Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Would the Minister like to respond?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’m not too sure what more I can say. The national standard says that it’s one of the three: affordability, suitability or adequacy, and my direction earlier in the House said that I have to work towards those national standards. Unless the House is willing to change the motion then I need to be able to work towards the national standard as defined. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Seeing no further questions or comments on this page. I see Mr. O’Reilly has comments or questions. Proceed, Mr. O’Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair, I’ll try to keep this short and I don’t want to prolong the discussion. I don’t know what Yukon and Nunavut are doing in terms of preparing a plan or a proposal for the federal government…
I’m hoping I can get the Minister’s attention.
Thank you, Mr. O’Reilly. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. If the Members would like, we can actually put together a document that shows the costing to address every single core need within the Territories. We can provide that. The reality, though, is that the argument that we give for the tri-territories is a business case based on the higher cost of living within the territories, and so we advocate again, not on what each territory would need. We just advocate based on that we have the highest core needs amongst the three territories in all of Canada. The federal transfer payments currently for housing cannot be based on a population base; that it has to be base-plus funding. Contrary to what I said, I mean, the tri-territorial business case that we just provided to the federal government resulted in us getting $35 million. Actually advocating as three territories without costing and saying that we have huge needs has worked in that we’ve never gotten $35 million and now we’ve gotten that, and the federal government has recognized that we have to have a northern strategy. They’re listening just on the basis of us saying that we have higher cost of living; that we have a huge Aboriginal population; that we have huge needs and that’s the business case we provided and to date it’s working. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. O’Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair, and I want to thank the Minister for her answer there. I think it would be really help if the Regular MLAs then actually saw this business case that was submitted. If that could be provided to committee I think that would help us understand. I applaud the efforts of the Housing Corp in putting that kind of work together to get the feds off the per capita housing formula that tends to be used for federal funding programs so that’s great. That’s part of the issue, but I think the motion that we were talking about earlier in the House is: what would it take to get our housing stock out of core need? How do we cost that out and can we put together a plan and can that form the basis of submissions to federal funding programs. That’s where I think the Regular MLAs were coming from, is we want to have that 2014 survey that shows core need, what is going to cost us to get out of that situation if we put that together as proposals and cost it out and get that into the federal government I think we’re getting closer. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O’Reilly. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. There are a number of variables to address the whole core need of the NWT and we can do that. It would take a bit of time and a bit of work but we can produce that. Of course, it wouldn’t be an exact science because there are differences. The bigger issue for me, though, is that we have an understanding amongst the three territories that we will not advocate individually; that we will advocate as tri-territorial which gives us more power, and unless I can get the other territories to do the same then it sounds like I’m going to be advocating for the Northwest Territories and going against the understanding and the partnership that we formed. I can bring it forward to the other territories but I’m a little bit confused. If the other territories say that they don’t want to go there, that they’re okay with how we’re doing it with the base funds, is the recommendation that I go forward and become individual and advocate as an individual territory? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. O’Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the Minister letting us know that there are some intricacies to working with the other two territories. I look forward to having a discussion at committee around that. You know, our submissions to the federal government for our needs don’t always have to go within the federal budget. Even some of the infrastructure funding that might be made available is going to be wide open. We may be able to use that avenue to help fund core housing needs in the Northwest Territories. In any event, I understand how we need to work with Nunavut and Yukon, and I look forward to having a discussion with standing committee around that, but at the same time we need to have even a plan like that for ourselves so that we know strategically where resources have to be placed to get us out of core need. If we can get the feds to help contribute to that, even better. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O’Reilly. Minister Cochrane.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We can work on that as well. I would like to meet with committee on that. We’ll do the costing, bring it to committee. The biggest thing that I’m really conscious of when meeting with the Yukon Territory housing Minister who has been in her term for a number of terms, has said that this is the first time that we’ve got all three territories to come together on housing and actually agree to a partnership. I really want to be careful that we don’t sabotage that because trust is really hard to gain and really easy to lose. We will do the costing and we’ll bring it to Committee, but I want to make sure that we are strategic within our moving forward on that. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. O’Reilly is waving me off. Mr. McNeely, you were on my list earlier. Would you like to make any comments or questions?
Yes, I wanted to point out, Mr. Chair, that the comments around core need are actually on page 368 on the next summary underneath “Transitional Rent Supplement Program.”
Thank you, Mr. McNeely. Nothing further right now, I will now call a page. Oh, I’m sorry, Mr. Thompson. Continue.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’d just like to get some clarifications on this conversation that has been going on. First of all, I must say it’s great that you guys have this work done. I guess my first question is in regards to Nunavut, Yukon, and ourselves working together what are the discussions and what do you present to the federal government? I know we’re not talking per capita but what information do you present to them? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Minister Cochrane.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. As committed, we will provide a copy of the document that we’re working from and that actually provided the $35 million. What do we talk about? What are we working on together? We talk about the high cost of food within the Territories. We talk about the inappropriateness that our small numbers within the territory or all three territories, our population base and the vast territory that we cover. We talk about because of the small population and the vast territory we talk about the high cost of infrastructure to be able to build houses, for example. To be able to transport; transportation costs; heat costs, you know, barging. We talk about commonalities that are addressed throughout the three territories. We try not to talk about things that differ from us but we try to pick out what makes us all the same and advocate on that, such as the high cost of food and the infrastructure costs that we all face. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. Thompson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank the Minister for that clarification. The Housing Corporation has done a cost analysis that has broken down all this information? Have the other two territories done that and do you guys share this information with each other? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have no idea if the other territories have done at all. We haven’t actually talked about what it would cost for all of us. The whole point is that we’re trying to get the government to realize to change their funding structure is the advocacy that we’re working on. Currently, the federal government funds per capita and we need to change that. The biggest advocacy that we’re doing is about cost plus and so talking about for all of us it costs more. To be able to provide a house in Tuktoyaktuk is a lot more expensive than it is to provide a house in British Columbia. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. Thompson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I appreciate the Minister’s answer, and I understand what you guys are trying to do. I guess what I’m trying to understand is I know we have these commonalities but we’ve done some work and I’m assuming that these other two territories have done that. I would like to see you guys work together and share this information. You know, you talk about trust and if you’re working together then it’s more information. Can the Minister look at that opportunity when you’re talking to your territorial counterparts as to tell them what you guys are doing and seeing if they’re willing to share. Because I think if we’re building trust and you want to talk about working together if we can show the federal government what our actual costs are for all three territories I think it would have a bigger impact. I understand what you guys are doing which is great, and like you said, we’ve got an extra, you know, $35 million is what you said, so that’s great, I mean, I’m not throwing that away. But I’m just saying if we could work together and share these costs and if they’re willing to share that with the federal government I think it might have another impact with the government as well. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. When we present to the federal government, we present as one entity, so within the tri-territorial business case, all of our issues are kind of in one. We looked at similarities. I will bring forward to the next tri-territorial meeting, the suggestion, if you are okay with it being a suggestion, from our territorial government asking that it would probably serve in the interest of all of us if we could actually do the costing and provide that in the report as well. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. Thompson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I thank the Minister. That is all I am trying to do. I want to make sure we continue to keep the trust going and the partnership with the three territories. If this works, it works. If it doesn’t, at least we made that offer there. Maybe some people in Ottawa are listening to what we are talking about here, and it may have an impact on it as well. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Would the Minister like to respond to that?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will take that as a comment. Thank you.
Thank you. Anything further, Mr. Thompson?
No. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am done with this page. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Any further comments or questions on page 364? Seeing none, I will call the page. NWT Housing Corporation, executive, operations expenditure summary, total activity, $1,391,000. Agreed?
Agreed.
Committee agrees. We will move on to finance and infrastructure services. We will defer the activity total on page 366 until we discuss the detail. Pages 367 and 368 are related. We can discuss these all at once here. Comments and questions? Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am just looking at the two homelessness initiatives, transitional support of housing and Housing First model. In the Minister’s opening comments, she mentioned that there would be an additional $16.6 million in new federal social infrastructure funding, and one of the initiatives will be sending independent Housing First units. Trying to reconcile these two line items, one being Housing First model and the other being transitional support of housing. Core principles of Housing First are immediate access to housing with no housing readiness requirements, consumer choice, and self-determination, which is enabled through the provision of a rent supplement, individual, client-driven, and recovery-oriented supports, separation of housing and services harm reduction and community integration. We have heard this from the Minister before that there are many different approaches to Housing First and other things fit in the Housing First model. We do have specific funding available for the Housing First model in the amount of $150,000 and then $600,000 transitional supporting. Can the Minister reconcile this difference here? Why one appears differently, but the opening comments seemed to imply that they are both Housing First. What is the Minister’s understanding and the department’s understanding of Housing First at this point? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Minister Cochrane.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The difference in the budget items are because the $150,000 for the Housing First model will be sustainable monies that will be provided year-in-year. That number is based on that because the mandate of the Housing Corporation is to really focus on housing. That money will be utilized for example, supplementary rent, if there is damages to the units, et cetera, so it has to be used for housing need. The reality is the City of Yellowknife, within this fiscal year, are looking at one person, perhaps up to five or six, but I haven’t got confirmation on that from the city. I have only heard one person at this point. To budget more than $150,000 for one person would probably not be necessary at this time. We would have to look at it later as the city’s Housing First model moves on. The 30 units that we are looking at for the one-time funding is actually… We are looking at a maximum of $600,000 because we are guessing that it would cost, at a maximum, $20,000 per unit. That would be one-time funding and would not be carried in the future. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Perhaps I didn’t frame the question well enough. I am less interested in the funding or the principles of the funding, I suppose. For the semi-independent Housing First units that the department is committing to, are those included in that $600,000 transitional support housing line item? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Minister.
That is the $600,000 is just for the semi-independent units that we will be renovating. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. How did those semi-independent housing units fit with the Housing First model being that the Housing First model is driven by consumer choice? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This model also will be by consumer choice. Anyone that does not want to take those units does not need to. It is an option for people. Everyone in the community, based on my experience with managing homeless shelters, is not mandated to stay in the shelter. They have an option if they want to get into other accommodations within the community. The reality is, who will open up their doors to these people? The semi-independent living will be by choice, not by force. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. My understanding of consumer choice would be that there is a choice given. The purpose is to house people and they have a choice in where they are being housed, not forced into housing. I don’t think that is one of the principles at all. By providing a rent subsidy, as per most established Housing First models, you give clients more choices than a handful of, I think the Minister previously provided, 30 semi-independent housing units. That is where I am finding the most difficulty with calling these Housing First units. I don’t take issue with transitional supportive housing and semi-independent housing. It is just not Housing First. I think there is still a great deal of confusion about this. If we are going to do Housing First, let’s do Housing First. The $150,000 to support the city of Yellowknife’s Housing First model, which is established under those principles, that is Housing First. Anything else deviates too far away from the principles of Housing First to be called that. Let’s just be clear about the language that we use, but I will drop that for now. The other question I had was about the Transitional Rent Supplement Program. I have personal experience with this. It doesn’t appear to me and the people who I know who have used it to be geared towards middle-class income earners. Those are people who may apply for the program and receive five to 10 dollars off their rent bills. But it is not helping those middle class move toward things. I know there is also the PATH program. What is the income threshold, really? Who is the TRSP really geared towards helping in the Northwest Territories? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
