Thank you. The motion is in order. To the motion.

Question.

Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion is carried.

---Carried

I think that should conclude the recommendations from this department at this time. Does this committee agree that the Minister bring in his officials at this time?

Agreed.

Thank you. Sergeant-at-Arms. For the record, Mr. Minister, would you introduce your witnesses at this time?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To my right is my Deputy Minister, Al Menard, and to my left is the Director of Finance and Administration, Mr. Jim France.

Municipal And Community Affairs

Thank you. We are on general comments on Municipal and Community Affairs. Are there any general comments? Mr. Todd.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think one of the concerns the Standing Committee on Finance had, with respect to his budget, was that as we increase responsibilities at the community level. it seems we were decreasing the support services that are required for it.

If you go back to the budget, you will see that there were some reductions in travel, and that caused me some concern because here we are talking about a major government policy, with respect to community initiative on the one hand, but on the other hand, saying we have not got enough money, it will influence our ability to deliver the kind of training and upgrading that is required at the community level. So it is a bit of a contradiction.

From my perspective, as an old local government representative from the 1970s, the role of the department then, was to work closely with municipal and aboriginal leaders to get them to understand what responsibilities were then in those days for the delivery of municipal services, fire control, and bylaws. It is now fairly complicated as we move into the 1990s.

With this significant initiative, in terms of transferring more community responsibility, it would seems to me in some ways we may, in fact, want to get back to some of our basic community development. Perhaps at a higher level, but certainly, we cannot turn over more responsibility, without the communities really fully understanding the ramifications of what it is, particularly as it related to the economic and financial component to it.

As most of you know, and I have talked at length about off-loading with the federal government to the territorial government, I would hate to see us do exactly the same at the municipal level. I think if we look around at some of our municipalities, even some of the ones that have been around for a long time, a number of them are having some serious problems with respect to the kind of levels of finance they are getting to perform existing services, whether it is Pangnirtung or Whale Cove or other communities. My feeling is the department is being a bit negligent, if you want, in trying to cut where it is most needed, and that is at the community level.

I am a strong supporter of this department. I think it has done some good work over the years, certainly, in the eastern Arctic, and I think it has brought a tremendous amount of learning to a lot of our leaders, or a sense of responsibility at the community level, and it should continue to do that. As we said earlier, in the earlier motion 59-12(2), and speaking personally, that M.A.C.A. should be the lead department in the devolution of the expense of these community initiatives.

They have the troops from the ground, it has got the understanding, the relationship with the municipalities, and it has had a long history in dealing with what I call municipal government, or local government.

As we move forward, I would hope the Minister, and his senior staff would see fit to adjust where the money is spent so that we have increased resources, quite frankly, for the skill development, at the community level. I think it is also important that in the transferring of these community initiatives, that significant discussions take place with the communities, and let us fully explain the ramifications of taking over more responsibilities. I need some assurances that the level of financing, the dollars that are going to be available, when some of these transfers take place, are they going to be adequate, or are the municipalities just going to be left holding the bag?

With respect to recreation, I find that again somewhat contradictory. We have spent significant dollars to put recreational complexes into these small communities, which by the way, in my opinion, was an excellent program. They have provided a place for most of the youth of the Arctic to go. You only have to look at the acceleration of hockey, and the way in which the kids have participated in these small communities. You cannot take away that program which was a success.

However, you know, we have got to be careful that we do not spend millions of dollars in infrastructure, then forget to put the necessary dollars to keep them running, and to keep them in a reasonable state. It seems to me, that we are off-loading on the communities, and I would suggest to you that you look again at that in the future. The last thing you want to do is, allow these millions of dollars worth of assets to deteriorate, because you cannot find sufficient funding to fund facility maintainers.

That is all I have at this time, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. General comments? Mr. Zoe.

Mr. Minister, do you want to respond to that? Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In respect to Green Plan monies, about three weeks ago we had a meeting with Renewable Resources, and the federal government to discuss how we could access the Green Plan money in terms of finding locations at the community level for water resources. We found that, in order to access the Green Plan money, the policies or the criteria which the federal government follows is very limiting to more research.

The Department of Renewable Resources and M.A.C.A. are in the process of putting together a submission to the federal government. In terms of community assessment mechanisms, we work with D.P.W. to put plans together for community infrastructures. For travel reductions, we have reduced the travel at the headquarters level. For the ones that give support to communities, we have not reduced that travel.

I agree with the Member that we are here to help communities, and we will try as much as we can to maintain the same levels of support that we give to communities in these particular levels, community recreational facilities, or leaders assistance that we provide to communities. First of all, Mr. Chairman, the department did not have a budget for this particular activity. What we have been doing is, we have been re-allocating monies to pay for community assistance.

For this year, 1992-93, we are not successful in obtaining more monies because of restraint, and also criteria that were developed by government. We will continue to work to see if we can find more resources at the community level to help them out to raise funds in this particular area as well, to look within our department to see if we can give more assistance. Thank you.

General comments. Mr. Gargan.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One of the main objectives of the department is the upgrading of community roads. I just have a few comments that I would like to make on it. The Department of Municipal and Community Affairs provides operation and maintenance funding to both tax-based and non tax-based communities. Each community receives a grant based on a formula which includes a factor for road maintenance and repair.

The allocation of the funding is at the discretion of each community, but the community is responsible for all road maintenance costs. However, for capital projects including road construction and major upgrading, M.A.C.A. provides 100 percent funding to non tax-based communities, and 50 percent funding to tax-based communities. Accordingly, to the department, occasionally a project will fall into a grey area between the two categories, and funding for road projects with the non tax-based community will be shared by the department and the community.

The Department of Municipal and Community Affairs is responsible for the development of local government with respect to the provisions of municipal programs and services. The department provides funding to both tax-based and non tax-based communities for their operation and maintenance costs. For non tax-based communities, the funding is provided to the department's operations and maintenance hamlet funding formula. The formula includes allocations for transportation, calculated according to the road use.

For roads with average use, $8.76 is allocated per metre of road, for equipment, wages and materials. For roads with heavy traffic, $9.62 is allocated per metre. The transportation allocation is also multiplied by the northern cost index, an indicator used to reflect the higher costs of doing business in some communities compared to Yellowknife.

In addition to the transportation funding, $135 is provided per culvert and $195 per street light multiplied by the northern cost index. The department provides this funding on an unconditional basis. Communities may use department calculations of average costs as a guide for their budget planning, but are not required to allot funding in accordance with that formula. However, the communities are responsible for all road maintenance and repair costs for this funding.

The Department of Municipal and Community Affairs provides additional funding to communities under the Capital Program. This program funds road construction and major upgrading for public safety and transportation, where the magnitude of the work exceeds normal maintenance and repairs. Fifty percent of the costs are provided to tax-based again, and 100 percent cost to non tax-based.

The department has a five year capital forecasting plan for funding expectant projects. According to the department, situations arise approximately once or twice a year which are not dealt with according to the above policy. There are no clear guidelines within the department to classify a project as major upgrading rather than as normal maintenance and repair.

Occasionally a project falls within a grey area and an agreement is reached whereby funding for a project is shared by the department, and the non-tax based community for its block funding. This apparently occurs primarily in situations where the department might otherwise not fund the project to this connection with the communities operation and maintenance responsibility, or might otherwise not fund it so quickly.

The proposed road upgrading in Fort Providence is such a project according to the department. The officials say that the department was approached, by the community, with a request for one half of the cost of the upgrading. The project was not budgeted for, this year, within the capital plan. The gravel application to the road, was proposed, which might be considered, and operations and maintenance is the responsibility of the community. However, as the project was needed, and was a major undertaking, the community has taken the initiative to propose cost shared work, the department agreed to contribute one half of the cost.

For another perspective, however, it might be argued that the road upgrading in Fort Providence meets the criteria of the department's Capital Program. In that, it is a major upgrading for the public safety and transportation, and the magnitude of the work exceeds normal maintenance and repairs. If so, the departments would normally fund 100 percent of the costs.

The department's five year capital plan, lists a total of 43 capital projects to its plans for non-tax based communities. One of the projects, within the Deh Cho constituency, the community road on the Hay River Reserve, is scheduled for upgrading during the 1994-95 fiscal year. There are no specific guidelines to determine whether a project will be considered, and the operations and maintenance responsibility of the community, or a capital project. The department has undertaken a policy review, of which one objective is, to develop such criteria. The policy itself is supposed to be completed by this fall, Mr. Chairman.

I would like to ask the Minister whether, or not, that policy has been developed?

Thank you. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are still reviewing the standards, and criteria, to develop that policy. We are hoping to have that policy in place before the beginning of the budget cycle. Thank you.

Thank you. General comments. Mr. Ningark. Mr. Gargan.

Mr. Chairman, I was not listening, sorry. What was that again?

Maybe if the Members are asking some questions, they should be more careful and listen. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We are still developing standards, and criteria, to develop the policy. We would hope that the policy will be in place before the budget cycle begins. Thank you.

Thank you. General comments. Mr. Gargan.

Mr. Chairman, last year, I wrote to the Minister in regard to the culverts being blocked off, as we had a hard time during the thaw out season. When the snow melted, we had a real situation in which culverts were blocked off, and it really deteriorated the condition of the road in Fort Providence. A lot of the roads in the community collapsed, and there was not too much you could do about it. The heavy vehicles were sinking into these roads, getting stuck, and they had to block off different sections of the road, because it was really quite bad.

What the community had to do, because it did not have any monies allocated that year for this problem, the only approach they could take was the Hamlet put in $5,400, and Municipal and Community Affairs came up with about $5,530, and in that kind of situation the community had no choice, but to do the work. They did it because they had monies they could utilize from the previous years that they had saved up, but also they had to sacrifice some of their contributions savings towards the curling rink, in order to do that. We had a situation in which, if we had voted regarding the situation of the flooding, maybe we would not have been in that situation.

I also wrote to the Minister with regard to getting a steam pressure system for the community. Again, its response, they do not have standards, or criteria, for purchasing that type of equipment. I do not know whether or not it is a first in the north for a situation like this to arise, but every spring we run into the same kind of situation. It is not because the culvert is not covered up, but because the water builds up in those culverts which you cannot avoid, unless you have a plug to plug the culverts with.

So water builds up and then it freezes again, and it does not take much, when you still have ice and snow in the ditches for culverts to be frozen right through. The equipment that they have in Fort Providence is a small little steam generator that they use to clean vehicles, and that is what they use. Last year, it took them about a week before they got through one culvert with that little steamer.

I think the Minister indicated that it costs about $20,000 to $22,000 to get a good steamer. It is a lot cheaper to purchase something like this than to go through about $113,000 worth of work. The community had no choice in that. Has there been any developments in that area with regard to saving costs? A suggestion is that communities that require those steamers should be allowed to purchase that equipment, as part of the capital process of the department, then the department would not be spending...

I realize that the department spent $56,000 as their cost, but they should have covered the whole thing, $113,000.

Thank you. Mr. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We will cover the full costs of extraordinary maintenance. I know in the eastern territory, when the culverts get blocked off, it is very, very difficult to thaw them out. What the communities have done, I do not know if they do it in the western arctic, is that they put a half inch, or a quarter inch pipe inside the culvert, and they put fluids in it that do not freeze.

It is a lot cheaper for the community to make a hole through a culvert that way than to steam it. I think that technology could be applied where the Member is concerned, and it is quite cheap to do that. Cheaper than buying the big equipment. I think that the community got a steamer from Hay River the last time, and if they could do that, we would encourage it.

For extraordinary maintenance, the department will assist the community, or pay for the whole shot of the extraordinary maintenance cost for that type of thing. Thank you.