Thank you, Honourable Premier. Minister responsible for Housing NWT.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And to the Member's question, I was kind of confused there for a minute there that the question was for the Department of Finance. But it's not my role to be telling the Indigenous groups how to spend their money within their riding. But as a housing minister, we have been working with the Member's riding very closely for them to be successfully receiving coinvestment federal funding and the rapid rehousing initiative funding as well too to the Member's riding as well. And he did see a number of units that were delivered to Lutselk'e. And the conversation between the housing and the Indigenous governments in the Member's riding continues. And I look forward to further successes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am directing that question to the Minister of Finance but then the Premier spoke up and passed that on to Housing. So I'm not sure if the Minister of Finance was able to speak to this question. Thank you.
Once it's redirected to another Minister by the Premier, the Minister of Housing is you have to direct your questions to her. Minister so, yes, there's really no question. Member for Tu NedheWiilideh.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess what I'm trying to get is that, you know, I've been trying to really advocate for housing for our people in our communities in the Tu NedheWiilideh riding. And, you know, I've been trying to really work with the Minister of Housing Corporation of how we could address and build relationships with Indigenous governments. You know, I see these MOUs are good ideas but, you know, they're they only go so far, and I don't hear no commitments from this government at all in trying to fix these problems we're having in our community.
So will the Minister work with the same Indigenous governments and the Cabinet colleagues to transfer housing projects scheduled for 20232024, along with other resources, to Indigenous governments housing programs through a contribution agreement? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And thank you to the Member for the question as well too. I'm not sure which units that are in question to be transferred over to the community. But I'm interested in working with the Indigenous governments. And if this is something that is a request that Indigenous governments are interested in doing, I would like to further that conversation and if they would be able to identify the units to me, I'd like to see what condition they're actually in. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yeah, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, you know, this issue is really not going to go away. I mean, we had 50 years to get our act together to provide housing for people here in the Northwest Territories. And in the Minister's statements earlier, she talks about the MOU and the great success she's made in the Sahtu region. But the chiefs are very clear on what I heard on Cabin Radio on August 26th on the SSI meeting. The chiefs made it very clear, bring your cheque book. So what we're saying now, Mr. Speaker, is that we want to see the Minister to come to our communities and look at building new relationships so we can improve housing in our communities. Right now it's not working. So I'm just saying that, Mr. Speaker, that we have an opportunity to build new relationship and I hear from the Minister, but I don't see no action. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And thank you to the Member for the question as well too. And, you know, I disagree with the Member. You know, Housing has been working with the Indigenous governments throughout the Northwest Territories, and we're trying to do things differently and really looking at the communities' perspective on what is required at the community level, what is it that the community would like to construct, what type of housing would they like to enter and to get into.
I just wanted to comment for the coinvestment, the Yellowknives Dene have received $90 million in coinvestment funding. Housing has also provided $133,000 to work on their community housing plan as well too. And also looking at the rapid housing initiative for Dettah and N'dilo, housing is at the tables with the Indigenous governments in trying to find these solutions. The Indigenous governments are the drivers of housing projects in the smaller community. We are there to support them. And if there's an opportunity to be flying in and getting into the Member's riding, I am open to be doing that as well. I did travel to Lutselk'e over the summer, and I did see the significant need of housing at the ground level. But I'm willing to be travelling into the community. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary, Member for Tu NedheWiilideh.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again, I heard this I've been around for a while, and 50 years Housing Corporation was here. And we're still talking about that today, and our communities are still suffering from housing repairs and I produced documents here showing that we have problems in our community. We have problems with cockroaches in our communities. We got big problems but yet we can't seem to be fixing these problems. And what I'm hearing from Indigenous governments now is that they're really tired of Housing Corporation's policies and bureaucratic red tape. So we're going to have look at new ways to building new relationships. So the sooner the better on that. That was just a statement, not question. Thank you.
Thank you, Member for Tu NedheWiilideh. Give the Minister opportunity to respond. Minister responsible for Housing NWT.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I just wanted to also comment on our policies and programming that is actually being reviewed right now by the Council of Leaders working group where that consists of Indigenous leaders throughout the Northwest Territories as well. I'm not sure if Tu NedheWiilideh is participating in those meetings, but I can provide the Member with an update. Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Hay River South.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, for lessons to be learned, one must conduct a review and assessment of the event. In this case, it's flooding. Mr. Speaker, will the Minister of MACA confirm if there will be any followup analysis in the form of reports prepared by this government on the flooding in both Hay River and Fort Simpson, and if so, when can we expect to see those reports? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Hay River South. Minister responsible for Municipal and Community Affairs.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, thanks to the Member for the questions here. Work is underway to conduct an afteraction review of the 2022 flood and the 2021 flood. Once completed, the recommendations will be public. MACA has worked with ENR and hydraulic experts to examine the cause of the 2021 and the 2022 flood, and we'll be doing the same thing with the 2022 flood. The work has been included include the production of flood extensive planning, our mapping of it, the flood zone and that. And this information will be provided to the communities of the town of Hay River and K'atlodeeche First Nation in October so at the end of October. In regards to the afteraction plan, unfortunately we will not be able to get it's going to be it's being done, but it will not be done until after late next year because we have to be as part of it is the flood recovery. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, will the Minister confirm, other than raising buildings, has the department started to work towards identifying flood mitigation measures for Hay River that would include watershed management, flood mapping, establishing flood risk elevations, berms, dredging, drainage, embankments, stabilization, dewatering equipment, and an action plan? Thank you.
Thank you. Yes. So the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs is working with the Town of Hay River, K'atlodeeche First Nation, and the federal government on how we can address these situation mitigation and work with them to get this work done. So we're in the process. We're working with them. And, again, it takes a little bit of time, and it's a little back and forth but we are working with the town and K'atlodeeche First Nation as well as the federal government. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, will the Minister confirm if any specific mitigation measures have been identified for Paradise Valley, The Corridor, Old Town, West Channel, and the New Town. You know, we don't know what's going to happen next year. So I think we have to take some decisive action and prepare for it. Thank you.
Yes. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The answer is yes, we are working on that. We're working with the town. There's a lot of discussion again. We're also working with the federal government, and we're trying to find and identifying funding sources to address this mitigation, to make sure that this situation doesn't happen again or we're prepared for it if it happens, or floods happening again. So we are working with the town as well as K'atlodeeche First Nation on this very topic. And, again, like I said, we're reaching out to the federal government and trying to find additional funds and funding sources to deal with this matter. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary. Member for Hay River South.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I hope the Minister and the department isn't putting all this work on the shoulders of the community because they just don't have they just don't possess the resources required to undertake this assessment review, evaluation. So can the Minister confirm if there is a communication plan in place that is directed at disseminating and gathering information to and from residents on mitigation solutions for specific areas in Hay River. Thank you.
Thank you. I know the first part. No, we're not putting just downloading on to the town or the K'atlodeeche First Nation. We're working together collaboratively to do this. As per the part of the question in regards to the public information component, yes, that's part of the plan. That's part of the strategies that we're working on. We're making sure that this information is public and we're making sure residents here in the town, in this area are able to provide this information moving forward. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. My questions are for the Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment. The news released on the sale of Mactung property says that GNWT will get $15 million. Can the Minister tell us whether we have received the initial $1.5 million from Fireweed Zinc, and where are we at with a definitive agreement when another $3.5 million may be coming our way? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. Minister responsible for Industry, Tourism and Investment.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I can confirm that the initial $1.5 million payment from Fireweed Metals was received in June of this year. And further to that, Mr. Speaker, they were given 18 months in order to do some due diligence work. I understand that there has been some work done over the last exploration season this past spring/summer and that we are expecting that the final agreement will then be signed or rather the purchase agreement will be signed which will trigger the further payment. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Merci, Monsieur le President. I want to thank the Minister for that. Details on the agreement for the sale of this property seem to be quite scarce. Can the Minister confirm whether the terms of sale will be binding on any future owners of the property in the case where Fireweed Zinc decides to sell the property or loses it? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, both the letter of intent as well as the asset purchase agreement would be binding on future owners should Fireweed Metals not be the owners of the property. Thank you.
Merci, Monsieur le President. I want to thank the Minister for that information. It's not clear who may be responsible for the residual junk at the property and any closure reclamation that might be required. Can the Minister tell us whether our government is on the hook for any responsibility and liability for the current condition of the property? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The property's actually relatively undeveloped and as such well, I mean, I can't speak for what the company may have decided upon but I can certainly say that the GNWT is selling the property as is, and that was part of the that will be part of the asset purchase agreement, that they all the liabilities, to the extent that there are any, will be transferred and that, of course, is the basis on which the agreement is moving forward. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary, Member for Frame Lake.
Merci, Monsieur le President. I want to thank the Minister for that. I'm happy to send her some pictures of the junk when we're finished here. But in my view, the Cantung and the Mactung saga is another example of postdevolution mismanagement of our resources. When I asked the Minister for lessons learned last time, she said that lessons learned would be considered at the time of sale. So I'm going to try the question again. Can the Minister explain what lessons have been learned about financial security and public liabilities from the Cantung and Mactung saga? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I'm not sure that the lessons learned here are necessarily the ones that the Member's expecting insofar as in this case, Mactung actually has turned out to be a fairly strategic and important critical minerals and metals project; it has been sold; it's been sold with the liabilities transferring to the owner. And hopefully, we'll actually see the development of a critical minerals and metals project. So in that sense, it actually has all gone quite well, which isn't to say that the government generally wants to go out and be the buyer of a mine. But in this sense, it did work out.
As far as securities go, well again, Mr. Speaker, this was a project that originally, under its previous ownership, that did go into CCAA, did not go through the board processes that we have today with respect to ensuring regulatory compliance. The processes that we have now are, in my view, far more robust than what they were and would hopefully not result in a situation where properties are undersecured. That is not anyone's expectation.
And, you know, so again, in that sense is that a lesson learned from this, or is that a lesson learned from devolution? Mr. Speaker, this again, I don't know that this is the time for that lesson. I think we've actually learned that lesson in another context. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for the Minister of Health and Social Services. I believe the department will work to create, you know, a number of information items on each of the specified health conditions and work with those people to get the answers they're seeking moving forward. But I think as legislators, there's some fundamental questions about, you know, whether this is a good idea in the first place. And I think one of those is costs.
So my first question for the Minister of health is how much are we currently spending on providing extended health benefits to those with specified health conditions? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member for Yellowknife North. Minister responsible for Health and Social Services.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the Department of Health and Social Services is working to make the extended health benefits more equitable. And we put out a number of products here, a discussion paper at FAQ, and a plain language summary, which talks about the supplementary health benefits for low income people, and a drug program for catastrophic costs. The amount of money we're spending right now on this, the 54 specified disease conditions, is $4.3 million, and that's for 1,514 individuals. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I guess the next question is do we know I'm actually somewhat unsure whether this is going to save us money or cost us more money, the switch from a specified list to a means tested model. Do we know how much this current proposal will cost us or save us, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you. We're in the information gathering phase, and I'm gratified to say we've been getting a lot of feedback. So we don't have a specific model that we can apply costing to. But given the fact that we're going to include more benefits for more people, we expect the program to cost more. Thank you.
Yeah, thank you, Mr. Speaker. And, yeah, I guess we're going to have find out some data there because I imagine providing prescription costs to people who already have specified diseases is more costly than, you know, just because you are a low income earner doesn't mean you get any prescriptions at all. We might bring thousands of people in who barely use the benefits. So I get there's some work to costing this. But to me the department is kind of completely gone out and engaged on, to me, what are separate questions. One, do we want to provide a means tested program; and two, do we want to get rid of the specified health. I don't know that we should be framing that as binary. And I guess my question to the Minister is why can't we keep both, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. And I appreciate the question. I don't see it as a binary situation here. The specified conditions' list covers 54 diseases. If you have ALS, as one example, you're not on that list. You're not getting any help from the government of the NWT. So the starting point was to make the program more equitable for people who not only have drug costs for chronic conditions but they also don't have any drug coverage at all. So that means for the most basic things like antibiotics. So the thing about this is that people and their conditions don't fit into these little silos very easily. So what we're trying to do here is ask the people who have the means to help pay for their own coverage and to support the people who don't have the means to get the coverage they need to live their best lives. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary, Member for Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You know, my hope is that we could find a way to work with each of those people on the specified health condition list. I know there are some very expensive drugs, and there are some people with some very unique circumstances. And we may have to keep some of the conditions. Also I know we may have to revisit the list. There's some confusion to me why cancer's on there if it's insured; what it actually is accomplishing by being on there.
But my other question is the federal government recently announced a federal dental care plan. It was means tested. And I believe there is announcement in the work at the federal level to announce a federal pharma care plan. I imagine it'll be means tested as well. I'm just wondering if the Minister has any insight from her federal colleagues about any news in that area or how that would affect our current plans moving forward. It may make a lot of what we're trying to do moot, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, first of all, the Member has raised this issue about cancer drugs, and I want to give him a specific answer to this. If somebody has cancer and they're receiving treatment in a hospital, those drugs are provided to the person without any means testing or any charge. If after the cancer treatment there is a prescription that is preventative, like tamoxifen for breast cancer, then that is part of the specified condition list, and it would be captured in this new program. So, again, in response to his points, there is there is consideration for a drug benefit plan that would cover catastrophic medical costs. For example, the most current treatment for cystic fibrosis is $300,000 per year per client, which is obviously a very huge amount of money for anyone to undertake.
So in terms of the federal government, we don't have any additional information about when pharma care is going to happen. There was a report given to the federal government on the pharma care program prior to the 2019 election, and we delayed the review of the supplementary health benefits program to wait for more information to come forward on pharma care national pharma care. It hasn't come forward. So we've decided that we need to move forward with our own review. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Monfwi.
