Marci cho, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I’m making a Member's statement on housing, but I’d like to acknowledge the Seniors’ Society. Mr. Speaker, today I’d like to speak on the NWT Housing Corporation and their definition of core need. In general, core need for housing is identified as a household that has one or more of any of the main ingredients that form core need. Adequacy, in general, is a house that requires a retrofit; or suitability is when there are too many people sharing bedrooms; and affordability is when the family spends more than 30 per cent of their household income on utilities, land tax or lease, rent, or mortgage. I disagree with the NWT Housing Corporation’s definition of core need. I believe that in order for a household to be in core need, it must have either an adequacy and/or suitability problem and must have an affordability issue. If the household has an adequacy or a suitability problem, but the household is bringing in an income where it is not spending 30 per cent of their income to house themselves, they should not be considered in core need. As is the same for a household that has an adequately suitable house but cannot afford the operating and maintenance, can afford to spend less than 30 per cent of their income, then they should not be considered in core need. I believe the NWT Housing Corporation must change what core need means. If it does not change, then most anyone that hires a person that has an affordability issue, would be essentially taking that person out of core need, or if an individual that’s considered in core need has an affordability issue was to go to income support and apply for income and they would take themselves out of core need. I believe that core need is an NWT Housing Corporation issue and that with the current definition, any of the departments that hire people or any of the departments that are able to give income to an individual can take people out of core need. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Members’ statements. Member for Sahtu.
