Thank you, Mr. Chair. I want to first follow up on the procurement and the administration of suitable land for the delivery of housing programs and services mentioned under the infrastructure services division. I wonder if I could get a concise description of the issue with respect to IAB lands and our challenges on providing housing there. What has been done to resolve the issue and what is our current approach to deal with it? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Minister McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is one that we’ve had some struggles with in the last couple years. It’s also one that we’ve actually made some progress on. We’ve worked with some of the communities that are sitting on IAB lands and we’ve had some band council resolutions and it’s kind of complicated. I mean, we’re working on one right now that’s been going on for awhile. The community group has agreed to a request. We’ve brought the situation forward to Ottawa and we’re still waiting to hear back from Ottawa on our request. So on IAB lands, because land tenures are an important part of our programs and they need to have land tenure, we’ll take a BCR if they can provide their beneficiary with a lease. Because there’s sometimes where they give them leases for 99 years. If they can provide that, then that would allow us to enter into a program with the tenant.

We’ve got a couple of instances where we’ve put infrastructure on IAB land and then now we’re trying to sort out the one particular issue that I’d

mentioned to the Member. We’re trying to sort that out now. We needed to use that infrastructure money that we got from Canada. The community actually did their part and Housing did their part. So we had an agreement, we put the infrastructure in. We’re still waiting on the federal government. I think we’ve corresponded with him once or twice on this particular issue, because they need to get this resolved because those units have been sitting in that community for almost six years now.

So it is a bit of a challenge and it’s one that we’re going to have to try and work our way through if we want to work with some of the IAB land. Because if you look at it, it kind of makes it harder for the beneficiaries in that particular community to access any of our programs without access to land. Thank you.

Thanks to the Minister for those remarks. I can’t say I’m that clear yet. I understand that this is IAB land typically or that it occurs in communities which are surrounded by IAB land and that apparently, if I heard correctly, the Housing Corporation requires a BCR that provides a 99-year lease to a potential tenant. Then what? That means the tenant can’t get a mortgage? So I don’t see that as a huge challenge, a BCR, and band councils are generally willing to help their members that way. So what are we waiting for? What’s our ask of Ottawa that we’re waiting for? What’s the hiccup there? What are we still working on? Thank you.

The Member is right; it is a very simple process and we’ve done our part, the community has done their part. We’re just waiting for federal government approval. Without land tenure, they can’t get a mortgage. The banks won’t touch it and it makes it awful difficult for us too. So, again, just waiting for approval from the federal government. Thank you.

I think I understand the band can offer a BCR, but it has no authority without approval from Ottawa. Got ya. Okay, is this something that our government is taking to Ottawa? We’re following up every chance we get and that sort of thing? I think that’s important, Mr. Chair. There’s just a comment there.

I’d like to move later in this same section here, infrastructure services division to the new housing technologies and perhaps get an update on, I don’t remember the name of it in Inuvik, the super energy-efficient duplex there, where we’re at with that. Are we learning lessons from it yet? Is it operational? Is it occupied? What’s happening there and is there an opportunity for Members to look at that facility when we’re in Inuvik? Can I get some information there? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Before we turn it over to Minister McLeod, your two previous questions, because the mics

weren’t on, were yes from the Minister. So, Minister McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The house in Inuvik is complete. It is occupied right now and we’re starting to monitor it. We’re going to monitor it starting this June for a full season, because they just moved in I believe it was in the fall time. So it is occupied and I haven’t had a chance to go in there yet and have a look at it, but I’m looking forward to seeing the numbers that come out of that because it was a very expensive project, I might add.

Just to follow up a little bit, the Minister mentioned a very expensive project. These sort of demonstration projects typically are, and hopefully we learn how to do it more effectively and with our dollars. But as I understand it, it was an EGH 84 or something like that high efficiency, maybe higher. What’s the goal with that project? Obviously, we’re investing some serious dollars into it. Maybe I can get the cost too. Thank you.

The house is 88, EG 88. It was a research project that’s cost shared between us and CMHC and the goal was actually to see and test all these different components and that to see how they work. So it was a research project is basically what it is. Again, after looking at it in June of next year, we’ll evaluate and see if it’s cost effective to do more projects like this, how we can improve on it, if there’s some things we can adapt from it.

Having worked in the housing field before, I know there are many occasions where they tried new technology and they just go put it into the housing packages in the communities without really giving it a good trial and we’ve had to learn by trial and error. I think this is a different way of doing business. We’ll see if these components work, if they don’t work, if they’re good for up here. Basically it boils down to a research project and we’re hoping to gather some good information out of this.

I hope maybe the Minister would be willing to update committee on this project. It sounds like an interesting one. Maybe after the fall when the data starts rolling in.

My last question is with regard to the debt repayment. We have a long-term debt of $52.3 million to CMHC. I’m just wondering for my own background here what the source of that debt is. I know this is something we’ve been paying on a long time and we will be paying for it for awhile. Are we simply paying on it or are we also adding to the debt from time to time? Is it a balance that we’re paying off as fast as we can but at the same time we’re sometimes adding to it? Could I get a little description so I understand that debt a little better?

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. For that question we’ll go to Mr. Anderson.

Thank you, Mr. Anderson. Moving on with questions I have the Member for Inuvik Boot Lake, Mr. Moses.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In regard to my general comments on the home ownership program, sometimes we find, well, in my constituency we’ve had some issues where we’ve had a single person trying to get into a unit but there were no units available for them. There’s always just a two-person household or multiple and vice versa. Sometimes we’ll have families but only have a two-bedroom available. They’re told to come back and wait until there’s an open unit for them. Meanwhile they get approved for the home ownership program. I just wanted to ask the Minister if he’s got any action or any ways to look at addressing this issue at the moment.

Thank you, Mr. Moses. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m glad the Member raised that because it is an issue that I’ve been dealing with on a number of occasions too. We follow the National Occupancy Standards and that’s something that we’re evaluating to see where we’re at with that. In many cases we get people who are approved for a home but there’s only a two-bedroom home available. They say they may be under-housed or over-housed so they’re not able to access that unit, or there may be a three-bedroom and according to National Occupancy Standards they can only qualify for a two-bedroom.

We have to look at what works best for the Northwest Territories and that’s something that I’ve asked the corporation to do. Because if you’re a young family just starting out, they say you’re qualified for a two-bedroom, your family may grow in a number of years. If you can get into a three, why not; because you will grow into it. It’s something that is on our radar and something that I have talked to senior management about, because I feel this is an issue we really have to address, because we do have people that are happy as heck because they’re approved for a home, only to be disappointed because they don’t qualify for a three-bedroom even though they’ve got a young child and they’re just starting out and they may have more children. Then they’ll be coming and asking for

more money to build an addition onto their two-bedroom house so that their family can fit into it. So we need to look at that.

I’m glad to hear that the Minister wants to take a look into this. In this sense we get the young families who want to start out a family yet there’s no investment for them. I know some of them say they’ll take a two-bedroom house and even though they say they’ll accept it, under the policy they’re still not able to take it, even though they’re willing to say they’ll make do with what they have, just to get out of paying market rent and money just going into the rental area.

On the same side, we do get some singles where there are two-bedrooms available, but with some singles they say that they’ve got family members that would come over every once in awhile and a two-bedroom would fit.

I’m really glad to hear that it’s something that the department’s going to be looking into and hopefully we can maybe adjust some policies to look into that, because obviously we are in a housing shortage in some communities and in the North here.

Moving on, that was more of a comment to the answer the Minister gave. Under the maintenance management area and in terms of putting investment into these areas, how would the department look at which region’s communities get the brunt end of the dollars for maintenance? We talk about climate change and how it affects infrastructure. I’d imagine that in the coastal communities we’d have more housing units, the infrastructure kind of dwindling or declining compared to maybe some from the South. How does the Minister decide how they divvy up the money in terms of maintenance management?

Thank you, Mr. Moses. For that response we’ll go to Mr. Stewart.

With that said, the department kind of has an inventory of which communities need the most maintenance for the stock that they do have. There is an inventory out there. Based on the

inventory, do they also have a needs assessment in terms of, I guess you could say, public housing applications or home ownership applications? Where they’re seeing the most applications, are they putting the funds towards those regions or communities?

I’m trying to rephrase this one question here. No. No further questions. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

We’re on page 5-49, NWT Housing Corporation, information item, finance and infrastructure services.