Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, at the midpoint of this Assembly, 33 bills have been passed, compared to 52 in the 17th Assembly after two years. My question for the Premier is: why is the pace of legislative change so slow in this Assembly? Mahsi.
Masi. The Honourable Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We are not a factory. We operate in a Legislative Assembly. Legislative proposals and draft bills before Cabinet are confidential documents which I cannot speak to, but we have a significant number of initiatives making their way through the system for introduction in the remaining two years. We had a slow start in year one with respect to introducing legislation due to a number of factors, the late election, and the focus on the development of the mandates by this House, but in year two, we are definitely picking up speed, Mr. Speaker.
The evidence just does not support what the Premier has said there. We are not picking up speed. We are about to start a three-and-a-half-month recess with one bill to contemplate. One bill. It is not as if this Assembly started from scratch with legislative proposals. In the transition report, there was a section about completing devolution and implementing a made-in-the-North regulatory system. That was available more than two years ago when the Premier was Premier. Why is it taking the government so long to bring this legislation forward for review?
Legislation can take a long time to develop, and we have a number of very large initiatives under way to bring forward in the latter two years of this Assembly. The revised mandate of the Government of the Northwest Territories identifies 14 larger pieces of legislation for introduction in the 18th Legislative Assembly that we have been working very hard on.
I wonder if part of the reason for the slowness is whether there is a lack of capacity among the legislative drafters to produce all the legislation that we have contemplated pursuing during this 18th Assembly. Is capacity the issue?
At the rise of the House today, we expect that the 18th Legislative Assembly will have passed an additional three financial bills. As the Member indicated, this brings the total number of bills passed by this Legislative Assembly to 36, with another bill introduced and before special committee for review. In past investigations, we have determined that capacity is not an issue, and we will undertake to review that again to ensure that is not the case.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife Centre.
Mahsi, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Premier if he will work with the Caucus to convene a short sitting in December so that additional bills can be introduced for review prior to the budget session. Can he make that commitment? Thank you.
Historically, the final two years of an Assembly are often the heaviest when it comes to a government's legislative agenda. The 17th Assembly had a very large number of financial bills compared to previous Assemblies, as well as ten devolution-related bills making comparison to the 18th Assembly difficult. I believe that we are on track to deliver on a fulsome and ambitious legislative agenda for the 18th Legislative Assembly. I am prepared to review it and to see what will be required to make sure that we can complete our fulsome and ambitious legislative agenda. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.
Marsi cho, Mr. Speaker. [No English translation provided.]
Mr. Speaker, today in my Member's statement I talked about the funding for housing that should be flowing directly to First Nations. I would like to ask the Minister a couple of questions on that. Has the Minister examined the treaties to see what the original agreement on the treaty part of housing indicates, and if not, can she do that? Thank you.
Masi. Minister responsible for the NWT Housing Corporation.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, that was two questions. I will do my best at answering. I can say that no, I have not examined a treaty, but I can say that the federal government last year gave the territorial government $28,673,000. That is $28 million. That works out to less than a million dollars per community. It actually works out to $868,878 per community; that is less than a million.
The territorial government put in last year $81,702,000, which works out to almost $2,500,000 per community. Statistics show that our population in the Northwest Territories is half Indigenous, half Caucasian. What that shows me is that the territorial government is actually putting in more money towards Indigenous housing. I do not know the stats of Indigenous people in housing programs, but I do know in my past history working with marginalized families that the majority of families that suffer, and I think that might be across, are actually Indigenous. That is not okay, but that is the reality.
What I do think is that the Government of the Northwest Territories is putting in more than its share towards the Indigenous housing in the territories. In fact, we are putting in eight times what normal provinces are doing. Usually, provinces are putting in 1 to 2 per cent of their income. We are putting in eight times that. I think we are doing a lot towards supporting Indigenous housing. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I was not going to get into Members' statements here, but Mr. Speaker, my point is I do believe that the original housing has evolved into the NWT Housing Corporation. What was originally on the NWT Housing Corporation, which created 2,000 units that were built under programs that were directly built by Department of Indian Affairs, was given to the NWT Housing Corporation, and that is how the NWT Housing Corporation started. The original intent was to continue to house Indigenous people with the NWT Housing Corporation. It has evolved into something else. I would like to ask the Minister if she can commit to working with the Dene Nation to see where common ground can be reached for funding for housing in the Northwest Territories.
Currently, the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation does have a community initiative that we work with municipal and Aboriginal governments to kind of look at how we can work together towards providing more housing in their communities. Quite a few of the communities have come forward and are putting things like land or labour on the table. Therefore, we are putting things like material on the table. I am more than willing to work with any government that is willing to look at a kind of partnership model.
In regards to meeting with any specific Aboriginal government or nation at this point, in regards to the housing, I think it is a little bit premature. At this point, we are still trying to clarify where the Government of Canada is going with the housing strategy. The housing strategy was supposed to come out in November of this year. We were supposed to have a federal-provincial-territorial meeting in November. That has now been pushed back to December. I do know that, in the last fiscal year, there was funding directly provided to the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation, which is an Aboriginal government.
At this point, I do not know where the Government of Canada is going to put the housing monies to; so I think it is a bit premature to meet with any Indigenous government until that is clarified from the Government of Canada.
The NWT Housing Corporation has existed for 40 plus years. I think it would not be premature. Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister, then, if she can direct staff to do some research on the background of how the Housing Corporation has evolved originally from funding that flow to the Department of Indian Affairs and then eventually to the GNWT through the vehicle of the NWT Housing Corporation.
I recognize that GNWT does fund money that supports the Housing Corporation and that the money flowing from Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation is combined with that. However, I think the original intent was to house First Nations. I do believe that global agreements --
Member, what is your line of questioning?
Will the Minister agree to direct staff to research the history of social housing in the NWT? Thank you.
I would like to remind Members to shorten your preamble and also to answer in short answers. Minister responsible for the NWT Housing Corporation.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I do want to make a clarification. In my answer before, I had said that we were half-Indigenous and half-Caucasian. That is incorrect. I have been corrected from the other side of the House, and they are absolutely right. We are about half Indigenous and half non-Indigenous. I do clarify that there are other people within our territory as well.
In regards to directing the staff to look into the history of the social housing, I will make my answer short and say yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in the research, I am asking the Minister if she is willing to go back to the 1950s to when the first housing was built by Indian Affairs in the Northwest Territories. Thank you
Yes, I will direct the staff to go back to the very original to see where the housing was, how many houses were turned over, and I will ask them to actually do research on the actual $28 million that is provided from the Government of Canada and to see if that money is actually being distributed properly, because maybe I am wrong. Maybe less than a million dollars a community is more than we are actually spending in Indigenous community, although I have a feeling that we are actually spending a lot more than less than a million per community per year. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Mackenzie Delta.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, in follow-up to my Member's statement, I have a few questions for the Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation. Mr. Speaker, can the Minister provide a status update on the construction and delivery of modular units throughout the Northwest Territories communities? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Minister responsible for the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So, the delivery of modular units throughout the whole Northwest Territories, that has kind of kicked me off. I am going to try to answer this. My belief is that we had 19 constructed, to be constructed with Concept Energy, and one to be constructed with the Energy Wall here, in Yellowknife. So, we have eight that are partially built with Concept, and we have one completed with Energy Wall. We have four that are delivered to communities at this point, we will still need some work on, so at this point we are still short some, but I cannot do the math at this point.
Mr. Speaker, can the Minister describe the comparison in costs and anticipated lifespan for modular units versus stick-built homes?
The lifespan of all of our units within the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation is about 40 years, so whether they are a modular unit or a stick-built unit, we do try to provide repairs and upgrades to make sure that they can last as long as they can. Some units of course suffer higher damage through a variety of reasons and so they do not make the lifespan of 40 years, but we do try to make sure that all units are repaired or upkept to meet that 40-year lifespan.
Mr. Speaker, increasing employment in our small communities is a priority for this government. It is a big item in our mandate, and the Housing Corporation has a role to play. How is the corporation planning its delivery of programs and services to create jobs and opportunities for residents, for instance in construction and maintenance?
The Northwest Territories Housing Corporation, it was kind of interesting when I started this position. My understanding as the Minister responsible for the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation was that I was to put houses on the ground. It was a short time later that I realized that actually a large percentage of the Housing Corporation's money does go to providing employment in communities. Not only do we provide jobs for maintaining and building units. We have 23 local housing organizations in communities that we provide support for, too, so a huge amount of our money is actually going towards employing people in the Northwest Territories. Perhaps a question that I am going to put out there that I would have liked to have heard from the MLA is that are we going to continue with the houses in the North, the modular units. I will share right now, today, that we had some difficulty, actually, with barging the modular units into communities. So we learned from our mistakes, so what I have given direction is that, for communities that we have to barge into, we are going to try not to do modular units because of the barging difficulties.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Mackenzie Delta.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, that is good news, but, you know, the Minister states that they are putting a lot of employment into the communities, but just to set the record straight, one building stick-built homes we have in the neighbourhood of five to six people working on one unit, whereas putting these modular homes into our communities, seeing first-hand when they brought the ones to Tsiigehtchic, we had probably two people who worked for one day to bring these units up the hill. Mr. Speaker, you do the math. The Minister may have a little trouble with this, but, you know, five to six months of employment for five people is no comparison to two days for most likely the same operator, as well, Mr. Speaker. So that is good news because they are barging into Tsiigehtchic, Fort McPherson, and Aklavik, so I am hoping that in the future we are doing stick-built homes. Will the Minister please confirm that?
It is important to note that the modular units that are currently being delivered are built within the Northwest Territories, and my ambition is to have northern-built homes for northern people, so that is my priority, and I have still stuck to it. As stated in my previous answer, communities that have barges, we are looking at a different model of building because of the difficulty getting modular units onto barges. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. My question is for the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources. Later today, we will be debating a motion about development in the calving grounds of one of our migratory caribou herds. The Bathurst caribou herd has plummeted from a high of 472,000 animals to 16,000. Indigenous governments have voluntarily halted harvesting, yet nothing has been done in terms of habitat protection. Can the Minister give us an update on the status of the Bathurst herd and whether there are any signs of recovery? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Minister of Environment and Natural Resources.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Bathurst caribou herd did decline to about 19,800 caribou in 2015. It was a 96 per cent decline from peak numbers estimated, as the Member pointed out, 472,000. The herd was fairly stable 2009-12, but declined further 2012-2015. A calving photo survey will provide an updated population estimate, and it is planned for June of 2018, and then management will be revisited once a new herd estimate is known.
Thanks to the Minister for that. I take it from his response that there is no signs of recovery. GNWT has been leading a range-planning exercise for the Bathurst caribou herd, and I commended the Minister in the House for this work back in March of this year. Can the Minister give us a status report on this range-planning exercise and when we can expect to see a concrete plan and some actions to protect the Bathurst herd and its habitat?
Mr. Speaker, first of all, I need to commend some of the Aboriginal groups that are taking it upon themselves to preserve the caribou. I think just in the news lately, recently, there was a historic wildlife management agreement signed by seven Indigenous groups in Quebec that wanted to protect the caribou in Ungava Peninsula, and I think that takes a great deal of leadership. So they decided that they would do that on their own. The Porcupine Caribou Management Board also has taken an active role in the protection of the caribou in their area. The Member is right; we will be debating that motion later on today.
The working group met in late September to review a draft of the Bathurst caribou range plan, and the draft plan is based on the best available traditional knowledge and science and makes recommendations for managing disturbance to caribou. The draft plan will be presented to the Minister and Committee-of-Cabinet on Economy and Environment in November and will go out for public engagement.
Thanks to the Minister for that update. It was very helpful. Protection of NWT caribou herds is a complex matter as there are a number of communities that have traditionally harvested herds, most migrate between the NWT and Nunavut, there are different management regimes on each side of the boundary, and very little habitat has any permanent protection. That raises the issue of whether our government has any policy or position on resource development within calving grounds. Can the Minister say whether our government has a position or policy on resource development within caribou calving grounds?
Mr. Speaker, GNWT has concerns about potential adverse impacts of projects on the population and habitat of transboundary wildlife species while recognizing the potential benefit of any proposed projects. Calving grounds are widely considered, both from a scientific and traditional knowledge perspective, as the most sensitive habitat for migratory barren-ground caribou herds, and so we do take very seriously and look at very closely any projects that are happening within the calving grounds. As the Member noted, we need to do what we can do to protect those calving grounds. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Masi. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President, and thanks to the Minister for that. It sort of sounds like we handled this matter on a case-by-case basis. The next case, though, has come up before us. Grays Bay Road and Port Project will cut through the remaining calving grounds for the Bathurst caribou herd. GNWT did not object in principle to the project, and support a less rigorous review.
A review by a panel under federal legislation would have given us an opportunity to appoint individuals to that panel, would have guaranteed participant funding while still reporting to the same Minister, as a new to impact review board-led review. Can the Minister provide an explanation as to why our government supports a less rigorous review process for the Grays Bay project, where our rights and interests are less likely to be heard? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
The GNWT recommended further review and left the decision to the Nunavut Impact Review Board. We felt that the decision for a northern project would be best handled by the North. While there is potential for a federal panel that included GNWT reps, under the land claims agreement, the panel members are appointed by the Nunavut minister and federal minister and there would be no guarantee of NWT representation. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
