Question is still being called. All those in favour? Opposed, if any? The motion is carried.

--Carried

Congratulations, Mr. Arvaluk.

Item 16, first reading of bills.

Item 17, second reading of bills. Item 18, consideration in committee of the whole of bills and other matters: Tabled Document 9-12(2), Strength at Two Levels; Tabled Document 10-12(2), Reshaping Northern Government; Motion 6-12(2), Discussion on Sobriety Clause in Contribution Agreements; Committee Report 10-12(2), Special Committee on Constitutional Reform Report on the Multilateral Conferences on the Constitution; Ministers' Statement 71-12(2), Federal Funding, Social Housing, NWT, with Mr. Pudluk in the chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The committee would like to discuss Ministers' Statement 71-12(2).

Does the committee agree?

Agreed.

We will take a short break.

--SHORT RECESS

The committee will come to order. Before we begin I would like to say a few words about getting a quorum in the afternoon. This is only a warning. If it happens again when I am sitting in the chair, there will be no more breaks in the afternoon. First and last warning.

Ministers' Statement 71-12(2), Federal Funding, Social Housing, NWT

We will now discuss Ministers' Statement 71-12(2). Mr. Ningark.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe my colleague, Mr. Koe, may have comments. I thought he was going to respond to the statement

General comments. Mr. Koe.

Yes, if I can speak on behalf of my absent colleague. Basically, at the time this statement was made, I think some Members were a little curious as to some of the discussions surrounding federal funding for housing; we were aware that the Minister responsible had gone to Ottawa by his noticeable absence during those two days, and the Government Leader had announced that the Minister would be down there. I guess we were hoping for more detail on the results of the meetings, but the statement indicates that talks are still ongoing, and we are waiting for the federal Cabinet or the federal Minister's favourable response to our government's proposals on federal housing. I would ask the Minister responsible, are these discussions ongoing? Can the Minister give some indication as to when he expects to see the final results? Will we got 35,000 units eventually, according to the housing plans?

I guess that is a question to the Minister. I know these are negotiations, and I do not expect the Minister to put all his cards on the table in this forum until a lot of these negotiations are done, but maybe the Minister can indicate to us when he is planning further meetings, and when does he expect this to be finalized?

Thank you. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I met with the Hon. Elmer MacKay last week in Ottawa, on the 17th and 18th of June, and when meeting with him I wanted to make sure that he understood the uniqueness of our housing problems in the Northwest Territories. I made sure he understood that, in the Territories, we are basically a first generation of people coming off the land. We have a high demand for housing. We do not have an old stock of housing to fix, like the southern provinces do. We are basically talking about getting people out of igloos and tents, and into housing.

I think he understands that now, and he also understands that the birth rate in the Northwest Territories is twice the national average.

Many of our communities also depend highly on housing for jobs. I told the Minister that in the past, with the fur industry, our people did contribute to the community. They did have some way to generate money, and a lot of our young people now look forward to the summer to work on construction jobs in the housing field. If you take that hope away from them, they are basically left without any hope of gaining any meaningful employment. So I stressed that point. I also stressed, that in turn, it would basically drive up the social and suicidal problems that we have, because people would not have any hope of gaining employment from new housing construction.

I also pointed out the problems we are having with health, because of lack of adequate and suitable housing. In the Northwest Territories, we had over 50 cases of tuberculosis occurring since 1988.

Approximately 50 to 55 per cent of our public housing clients are also on social services, which makes a difference from the South. Our government supplies social housing, and the biggest part of our clientele is aboriginal people, so they have a certain commitment to supply housing to aboriginal people.

I also made it clear to the Minister that the territorial government's highest priority is housing. We spend eight per cent of our budget on housing. There is no other province in Canada that spends close to that of their provincial budgets. The highest any province spends is one per cent. Some do not spend any of their own money on housing.

I made it clear that we are committed to try to solve our housing problems; that we do not continually expect to go back to the pot for more money. We would make commitments to cut costs and cut increased expenses by redesigning our units and getting a better bang for our buck, getting people to kick in more for the cost of their own housing, and also look at the programs. I felt, when I came away from the meeting, that he understood our problems, and he knows that we have unique problems in the Northwest Territories.

I will be going again on Sunday to the Ministers' meeting in Toronto to discuss the same things again. All the provincial governments' Ministers of Housing will be there, as well as Elmer MacKay, Minister of Housing for the federal government. So I am going to pursue the issue more at that time. We are also speaking to and writing to the Minister of Indian Affairs,

Mr. Siddon; the Minister of Finance, Mr. Mazankowski; as well as Joe Clark, the Minister of Constitutional Development. It is an ongoing thing. There should be some finality to this in July or August because the year is getting late.

What we are trying to do is at least get our funding back to the 1991-92 level of funding that was in place at that time. I also talked to the Minister about our share of the federal pie; that no way could we accept any reduction in that share. Right now, we enjoy 6.44 per cent of the federal social housing budget, and we have to continue to enjoy that if not increase it, because of our unique circumstances.

That is basically where things stand right now, and, as things develop, I would be happy to let Members know as soon as possible. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One of the discussions that the Minister indicated was with regard to the unique circumstances of the North. I guess one of the other things about the uniqueness of the North is also the way that the federal government treats the aboriginal housing program; that is, it differs where the Department of Indian Affairs gives money directly to reserves. In the North, it is all put under one pot and everybody benefits from it.

One of the things that Mr. Morin is aware of, and before Mr. Morin, Mr. Butters, and before Mr. Butters, Mr. Wray, is the situation that for social housing up here, at least there is no requirement for ministerial guarantee. But there is a requirement by this government to require indemnification. I guess this has never happened. I am wondering if we have a situation in which, in Fort Liard for example, there were 20 social houses built I believe in that situation, indemnification was provided by this government. Or did the Minister, Tom Siddon give ministerial guarantee for the construction of 20 social housing units?

We provide public housing in all other communities except with regard to the Hay River Reserve, and in the last six years we have not provided the adequate level of housing because we cannot fit the programs to fit the reserve. In southern Canada on the reserve, they fund you directly, so your 'housing needs are addressed at that level. But that is not the case. I am wondering if you have discussed the situation with the federal Minister, Mr. MacKay at all.

Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am not up-to-date on the issue of indemnification in Laird at all, Mr. Gargan. I was to the reserve in Hay River this winter to visit the people there with Mr. Gargan. They raised the issue of land and public housing. We are looking into that. I never mentioned anything about that to Mr. MacKay when I met with him because I focused on the one issue, the 55 per cent cuts to housing.

Mr. Dent.

Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have let the other provinces know. I went to an emergency provincial meeting a month or so ago in Ottawa, and I let them know about our special circumstances. My understanding is that it is a federal responsibility to cut up the pie or the federal portions and deliver them on the advice of the conference that I am going to next week. It is my understanding that I have no information on the 1992 survey to take with me next week. Maybe somebody else will tell me differently, but that is my understanding right now.

Mr. Lewis.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We have had good fortune in the past in having a pretty large allocation of housing for the size of the population we have. It is because the federal government recognized our unique circumstances, as the Minister has pointed out. I would like to get some clarification on some of the statements made on the document we are discussing today.

It is pretty clear to me that the federal government would very much like to get out of housing. In fact, it was one of the federal institutions that they were quite happy to put on the block to go to the provinces so that they can deal with their own problems in their own way. But on the basis of the meeting that the Minister had with our federal counterparts, It is not clear to me exactly what is meant when you say that the three Ministers - MacKay, Siddon and Mazankowski - will pursue ways and means of allocating sufficient federal funding for northern housing. Reading it just as literally as I can, that means they are going to do it. It is just a question of finding a way of doing it. They are going to do it, but they have not figured out how yet. So in his statement, I wonder if the Minister is really saying he has solved the problem and has convinced them that we are unique and we have to have these levels; and that we are going to do it, but just give us time now until the 29th of June, and we will have it all fixed up.

However, I know that when our own Minister goes to meet with his provincial counterparts, it will not be a meeting with MacKay and other federal people to see whether they have delivered on the promise or not. It will be a meeting of provincial Ministers where they will discuss the federal plan which, according to this document anyway, really reduces the amount of federal commitment to social housing, and they are going to give the bad story to each of the provincial Ministers. This is the story; we just do not have the money, and this is what we are going to do. Then, if there is going to be a reaction obviously each of the provincial Ministers is going to argue for their own particular jurisdiction and to indicate how the federal government should be dealing with each of these jurisdictions.

So I suppose the concern I have is that this document gives us the indication that the Minister has been successful, in convincing people, and they are going to solve it; but, they just do not know how yet. They do not know what the ways or means will be, but it is going to be done. And when he meets the people at the meeting on June 29th then he does

not have to do any more fighting because the money is going to be there. It is just a question of defending whatever the federal government wants to do against the other provincial Ministers who may not see it exactly the same way that Mr. Elmer MacKay sees it. Do I have it right?

Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If it was good news, and if he said, "Yes, we are going to do it," I guarantee, Mr. Lewis, that would be in big block letters right at the beginning of the statement. I did not get a solid commitment from him. He committed to talk to Mr. Mazankowski as well as Mr. Siddon on the issue and we are going to continue to work on it. As far as the Ministers' meeting in Toronto is concerned, my understanding is that we will talk at that time about the provincial share of the national budget, and I will be there to defend my share. But there is also opportunity to meet with Mr. MacKay at that time. It is not all in one big room. I will continue to push the issue with him at that time.

Thank you. Supplementary, Mr. Lewis.