Thank you, Madam Chair. I have just a few general comments. We, as a committee, had a number of meetings with the Housing Corporation over the last number of months, and I just want tell the Minister and the officials there that it has been generally a very positive relationship. I think just by happenstance of having a new Minister and a new president of the corporation might have, not that I'm saying anything bad about the former ones, I'm just saying that sometimes new players bring an opportunity to work on something. I'm happy to note that we have been able to work through the mandate and the consolidation of new programs. I don't believe there are a lot of changes being made because of the consolidation, but it is certainly streamlining and improving in some areas.

I'd like to know from the Minister whether that will be used as an opportunity to continue to improve and to refine the programs and such, with a main goal that we would like to have as much housing and houses built and enhanced in our communities as possible.

Another question I want to ask is we know that the federal presence in the housing contribution to the North will continue to decline. I know that I've heard...I'm sure the Premier, or Minister who is also the Premier, is looking for ways to impress upon the federal government that we need them to step in further. There have been media reports about what's happening in that regard, so if he could update us on whether there is any movement in that regard.

My third question has to do with land. Our committee report spoke about passing the issue of all the players working together to increase the availability of land, because obviously that's the essential part of any housing initiative; however, that's not to say that this issue is not

urgent. We would like to see the corporation and the government move as far and as quickly as possible on that issue. I'd like to know if the Minister could update us on what sort of measures he's taken to move that process along.

Gee, I'm being really quick today. I don't want to have too long of a preamble because we've been here for, this is the fourth year and I've probably said everything I need to say, unless of course I want to have some follow-up to some of the answers that the Minister will give. However, the fourth one has to do with what we found in our committee review. We mentioned that in the report, about the fact that lots of contractors, well, maybe it's not lots, but there are a few contractors who don't do the work as well as they should or not completing the work in a quality way. I think we were overly generous in our report saying that, you know, if you don't do the work, you're not going to get work. I would like to know, why hasn't that happened before? In any private contract thing, say if you're building a house and somebody doesn't get the job done, then they are not going to get paid. I would like to know if the corporation has such a policy in place where I would think that any contract work...The payment plan could be divided so that you do the first part of the work...It could be money upfront, but, you know, payments are made on a base-by-base basis with the last payment being held back until all the work is done, or done in a satisfactory way. I would like to know from the Minister what is in place to make sure that happens. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Let me say, first of all, that the restructuring or the consolidation of the programs has in some ways taken all the pieces and built four new programs. However, it has also added some new emphasis in it. One of our goals, as a government and as a Housing Corporation, is to develop self-reliance. We realize more than ever that we have to have a more structured way of doing the education, the training, the preparing of people so that they can successfully move into homeownership. The STEP program is essentially new. We were doing some training, but this is a more structured way, the four modules that people go through and they understand financing. It will also help them in areas outside of housing and we certainly make that program available to others.

The other one that is new as well is the Transitional Lease Program, where we will help people to go into a lease arrangement where they're assisted while they get used to the idea and the responsibilities of homeownership, including the financial as well as maintenance of homes.

Those two are our new emphasis. Then the others are really taking a lot of the other programs, rolling them together and working. We also, in addition to our own GNWT program, we also deliver a number of programs for CMHC. Gradually, we want to see those programs, like the rehabilitation programs rolled into ours so that we don't have four programs plus the federal programs but they all fit together under the CARE program, the Contributing Assistance to Residential Enhancements, and so on. There is a change; it's a subtle one, but I think it's an important one in terms of building self-reliance.

Madam Chair, on the other one, we have to work together more cooperatively as departments and as corporations in the government. Certainly, MACA and the Housing Corporation people have to work together very closely on the land issues. I like the direction, the advice of the committee and so on, with regard to streamlining our income support system along with housing so that everybody has fair opportunity and a level playing field, so we don't have one system over here and another one over there. It's important that ECE and the Housing Corporation continue to work very closely together.

The other issue the Member raised has to do with contractors. While it is written in every contract that the contractor has to complete that contract, we may not have been as diligent as we should have been in the past in making sure that everybody does a job and they do a good job when they do it. Too many times things were beginning to slip and they just weren't getting them done on a timely basis. Sometimes it would go years where they wouldn't put the trim on or wouldn't put some small piece on to complete the house. We're not going to tolerate that any more. It's frustrated too many people by having a house that isn't entirely completed. While we don't have a written policy on it, we have, through the president and myself and the regional people and so on, made sure we got the message out to the contractors that they have to complete the job. Otherwise we may not give them another contract. In fact, our approach is going to be that they don't get another contract until they finish up what they're doing. There may be overlaps because they get, or the time isn't up to finish one of them, but we want them to do the complete job. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Ms. Lee.

I think committee will be looking to see how we improve that contractor/contractee situation. With the remaining minutes here, I would like to comment on what I'm hearing out there about this transfer of housing subsidy, or housing program, to ECE, some part of it. Sitting where we are sitting and having been advised and briefed about why this transfer came about and what its objective is to achieve, it sounds good sitting here; however, listening to the people out there, there are a lot of problems.

As a committee, we heard of people losing jobs because they couldn't go through the training program properly in the communities. We heard of backlogs in application process for housing and everything being forced to move to the regional centres. In the city of Yellowknife we are hearing, and I think the Minister might want to check this, and I guess now with the ECE department, but I understand that the rental complaint from those people who are having problems with arrears because of the changes and calculations and what's being included. I mean the number of appeals filed to the rental office as a result of this transfer, as I understand it, has tripled, if not doubled, in the last year.

From where we sit, I remember hearing that ECE was going to take the money and that they were going to come up with a detailed plan on this before we would have a chance to do this. I don't think we had a chance to go through all the details, and I'm still not clear as to why we had to do this, other than making everything consistent. However, I don't think our objective is to make sure that,

you know, that...Not all programs are the same and we don't need a situation where someone working in Income Security Program telling somebody who's in the Housing Corporation that, you know, I know that you sold something in YK Trader website and you have extra income and you have to come and report that or people who have...People who get housing assistance from the Housing Corporation aren't necessarily those who would be eligible for income support, for example. I'm not saying that any one group is better than another or anything like that. I'm just saying we have all sorts of programs in government that are aimed at different people with different needs at different points in their lives and I don't think we, as a government, with this transfer, have done enough to make sure that we don't lose sight of the program end, you know program objective we're trying to achieve.

I guess I'll have to ask the Minister, what role does the Housing Corporation play anymore in this regard? Or is it just all being transferred to ECE and you have nothing to do with it anymore in terms of some of the complaints that we're hearing? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Lee. Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Madam Chair. The Housing Corporation hasn't just handed it over to ECE and washed its hands of it. We do continue to work with a steering committee, a very active steering committee, lead by, I think, the deputy minister or one of the senior people in Education and senior level in the Housing Corporation. They have been working regularly. They have met with the LHOs and are meeting again in a couple of weeks and continuing to iron out the rough spots during this transition.

Madam Chair, the transition, we knew would take some time but, overall, I have to say that the number of complaints we're hearing is far fewer than it was even three months ago. It's improving a lot as people get used to the new system. The main reason for doing it, Madam Chair, really comes down to having us, as a government, having one system of income support that is fair and equitable to everybody. What we were developing is...We got $128 million out there as a government and with so many different ways of subsidizing people we were ending up with some people getting, if they went this route, they'd get one answer; if they went over here, they'd get something else. Now we've got that down to one, so everybody is treated equitably.

There has been some adjustment period. That's necessary, we knew it, both for LHOs as well for the Education people and we're working our way through that, I think, quite successfully. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. On the list I have Mr. McLeod and Mr. Braden for general comments. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to thank the Minister and his officials for appearing before us. There has been quite a change in the last year with our relationship with the Housing Corporation. It seems to me like you are starting to listen to what we have to say, and what we have to say is what we're hearing from back home.

A couple of comments and a couple of questions, if I may. In responding to the question from Mr. Ramsay, the Minister said that there was 185 units last year, 100 of them were complete, so that leaves 85. We're getting 168 this year. Is that 85 figure included in this 168? Or is this 168 plus the 85? Did we lose the money for the 85 that we had last year? I'll start with that for now, Madam Chair. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Handley.

Madam Chair, we are getting 168 for the 2007-08 money plus we'll get the total of the 185 for the 2006-07 money that will flow into it. We don't lose any units. The 85 or so outstanding are not part of the 168.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Minister, for that. So we're getting 253 units this year? Okay. That sounds like a good number.

The one thing that I do want to comment on is the mortgage arrears. I think the Minister and his department are doing a good thing starting to go after people that carry large arrears. It's really not fair, like we read in our report, to the people that are paying their mortgages on time and they look at their neighbour and they are three or four years behind and nothing is happening. That doesn't send a very good message. I commend the department for starting to clamp down a little harder on them because that just casts a whole shadow on this whole housing ownership issue when you have 463 clients owing that much money. I support that mainly because there are people who are faithfully paying and then this is taxpayers' money that we're speaking about, too. It's not fair to the taxpayer who is paying $1,500 a month mortgage to see something like that.

One other question I do have, you mentioned a figure of $4.441 million. Now that, I'm assuming, is the money that comes from the actual public housing tenants. I think we got a $36 million figure and this is the money that's actually out of their pockets. Am I correct? Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Madam Chair. With regard to arrears, our approach to this is to try to stem that increase in arrears. It has been growing and we want to limit that. The way to do it is to make sure that people are making their current payments plus paying something down on the arrears they've developed. Second is to catch those arrears early, because once it gets to be an unmanageable amount then people just give up on. Our approach is going to be to try to be firmer earlier on.

In terms of the housing clients and the rental that they pay, it is the $4.441 million that I referred to, that clients in public housing pay to the corporation as their rent. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Thank you, Minister, for that. That comes to $1,432 average per unit a year. That's a pretty good deal, if you ask me.

The other question that I do have is with regard to all the programs that you have coming out this year. The public housing units, I believe you said you've got 71 public housing replacement units. I'd like to know -- and this is a concern that I've heard from contractors and I've brought it up to the Minister and his officials before -- is the amount of time that it takes to get the contracts out. You've got 71 public housing units coming. Of the 85 units that were carried over from last year, I'm not sure how many of those are public housing units and how many are homeownership, but with the public housing units do you have the plans ready to go, do you have the specs ready to go? Is that something you can put out to tender the minute the Legislative Assembly approves the budget so you know what you've been approved for and if you have them out? The contractors have said you'd get a better price having them out early and you get a better product. So is that something we can look at? Do you have plans ready to go as we speak and are just waiting for the budget approval? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Yes, the amount we have in rental collections is low, it's fourteen-hundred and some dollars I think, if the Member's math is right. It's true; we do have a good deal. Some people get the public housing units for zero for seniors, some get it for $32, some pay considerably higher, but it does average low. So we do provide a great deal of subsidy in public housing. In terms of getting the contracts out on a timely basis, that one we've set as a high priority and, Madam Chair, yes, we do have plans, we do have proposals that are ready to go out. In some cases we might run into delays because of negotiated contracts, but we'll work our way through that.

Madam Chair, I must say that we do stick our neck out a bit here. For example, in the Sahtu region we already have packages that are purchased on the assumption that the Legislative Assembly is going to approve something for us, but that is the only way to get them in on the winter road. Otherwise, we're going to be waiting until fall again. So we're taking some chance here. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Do we have anything on the go for Inuvik? Any prior commitments for Inuvik?

---Laughter

No, I think that is a good idea. Like you said, take advantage of the winter roads. So I fully support something like that, but I do just want to say that I do appreciate the fact that the Housing Corp seems to be listening to what we're saying now and I appreciate the fact, and a lot of people sort of appreciate the fact, that they are providing housing. There's a lot of older stock there that will eventually be replaced. So there's going to be a lot of complaints coming in regarding the state of some of the units, not all of them, because I've seen units that are old that are well looked after, but I think we're on the right road here and I just want to encourage the Housing Corp to continue to just get their house in order and I think everything else will follow, because I think we are starting to see some improvement in the Housing Corp and I'll look forward to the same thing next year, hopefully. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. I don't think there was any question there, unless the Premier would like to respond. Mr. Handley.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Just very briefly, there are 81 units out there with a condition rating lower than 60 percent and of those, half of those are, right now, slated for demolition or repair or fail. If there are privately owned units, homeownership units, then there is nothing preventing us from using affordable housing money to bring those up to a good standard as well. We don't necessarily have to just ignore the privately owned ones if people need assistance from us. So that will be another way. We're spending roughly $7 million on repairs and upgrades to public housing units this year. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Next I have Mr. Braden.