Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, one of the main concerns I have with regard to the issue of housing, is that we still do have two standards, one of which is for aboriginal housing, and the other is for the public service, which are provided with housing subsidies.
We spend over $17 million a year, Mr. Chairman, on housing subsidies. I do not know how involved the Minister is with regard to negotiating the C.A.P., and trying to maintain the level we have now with regard to housing, but if you allow the civil service, or the bureaucrats to also negotiate, I wonder how serious they would be?
You have bureaucrats meeting with bureaucrats addressing a housing situation, in which they really have no problem with, themselves. They have subsidies, and they are on salaries so I have much difficulty if the breakdown is as a result of not enough effort being done on the part of the bureaucracy, then the Members should know about that.
The other thing, Mr. Chairman, is that before the housing transfer occurred in the Northwest Territories, the responsibility for housing was with the Department of Indian Affairs, for Indian and Inuit housing. After the transfer happened, it was a housing program for everybody, and a lot of people that are even non-residents up here, have benefitted from those programs.
I think we should really also be directing our questions, not only to C.M.H.C., but also to the Department of Indian Affairs, with regard to their obligations to Indian and Inuit people. Because the money that goes to those communities, now goes to C.M.H.C. The other problem is that if we cannot find a solution, then the Minister should also seriously think about having the program transferred back to Indian Affairs, so that under that regime, perhaps we might be able to get ministerial guarantees to build non-profit housing, as it is called in the south.
The Minister would then guarantee C.M.H.C. that, in the event of a default on non-profit housing, then the department would cover that cost. Mr. Chairman, the Minister asked for some suggestions on how they might be able to address it, and I think that these are some of the suggestions that I have. I do not have any other, except to say that we do have a large, housing subsidy for civil servants which is about $17 million, but there are a lot of other benefits that we spend on civil servants.
I think we should really look at where the dollars are going with regard to that and, whether or not we might be able to make changes to the benefits. I know that there is a collective agreement on that, but I think we should really seriously look at whether or not, at this point in time, we are affecting the people. Does the service directly affect the communities and the people, the aboriginal people in particular? We should seriously consider ways in which we might be able to look at the existing budget, and whether or not we might be able to make some compromises. In my opinion, I feel that communities are the ones that are being short changed, and as much as I hate to say it, perhaps there is concern by the bureaucracy about it, but as long as they are the ones who have all the luxury as an employee of the government, I think we missed having to deliver programs to the communities, and I think the sacrifice should go both ways. I mean right now, the penalties are on the communities, the programs are suffering, but nothing else, the persons who are delivering those programs are not suffering as a result of that. I would ask the Executive, not only the Minister himself, but the whole Executive, to look at that, too. We have a situation where we are $20 million dollars short, and the Minister did say that he cannot find it in the existing budget. I think one of the big things that happened during the constitutional process, was that we took a leap of faith, as it was called, and I think this is one in which that is not the best thing to do, but I think that might be the one solution. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.