Minister of Housing.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To the Member’s point, he talks about the local economic development and the Housing Corporation in partnership with the LHOs are some of the biggest employers in the community whether it’s guys doing maintenance or during the summer you can have up to 16 or 17 people if you’re doing a lot of the M and I work yourself. So we contribute quite a bit in that regard. The local materials, I think I made reference to yesterday, were possible. We’d love to use local materials for construction, however they do have to meet a standard and if those materials were to meet the building standard, then we’d be glad to use them.

Housing is always interested in partnerships. We have partnership with... And the Member and I discussed this yesterday in the Chamber on the good work that Yellowknife was doing, and I said then that we were at the table with them and continue to work with them. It is our intent to be part of the long-term plan on this Affordable Housing Initiative and the affordable housing organization when it rolls out.

So we want to be a part of that. We need to have discussion with committee on some of what they’d like to see in some of our longer term goals as far

as planning, because we’re getting to a point now that unless we work out arrangements with the deep-pocketed CMHC, we’re going to have to look at creative and innovative ways to continue to deliver with some declining funding. So we’re always looking to develop partnerships with folks out there that have the same interests that we do of providing affordable housing to residents of the Northwest Territories. It’s an ongoing process and I’m looking forward to some committee time to seek their input and incorporate that into a long-term vision.

I am cognizant of the references in the discussion we had yesterday and so on. I appreciate the Minister’s comments. Again I’m trying to emphasize, too, the coordination role and integration with other government departments and agencies and wouldn’t expect that the Housing Corporation would do all this. There are other departments that could assist with developing the local materials so that they did meet standards. The Housing Corporation could probably work to come up with some forms of appropriate housing that perhaps didn’t have the same types of standards and meet the situation halfway. There are others involved in capacity building that could be brought into the equation and I’m sure are. But that’s the sort of thing that I was looking for. Sort of the strategic planning sorts of things. I think we need to, as the Minister says, our resources are declining sooner or later, and more and more, almost regardless of what happens, we’re going to be depending on local capacity for these things. I’m trying to seek ways, as I’m sure the Minister is, to help ensure that those skills are on the ground in all our communities so that when we do hit rock bottom or should we, the potential is there to pick up the slack.

I again appreciate the comments of the Minister and I would just ask him to make sure that is emphasized in the strategic planning for the Housing Corporation. Just a comment.

Mr. McLeod, did you want to respond to the comment?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We will take committee’s advice and input when we’re developing the strategy. We need to make sure that when the money is declining, we’re able to meet the challenge. We do continue to support local development. I know from experience that there were times where the Housing Corporation would make a commitment to buy materials from local producers and distribute them to the LHOs, and unfortunately these products didn’t quite measure up and there were issues with that. But we’re always looking for ways that we can continue to support and we’ll make it part of our strategy and work with, like I said, committee, because they know best what works in the

community and what people are saying. I commit to the Member that we will continue to do that.

Thank you very much, Mr. McLeod. Next on my list I have Mr. Krutko.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I believe that the corporation realizes we can’t do everything. I think it’s critical that we do formulate partnerships, especially for communities that are trying to find unique ways to deal with the housing crises in our communities. Also trying to work with the clients to work around some of the situations. I think it’s through those partnerships that we are going to have to develop a way.

A good example is the liaison positions that were put into communities. It was a $20,000 investment and for that investment that was made, it really improved the communications between the community clients, the political organizations in the community, and the people at the regional level and headquarters. You had a means of communicating. You had people on the ground that were local and really realized the importance of housing programs and services to our communities. I think for that $20,000 investment versus having somebody that’s hired full time and having them in headquarters and having to put them up in government offices, that the savings were huge compared to the practice of today.

I think it’s important that we sometimes have to take a look at where the highest needs are. I know you just put out your report and it looks like there’s been some major increases in housing upwards of 10 percent from the previous survey. It would be interesting to see what the previous survey was compared to the one presented in the House here yesterday.

Again, I think it’s critical that this government and the Housing Corporation build on those relationships, because I think, like you say, we do realize that we’re going to have some challenges going forward. But, I think, if we can find unique ways to deliver services maybe a little cheaper, a little more unique ways of doing it, that we can save ourselves money in the long term.

The other issue that I’d like to reflect is in regard to the whole area of single housing. I mentioned earlier in regard to dealing with single dwellings to family units to aging populations by way of elder care and, more importantly, realizing that we do have to have different types of housing units to meet the different segments of our population. I think it’s important to realize that we look at our programs by way of need. I know the frustration from a lot of community members that we have a lot of units in our communities and yet we still see the percentages going up by need in regard to core need, but yet the Housing Corporation has a couple hundred units on the ground, boarded up, not being used. I think if you got those units up and ready to

go or simply getting rid of them and giving them to individuals, that it will reduce the core needs in a lot of our communities. I think it’s important that we do look at that.

I would just like to leave it at that and let the Minister respond to my questions. I may have a few more later. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Minister McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think the Member said it very well when he first started, when he said the Housing Corporation can’t do everything. That’s a very important comment, especially with the challenges we face right now. We do continue to work with the communities. We’re trying to have community-based decisions. We work with communities with lease commitments. We have communities where we’re leasing space from them. In some communities, a small community might be one building that we’re leasing from them and being rented out. The housing for staff was another one where there was a good example of the Housing Corporation working in partnership with the communities, the dev corps, the community corps. There’s been a great deal of interest in that. So we’re working with them.

The single dwellings, that again it goes back to another challenge we’re facing with declining funding. We’ll have to have a look at how we do our infrastructure. If it’s more economical to do multi-family type buildings then that’s the direction we may have to go. We see some of our biggest need being single and one-bedroom units. I think that’s some of our highest needs. The elders, we continue and we will work with Health and Social Services to come up with a plan. If we can form a partnership then we’d be able to put the infrastructure up. So it is a growing concern, especially with the changing demographics and more people getting, I don’t want to say older, but getting more experienced.

Then the vacant units, I did quote some numbers before. We do have a number of vacant units across the Territories and we are trying to find solutions for some of the homeownership. The public housing ones are some of the numbers that I quoted where there is work being done to approximately 150 units. Once that work gets completed, and this year with the huge influx of money from the feds we’re able to do a lot of major M and I’s, and that could be one of the reasons we have so many vacant units. I can commit to this Assembly and to all Members that it will be our goal in the coming year, in the coming fiscal year, to try and knock all those vacant units off so when the Housing Corporation reports back to this Assembly this time next year, I’m hoping that our numbers are way down and there’s not so many vacant units. As the Member said, it does affect our overall core

need, so if we can get these 150 units on the ground then that will go a long way into meeting the core need, and I think that’s going to be a goal of ours. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

One of the other areas that we do, as a corporation, have to look at is that we are going to be taking back the rent supp program from housing. I noted that that money is still in the ECE budget but again, it has to come over. So there is going to be a transitional period.

I know that we were looking at some alternatives in regard to challenges we’re facing as the Housing Corporation such as land development. I know we have put land officers in place in different areas to assist in that area, but I think with the decline of the different programs, we may have to see where we can fit those positions moving forward or finding ways of…because we are looking at transitional process before we have some major construction by way of the 500 units under the Affordable Housing Initiative.

Now, most of the money that we’re looking at coming forward is more dealing with retrofits. So I think because we’re shifting our focus in regard to actually physically finding land for housing now, actually moving to bring our houses up to certain standards by retrofits, that we now have a different group of delivery agencies that we’re going to have to look at in regard to those services. I’m just wondering where are we in regard to making the transition from actually physically building housing to renovating units.

We are working with MACA on a land development strategy, but we have made significant progress in the last little while. Communities where there was some land tied up are starting to make more and more land available to the Housing Corp, because they realize too that it’s beneficial to them. We’ve seen a couple of good examples of that. If that partnership continues to flourish then I think we’re going to see that we’ll be able to have more and more access to land. As the Member knows, there’s lots of band land in some of the communities. That’s an ongoing process and it’s one that we’re quite pleased with. We’re making some progress with that and the more we work with the communities and they realize that it would be good for them because it would allow more houses to get on the ground, and that’s something we’re working on.

I think the Member’s second point was on the transition from public housing to private housing. With that, we continue to try and get our ownership programs out there. The renovation money for homeowners has gone up quite a bit. There’s been a huge investment in major M and I’s and the public housing stock. With the money that we receive from the feds and matched by this government, we’re

hoping to make huge progress in the quality of the units in the communities. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister McLeod. Committee, we’re on page 5-47, information item. Mr. Krutko.

Just in regard to one of the items that you have on this page, this talks about research. I know that we had a pilot project a number of years ago called the log housing initiative program and I think that a lot of good work was done under that where you actually had people trained and you brought people in that were professionals on building logs houses. I’d just like to know exactly where is that program by way of moving forward. I think that a lot of communities are still requesting that we have such an initiative by way of log housing initiatives. We’ve built houses in communities. Basically, the individuals went out, got the logs, they brought the logs in, they worked on them, they brought a professional in to show them how to build a log house, constructed, people were trained. For me, I think that alone has the potential of generating jobs and putting money back into the economy and, more importantly, making communities more independent when it comes to constructing houses. So I’d just like to know, is this department looking at implementing such a program going forward in regard to research and development?

I mean, obviously, we’re always interested in doing some research. I mean, you obviously have to try to get the best product on the ground. One of the drawbacks to this particular one was good that people were able to get trained. One of the big drawbacks is you have to make a business case for everything and if it’s too expensive to build, then it is something that we have to take into consideration. If you can get more stick built units on the ground as opposed to log homes, then that is something you have to be aware of. We are always looking for ways to improve the quality of our products on the ground. It is communities’ desire in some cases to go with log homes. If it was economically feasible, it met all the energy standards, then it is something that we would be quite willing to do, because we are always about supporting community development, community economic development. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I think one of the most accessible programs that we delivered in the Northwest Territories where we don’t have LHOs or people basically still are pretty independent was the HAP housing program where people went out of their way. They cut their logs. They took the initiative on themselves. They got a lot. They basically went out, put sweat equity into this thing. They helped build the house. At the end of the day, they owned it. Yet, there was money there to deal with electrical

issues, deal with the mechanical stuff which was separate from the program. I think that, if anything, that is how we are going to have to meet those communities that don’t have LHOs, that don’t have a Housing presence. I think that a lot or most of those aboriginal communities are in the Deh Cho.

Looking at statistics, the Deh Cho is the most affected in regards to the latest survey that came out in regards to core needs and adequacy in regards to housing. I think that we have to look at programs that have worked in the past where people will actually put sweat equity into these units and make a go of it and, at the end of the day, make them successful. If you go back in the history of the Housing Corporation, that was probably the most successful program that was put in place where people actually… It was their home. They built it. They put time and effort into it. I think that, as a corporation, we have to look at the things that have worked. I think that a lot of the times government means well, but when you are telling somebody you have to go to the bank and get a mortgage for $250,000 or $300,000, a lot of people don’t fit in that bracket.

A lot of people in our communities, all they want is a simple dwelling in regards to having a wood stove and maybe a fridge and basically have simple necessities of life to maintain a household. I think sometimes the simple stuff are the most practical things for a lot of people. I would just like to know in regards to going forward as a corporation that we look at some of these initiatives that have worked in communities where people are independent, where they are self-reliant and, more importantly, they are still people in the communities who are very proud of that program. I would just like to suggest that that be something that you look at. Because you look at the statistics in regards to the needs survey, you can see where the biggest needs still are and biggest needs from what you look at in some of the Sahtu and the Nahendeh riding. You can tell a lot of those communities you are talking about don’t have LHOs. Look at Colville Lake at 95 percent. That is unacceptable.

I am very familiar with the SHAG program where people harvested their own logs. At that time, the package I think was only $30,000 and that got you your windows, doors and everything else, but the bulk of the work and I know people that did all the work. The Member I think was also referring to the HAP program, which was a very successful program where materials were provided to individuals that qualified and then they supplied the labour. It started going to where everything was being supplied, but it was a very successful program.

One of the things that we are seeing today through the CARE homeowners home repair program is a lot of the people that had the HAP program are now

applying for the repair program because most of these units are older. These were programs that work in the communities. If someone wanted to build a log home and they qualified for one of the programs, then they can have up to $125,000 to do this and then anything above and beyond that would obviously have to go to a mortgage or there would be a retainment plan. This is one of the things, and I have made the offer to sit with committee and seek their input as we try and develop a basic unit strategy.

One thing we have to be careful of when we get into that discussion -- and we will be able to have a discussion hopefully before the end of session -- is that there are some folks who still want the plumbing. I am not sure if we can not include that. This is a discussion that I think we need to have with committee. I have made that offer, because I would be very interested in getting committee’s opinion on what they see as a basic housing design concept and then we can take it from there and see if it is something that will work. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Next on my list is Mr. Beaulieu.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I had an opportunity today to brief the review, the 2009 Housing Needs Survey. As indicated in the Member’s statement or indicated in my discussion making some remarks on the budget, one of those two places yesterday, I talked about the increase in the core need across the Territory. Now it is kind of an interesting situation, because we can’t just look at the increase overall because the actual true reflection of what has happened in the small communities is actually greater than what the actual increase of the core needs in the needs survey is because of the decrease in Yellowknife, because Yellowknife has about half of the households. If Yellowknife has 60 percent of the households and Yellowknife decreases by a certain number, then you have to take the rest of the Territories, look at the overall increase plus the increase in that is the opposite effect of Yellowknife. It is like a seesaw. When the overall Territory increases by 3 percent but yet Yellowknife decreases by a certain amount of percentage and that is half of the households in the Territories, that means the increase in the small communities is greater than the average of 3 percent. That is what my point is.

It is very difficult to pinpoint exactly what the issue is. However, I think one of the issues is programs and policies that are being delivered by the Housing Corporation. I don’t see a real logical reason for eliminating programs and reducing programs and rolling programs into other programs and consolidating programs if the effect is going to be a decrease in core needs. You have the NWT Housing Corporation who has various programs,

some targeted to seniors, some targeted to seniors and disabled, so on and so forth. Some actually is targeted to singles and the majority targeted to families. You have that type of regime and your core need in the Territories is going down. The Housing Corporation decides that they are going to change that. They consolidate all of the programs into essentially four programs and then the core need goes up. Is it not incumbent upon the Housing Corporation to work towards decreasing core needs?

This is going to be my first question. Why is it that when places like Norman Wells, Yellowknife and other communities, which had a core need below the territorial average, went down further when the core needs that were already above the territorial average, above 16 percent in 2004, went up? Could I get the Minister to maybe explain that first? Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Minister of Housing.

I think I’m going to let you try to explain this. Mr. Chair, the Member is throwing a lot of numbers out there. So I think what I’m going to do, and I couldn’t quite understand it and I’m not going to pretend that I did.

You know, my line is that we’re trying to use the core needs survey to identify where we can put units on the ground in the ‘11-12 budget. Obviously the Member feels that there is some issue with the way the numbers are and we just looked in some of the communities… I mean, core need is also affordability and with the economic downturn obviously that has a huge effect on the core need, the suitability, the adequacy and then that’s something that through the major M and I and the $14 million that we’re investing in that area we’re trying to address that. So that should affect the core need when you’re talking about adequacy and then affordability, you know, once the economy picks up again I’m quite confident it will, and I think that’s going to affect the core need too. But the numbers that the Member was referring to, I might have to sit down, I think, with the Member and get an explanation and just have a discussion as to those numbers. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Okay, I guess in simple terms, my question is the Housing Corporation has programs in play that are doing their job, right? It’s taking the core need in the Northwest Territories and taking the core need down in all the appropriate communities where core need is highest, which in effect is bringing the overall core need down. So if we just divide the amount of units in the Territories in half, half is in Yellowknife, half is outside of Yellowknife. If the overall core need goes up, right? It’s simple math. If the overall core need goes up but the core need in Yellowknife goes down, that means that the actual core need outside of Yellowknife has gone up greater than the

average core need. Okay, 3 percent, that’s all I’m saying. But I don’t even want to go there because I guess I’d have to have a white board to try and explain what I’m saying. It’s just that I’m good at numbers and I know all these things in my head.

Now, what I am asking is if you have programs that are effective, going down, taking the core need going down in the appropriate places in the communities that have the highest core needs, there’s no problem, no problem. All of a sudden the corporation comes in, takes all those programs and replaces them with four programs, essentially the story is that all the other 14 programs that were there are still rolled up into these four programs. Yet, after a few years of that application the overall core need has gone up. I know that M and I is protecting assets of the Housing Corporation, but it doesn’t take people out of core need, okay? People in public housing are protected from being in core need except for the affordability aspect of it, and, in essence, a guy that’s in public housing pays according to income, he’s supposed to be allocated a suitable unit and the NWT Housing Corporation’s LHOs’ maintenance employees essentially ensure that they don’t have an adequacy need. So that’s okay and it’s good that the Housing Corporation spends money on M and I and fixes up public housing units. It does help the overall stock and operating costs and everything, but I guess I’ll just bring it down to a question.

I recognize that this is not the Minister that took these programs on also, but the consolidation of these programs hasn’t worked. Is the Minister prepared to look at, like you just indicated, Mr. Chairman, a HAP program, look at other programs and address other ways of taking core need down? If we’re doing the same thing over and over again and expecting it to work, I think that that’s a definition of something. Now, that is something we shouldn’t continue to do. Will the Minister look at reincorporating programs that used to work to address core need? Thank you.

Good question. Minister of Housing.

---Laughter

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Member raised a few points there. I think he’s saying that because of these four programs it’s his opinion that our core need went up based on…(inaudible)…and the four programs cover just about everything. Even the overall houses that need repair affect our core need. That’s factored into our core need, public housing units. So that’s factored in and I think we’ve talked about the number of units that are under repair. That would obviously affect our core need.

I think in response to Mr. Krutko’s question before, or Mr. Bromley, we have 150 units that are under repair now that are vacant. That affects our core

need and this is the instruction that I’ve given to the Housing Corporation is exactly what the Member is referring to, is Members still feel like there’s some gaps in some of the programs and as the Minister I’ve heard it and I’ve raised the issue on numerous occasions. Some of the homeownership issues, there’s some gaps in there that have been brought to my attention and I’d like to work with the corporation to try and address some of these gaps if it means, you know, we’re not stuck on four, if it means adding another one where it will address some of the gaps that are there, then, you know, we’d be willing to have that discussion. But I think before there was I think 14 and it did get quite confusing for some people. Which one do I fit under? I think the four that we have now basically covers a wide range of people, pretty well all people. But, like I said, we’re not stuck on four and I’m looking forward to having a discussion with committee on some of the future direction that the Housing Corporation needs to go, but it is very important to me and to Members that we find a way to address some of the gaps, especially the homeownership gaps. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Before I move on I’d just like to recognize some people in the gallery and thank you for coming today as we take part in the procedures. Welcome to the House.

---Applause

We’re on page 5-47, executive, operations expenditure summary. Any questions? Agreed?