Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am pleased to present the 2017-2018 Main Estimates for the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation. The main estimates propose a budget of $132,888,000, a decrease of $14,019,000 or 9.5 per cent from the 2016-2017 Main Estimates.

These estimates continue to support the Government of the Northwest Territories’ objective of ensuring a strong and sustainable future for the government and its programs by managing expenditures due to limited revenue growth.

The 2017-2018 Main Estimates include a decrease of $7,814,000 from the 2017-2018 Business Plan reviewed by standing committee in September. This change relates primarily to the reinstatement of $745,000 for the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation’s homeownership repair programming and the introduction of a $500,000 renovation and energy-retrofit program for seniors to allow them to live in their homes longer and more affordably. Other changes include an adjustment of $10 million to reflect federal funding flowing, not to the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation, but directly to the Inuvialuit Regional Corporation, or IRC, for the delivery of social housing projects in the Beaufort Delta Region, and an increase in amortization of $990,000.

The major changes from the previous year’s main estimates include sunsets of $6.75 million for the market housing program initiative for non-market communities, $783,000 for the rental housing in rural and remote locations initiative, and $3.5 million for the first year of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police housing project. As part of reduction initiatives, the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation will be implementing partial reductions of $644,000 to the CARE Major Program, $300,000 to the Transitional Rent Supplement Program, and a $216,000 reduction related to local housing organizations.

In fiscal year 2017-18, the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation will be receiving an $8.79 million federal funding allocation, a decline of $7.84 million from the previous year. This change is primarily explained by the re-allocation of the Inuit housing funding component directly to the IRC. This allocation will include:

● $4.1 million for public housing replacement and modernization and improvement projects;

● $750,000 on repair support for third-party social housing providers;

● $375,000 on semi-independent housing-first units within emergency shelters;

● $156,000 for repairing family violence shelters;

● $1.2 million for homeownership programming; and

● $750,000 for the demolition of surplus housing units, including opportunities for the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation's Working Off Arrears and Community Training Programs.

An additional $1.4 million will be used for minor capital repairs and fuel and hot water tank replacements, including an LED lighting initiative for public housing units.

The 2017-2018 Main Estimates also reflect the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation's priority to work with other levels of government for their housing needs by investing $5.5 million in developing RCMP housing, which will help ensure that our communities are able to staff policing personnel. The Northwest Territories Housing Corporation is also committed to the priority of the 18th Legislative Assembly to improve community wellness and safety by supporting seniors to age in place. The new seniors repair program that addressing housing quality issues and energy efficiency will support seniors to remain in their homes longer.

That concludes my opening remarks. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister. Do you have witnesses you'd like to bring into the Chamber? Thank you, Minister. Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the witnesses into the Chamber. Minister, would you please introduce your witnesses to the committee?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. On my left is Tom Williams, the president and CEO of the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation. On my immediate right is Mr. Jim Martin, the vice-president of Finance and Infrastructure Service. On the far right is Franklin Carpenter, who is the vice-president of Programs and District Operations. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, and thank you to the witnesses for appearing. We will begin with general comments from the committee, followed by an opportunity for the Minister to respond. First, I have Mr. Thompson.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, we and our committee have been looking really hard in looking at this budget and so the first thing, our biggest challenge we're looking at was the elimination of the Transition Rent Supplement Program. We understand that this program has not met its goals, but this should be addressed. Instead of getting rid of the program, the goals should be looked at and, if it's not efficient, then maybe the fund should be allocated to different housing programs instead of being removed. That is very important to us. Housing is important, as we all know, and this has an impact on all our residents.

So by this Transition Rent Supplement Program being addressed and saying it's not being efficient, maybe the department should be looking at it and seeing how it can become more efficient; and if it's not going to do that, then maybe allocate the funds instead of getting rid of this program. So that is what committee has being trying to very much stress.

The other part of it was the CARE, and CARE is an important program. I mean, I understand when the government talks about it's a 10-year program and that, but there are lots of homes out there that need to be repaired and need to be addressed, especially our seniors. For our seniors, there are some challenges because, in my riding and hearing other people talk about it, is that the commitment to be in their forgivable loans seems to be a little bit more challenging for some of these seniors, and so this needs to be looked at.

So we looked at CARE as an opportunity for the government to actually increase it to help address our seniors and the residents, the people who have homes. Yes, we have lots of people who have accessed it, but there's still more people who have the opportunity to access this program, and if we're not going to help them we're going to have a huge deficit as we move forward, so the committee has stressed this important part of it.

On a personal note, in regard to housing, I'm not a big fan of modular homes; I've said that in the past. However, bringing the modular homes to be built in the North has had a huge impact on providing employment opportunities. We've had, to my understanding, up to 50 people being employed to help build these modular homes and other opportunities this company has been able to do. However, in saying that, we still need stick-built community-built homes in some of the communities.

Also, in regard to these modular homes that are brought in as market rents, some of these trailers or modular homes are not being used. In my riding, they sit vacant. I've had the opportunity to see some pictures of these homes, and they're starting to fall apart, and this is non-usage. So again, the corporation needs to address this. If they're going to be sitting there in these communities, then we should be utilizing them for homes so we can help the market rent.

Finally, my colleague here today talked about tiny homes, the small homes, and talked about the success of Deline, and there was a person here in town who was building these tiny homes that would have a huge impact on these single individuals, and I'm hoping that this corporation will start looking at this. I understand that there are land issues, and stuff like that, but if you build these things and provide this opportunity for them to have these homes in place, then I can guarantee you these communities would be willing to work with you to provide land and get these people in homes, which will help the homelessness, the couch surfing. There's a whole list of people there.

So I'm hoping that the Minister and the department -- I know it's not on here, but I hope you will bring it next year, because we need to put people in homes, and if we don't do it this way we're going to have struggles and we're going to continue to be doing the same. As the old saying goes if we continue to do the same thing we're going to get the same results, and that's just crazy. So I'm hoping that the Minister will look at that. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Thompson. Further general comments from committee? Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I guess I'd like to start just with a general comment on the Minister's opening statement, where the budget for the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation is going to be reduced by 9.5 per cent in one year. I think that says something about the priority that this government is placing on housing.

I understand some of that reduction is related to reduced funding from the federal government, but not all of it. I think that's a sad statement about the priorities of our government, quite frankly, that you can find money for other big infrastructure projects, but when it comes to housing we don't seem to be able to find it; in fact, we're going to be facing cuts.

So I know that my colleague talked about some of the other reductions in this department. There are some good things here: that the Minister has committed to an additional half-million dollars for keeping seniors in their own homes, aging-in-place, that's a good thing, but there are some other cuts in here that are just not good for our residents, and certainly I can't support this budget overall for the Housing Corporation. I'll have more to say as we work our way through. Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Further? Seeing none, I will -- Mr. Testart.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think it's quite appropriate that we're reviewing the main estimates for the Housing Corporation today after we had a line of questions for the Minister earlier, and I think a lot of good ideas have been shared, not just today but throughout the life of this Assembly. I think we all know that this is a key concern for our constituents, the people of the Northwest Territories, and for individual Members. Housing remains a priority. I know the Minister feels the same way, and the government feels the same way. It is about how we act on that priority and ensure that we have the best possible housing support for our residents.

I know the Minister has rolled out a very extensive survey to support those goals. I think some of that process, although well-intentioned, has created a bit of frustration. From personal experience, I know that I have constituents who have been waiting for support but have been running into policy barriers. This survey is supposed to be designed to inform the department's response to that, but I do fear that the survey is only the beginning of a long series of strategic plans and action plans, and further reporting and planning, rather than taking decisive action. I wanted to make that very clear before we start going into the detail that, although well-intentioned, we really need to act.

The survey has already been delayed once to allow for more respondent time, and it does seem to be what the Minister often relies on when questions are being brought forward about these policy changes. It is very clear that we want those changes sooner rather than later, and we really need to get on with this very important work. I do stand in support of the recommendations that the honourable Member for Nahendeh has brought forward in his opening remarks and that the Standing Committee on Priorities and Planning has made very clear that need to be reflected in these main estimates for our support moving forward. With that, I will end my opening comments. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Testart. Mr. McNeely.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Housing Department is a very common concern throughout all 33 communities. A house in downtown Nahanni Butte is similar to a house in downtown Fort Good Hope; therefore, the demand is high for the same unit. It is a controversial one, and one that has continuous support of the government in previous Assemblies to try to address the growing demands. So I look forward to going through this budget, more so on the operational side of things. I just highlighted some issues of concern; land tenure, vacant home ownership units. I am thinking and being mindful of what we had years ago, half units and the sharing program, and the RCMP allowance or the endeavour of the RCMP, and the transitional rent supplementary program. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. McNeely. Next, I have Ms. Green.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, as you may recall, Members on this side of the House proposed a motion in June of last year where we asked the government to make a commitment to reduce the level of core need in NWT housing at the rate of 2 per cent per year for four years.

It is my understanding that this hasn't happened. In fact, the same number of units are available in social housing today as there have been for many, many years. Without adding new units to our stock, we are never going to get on top of the waiting lists which are common to all social housing LHOs. That hasn't changed, to the best of my knowledge, and nor has level of core need. I am not aware of an investment in the three areas of core need, which are overcrowding, affordability, and suitability, meaning the condition of the house, that there has been an investment that would reduce the level of core need by 2 per cent.

We are well aware that CMHC's support for the Housing Corporation O and M has been declining for about 25 years at this point, and it will continue to decline for another 20. The Housing Corporation has not been able to come up with a plan to offset that decline in revenue. I know there are some new initiatives, for example, the RCMP housing and having tenants pay a greater proportion of their utilities, but at the end of the day it does not offset the amount of money that is being taken out of the Housing Corporation by declining CMHC support.

Mr. Chair, we are at a moment when we need transformative change in the Housing Corporation. We need to rethink the way that we provide social housing in the Northwest Territories. I appreciate the Minister's commitment to her housing survey, and I am looking forward to seeing the results, but at the end of the day I don't think that crowd-sourcing housing policy is going to give us the transformative change that this agency needs in order to meet our current needs, let alone our future needs, in terms of social housing.

I recognize this is an expensive area to make investments in, both for the construction costs and the operations and maintenance cost, but, at the same time the needs keep getting greater. I don't know to what extent we can keep asking people to defer their need for a house to the need to build a road to one place or another. It does not seem to me that housing benefits from these roads or from economic development generally. There has been no evidence that that has been the case in the last 20 years, where our economic fortunes have gone up and down according to the resource economy that sustains us.

All of that to say that the Minister has a very difficult portfolio. She has a portfolio where the budget is not meeting the needs of the people who are depending on it, and there is no prospect of it doing so anytime in the future, short of this transformative change that I have just spoken about. Having said that, those are my opening comments, and I look forward to asking my questions. Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Green. Mr. Nakimayak.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don't have much to say other than I know my colleagues talked about the cost of doing business in the North and the cost of shipping and construction in the territory, as well as maintenance. I just want to point out that the Minister, earlier on, mentioned during question period that she would be going to Inuvik to sign an MOU with the Inuvialuit, and I want to say that I am in support of that. You know, with other governments in Canada, as well, they are looking at focusing on the needs of Indigenous people all over Canada, and I think what the GNWT and the IRC are doing is a good partnership to lead the way, as well as to show a good example of cooperation and coordination. It also gives other Indigenous groups a chance to refine these agreements and MOUs, as well as a way working forward. That is all I have to say for now, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Nakimayak. Mr. Nadli.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. [English translation not provided.] I just wanted to provide some comments, but I think my colleague indicated the obvious, that this is a big department and it is fairly contentious because you are basically dealing with people's castles, if they have access to them, at the community level. It is a very difficult portfolio, and I applaud the Minister for leading the way to this point. You know, we look forward to the continued working relationship at this level but, most importantly, at the community level. Just some comments I wanted to make: as I said, housing is a big issue in my riding. People want and desire their own homes. How can we get people to own their own homes? The common is that you get a job if the economy is good, and then you can mortgage your own home with the support of your bank, and buy your own home. If you're in the NWT, we have fairly limited industrial and resource development, and some parts of the NWT that are far out of reach for small communities. Therefore, people rely on government to provide housing.

There are some things that I wanted to note that, again, we did pass a motion back in June in terms of the core needs, in terms of ensuring that we provide programs and services to people in the NWT. I think at that point it was noted that there is a need in non-market communities of 32 per cent, and that it continues.

We are dealing with an aging infrastructure of people who had brand new houses perhaps 30 years ago are now at a point where the houses need to be repaired or replaced, or else in some instances, demolished.

It could be an opportunity for local governments to become involved in terms of how it could become, possibly, if they are going to refurbish or renovate or make improvements to housing, then the opportunity is maybe to bridge an alliance with local governments to ensure that local resources are used to the max.

The other point I wanted to make is on the homelessness issue. People make sincere efforts in terms of the people who I work with at the community level, and there is a recognition that we wanted to do something in terms of addressing the homelessness issue. There are people who are couch surfing, and do not have a place to stay. Out of the compassion of our hearts, we moved to ensure that we had an organized body to try to work with the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation. We saw other communities get priority in terms of pilot projects, in terms of piloting the need to address homelessness issues. On the part of the local body, there was some conceptualization of at least how units could be constructed, perhaps bringing other departments such as Health and Social Services in terms of almost bringing a person into the home, but also bridging other services that they could access in terms of getting a strong footing in the community to own their own homes.

Another point is, I applaud the progressiveness of working with First Nations people. We are directly transferring the resources and agreements of First Nations people, and that's commendable, but I wonder if that is predicated on Aboriginal governments having to have a land claim first, and if that is the case.

Just another point that I wanted to highlight is, as I said, home ownership, ultimately, is what we try to strive for, but it is a challenge. The opposite side of home ownership is public rental, and that is pretty common in our communities. You have to rent out with the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation, and in that instance, it is local housing organization that we have to work with.

Those are just some things I feel have been very common in terms of concerns and issues that profile the riding that I serve, and I look forward to the continued working relationship with this Minister and the department to ensure that everyone has homes. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Nadli. Mr. Beaulieu.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, housing is a very, very big issue in my riding. Housing is a very big issue across the NWT. One of the things that I have talked a bit to the Minister about, recognizing that the Minister is currently gathering data, maybe to make good decisions moving forward on what is really needed in the communities.

What I think is really lacking in the NWT Housing Corporation is a good plan by per community. The NWT Housing Corporation at one time had quite a few programs. I think the number is like 18 or 14 programs comes to mind, and it was reduced in many of the programs and consolidated into a few programs. Those few programs are difficult for people who really need it to access.

One of the issues that I have in my riding is the requirement for insurance, fire insurance, that is, or else the corporation cannot spend any money on the people and on the homes. I have situations where there are elders who could use a fairly large project in order to get their house up to standard. The policies sort of run along the line that they need to have secure insurance. You secure the land; in order to get their land secured, they have quite a substantial tax bill, or quite a process to go through even to get a lease. We have situations where property becomes rental/lease. I have one situation and others that -- I don't know the exact number but one that I am currently dealing with, an elder had land tax/rent for $4,000 a year. We are talking about property that is a 1980 HAP house. These guys know what the HAP houses are, of course. 1980s HAP house. That is the first obstacle for this elder who actually makes about $1,000 a month. First obstacle is forking out $2,000 because he gets the tax release. That was two months' salary for the lease. The second obstacle is the fire insurance. That is a couple more months of salary because, if you have a community where there is no fire hydrant and there is only a small volunteer fire department, then the insurance puts some surcharges on.

If you go see an insurance company, on the face of it just say, how much is it to insure a house in Lutselk'e, as an example, the chances are they will probably say, there is no different than Yellowknife, until you get into the application process and find out there are no fire hydrants, there are only three firefighters. With all of those things, even a fire truck that does not function all the time.

I think that as the NWT Housing Corporation, the mandate should be to make sure that people are living in adequate and suitable accommodation. With the policies, I do not think that can happen. I do not think individuals can afford to pay the requirements in order to get their house fixed. It has become a program, I think, of who could afford. When you talk about the NWT Housing Corporation, and you talk about social housing and the history of NWT Housing Corporation, it is definitely designed to support the people who can afford to support themselves. It is not really designed to help people who cannot afford the help. What has happened now is that individuals cannot afford to get into housing programs because their incomes are too low, and their incomes exceed a certain amount, and they cannot get into a program because their incomes are too high.

That is something I think the NWT Housing Corporation has to look at very closely. One of the ways it was proposed that they create housing development plans per community to see what is on the ground, in what type of inventory that is in each community, and using that to develop some sort of a plan to be able to assist the people who need the help the most. That is the intent, I believe, of the social housing department or social housing organizations such as this, but it is not really meeting its intent. It just kind of misses that target group. I have an elder in a wheelchair who can't afford repairs. I wish I could get $3,000. That would get her through one year. We could never get anything substantial to fix her house right up so that she is sitting comfortably. That, I think, is something the corporation could look at. I find the biggest issue seems to be repairs, the repair to units. Those are the programs that people are having trouble accessing.

One thing I have harped about for a long time, since I have been in this Legislative Assembly, has been the Housing Corporation staff going to the homes of the people to sit down with the people in their homes and have a first-hand look at what is in there, with a couple of officers, maybe the programs person, one, maybe a technical person, two, to be able to go into the home and focus in on individuals who really need the help. It is very easy in the community to determine which people really need the help, and it is also very easy for me to say because I represent small communities. It may be a little more difficult to be able to do something like that in Yellowknife or in some of the regional centres. Certainly, in the small communities is where, as we have proven in the House many, many times, is where the poorest of the people live, and the NWT Housing Corporation is a program that is targeted at that group, targeted at that group but inaccessible by that group. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Mr. Vanthuyne.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think my colleagues have mostly touched on some of the detail, especially as it relates to programs and the mandate and what have you. I want to look, just for a moment, at some of the overarching challenges that we have in trying to deliver housing and, in particular, meet our mandate.

This is the part where I am actually going to have to disagree with a previous colleague speaking on roads. As most know, I have had some experience working with the Housing Corporation from the technical side, and so I know some of the challenges that we have had to deliver affordable housing in some of the communities.

You know, when I see communities like Whati, as an example, where there were instances where someone might have a frozen-up house, that obviously leads a lot of problems that will require attention. There were just instances where we simply could not afford to get a plumber on a plane and get them in there to assess this house only to come out and have to identify a bunch of materials and equipment that would have to go in to help repair the house, so you had to essentially wait for another three, four, or five houses to have some degree of maintenance or problems that needed addressing so that you could actually afford to fly someone in and address these needs.

Clearly, there are a number of communities, as well, that have to wait annually for a winter road in order to get housing packages or significant amounts of materials in to do major renovations. That is all very costly. So, transportation is one of the challenges that is a barrier to delivering affordable housing, in my view, and that is why I continue to stay committed to investing in critical transportation infrastructure that is within our mandate.

Land tenure is another one, and it comes in all forms. I don't care to get into the detail, but there are instances where certain program eligibility and/or the delivering of new housing, whether it is public or otherwise, is challenged because of land tenure issues. So I think there needs to be some focus worked interdepartmentally and, as well, with our federal partners in making sure that everybody understands that land tenure needs some degree of streamlining because arguably a third or more of our challenges with regard to delivering housing and successful housing programs are troubled by land tenure.

The other thing is regulations. We have good intentions when it comes to some of our programs, and CARE is a good example, where a person applies for a CARE major and they might be in a community -- I will use Yellowknife as an example -- that has EnerGuide 80 standards in place at the municipal level, and now this family has grown and they need an addition put on their home to put on a bedroom or two, but now, because of that being such a significant renovation to that person's home, the municipal regulations kick in and now there are going to be some EnerGuide 80 standards type thing that have to be met. It turns what could have been, say, a $20,000 major project into a $200,000 major project and, therefore, the client just turns it down and says, forget it. At the end of the day we are not serving anybody. We realize then that the person does not get to enlarge their home to meet their family needs, and the house is certainly not meeting any kind of EnerGuide 80 standards and continues to be energy-efficiently challenged.

Lastly, it is the federal government. We have to be clear with our message to the federal government about the challenges that we face. We can't just continue to accept that funding for community housing services is going to just fall off the map here, somewhere in 2033 or 2035, whenever it is proposed to end. There has to be some kind of negotiation, meaningful negotiation, that takes place sooner rather than later that establishes our unique needs for continuing to support public housing.

As much as we all want home ownership, home ownership in some communities is just not going to ever be a reality. Public housing is the reality. We can't wait around for the funding for public housing to just fall off the map. Then we will be in a much more dire situation.

Then, just lastly, Mr. Chair, I want to always give credit where credit is due. I really want to commend the department for the efforts made recently as it relates to the commitment of Housing First. We are seeing some success in that already as it relates to the capital city here. Of course, we are all aware that there is some investment being made in a few other communities with regard to Housing First, so thank you for that. Those are my comments. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Minister, you have 10 minutes to respond, keeping in mind that much of this will be touched on as we go through the department. Minister Cochrane.

Excuse me, Mr. Chair, if I have to speak really quickly. I don't have a clock here, and I am going to try to address as many as I can. I will be going all over the place because I didn't have time to format it.

Thank you for recognizing that it is a difficult portfolio. I also recognize housing is a difficult portfolio and really important. When we were doing the Cabinet shuffle, I actually asked to keep housing because I believe that it takes someone with experience, with a social degree, actually, to provide some necessary changes, so I did ask to keep this portfolio, good, bad, or ugly.

The elimination of the transitional rent program, in all honesty, that program was not working. It was a two-year program, and we weren't giving people the skills to be able to address their living situation after. We are looking at changing programs, so, yes, we will be re-profiling perhaps a lot more money than that, actually, because programs that are not being effective or are not being efficient need to be changed into things that work, and that will be part of our program renewal project that we are doing now.

The CARE program, there were some cuts to it, and, yes, people do need CARE packages. They need major renovations. However, we put more of a focus on prevention. There is lots of research that says prevention is better than intervention; in-home maintenance as well. If we go into people's homes every year and provide preventative maintenance and we're there every year, we should not have to spend $100,000 every 10 years to deal with huge renovations that people could have alleviated if they had done things like clearing the snow off their roofs or cleaning their furnaces or little basic home maintenance, preventative maintenance things that people are not doing, and perhaps because they don't have the knowledge. So we're focusing on prevention with that.

Modular homes versus stick-built and tiny homes. Agreement. Modular homes are actually more suitable for the southern communities than the Northwest Territories, where our climate is a little bit more tempered. Northern communities, I agree, it's probably not the best structure for it. It's certainly not good for community development, economic development within the northern communities.

So we did a project, we tried to get modular units developed in the Northwest Territories so they could sustain themselves and take off. We've done that. We're looking at more different types of housing units, not only stick-built, not only modular, but also tiny homes; a lot of different options, and I've been working with IRC looking at even Inuit-based and culturally appropriate homes. So we're looking at all different types of housing units.

Vacant homes. I was floored as well when I actually took over and found out that we have market homes in the communities that have been sitting there for a couple of years. We will be re-profiling all of those; if they're not going to be used for market homes, then maybe they would go into a homeownership or a public housing unit, so those will all be taken off.

Less money for housing. The federal money, we've been lobbying big-time with the federal government. We've gotten the partnership with the three territories. We've done a northern strategy, a northern business plan. We've gotten a commitment from the federal government that they will do a tri-territorial housing strategy specifically. In fact, I have been lobbying so hard that the last time I went to an FPT meeting they asked me when was I going home because I spoke so much, and I told them I will go home when I get what I want. So I am working hard to get the federal money, just to let you know that.

The survey, yes, it was a long time coming, I do recognize that. It will not be, hopefully, long action plans; I am not going to allow that to happen. We have been talking about it. We will be meeting fairly quickly here to decide how we're going to dissimulate all the information. We will be looking at the easy situations, the medium, and the hard situations. The easy ones are things that affect just the Housing Corporation, that don't affect any other departments or any other government, so things like student housing and things like that, people leaving their homes for wellness, they should not be penalized. Those things will be off the table; we will be dealing with those ones.

The medium ones, the long-term ones, things that implement other departments, like land leases, et cetera, will be a little harder to deal with because we are dealing interdepartmentally and sometimes inter-jurisdictionally with some things, so we'll be looking at that.

Reducing the level of core need. Yes. So there hasn't been a lot, in all honesty, and we do have to look at that. I am anxious to get this survey done. My thinking is, in all honesty, it's costing us an average of $22,000 per year per public housing unit. We give CARE major program to people every 10 years of $100,000. That means to me, my little layman thinking, is that every five years we're spending over $100,000 to keep a person in a public housing unit. So why would we not support those people in getting into homeownership? We'd be saving $100,000 every five years by doing that. If we can move more people into homeownership, then we can actually provide more public housing units, so it's a win-win situation. So that is one of the things we will be looking at, and how to do that.

Economic development in housing. I beg to differ. I believe that economic development is critical for housing when people actually make a decent income. One of my fellow Members has said many times a good job is the best social program. I'm not 100 per cent sure I would agree 100 per cent with that, but I do agree that people who have secure income are better off and can afford more things in life if their income is sufficient. So I think that jobs are important to address the needs of not only housing but all social issues.

Working with other governments, Aboriginal governments. It was an easy win-win for me; it just makes logical sense. So not only are we working with IRC, we are working with other Aboriginal governments and municipal governments, and that has nothing to do with land claims. The Member has gone, but it has nothing to do with land claims, it's only if people approach us and want to work with us, then I am willing to work with them. Because the more governments that are working towards housing people in their communities, the better the services, the more services we will be able to provide. It's a win-win situation.

The lack of community plans. Like I said, when we developed the survey, that's why we've asked people what are their communities they live in. Because actually with the survey completion we are able to, using the Survey Monkey -- thank goodness for technology -- we can actually tap in and say what did people in -- I'll just use: what did people in Yellowknife want, and we can actually get rid of everybody else's surveys and only look at those replies from Yellowknife. So it will be easy to do community plans when we eyeball the inputs. We will be basing further work, future budgets, future program delivery, based on what the communities themselves say; it won't be a one-size-fits-all.

Insurance and land tenure. Huge issues. We need to address it. It's kind of a hard issue because it's not good to invest up to $100,000 if people don't have insurance or they don't own their own land. However, maybe we can restructure our programming so that insurance and land tenure is part of the package when we're giving out the $100,000, is that maybe we provide that. So there are options we'll be looking at. However, in saying that, I will not support squatting. There are people in the communities who are living on Crown land or -- what's the term for the territories? Oh, Indian band lands.

So if we start to provide renovations to theirs or stuff then we set a precedent, and that is not appropriate. So I've been asking people, if they illegally have houses on lands that are not theirs, to deal with the bands, with their communities, to try to get that secured. It's not a precedent that I want to start doing, too, because it tells people that it's okay, you can just go anywhere and build a home, and I don't personally believe that's the right way.

Repairs. We do need more repairs in the communities; however, we need more than just repairs. The problem is is that -- like, I went into a community just over a month ago with just over 200 homes in that community. In the one summer alone we fixed 108 windows. So we also need training with that.

So we need training, we need a lot to do. We're working with the federal government and we also have to be careful we don't put too much money in because there is also contractor capacity within communities, and so what I'm noticing now is even we're carrying forward some capital from last year because sometimes contractors and communities don't have the capacity to do it. So we want to make sure we don't over-flood the market. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Minister, and I appreciate that there's not a clock at the witness desk, so sometimes I might sort of let you know when it's time to wrap things up.

The NWT Housing Corporation in the main estimates starts at page 345, but as always we'll defer the total until we look at the activity summaries, the first of which is on pages 352 to 354, community housing services. So I'll give committee a moment, and if we have comments or questions on community housing services please indicate when you're speaking which page you're talking about so we can all follow along.

I also ask that the first time, at least, that committee uses some of these abbreviations like IB land, CMHC, these type of acronyms, if you just let us know what it is so people following along in Hansard know what we're all talking about. Ms. Green.