EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
For 2018-19 public housing construction there will be 5 units in Sanikiluaq, 15 units in Cambridge Bay, 20 units in Arviat, 20 units in Iqaluit, 10 units in Pond Inlet, 10 units in Kugluktuk, 5 units in Naujaat, 5 units in Kimmirut, and 5 units in Qikiqtarjuaq.
That’s the proposed construction for public housing, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Akoak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank the minister for announcing. When I tried to get elected, I told my community that I would fight for more housing in my community and I would like to say “thank you very much.”
My last question would be: how will local housing organizations be consulted on public housing unit designs?
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I also thank the member for that good question.
We consulted with the local housing organizations in the Kivalliq, Kitikmeot, and Baffin regions.
When we were consulting the local housing organizations, we talked about different topics such as whether there should be single, double, or three units built together.
Each community had different ideas and so we consulted with the local housing organizations to decide on one-, two-, or three-bedroom units to be built.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) Following the list of names, Mr. Enook.
Welcome, Minister Kuksuk.
Before I ask a question, I would like to go back to what you said about proposed construction for 2017-18 that will be going to the communities.
I know that some communities have problems with either the land or the need for more electricity. There have issues with a lack of capacity.
Mr. Minister, please be aware that we have absolutely no capacity issues in Pond Inlet and we are ready to welcome the new units in 2017-18 if any of the other communities are not ready for them.
We have adequate power poles already put up and we’re very welcoming.
Let me ask this question first of all, Mr. Chairman. The Nunavut Housing Corporation’s budget includes the homeownership programs.
Let me ask this question: why are the homeownership assistance programs in the capital budget?
It’s a program, but it’s included in there whenever we get into the capital estimates.
I sometimes think that when we’re talking about capital estimates, we usually refer to buildings and assets that will be owned by the government.
Now this money is going to be used for private homes. Is it in the right place?
I would like to know the reasoning behind why it’s included there.
I would like Mr. Gershom Moyo to respond to that if you don’t mind.
Mr. Moyo.
That’s a very good question. We grapple with that as well.
I think it’s appropriate for it to be in our O&M budget. That’s why it resides in the capital budget. As you correctly pointed out, really, these are not our assets; they are private homeowners’ assets.
Sorry to talk accounting, but when we account for homeownership programs, we actually expense them through the O&M budget. It’s a disconnect, if I may say that.
We continue to explore ways with the Department of Finance to see if it’s possible to reclassify the homeownership budget into our O&M budget.
I want to add one more thing, Mr. Chairman. The benefit of having homeownership financing through the capital budget is that we’re able to carry forward from one year to the next in case we don’t fully spend what has been allocated to us.
That’s one specific reason that I can cite for including the homeownership budget in the capital budget.
Whereas if we’re to include them in our O&M, we will have to expense them and each year, we will have to start afresh and write it off to accumulated surplus.
I’m really proud. This is the first time I have ever been told I had a good question.
I’m really happy about that.
Let me ask another question about that. I believe that I can ask this question.
It follows people’s salary eligibility requirements. If I make a certain amount of money, I’m eligible. If I make this certain amount of money, I’m not eligible.
I know about those.
Have you ever thought about reviewing that?
As I have said a number of times to Minister Kuksuk, everything is extremely expensive in Nunavut. There are younger people who are starting to make families, who are trying to do it the right way, and they want to have a proper home for their children. The only way they can keep up is to have both parents working if they’re going to provide all the clothing, food, and everything.
They’re going to be staying in Nunavut and they will probably die here. All of their money is going to be spent in Nunavut.
They exceed the income threshold, but they have to work in order to have a good home.
Have you thought about reviewing that?
I think I understand your question. You’re asking whether we have thought of reviewing it or if we would review it.
Yes, it can be looked at again in response to your question because of the reasoning that you put.
In 2014, if I remember correctly, we had a revision of that for homeownership.
In regard to your question if we can review it, yes, we can review it.
I believe it really needs to be reviewed. Our fellow residents of Nunavut who are younger than we are want to have a good career. They have a partner and they want to have everything that they need like transportation equipment, proper food and clothing.
If they want to do that, they both have no choice but to work because it’s so expensive.
Now because they’re both working, they’re no longer eligible for our assistance.
I encourage you, minister. I would be able to talk to you about this at a later time, if you didn’t really understand me.
Mr. Chairman, let me ask you questions about housing construction now.
There is something I don’t understand.
I’ll use an example of what I know.
In Pond Inlet they built houses last year and after they constructed them, they could not completely finish them because they had missing items.
They had to wait for the 2016 summer sealift before those buildings could finally be completed.
That is just a story.
People moved into them before the exterior was completed.
My question is about the 10 units in Pond Inlet that comprise two five-plexes.
They will not be fixed up until next spring and summer, and now you have stated that buildings have to be completed by October 2017, which is next year.
Those buildings in our community are supposed to be completed in October 2017.
Those people who build houses know what the deadline is and now they’re only going to start working on them again next summer.
My concern is if they miss a whole bunch of stuff again. The ships fill up very quickly with cargo.
What will they do? We have experienced this already last year in Pond Inlet.
We had to wait until the next fall to complete.
What would happen if that happens again? What if the ships are too full and they can’t put any more building material on them and then they will have to wait until the next year to fix them?
Whenever someone gets a contract to build houses in the communities and once we know who the contractor is, we agree with the contractor on a completion date and they sign off on that. They give us a date as to when the construction will be completed.
In regard to your question as to what would happen if there were missing materials that are supposed to be a part of that house that is being built, if all the parts don’t arrive, it is the contractor’s responsibility because of the agreement with that contractor, along with the completion date.
The contractor would have to meet the construction deadlines.
If the construction is late, if they needed more money and the contractor could not complete the contract, if you don’t mind, Mr. Chairman, I don’t have that information. I would like my deputy minister to explain the process.
Mr. Audla (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) It’s in the contractor’s best interest to complete by the specified completion date, October 1.
If they don’t, then they could risk penalties where their contract would be reviewed and looked at, and we would consider at NHC what penalties may apply.
If it’s monetary, then that would be considered as well.
As it stands right now, it’s always in the best interest of the contractor to ensure they are completed by the specified completion date. (interpretation) Thank you.
That’s what I’m concerned about. If the contractor does not complete the construction or they don’t have enough material, then once again we will have to wait a whole year until they are resupplied.
I’m just going to use an example.
If I know there are two five-plexes and the completion date is October 1, 2017, if you had urged that the exterior has to be completed and the roofing done prior to winter setting on, they can complete that within a month.
In the winter when there’s no light, they can take a break and start working again in the spring.
It would be a lot more realistic if they finish the exterior so that they will know whether they need more supplies or not.
We have very limited housing and we wait very long, a year or more, because you’re not urging them to keep on the timeline or in such cases where they have a shortage of construction material.
I’m very concerned about that.
Yes, contractors do bid on tenders and they sign contracts that contain completion dates. It would specify that the completion date would be on such-and-such date in this community. It’s all outlined in black and white.
Once the contractor agrees and signs the agreement, they start the construction and whatever they have to do to complete the construction of the house.
As my deputy minister indicated earlier, if they do not meet the completion date, then there would have to be a review of the contract and whether there are going to be penalties or some kind of action taken by the housing corporation.
The contractor would look at the completion date and try to have it on or before that date.
If they do not meet the completion date, then they will be penalized accordingly for not completing the construction of the house after it has been reviewed to remediate the problem.
Let me ask the minister: do you not understand my concern?
Yes, I understand your concern completely.
It is outlined in the contract. There’s a completion date indicated in the contract and they have to meet that deadline.
I don’t think we understand one another.
What I’m trying to say is, yes, they do have a completion date and yes, I agree with it.
However, I don’t agree with completion deadlines because there might be other problems like a shortage of construction material not being able to get on the ship and then we would have to wait for a long time before we can occupy that building. My concern is if there is no room on the ship left to supply whatever material they need.
You indicated that there would be a penalty applied if they did not finish by the completion date.
We have been waiting for years for additional housing. Even if a company is penalized, it’s not going to matter to the people who are trying to get those houses.
Wouldn’t it have been better if you have a law that the house’s exterior has to be completely walled in and roofed?
Yes, they can take a break in the winter as long as they can start again in the spring so that they will know earlier that they’re lacking additional material or whatever.
That’s what I would like the housing corporation to look into.
I know exactly what his concern is, but they have been on time and they have completed it on or before the completion date.
The housing corporation can also extend a completion date should there be, for example, lack of construction material to complete the house or if there’s a good reason to extend the contract. The housing corporation has the right to extend a contract if necessary to complete a house.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) Following the list of names, Mr. Joanasie.
First of all I would like to support the Member for Hudson Bay for asking to have two entrances to a house.
This concern is shared in the communities. I wanted to express my agreement with many who believe housing units should have two entrances and that needs to be reconsidered by the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Your capital estimates for renovation and improvement are usually the same just about every year, but most of the houses in Nunavut need to be improved because the housing stock is aging.
They have to be improved or renovated and they’re unoccupied for the time that they’re working on the house.
Is it possible for the housing corporation to consider renovating or improving the interior of the houses?
Of course it’s very good to see new houses being built in the communities, but I’m talking about the current stock of 5,283 units. I don’t know what percentage of those units are unoccupied because they are being renovated or improved.
Have you ever considered modernizing and improving more houses?
Chairman (Mr. Enook): Thank you, Mr. Joanasie.
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): Thank you very much, Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, regarding modernization and improvement of the present stock that the housing corporation holds, the monies are set aside for the regions.
We usually set aside some funds for M&I.
The local housing organizations then let us know how many units of the present housing stock would have to be improved or renovated.
I understand that you want a larger budget for modernization and improvement.
It is equally divided among the communities so that they have a budget for maintenance and improvements. That’s how we base our budget estimates.
If a housing unit was poorly designed or if there are problems with a unit after the tenants have moved in, what can the local housing organizations do to have input into the design of their new houses?
I spoke to this issue earlier in response to a question that was posed.
We have to work with the local housing organizations. We consult with them to find out exactly what they would like to see in the design. This is being reviewed and we are consulting with the communities in regard to this.
Moving on to another topic, you work with your counterparts in the federal government in trying to come up with buildings. For example, there is Habitat for Humanity. We have heard that they have built housing in Iqaluit.
Have you worked with Habitat for Humanity to build houses from that organization in other communities? Have you started working with this entity?
I will have my deputy minister respond as to whether we’ve had those types of discussions.
Yes, we have approached Habitat for Humanity. We asked them to see if they can construct homes in communities other than Iqaluit, whether it is in the Kivalliq, Kitikmeot, or other smaller communities. We have discussed that with Habitat for Humanity.
What kinds of discussions have you had with them?
I would like my deputy minister to continue responding.
Chairman: Mr. Audla.
Mr. Audla (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) We have discussed the difficulty in the logistics involved when it comes to smaller communities.
They added expenses for transportation purposes as well as a local labour pool and how we can try to best fit that type of scenario within those communities.
We will continue to try to look at that option.
As it stands right now, because the local Habitat for Humanity has been Iqaluit-centric, we have made the suggestion of going into the other communities as well where they have capacity, but that involves also speaking with either territorial and regional representatives for Habitat for Humanity.
As an example, Edmonton mostly looks at northern builds and we would want to discuss with them as to the viability, if we look at the expenses as well as the potential of local labour force.
I also thank him for the proper response and clarifying it.
When someone alluded to the cost of constructing a new unit, they said that it would cost about $500,000 per unit and a five-plex would cost approximately $2.5 million to construct.
For example, in order to adequately expend the funds, do you provide funding to do research to save costs? If a building is a certain size in the north, it would cost the least amount of money. Have you looked at small houses that have trended internationally?
Briefly, no, we haven’t looked into other international countries, but it is starting to become evident that when we use the designs for five-plex or ten-plex units, it’s a lot cheaper to construct. We save more money using the same design. We use a common design and that saves us a lot of money with the multiplexes.
That’s what you see with the multiplexes in the communities.
My response is that we haven’t done any fact-finding to other countries to see if there are better designs that can be used for the north.
However, the (interpretation ends) Blueprint for Action on Housing (interpretation) which I referenced in the House a few days ago contains many of these, including which kind of building design is best for the north to make sure that these units are not too drafty.
I am asking the housing corporation to see if this can be considered. I know that you have funding available for this kind of work. I realize you have a very huge responsibility, but perhaps you can look at new options and be open to more options for Nunavut in regard to housing design.
Moving on to another topic, in your opening comments you indicated which staff housing units will be built in which communities.
When you’re identifying which communities will be allocated staff housing, in 2017-18, $5 million will be used for four communities, if I’m not mistaken.
Can you explain what process was used to come up with this decision?
There are various reasons, such as which communities are in shortage of staff housing. Under the Staff Housing Program, we consider the communities with the greatest need for staff housing units.
Mr. Chairman, I believe the member is asking about which communities will receive staff housing in 2017-18.
There are four communities where we will construct 17 new staff housing units across the territory; 2 units in Sanikiluaq, 5 units in Taloyoak, 5 units in Cape Dorset, and 5 units in Baker Lake.
In total 17 staff housing units will be built in 2017-18.
Moving on, Mr. Okalik.
I would like to welcome the minister and thank him for his opening comments on the homeownership programs.
I would like to ask about the homeownership programs.
It is very rewarding when you own your home and it contributes to the economy of the community.
In the past, before the creation of Nunavut, there used to be assistance where they would deliver the construction material to the community. The applicants who applied for the HAP program would help to construct the unit. Sometimes they would be done by the contractors.
For example, in Nunavut, in some communities we don’t have financial institutions and this program can have a good benefit to the people and create jobs. It’s very expensive to construct a home.
I was wondering if the housing corporation can come up with a similar program to help the homeowners.
Mr. Chairman, even though the old program is no longer being used, we now have a new program called the Tenant to Owner Program.
If a tenant wants to buy their unit, they can use the Tenant to Owner Program.
In regard to the member’s question, we have not considered that, so I can’t really respond to his question at this time.
Although I am very happy about this program, these units are usually very old and people who want to own their home would like a new home to make sure that their home is maintained properly.
When the house starts to deteriorate, they have to pay for the resulting increase in maintenance costs of the unit.
The HAP program was very beneficial in the smaller communities.
Maybe you can consider putting that program back in Nunavut.
Many Nunavummiut are dreaming of living in a nice home.
Can the housing corporation start planning for this kind of program?
To answer his question to move this forward, yes, we can reconsider that. I can’t say exactly what we will do about it, but we can surely look into it.
The homeowners pay for fuel, electricity, water and sewage.
These costs were supposed to have been paid by the government, but are now paid by the homeowners instead.
These costs could really be reduced if our government bought those units owned by their employees who were moved elsewhere.
Those units would then be available to those who are under-housed.
If we look at it that way, it would have a considerable benefit not just to homeowners in Nunavut.
If you look at it that way, you could have more programs for homeowners.
The homeownership program we had in the past achieved this to this very day. Now that there are more people working in the communities who want to own their own homes, perhaps it can be looked at again.
It can be a great benefit and I want to see that in the future.
If they can respond by saying that they will definitely look at it again, that’s when I’ll stop asking questions on this issue.
As I stated earlier, we can take a look at it again, what problems would be there or what problems they had in the past, and if those types of homeownership programs are benefiting everybody.
New houses were built. There’s data out there. They started out good as homeowners, but for some reason they couldn’t afford the cost of homeownership.
There were 13 homeowners under that program who gave up or couldn’t pay for their home anymore.
Those were some of the reasons the program stopped, but we can take a look at it again.
We can look at what the consequences would be if we return the program, but I can’t tell you if we’re going to move ahead with it or not.
You were the Speaker for a while because you’re the Deputy Speaker.
He mentioned the 13, but there are so many more who are successfully continuing as homeowners and they are proud to be homeowners because they don’t have to rely on the government.
If we look at the smaller communities, there are many government employees now who want to own their homes.
There are no financial institutions to approach for a mortgage and a program like that would be of great benefit for people who want to own their home.
I don’t want to hear about the few problems in the past.
I would like to see new assistance programs for people who want to own and maintain their homes.
I would like to point out that I will not stop asking about this, even if I may take a pause on the issue.
The second question I wanted to ask is here in Iqaluit they will be constructing more units and we know that we’re very short of land for construction.
It’s becoming harder to construct units in Iqaluit due to lack of land.
Would the money that was set aside be used properly?
For the construction of housing in Iqaluit, I know the Iqaluit MLAs are quite aware that acquiring land for public housing construction has been a cause of delays to date.
Right now we are working together with the City of Iqaluit and the Department of Community and Government Services.
We had discussions about land in Iqaluit and that’s ongoing work. We talked with private homeowners.
Iqaluit is going to do proper land planning for new construction of units so that they can have a proper land plan and to have them identify land. The lack of available land delays the building of units in Iqaluit.
That’s how I can respond right now.
We don’t want our share to be taken away and have them transferred to Pond Inlet.
Minister, don’t forget the comments that I made.
Tomorrow we will continue with our review of the proposed capital estimates for the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Thank you, Minister Kuksuk. We will see you again tomorrow.
Monica Ell-Kanayuk.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) This House stands adjourned until Thursday, November 3, at 1:30 p.m.
Thursday, November 3, 2016
Pages 2867 – 2929
Opening Prayer 2867
Ministers’ Statements 2867
Members’ Statements 2870
Returns to Oral Questions 2873
Oral Questions 2874
Tabling of Documents 2891
Notices of Motions 2892
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters 2893
Report of the Committee of the Whole 2927
Third Reading of Bills 2928
Orders of the Day 2928
Thursday, November 3, 2016 2867
209 – 4(3): Community Tourism and Cultural Industries Program (Ell-Kanayuk) 2867