Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I have a lot of concerns with respect to the operations of the NWT Housing Corporation, and these are general comments so I will try to keep my comments general, but I'll probably take up the whole 10 minutes. It's a subject once I start talking about, I can't stop.
Mr. Chairman, the Housing Corporation's mandate is askew, as far as I'm concerned. I look at the mandate, as I understand it, as being to address those in need. When we talk about housing crises in the Northwest Territories, I surely hope we're talking about people who are in need. I think that the programs of the Housing Corporation should focus on those people who are in need. Yet I look at the barriers to getting housing and shelter, which everyone should have a right to, from certain groups of people and I see the barriers and I go, who is the Housing Corporation there for. I'll tell you who they're not there for. They're not there for the hard to house, because I know, for example, in the community that I represent, the hard to house go from pillar to post looking for somebody who will take them in. It will not be the NWT Housing Corporation or the LHO, and I'll tell you why. It's because they are problem tenants. Hard to house people are problem tenants. People who don't pay their rent are problem tenants. But if they are not the responsibility of the NWT Housing Corporation and the housing authorities, then whose problem are they?
We cannot get emergency shelter for people because there's no policy that the Housing Corporation allows for emergency shelter. The rules are set up in such a way as if you come to a community, you have to go on a waiting list for six months. After you've been there for six months, they don't care where you came from. They don't care if you came from Timbuktu. If you've been a community six months, you're on, and you can probably get in. But just weigh that against the irony that if you've lived in the Northwest Territories your whole life and you've got five kids, and you've gone away to school in Fort Smith to try and better yourself, and things have fallen apart because, you know, people who need social housing, their lives aren't always perfect. Now they've come back to their home community and they have to go back on a waiting list for six months. Now where is the responsiveness in terms of the programs delivered by the Housing Corporation when there is no provision for emergency housing for families, for northerners, for people who haven't just parachuted in here from who knows where? These are our people.
The other barrier I want to speak to is the fact that if you haven't paid your rent to the Housing Corporation and you apply again, if you have outstanding arrears or damages, you can't get back into housing again. So where are those people supposed to go? We just can't sort of turn a blind eye and say well, these people had problems, or they owe us money, therefore they don't qualify. Again you have to think of it in the context of where are they going to go? If not the Housing Corporation, then who? We talk about overcrowding in the communities and that, well probably the overcrowding is because the system itself sets up so many barriers to people accessing the housing that they have to go live with somebody else and sleep on somebody else's couch. So if it is truly social housing, then you have to address the social needs of the people who need that kind of support. That's where I think we have a big gap.
The application of the rent scale, the new rent scale. You know, somebody goes from a community, they all of a sudden have a good paying job at a mine, well, good for them. But then their rent becomes so high under the rent scale that they can't literally afford to pay the rent. If they're in a community that's not a market community where they have alternatives where they can go to a different landlord and rent, in many communities the NWT Housing Corporation is the only show in town. There aren't a whole lot of other private rental options available to them. So under the rent scale that's in place now, it's quite possible for somebody with a good paying job to have literally no option but than to pay the rent. Now, I know there are housing ownership programs which they should be able to access, and perhaps even mortgage programs. But again the housing has to be there to buy, or ability to build, or ability to access a piece of land to build a house. Either that, or they have to move to some other community.
The issue of rent supplement units has already been raised. I see that as an idea, and I provided, during the committee meetings, a list. When the Housing Corporation made their presentation to the committee, I did provide a list of all the rent supp payments. It's in the millions of dollars that the Housing Corporation pays out to the LHOs. Someone made reference to the fact that many of these are long-term, 20-year commitments, and, yes, they might have gone in place 10 years ago or something, and many of them are over market rate. They need to be analyzed. They need to be assessed. We need to determine if we're paying too much for those. If we are, you need to opt out on one of the five-year clauses. Yes, they're in place for 20 years, but all of them are in five-year increments so you should be able to opt out if you have another look at it and say this is not a good deal, we should not be directing so much of our funding towards these units. So I would ask you, I would beg you, I've been asking for a long time, would you please assess the rent supps that you've entered into and make sure that they're a good deal? If they're not, you should look at them on their five-year renewal date and do something about it.
The ongoing status of the market housing initiative -- and I'm just touching on these briefly, I could talk about these for a lot longer -- these were supposed to be on a cost-recovery basis. I haven't heard an update lately on whether or not...Well, first of all, I don't know how much capital we actually put in to bring these units to the communities, to set them up, to obtain the land, to heat them when they've been empty, to do everything associated with the market housing initiative. I haven't
heard those numbers lately. But I would be surprised, Mr. Chairman, if there has been a full cost-recovery on those units. How far did we go from the target? I believe initially the target was professionals required to support the community that could not find a place to rent in non-market communities, communities where there were not a lot of private options. I believe that was the original intent. So the units went in there, and maybe there's been a vast improvement in the uptake and the rent that people are paying, but I have yet to be updated of the status of that program and convinced that we have reached full cost-recovery on those, and, in fact, if they have gone to address the needs of those for which they were targeted in the first place. I would like to know how that's coming.
Something else that I don't really understand too much about the mechanics of is the harmonization initiative. I understand a little bit how you can't really be providing people with housing without them having an understanding of what that is worth, that market value, and having that somehow reflected in a fair way between income support clients and others. I understand that needs to be done. But I don't understand why the money for that public housing had to be transferred from the Housing Corporation to ECE. Because now I understand that ECE is transferring that money back to the Housing Corporation to distribute to LHOs. Now, I could be wrong, but that's my understanding of what's going on. I don't really know why you would pick up positions along the way in terms of that exercise. That part of it does not make any sense to me.
Mr. Krutko has spoke to headquarters staffing levels: 200 prior to division; 140 after division; and now just down to under 100 people. You know, 100 people is still a lot of people. I don't know all of the different activity areas which the Housing Corporation is involved in, but again I agree with many of my colleagues here who have said let's get that focus narrowed, let's get that mandate very succinct, and let's not be looking at broadening the mandate of the Housing Corporation, but let's get it really focussed on housing and not a whole lot of other things that are peripheral to that.
I'm just about out of time, Mr. Chairman, so I think I should follow my own advice and not take up the entire 10 minutes, just in case the Minister has anything to say in response to all of that. I'll get back on the list. Thanks.