Thank you, Madam Chair. The Member is correct; there is clearly a demand for single units that are out there. The Housing Corporation did some work a number of years back on the concept of a small unit. The costs were higher than I think made sense in terms of looking at that versus one-bedroom/two-bedroom type units. I think there’s some more research that needs to be done. I know there was a northern housing conference recently where there were a number of discussions around smaller units and those sorts of things, and I think it’s one of those areas of innovation that Member Dolynny spoke about that I think we have to continue to do the work and see if there are some options there. It really is the cost that has to drive us on that one and then recognizing that families continue to have fairly major needs as well. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Stewart. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Madam Chair. My last one. I see 159, according to my math, major retrofits proposed in this draft budget. First of all, I’m assuming these will include the attempt to bring our standards up to AEDG or as close as we can get. What proportion would this put us at now for all our units, given all the other renos we’ve done AEDG? If that’s not handy, maybe the Minister could provide that at some point in time. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The Member is correct; these 159, we call them modernization and improvement projects, they are to upgrade our energy in a lot of these units because a lot of them are older units, so there’s a lot of good work done on them there.
As far as the number, we will have to pull that information together for committee and then I will make a commitment here that we will provide them with that information as to the number of units that we’ve had over the last few years that we’ve gone through the NMI process. So we’ll provide that to the Members. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I would be irresponsible not to ask about the plans for Detah and Ndilo. I don’t see any in the plans here for this coming fiscal year. I know there are needs certainly on the quality of housing, perhaps on the quantity as well. Could I get an indication from the Minister what the plan is for Weledeh?
We’ve got about $340,000 earmarked for Detah/Ndilo. That’s mostly in the homeownership side of it to help homeowners improve their programs. I think we still have some vacant units out there that we’re needing to deal with right quick here too. So $340,000 that we have earmarked for Detah/Ndilo in this upcoming year. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. NWT Housing Corporation, information item, finance and infrastructure services, infrastructure investment summary, agreed?
Agreed.
Agreed, thank you. Let’s turn back, then, to page 3-10, NWT Housing Corporation, information item, infrastructure investment summary. Agreed?
Agreed.
Agreed, thank you. Does the committee agree that this concludes consideration of the NWT Housing Corporation’s budget for capital?
Agreed.
Agreed, okay, thank you. Thank you, Minister McLeod, Mr. Stewart and Mr. Anderson. I’ll ask the Sergeant-at-Arms if he would please escort the witnesses from the Chamber.
Is committee agreed we’re ready to move on to the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs?
Agreed.
Agreed, thank you. I’d like to ask the Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs, Minister Robert C. McLeod, if he’d like to bring witnesses into the Chamber.
Yes I would. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you. I’ll ask the Sergeant-at-Arms to please escort the witnesses to the table.
For the record please, Minister McLeod, could you introduce your witnesses.
Thank you, Madam Chair. To my left I have Mr. Tom Williams, the deputy minister of Municipal and Community Affairs. To my right I have Ms. Eleanor Young, who is the assistant deputy minister of Municipal and Community Affairs. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. To start off, do we have any general comments on the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs? Ms. Bisaro.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have one comment and one question, I guess. I think the Minister is well aware that as communities accept more and more responsibility for their own affairs, they are also, at the same time, gaining more and more buildings and infrastructure, therefore, more and more costs. This infrastructure budget has remained the same for quite some time, but the responsibilities of communities have grown. This infrastructure budget can’t stay the same forever. So my question to the Minister is: When are communities going to see an increase in the infrastructure budget so that they can, as we are doing as a government, they need to do some of the deferred maintenance and so on that is required? Thank you.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The Member is correct; the infrastructure budget itself hasn’t changed from the $28 million in 2000, but what we’ve done is we’ve heard from the communities and they are challenged, they are getting more and more buildings and they’re challenged with the O and M side of it. But we have made it a little more flexible with the capital budget where they’re able to use 10 percent towards their O and M.
As far as increasing the infrastructure budget, their biggest concern right now was the O and M side of it. We’re working with Canada to try to find out what our share of the new Building Canada Program is going to be. Until we hear that, we’re not anticipating any change to this particular budget. Maybe there might be some we look at next year.
I think we’re challenged for the next couple of years as far as our fiscal situation goes, but we’ve heard loud and clear from the communities that they appreciate very much the infrastructure they’ve been given over the years and the flexibility to choose their own projects, but their biggest challenge was the O and M. So we’ve put in there that they are able to use 10 percent towards their O and M. Thank you.
Okay, I didn’t really hear from the Minister when or if – I hope it’s when – there will be an increase to this infrastructure budget for communities. Is that in the future anywhere? Thank you.
The earliest that there would be an increase to the budget is 2017. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Next for general comments I have Mr. Blake.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a comment I’d like to make on this department. The communities are very thankful for this capital funding that they got. Gone are the days when they put in a wish list of what they’d like to see in their communities. Now the communities make their plans of what they’re going to do and every year you see the communities building, building up their infrastructure and a lot of people working in the communities. I just wanted to thank the department and hope this keeps going in the future. Thank you.
Thank you for that general comment, Mr. Blake. Mr. McLeod.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate the opportunity to respond. We appreciate the Member’s comments and he’s absolutely right; the communities have taken this responsibility. There have been some challenges, but for the most part they’ve done a fantastic job at determining their projects and their priorities, and you’re absolutely right when you say gone are the days when you tried to get your project into the capital system. So it’s been working and we’re quite pleased with how the communities have responded to the challenges of administering this themselves. They’ve done a great job. In many cases they’ve done it probably cheaper than we could have done it as a government. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Next for general comments I have Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to follow up with Ms. Bisaro’s comment about the status of this budget staying the same since 2000 at $28 million. I think operational costs have certainly become a challenge and I know the Minister was dead on with that, but unfortunately, I think the expenses, general expenses, part of that equation means that infrastructure expense costs have escalated quite considerably at the same time. For example, I think our Minister of Finance has told us that we used to spend $75 million in our capital budget and we were happy to do that when we could achieve it, and that probably was about 2000 or maybe even a few years later than the year 2000 when we set this at $28 million. As everybody knows, we’re up regularly over $150 million, typically over $200 million. So there is a disconnect here.
I have to disagree with the total perspective that the Minister presented that it’s just operational costs. I think, in fact, the cost of putting infrastructure on the ground without even operating it has escalated considerably over that period of time. Just by way of supporting Ms. Bisaro’s concern that we hear from communities that the $28 million was welcome, the new approach was welcomed, but the amount just doesn’t seem to be having the same capacity that it used to. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Madam Chair. There is a full formula review underway right now including the infrastructure dollars, and we’re targeting ’16-17 as probably the earliest we can make the increases. Then we try and access any other monies that we’re able to through the Building Canada Plan and any other monies, the gas tax money. I mean, if there is any opportunity for us as a government – and we’re getting quite good at it – trying to access any pots of money so we can pull it into the Territories and distribute it to the communities, they’ve done a pretty good job with that. The review is underway and we’re targeting ’16-17.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. General comments. Next I have Mr. Menicoche.
Thank you very much. I raise the same concerns about getting an increment in the capital expenditures in MACA and a couple years is probably not soon enough for some of the communities out there that have growing infrastructure needs.
Aside from that, I just wanted to ask the question about the Wrigley water plant and what’s the process there. I know that’s not in this capital plan but it’s an old Build Canada funding. Thank you very much.
Thank you. I’ll refer that question to Ms. Young, please.
Thank you. Yes, that is a Building Canada project and the design is complete. We have a few issues with the design being overly complicated, and we are taking a look at a slight change in that design to make it more appropriate to the size of the community that Wrigley is. I believe our staff are actually going in to meet with Wrigley next week to talk about a slight change in the approach with the design to make it less complicated and more easy to operate at the community level. I believe they’re looking at actually putting a reservoir in as part of the project now to make the water quality handling a little easier, and so that project is still well underway and targeted for completion, I believe, next year.
Okay. So just with the change in scope, is it still manageable within whatever capital they had allotted?
Yes. I believe that we don’t anticipate any further money from the community being required. It is something we can manage within the budget.
Thank you, Ms. Young. General comments. Next I have Mr. Yakeleya.
Just a short comment there, Madam Chair. It’s just with the increase of the infrastructure in the communities. It’s very interesting to hear the Minister talk about further discussions and the formula funding. Of interest, I want to raise the point of type of infrastructure that possibly could be needed in the town of Norman Wells with the increase of the oil and gas activity and that sort of being the regional staging area for the oil and gas companies in regard to the different activity that’s going to happen this year and next year. Is that something that the government is looking at, that type of funding to support the town of Norman Wells on their infrastructure and the use of oil companies using their additional infrastructure, which is sewer and wastage in other areas that the town may not have the dollars to support that?
Also, along with some of the infrastructure that’s going into the communities, communities are starting to prioritize their needs, because they’re only getting so much money a year and they want to do many things. However, as you go further up north, the cost of living is high and the cost of doing business is high there. Is that something that’s considered in the formula?
I know there’s a formula, I just don’t quite understand it well enough there, and you don’t need to explain it to me now. Is that something that MACA has considered? I think that’s something that the community is getting used to, and when they take over some of the infrastructure, they don’t quite yet know if that’s a good thing or until they fully understand what it means to take over some of the infrastructure. They are planning some of their work out for themselves and it’s quite costly. Those are the points I wanted to raise. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Madam Chair. We’ve worked closely with the communities, and communities have provided us with their five-year capital plan, because they realize how much they’re getting over the next number of years so they do a good job in prioritizing their investments over the next five years. I was looking at them, actually earlier this morning, and they’ve done a great job in some of their priorities and even recognizing the fact that with development coming and that, you know, we’ve got to be ready for it. Again, it’s a decision that the community government makes.
We have assistant superintendents that we’ve hired in each of the regions and they are going to help – especially the one in Norman Wells – with identifying some of the challenges that may come as a result of resource development, so they will be in a good position to provide some advice and work with the community as to where some of their needs might be. But the community knows their needs better than we do and they do a good job in addressing it through their capital plans that they submitted to MACA.
Certainly, the Minister is correct on the needs are addressed by the community that knows it best in those communities, and sometimes the infrastructure, sometimes when it gets into the community, it has to go through some growing pains. I appreciate the Minister having some flexibility as to say, well, we can help you out here and there. I’ve seen that already, where some of the communities want to take over an operation but just don’t have it yet in our means or our understanding or financially and because of the new technology, and sometimes that causes a hiccup for the community. But I’ve also seen the Minister’s staff be quite flexible in helping them out. I mean, it’s not a cut and dried sort of a case here, take it or leave it. I’ve seen that flexibility with the Minister and the staff when I met with some of my constituents with the department, so I appreciate that. That’s what I wanted to come across, that there is some openness and some flexibility and some understanding that some of the infrastructure that’s going into the community in theory is good, in practicality sometimes it doesn’t quite match the theory of what we’re trying to do. But it’s also a good exercise as communities, again, looking at their top 10 list and saying, well, we can only do three this year and so forth. I mean, that’s understandable. However, I think this department is the one that gives most empowerment to the communities in terms of developing their communities. Just more of a comment there.
We see our role now as support to the communities. We work with them closely in identifying best practices, and if there’s a need to try and identify some financing that they have to go and borrow to see their projects come on stream, then we work with them. We point out some of the challenges they might face. Then, at the end of the day, after we provide them all the advice, the ultimate decision is theirs.
Again, I give a lot of credit to the communities. Through the NWT Association of Communities and Local Government Administrators of the Northwest Territories they’ve done a pretty good job in trying to help the communities adjust to a lot of the new responsibilities they have. There are so many more people from the communities taking courses now through the School of Community Government. All the support systems are there and I like to say, at the end of the day, the final decision is the community’s, and that’s the way I believe it should be.
Any further general comments?
Detail.
Detail. Okay. If I can refer your attention, please, to page 4-4, Municipal and Community Affairs, activity summary, regional operations, infrastructure investment summary, infrastructure investments, $28.002 million.
