Thank you, Madam Chair. This is the goal for the Government of the Northwest Territories. Again, I am sorry if I get passionate too much, but this is my passion. We will have 100 new homes, and 100 people will be moved into homeownership. The Indigenous governments, that is aside. The previous government with housing was always saying to the federal government, "Give us the money, and we will put it out there." This government, I have met with the federal government; I have met with Ministers; I have met with our Prime Minister. We have a different tone. I want houses in the North. I have been saying to the federal government, "Give it to the Indigenous governments." All I want is housing in the North. We are not in the way. We are not fighting the federal government and Indigenous governments. People have said, "If we work hand-in-hand, we are stronger." If we work hand-in-hand with our Indigenous governments and they can get housing money and we can use our housing money, then we are doing better service. It is not about one or the other. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Premier. I will go on to Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you, Madam Chair. My first question in regards to these 100 units is: how do you intend to ensure that the construction work done on these units is actually going to go to northern employers? Thank you.

Madam Premier.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I am trying to remember. I think northern business was a priority in here. I have looked at this mandate so long it is starting to blend. However, even if it is not clear enough in there, it is a priority of Cabinet. Amongst our Cabinet priorities that I shared with Members, Cabinet as a whole, we have taken a stance that we want as much as possible northern businesses doing northern work. None of us is happy with sending the dollars South. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Premier. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I have also noticed that in other priorities, there was indication of some other housing units. For example, on page 32, it does say that for mental health and addictions programs, there are nine transitional housing units that will be added to several communities. Will that number of housing units affect the 100 housing units committed in the first priority on page 6?

Madam Premier.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I just confirmed with my Minister. Absolutely not. Those are in addition. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Premier. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you. I think I am good at this time.

I will move on to Member for Frame Lake.

Merci, Madame la Presidente. I am convinced of the Premier's passion on this issue. I know she has got lived experience. I have already seen evidence that housing is going to be a higher priority with this Cabinet, and I am very supportive of that. I just question the number here, the increase in 100 units while we're also going to transition 100 units for home ownership. It looks like it's going to be a wash. Maybe I am misunderstanding this. I get where the Premier is coming from. I think most of us share that priority. If she can explain the numbers a little better to me, that would be helpful. Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you. Madam Premier.

Thank you, Madam Chair. The old model with the housing corporation was we waited till a building deteriorated until it was unusable. Then, we ripped it down and we put another one on. One house, one family.

This model is the same. I have already said, we can't exceed the 2,200. I think it's 22. Is it 24 now? 2,400 and 200 market. The 2,400, we can't exceed that. We're not going to exceed that. Instead of waiting until they deteriorate and ripping them down and then put another one up, which was the old model, why aren't we giving those houses better, in good repair, not junk. I'm not okay with giving away shacks. I lived in a shack. I know the problems with living in a home that's not appropriate. Give 100 homes away, build 100 more. You're right, we stay at 2,400. But if I use it one and one because it's easier. In the old model, we have one house. We wait until it deteriorates. At that time when it's deteriorated, we rip it down, and we put one more house on. We have one house.

This model says, we give 100 homes away. We build 100 homes. We have 200 people living in homes versus 100 from the old one. We're not increasing. We cannot afford to increase our public housing stock. We don't know how we're going to figure it out. We can't leave our future governments in jeopardy and say, well, this government will be done in 2038, which isn't very far if you think about it; that they can deal with that. We have an obligation to protect our future. My goal is to have people in homes, irrelevant of whether it's public housing or not. In fact, I'm not even a big fan of public housing, period. I'd rather have all people in home ownerships. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Premier. Member for Frame Lake.

Thanks, Madam Chair. I guess I understand the math a little better. What I want to do, though, I want the Minister to think completely outside of the box. There is this glass ceiling of 2,400 units. We have to break that glass ceiling if we are going to ever get all of our residents housed properly. We cannot live within that limit. We are going to have to find more ways to raise revenues. We are going to have to get more money out of Ottawa. If we ever have a hope of actually getting adequate housing, suitable housing, affordable housing, for all our residents, we've got to get rid of that cap. I think it's as simple as that. We just have to find other ways to do it. If we can't house our people, there's no future here. I want the Minister, the Premier to think a little more seriously about that. I understand there are costs associated with this, but if we don't have housing for people, there's no economy. There's nothing happening here. We've got to get rid of that cap. Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. Madam Premier.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Again, I hear the Member's concerns, but I want to go back to the philosophy. One, the Government of the Northwest Territories is not the only housing provider in the Northwest Territories. I've already said earlier that we are working with Indigenous governments. Indigenous governments are going to Ottawa and getting money. IRC is a great example of that, that they got money in the last Assembly for housing. I know that Dene Nation is putting their name forward for housing, for money. I'm not fighting those. Those are extra.

What I'm saying is that, out of 45,000 people, 2,400 houses for public housing that people can't afford should be sufficient if we can get people into home ownership who can afford it. There are many people in our public-housing units who are not low-income, and they need to be moved into home ownership. If we had more than 2,200 people forever who are in public-housing units, we have bigger problems. We have poverty problems. Our goal should not be to increase the number of public-housing units. Our goal should be to decrease poverty for people so that people don't have to be in public-housing units. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Premier. Member for Frame Lake.

Thanks, Madam Chair. I don't want to prolong this. I think we share the same objective. We probably just disagree on maybe how we're going to get there. I just think that housing needs to be our top priority, probably, and that we can't let this glass ceiling get in the way of this. I'm not convinced that, even if we increase the housing stock by 100 units, that's even going to start to take care of the waiting list to get into public housing period.

In any event, I think we agree on where we need to be. I read the On Level Ground report from the last Assembly, where it would cost, at least a few years ago, half a billion dollars to get all of housing at a core need. We need to get a plan to do that. If part of it is home ownership, I get it. Getting the Indigenous governments to be partners and do some of it, that's fine. We've got to get rid of this. We cannot let this glass ceiling hamper our efforts on housing. That's all I have. Thanks, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. Madam Premier.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I will take it as a comment. I didn't hear a real question. I do appreciate that we're on the same track. We just talk different, though.

I just want to remind that we are only doing one round of questions per priorities, so, Members, I encourage you to use short preambles for your questions, and I encourage the Premier to respond completely but briefly. Thank you. I will move on to the Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.