feeding students who show up for school hungry is a big help. It may even help attendance, which is another big problem. But in my community of Tuk, Mr. Speaker, this last week, there were 108 kids with perfect attendance for the last month.
---Applause
Educators and parents say feeding helps and yet the Department of Education cut the nutrition program for the year ahead without even proper evaluation of the program. Mr. Speaker, most likely saving the $400,000 the government spent on this program will end up costing much more in some other area. More importantly, this undermines the success of our children, Mr. Speaker.
The program was in the community, for example, for years. We haven’t been able to eat our traditional foods as much as we want. There is caribou and that and dry meat, as the Education Minister just said. It is hard. This program that was cut helped teach the children about healthy eating. That is important, especially in small communities with traditional diets that are changing.
Mr. Speaker, the school’s nutrition programs really helped. A little food shows our students that they are important. It shows that happiness and success is important too. It is very simple for the Education Minister to restore this funding for these programs. He should do it. It is not a lot of money if we spread the cost to 33 communities, but this does make a big difference to our children. I thank the Members for supporting this motion and helping get the message across loud and clear to the Minister of Education. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Jacobson. To the motion. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The key window of opportunity to feed the bodies and minds of our children and to support their brain development and their learning is their early years. The parents have a responsibility to feed their children properly, but as I have outlined in the House earlier and in my statements, they are not always able to meet that responsibility and there are many reasons for that. Do we want to let the children suffer the lifelong consequences of insufficient nutrition during their critical years, Mr. Speaker? Unfortunately, our lack of government action in response to repeated calls here in the House and our decisions on where to put money speaks louder than words.
Mr. Speaker, Breakfast for Learning notes that they were only able to respond to 38 percent of the requests for food from schools in the Northwest Territories over the past year. This is during the time that this government was putting in a one-time $400,000 in school food programs. That also is a statistic that speaks louder than words.
Mr. Speaker, we have spent four years requesting action on this front. Finally, I ask to join my colleagues and I thank the movers and seconders of this motion. Let`s get it done.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. To the motion. The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Beaulieu.
Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. I have spoken in this House in the past about absenteeism and the great cost of absenteeism to the education system and the great cost of absenteeism to our society and to our government. The one thing that I have been told in Tu Nedhe is that this Food First Program is something that actually had the kids come to school. We had kids that were absent on a regular basis that were now coming to school. Another thing that the Food First Program has done is that it allowed a lot of the students to show up on time because the kids knew that there was a certain window in the morning where they could come in and have something to eat and then they were off to class. They were in class on time, Mr. Speaker.
I support this motion. I don’t think the government should cut it. It created all kinds of positive things in one of the schools in Tu Nedhe. There was heavy parental involvement. The parents would come in early, get up early with their kids, bring their kids to school, cook for the rest of the school. It was very positive for the kids to be with some of the parents and to have a good meal. It was also good for educating students. There were a lot of students that were assisting. The older students were assisting younger kids to cook. They were in the kitchen. They were learning that aspect of life, at least. It was something that was done and, also, for healthy food, the schools made sure that the breakfast was serving healthy foods. That was beneficial so that at least the kids were getting one good healthy meal per day. Most of them were getting more than that, but this was something that was guaranteed.
As Mr. Jacobson indicated, the one aspect of the small communities is the cost of living. The cost of living is high here too in Yellowknife, as it is right across the Territory. This was a little opportunity again for people to feed their children. Their children were fed in the school. It was doing what it could. Lastly, I think this is leveraging our future. If we keep kids in school by giving them one good healthy meal, it would pay dividends in the future for many years. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. To the motion. The honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, too, will be supporting the motion. I feel, for one, that this is a critical program to not only include supporting our students, but more importantly, developing our communities so we do have healthy, vibrant communities and help the most vulnerable residents in our communities, which are the young students and young children in our communities, so that they are able to grow healthy lives and be a positive role model in our communities.
Mr. Speaker, this program is more than just having a breakfast program in the school. It builds relationships between the teachers, the students, the community, where the volunteers... This program is a majority of volunteers, by way of the parents, the high school students, the teachers, get together. They volunteer to deliver this program. It is no cost to government, if anything. It shows that the communities, by working together helping each other providing these types of programs, it is a building block of how people can help people in our society who may not have the means to provide the nutritional breakfast program without it.
I think, Mr. Speaker, it is important also for the students to realize that as you grow up, part of the value of life is more than just dollars and cents. It is helping those people in our society who may not be as fortunate as other children or other people in our community to help those people who may need a handout and help to basically get them moving forward. Again, Mr. Speaker, for a $400,000 investment throughout the Northwest Territories and also realizing that we have a lot of these individuals who are on income support, who are struggling, like Mr. Jacobson says, with the high cost of living in our communities, people are just making ends meet. People cannot afford to purchase nutritional foods, regardless if it is fruit, vegetables and making sure that we are able to do that.
Mr. Speaker, I think it is important that we realize that, as a government, we have to sometimes look at simply the dollar sign but realizing the value of these programs and how it helps us to not only develop our students in our communities but develop a community as a whole to help each other to be able to promote these programs and ensure we achieve what we say we are going to achieve, have healthy vibrant communities and that includes our children. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. To the motion. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. One time in our life, I remember growing up, we used to eat at home. We used to have porridge when we were young and growing up in Tulita.
Sorry, when we were young. When I was growing up in Tulita, I remember, when I was young, I remember before we went to school Mom always got us up early and we made a fire if it was real cold in the house and heat up the little pot there and make porridge and we all would sit around and have breakfast, have porridge or have some wild meat, then we went to school. That was the lifestyle that we grew up with. Slowly on, Mr. Speaker, we started to see that the school had hot chocolate, macaroni and hardtack during lunch and I think a couple of times during the week. That was really good to have food in school, Mr. Speaker.
Little did I know, Mr. Speaker, even at that age some kids would come to school without breakfast. They had hot chocolate and macaroni, hardtack and they just really enjoyed eating that in school.
Just recently we started to witness and even hear children coming to school without breakfast in our communities. That is unheard of. You know, then I started to see where school and the community started working together to raise money working with oil companies or working on different projects that they started to get extra dollars to bring the food into the school and have a program going there. That was one of the best moves that the schools in the communities have done, bringing breakfasts into the school. A lot of kids aren’t eating breakfast anymore. That’s the way we have it now.
The government has invested $400,000 into this project. We looked at it and it’s a good project; however, we don’t have the money, so it might not be funded anymore. Take out the nutritious foods, healthy eating in the schools, you guys go fend for yourselves. You go negotiate with the oil companies if you can get a deal. You raise your own funding. Our schools are into fundraising initiatives now. Kids should get good credit for fundraising to the programs they go to.
This government here is for the people, by the people and even those little people’s health. And they’re worth it. They are worth the investment. Surely we must reconsider this and give up something or sacrifice something for the good of the little ones, for an investment. Somewhere we can take some money out and put that back into the school or help the school. Just don’t drop the ball on this like a hot potato in the communities. We can look at somewhere where we can work with them. I think that’s what this motion is saying. That’s why I strongly support it. We cannot let our people go hungry, especially the little ones. We’ve done this, Mr. Speaker. It has cost a lot in our communities and by not investing, it’s going to cost us more, I think, I’m afraid.
I think this government here has very been vocal in some of its initiatives. They’ve showed some great leadership in some of their initiatives, that they can give this type of initiative another look at and see where this motion can be supported and they can look back and say where can we find the funding. For example, do you know that we have over 180 inmates in the North Slave Centre here and every morning their meals get wheeled to them? I think they could sacrifice breakfast for these little ones here. That’s something we should look at. We’ve got to think about everything, how we can bring this money to the little ones here.
So, Mr. Speaker, I would just say this is a good motion and I’m going to be supportive 100 percent.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I just want to say I’m rising to support the motion put forward by Ms. Bisaro. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. I’ll go to the mover of the motion for closing comments, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to first of all thank the seconder of the motion, the Member for Nunakput. I’d also like to thank my colleagues for their comments. I think you can tell that this is an extremely important issue. We are very passionate about it. Regular Members have fought very hard to get this funding and this program into our budget. Last year it was intended to be a food study and we managed to get that changed to a program where we could actually use the money to go and buy food to assist the kids in our schools in the various communities.
We’ve been speaking about this issue, the need for providing funding for healthy foods, for nutrition, making healthy choices. We’ve been talking about this since we started in this Assembly, as my colleague Mr. Bromley has mentioned.
I want to mention, too, that the money that is in this current budget year has been distributed according to the contractor by need. So those communities that have higher food costs, where the food prices are far more than they are, say, in Yellowknife, those communities, those schools get more funding than schools in communities where the food prices are lower. That’s a great way to go. But we are basically saying, as my colleague to my left has said, we are leaving the schools to fend for themselves. We are leaving the schools to try to find another method to get the kids to come to school. We are leaving the schools to try to struggle again to increase academic achievement. Both of those things have been proven to be successful through this program, and I’m failing to understand that the department, without an evaluation, is going to cut this funding.
Recently we heard from the Minister of Transportation that we’ve increased the Community Access Program from $320,000 to $1 million. That’s $680,000. I support the fact that communities need some assistance in trails and boat launches and so on, but if push came to shove when you ask the parents whether they would rather have their children have a healthy breakfast or whether they want a trail to wherever, I suspect the answer would be food.
I think in this particular case I have to say that I think the government has put their priority in the wrong place. I think really if the government believes in the success of this program and it has contributed to better attendance, higher academic achievement and better learning at school, the department and the government will look at the budget, will find the money. If we take some from each department, we can do it from within. As I said, where there’s a will, there’s a way. I believe it could be done if they want to do it.
On that note, Mr. Speaker, I will ask for a recorded vote, and thanks to my colleagues.
Ms. Bisaro, Mr. Yakeleya, Mr. Krutko, Mr. Bromley, Mr. Abernethy, Mr. Menicoche, Mr. Ramsay, Mr. Beaulieu, Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Jacobson.
All those opposed to the motion, please stand. All those abstaining from the motion, please stand.
Mr. Lafferty; Ms. Lee; Mr. Miltenberger; Mr. Roland; Mr. McLeod, Deh Cho; Mr. McLeod, Inuvik Twin Lakes; Mr. McLeod, Yellowknife South.
Thank you, Madam Clerk. Results of the recorded vote: in favour of the vote, 10; opposed, none; abstaining, seven. Motion is carried.
---Carried
The honourable Member for Nunakput, Mr. Jacobson.
WHEREAS “economic rent” for public housing in small and remote communities it unaffordable for most working tenants, due to local economic conditions;
AND WHEREAS the system used to determine economic rent is not fair to smaller communities where there are fewer public housing units;
AND WHEREAS the current system of adjusting the rental rates in public housing according to the fluctuating income of tenants is unnecessarily complex for both tenants and housing administration;
AND WHEREAS arrears in public housing are a perpetual problem for tenants and the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation;
AND WHEREAS this government needs to stimulate the depressed economies of small and remote communities;
AND WHEREAS practical rental options in public housing could enable more tenants to continue working instead of turning to income support;
AND WHEREAS a maximum rent program, as an option offered to tenants receiving private income, could help reduce many of these problems, while maintaining the public housing program for those who wish to be there;
NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, that this Legislative Assembly strongly recommends that the Minister responsible for the Northwest territories Housing Corporation establish an optional maximum rent scale for public housing in communities with no real private market, with rents set as follows:
$1,200 per month for four or five-bedroom units;
$1,000 per month for three-bedroom units;
$800 per month for two-bedroom units; and
$600 per month for one-bedroom units.
Thank you, Mr. Jacobson. A motion is on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion. The honourable Member for Nunakput, Mr. Jacobson.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, colleagues. We see arrears piling up in our public housing in the small communities and across the Territory. It’s because even people who are working cannot afford the so-called economic rent that they’re being charged by the Housing Corporation. Economic rent is so high it actually encourages people to give up working and go to income support. We have to do just the opposite.
We have to encourage people to keep working. They have to see that they are getting ahead. Economies in small communities are weak, with a few jobs. Everything is expensive, especially trying to buy food for your kids, clothe them. It’s making it tough on families.
Housing arrears are leading to evictions and more eviction notices. The current system of economic rent is just not sustainable. We need an alternative.
It would be good if the alternative support local economy that would, is what its purpose was. The tenants in the public housing need affordable options.
The Maximum Rent Program addresses many problems. It helps keep the people in their homes and keep the people working. The Maximum Rent Program would also help the Housing Corporation with a simpler system and be able to do more. More people could pay their rent.
This is a two-tiered system. We’re going to keep the system that they have already. This option that I’m providing is an option for if the people want to be able to pay for the four or five-bedroom. People that have dual incomes in the small communities, they would be paying $1,200 a month instead of $3,000. It would really help the people when people are trying to get ahead and be able to buy food and clothing for their kids and seeing that they’re actually making headway instead of the government coming in and swooping 30 percent out of their cheque on their gross.
This option is one that I really encourage the government to take. I’m born and raised in the communities, like in Tuk, I’m an Inuvialuit and you never see people want to give hardship to another person. Government could do this. Government is in a position to do good right now to offer this option. It’s an option with an open-handed approach. I really encourage the Minister and his department to make this happen.
I look forward to all Members who will support my motion and I thank them for their support.
Thank you, Mr. Jacobson. To the motion. The honourable Member for Tu Nedhe, Mr. Beaulieu.
Mahsi cho, Mr. Speaker. I second the motion. I am aware that we have had passed, this would be the fourth motion of this type concerning this area. The problems are huge. It’s not equitable as it currently stands. The rents in communities where there’s few public housing, pay a lot more of their gross income if they get jobs. Right now, as it stands, this motion recommends an equalization across the board of people that go to work, go into a certain size house, they pay a certain amount across the board. It doesn’t matter if you live in a community where there are 300 public housing units or you live in a community where there are 30. When you live in a community where there are 30, under the current system the cost of administration and the cost of maintenance and everything is distributed amongst the 30 units and it’s very high. Also in most of the smaller communities the price is very high. Fuel is high, power is also costly, water and sewer is costly, because everything is on smaller scale and it’s more remote.
This kind of equalizes it. This is where we should go. This is the direction we should go. This is a win-win for the people in the communities and for the government. It keeps people at work. It has people paying something.
Right now if an individual goes to work in a small community, there is potential for them to start paying $3,000 a month. Even if you have a real good job, that’s a little more than one cheque. That’s one cheque. Because even though you can sit here and say it’s only 30 percent of their gross income, well, income tax will take 30 percent too, and then there’s the cost of working. There’s the cost of daycare, if you have to have daycare when you go to work. There’s those additional costs that the government must look at and take into consideration, not just looking focused in on the shelter cost. They have to look at all the other factors that come into play here. And the people will pay something. Like, you know, better that than sitting at home drawing income support, having the government pay them for doing nothing.
So this is an opportunity to put people back to work, especially in communities where employment is very rare. A lot of these communities we’re talking about, the reason they’re non-market communities is because there’s not much employment. It’s very difficult to buy and sell a house. That’s a non-market community because there’s no employment, there’s no income. People can’t buy your house because they don’t have the money. This kind of sets things in the right direction and I hope that the government does employ this policy change.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. To the motion. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This motion suggests yet another way to skin the cat; an alternative to dropping the affordable housing threshold from 30 percent to 25 percent of gross income as proposed in another motion passed in the House this winter. This motion again recognizes the special considerations needed for our small communities where employment rates are devastatingly low.
I would like to compliment my colleagues for this innovative idea and request that the government clearly hear that our housing policies in this area are not working. New policies such as this motion proposes are required.
Ultimately we need a solid Anti-Poverty Strategy that embeds and delivers new approaches such as this one. That actually helps people get out of poverty.
I will be supporting this motion.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. To the motion. The honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I too will be supporting the motion. I, for one, do feel that we have to fill the gap between market and non-market communities and we have to be fair to all our working residents in our communities. I think that we as government have provided housing in the past, whether we called it staff housing. We still provide housing in our communities for the nursing staff in our communities. They have a fixed rate. They know what their rent is when they go into those facilities in our communities. They know exactly how much they’re going to have to pay for that particular unit. So we already have a program running in our communities. All we’re asking is to expand the program to offer the same type of programs to the residents of the community with a set rate per unit based on the unit that’s there.
I think it’s the question of not only fairness but also of ensuring that we are as government being able to provide government programs and services and deal with the fundamental challenges we face in our communities. One of them is dealing with affordable housing and professional housing in our communities to attract those individuals to stay in our communities, provide government programs and services, and not see that as a barrier to delivering government programs and services. All I’m asking is, we already have a program similar to this in our communities with the nursing staff. We already know that they’re paying about $1,000 a month. We’re asking that you provide the same program to the other working residents in our communities.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. To the motion. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I too will be supporting the motion, but I do have more to add. It’s a very good motion. I know that the honourable Member for Nunakput wanted some options for housing but I really feel that we should also be, it should be the whole program. That’s the way we looked at it.
At one time we did have our housing program before it was converted to ECE and back again, and even further back it was listed at 75 percent of household income. It was a real break. Then the rent was at $600 a month. I don’t know, along the way somebody signed off to produce it up to 90 percent of income and then 100 percent of income and now to this date they don’t even get credit for how many children they have. It’s full economic rent. I’ve always been against that.
Other areas in Canada have special economic zones and they do have low-rental units, like $500 or $600 a month, in order to stimulate the economy and stimulate employment so that people can make a living and move into the depressed areas. I think our whole Northwest Territories should be a special economic zone and we should be taking care of the rent because that’s what governments do. When there’s a need, then the government comes to the action. It’s not about because they can pay more we make them pay more. They’re just barely getting by as it is. I had a constituent that actually told me, he said, don’t call it a low-rental unit if it’s not low rent. Just a couple of those things.
I strongly support the motion and I’m glad that it came forward. We have many motions on this side, like my colleague for Tu Nedhe said. Government’s going to have to start listening. We’re going to have to make those programs more flexible so that it fits the needs of our people.
Thank you, Mr. Menicoche. To the motion. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I support this motion. I believe that the intent and the background for this motion is very similar to something that I raised in the House last week. I was talking about transitional housing. This is talking about public housing.
---Interjection
I’m complimenting the mover and the seconder, you guys.
I think that the strategy that’s espoused here is something that the government has to take note of. We need to look at enabling our people to get out of poverty, those that are there. The only way we’re going to be able to do it is by providing them with assistance. It is obvious to Members, certainly on this side of the House, that the policies and strategies that we are currently employing are not working. We need to totally revisit where we’re at.
This motion talks about setting maximum rents in public housing. There have been other suggestions to change the maximum rent scale all over the place. There have been suggestions to assist people in transitional housing to keep them at work so that they don’t go back onto income support.
The Housing Corporation I believe is doing a review of their Shelter Policy and that’s a good thing, but Lord knows when we’re going to see the end result of that review. I certainly hope that these suggestions and previous suggestions from Members on this side of the House and motions on this side of the House are going to be considered within that review. All of them go to the basic principle of getting our people out of poverty, and that should be where the Housing Corporation should start. Provide housing that enables people as opposed to housing that disables people and I think that this motion goes a long way to doing that.
I hope that the Housing Corporation is listening. I certainly support this motion and I encourage the rest of my colleagues to do the same.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. To the motion. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to compliment the last speaker, Ms. Bisaro, because I think she said it perfectly. It enables hope and I think it certainly inspires people to do more and become more. That’s a lot of the reason why we’re here, is to help people and give them that chance. Government policy will quite often try to focus so hard on inspiring people to be more and when they do stand up on their two legs, we find these housing policies pull the ground out from underneath them rather than giving them a chance to get running and build momentum and inspire themselves again to do more and be more.
Mr. Speaker, as alluded to earlier, this is a process, this is a motion that works towards breaking the cycle of poverty, which is holding a lot of people back. For that fact, I will be supporting the motion. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The honourable Member for Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. MLA Bromley has said it well, that this is just another way to skin a cat here, so telling the Minister and the government there’s another option to look at. Mr. Speaker, I say that because in front of me here I have three motions speaking about the rental and the issue of housing in the Northwest Territories that were debated and passed in the House. There’s another motion for the Minister to look and to help our people.
Mr. Speaker, in 2006 the United Nations called the issue of housing and homelessness in Canada a national emergency. I think that’s something that we’re looking at right here in the Northwest Territories in Canada, that this government here and all governments, our responsibility lies with us. It’s estimated that four million Canadians are in need of affordable housing, Mr. Speaker, and growing.
Mr. Speaker, as I heard from my colleagues, these issues here that we deal with, especially with what Mr. Jacobson has raised, is very, very good because we want to help our young people to get into the economy when there’s work in our communities. The regions that I talk about, the economy is very short and then we have to, sort of, wait until we get an oil and gas exploration or we go trapping or, like it says, that they walk down to the income support office. People do want to make a difference in their lives. They do see the value of a house, Mr. Speaker, because you know the housing insecurity is sometimes a symptom and sometimes a cause of poverty in our communities, and that causes other issues that we have to deal with.
Mr. Speaker, I do want to say that with the housing in our communities, and this initiative is a good step to bring other issues such as evictions. Mr. Speaker, I’ve been notified that in the Sahtu there were 33 rental orders -- 16 for Tulita and 17 for Deline -- to leave the premises, leave the house. Now this is going to cause 33 other issues with families, people asked to leave the units, because as we stand right here, they cannot afford the public housing units. We have to do something different. We have to do a made-in-the-north solution to keep people in their houses.
Housing has done a lot of work not to kick out, as the Minister said. His job is not about evicting people from their units. However, the policies that we operate under now lead us to that. As much as we try to do repayments, give them a chance, we need to look at something, as Mr. Menicoche said, look at a zone where a young man who has finished high school or college can come back into one of our communities, get a job for two or three months, learn how to operate his house, and pay a certain rent and not be worried that it’s going to cost $1,800, $1,400, that he can afford it, and that he should not be penalized for working for a short period of time. Then we could look at situations like that.
I think that’s what this motion is saying. It’s about keeping people in their homes and making them feel good about them. They are dependent on us. Government has caused that dependence over the years and now we need to make sure that they can handle these units in an affordable amount. Some of them can’t even pay for their food or any other things that they want to buy for themselves and I think, again, as Mr. Bromley has said, this is just another way to skin a cat and I hope the Minister will look at this motion, as with other motions, look at how this issue here can be resolved in a manner that knows that people can live in a house and they do have a chance in life, especially in our small communities where it’s very hard to find a job let alone live there. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. I’ll go to the Minister responsible for the NWT Housing Corporation, Mr. Robert McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Members have pointed out the fact they’ve brought forward a few motions and I assure the Members that we take those motions very seriously. We are looking at the motions that they’ve brought forward and some of the recommendations we’ve made. We’ve heard a lot of comments this afternoon on trying to get people more independent and getting them out there. That’s our ultimate goal. I mean, we say the visions and goals of the 16th Legislative Assembly is to have healthy, vibrant, safe communities and have our people out there being independent. That’s one thing we try to do as the Housing Corporation. It’s hard sometimes to think that we’re going to meet those goals that we set out if we continue to find ways that we can make people be less responsible.
Having said that, Mr. Speaker, I was looking at some of the recommendations and the motions they made here. I know there are a few of them that, I think, in my conversations with some of the Members, I believe we’re addressing. We have the Shelter Policy review that’s going on right now. The rent scale review is a part of that. I had spoken to Members about the regionalized assessments, which I think some Members thought was a very good idea. We are doing work on a lot of the motions you brought forward.
I want to point out a couple of statistics, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, we have, across the Northwest Territories, approximately 2,400 public housing units. We have 21 percent of people paying zero. We have 45, almost 46 percent paying $32. So we have 67 percent paying $32 or less. Out of the 2,400 units, we have approximately 12 to 19 at any given time paying economic rent. There are very few people across the Northwest Territories who pay economic rent. But having said that, I mean, we recognize the Members’ concerns and some of the issues that they’ve brought forward, but I can assure them that the Housing Corporation has heard the other motions that you’ve brought forward. That’s one of the reasons why we’re trying to do the Shelter Policy review, is to address a lot of the motions that you’ve brought forward.
Mr. Speaker, there is really not much more I can add. I was looking at the last part of the motion, “therefore I move,” and I wasn’t quite sure exactly what that meant. Do you want to cap the rents? Is that what it is? For a five-bedroom unit it doesn’t say whether these folks are working or not. I mean, it’s something that we’ll have to clarify. Is it just going to be charging everybody so those that are paying $32 living in a five-bedroom unit now may have to potentially pay $1,200? These are questions that we’d have to have answered, so we’ll look forward to having the discussion with committee on some of the recommendations they made and sharing some of our thoughts with them. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. I’ll go to the mover of the motion for closing comments. Mr. Jacobson.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Out of the 67 percent of what the Minister is stating, the 2,400 units that we are paying the 21 percent paying zero dollars, 46 percent paying $32, it’s a total of 67 percent. The other 23 percent, Mr. Speaker, I think this option is going to help. It’s an option.
What I’m asking for, the Housing Corporation can keep their economic rent scale. This is an option B. If people are working, say if myself and my wife are working, we’re in a rental unit, we’re going to choose option B. This is the option that I’m providing today. For a five-bedroom unit I’ll pay $1,200 a month for the family, and that’s an option. If the people that want to stay under the current housing policy, they could go ahead. It’s a choice. But we’re providing a choice, Mr. Speaker, that’s going to help the people in the long run so people can actually buy food for their kids, pay their power bill, be able to have extra funds to do things. For myself, the Minister said this is an option. For myself, when you look at it, this is going to help the people. The people should not have to worry, Mr. Speaker, about a roof over their heads. If we’re lucky in the communities, we’ve got 20 government jobs. And those are the people that are lucky enough to get them.
The rent scale we are going off, this is an option. I’m going in with an open-handed approach because I’m not going to tell the government what to do. This is an option. I want to work with them to make this happen. The people ought to be able, like I said, not worry about a roof over their head and be a little bit proud of what they have because they’re paying their rent and it’s an option for them to do that. Our people in the Territories, we have to help them as much as we can as a government. This government can do that. This Minister could go and say option B, Jackie, we did it, we’re going to do something about it. Under their assessment that they’re doing, it’s possible. Again, this is an option. I’m not going to put fear into the communities right now. That’s what I don’t want. You can stay under the current system and this system is option B, it’s up to the tenant to choose option B. Again, I don’t want to get anybody in the communities scared of the rent scale I’m providing or trying to get into the system.
This has come forward so we can help the people in the Northwest Territories, people who are being evicted. That shouldn’t happen. People shouldn’t have to worry about a roof over their head. Again, we’re just trying to make a better place for the people to live in the Northwest Territories. I know this Minister can do that.
Thank you, Mr. Jacobson. The Member is requesting a recorded vote. All those in favour of the motion, please stand.
Mr. Jacobson, Ms. Bisaro, Mr. Yakeleya, Mr. Krutko, Mr. Bromley, Mr. Abernethy, Mr. Menicoche, Mr. Beaulieu, Mr. Hawkins.
All those opposed to the motion, please stand. All those abstaining from the motion, please stand.
Mr. Lafferty; Ms. Lee; Mr. Miltenberger; Mr. Roland; Mr. McLeod, Deh Cho; Mr. McLeod, Inuvik Twin Lakes; Mr. McLeod, Yellowknife South.
