EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
We do not have that. We encourage homeowners and the public out there to acquire life insurance or homeownership insurance. That will alleviate some of the cost that’s necessary to carry out of the functions of a homeowner passing away.
I think this should be looked into in the future because there is no program at all to assist these people.
My last question is on the lack of housing.
Even if you are not with the housing corporation, we hear complaints about the lack of housing and whether this issue can be considered.
I wanted to ask not just about our community. I know that the houses that were owned, as there was encouragement to get into homeownership, have been abandoned because the owners weren’t able to keep up with mortgage payments.
Some of them could be retrofitted and reused.
Do you do anything at all for those houses that are abandoned by the homeowners?
With your permission, Mr. Chairman, I would like Mr. Barriault to respond to that question in detail.
The Nunavut Housing Corporation is aware that there are a number of abandoned houses or houses that have been boarded up that are privately owned for a number of different reasons.
We have identified 55 such houses through our local housing associations just in the Baffin alone.
With some flexibility in our capital budget for spending, then it gives us the opportunity to look at buying some of these houses from the owners and retrofitting them and making them available as affordable housing for people in all of our communities, but we do need to have some flexibility in our budget to be able to do that.
There was an issue kind of touched upon by a previous question for which I want to get more clarification.
I believe Mr. Curley raised the issue of homeownership within Nunavut earlier.
We all are aware of the challenges associated with living in Nunavut, as everything you need to purchase is extremely high.
I want to see more emphasis on assistance programs specific to young couples just starting a family and who are keen to work at a job.
I refer to young people on the cusp of starting a family, with both parents trying to work since they have completed their education and they are in the prime of their working lifetime.
It is due to their dream of having a good job, of being in a position that has a good salary, yet this government seemingly abandons their need for assistance.
I believe the threshold is set at $126,000 for the couple heading a house, yet these two persevering people who are trying to live the good life and who will never leave the territory of Nunavut and grow old in their community are suddenly deprived of the chance to make any progress. If their combined household income is over this threshold of $126,000, they no longer qualify.
Is this cast in stone? Can’t we revisit this threshold at all?
Whoever travels to Nunavut for employment and their salary is below this threshold of $126,000 is eligible for this program and they can be approved, even if they will probably leave our territory. Isn’t this contrarian?
We are penalizing our own young people from ever becoming eligible for this program.
Can’t this threshold be revisited for cases like this?
Hon. Peter Taptuna: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the member’s question.
Mr. Chairman, that’s right. There’s criteria put into the application process and everybody is treated equally, whether you’re from Pangnirtung, Pond Inlet, Kugluktuk, or just moved into Nunavut.
There is, I guess, what you would call some stipulation that some people just move into town here and get approved. That is not the case. Every application is evaluated, looked at, analyzed, and whether it’s approved or rejected or put aside for more information, it’s an ongoing process.
If a couple or a person, let’s say, is approved, they do get that funding for assistance.
Mr. Chairman, why there are limitation caps on the criteria is because we do not have all that much funding to pass around. When a person does make that amount of money, they’re capable of going to the bank and getting assistance there.
I thank the minister for indicating another problem.
Thank you for recognizing the criteria. That’s why it’s not helping the people of Nunavut.
The criteria are exactly what I was talking about.
If our young people are encouraged to work because they want to have a good life and if they make over $126,000, then there’s nothing they can do.
Any outsider just coming into Nunavut who makes less than $126,000 can get approval, yet they’re not here for a very long time.
Here we have couples who will not move out of Nunavut and who will start a family.
For a couple and their children, it’s expensive to try to keep your family alive on one income.
Sometimes you have both couples work in order to survive. Once both of them start working, the government doesn’t want to help them anymore.
Can’t the government look into this again?
The committee member stated that the government does not want to help.
Mr. Chairman, we put out over $72 million in assistance last fiscal year to subsidize fuel, the cost of power, and the cost of water.
Mr. Chairman, there are ongoing programs in various departments of the government that assist Nunavummiut out there.
When it comes to a young couple making that kind of income, they are quite capable of going to the bank and having the bank set up a mortgage for them.
Mr. Chairman, out of the number of people in public housing, approximately 90 percent of them are under the minimum wage criteria, so we focus our attention on them and we do the best we can with the small amount of budget allocated for the homeownership programs.
Pursuant to Rule 6(1), I would now like to recognize the clock and report to the Speaker. We will adjourn.
Please note that Mr. Rumbolt will be the first one to ask questions tomorrow.
Mr. Minister, please note that we are not done. Thank you. We will be back tomorrow.
Your committee has been considering Bills 49 and 50 and would like to report progress and that Bill 50 is immediately ready for third reading.
Bill 50 – An Act to Amend the Nunavut Elections Act – Third Reading
I move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Rankin Inlet South and Whale Cove, that Bill 50, An Act to Amend the Nunavut Elections Act, be read for the third time.
The motion is carried and Bill 50 is ready for assent.
I am seeking unanimous consent to return to Item 15, Notices of Motions for First Reading of Bills.
The minister is seeking unanimous consent to go back to Item 15 in the Orders of the Day, Notices of Motions for First Reading of Bills.
There are none. Please proceed, Minister Shewchuk.
Revert to Item 15: Notices of Motions for First Reading of Bills
I would like to correct the title of Bill 60 for which I gave notice to first reading of bills earlier today.
The correct title of Bill 60 is An Act Respecting the Nunavut Law Foundation.
We will continue on with our orders of the day. Item 22 in our Orders of the Day.
This House stands adjourned until Friday, March 15, at 9:00 a.m.
Friday, March 15, 2013
Pages 4163 – 4200
Opening Prayer 4163
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters 4163
Report of the Committee of the Whole 4199
Orders of the Day 4199
Friday, March 15, 2013 4163
Bill 49 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2013-2014 – Nunavut Housing Corporation – Consideration in Committee 4164
Bill 49 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2013-2014 – Culture and Heritage – Consideration in Committee 4195
Before we proceed with today’s sitting, I would like to ask Mr. Elliott to lead us off in a prayer, please.
Speaker: Good morning, everyone.
Good morning to our guests in the Gallery and the former mayor from Iqaluit, John Matthews. He’s teaching a four-day financial management course to the students from here in Iqaluit, Baker Lake, and Pond Inlet.
Welcome to our proceedings.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Good morning, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation) I seek unanimous consent of this Assembly to go directly to Item 19 in our Orders of the Day.
The member is seeking unanimous consent to proceed directly to Item 19 in the Orders of the Day.
So we will move on to Item 19 in our Orders of the Day.
Bills 47, 48, 49, 54, and 56 with Mr. Enook in the Chair.
I would like to ask members to remain at their desks and we will go directly to Committee of the Whole.
Good morning, Nunavummiut. I also say “good morning” to the students in the Gallery with us today. Welcome to the Gallery.
In Committee of the Whole, we have the following items to deal with: Bills 47, 48, 49, 54, and 56.
Mr. Rumbolt: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning.
We wish to continue with the review of the main estimates for the Nunavut Housing Corporation, followed by the review of the following departments: Culture and Heritage, Environment, and the Legislative Assembly.
We would then wish to review the following: Bill 47, Bill 48, Bill 54, and Bill 56.
Using my discretion as the Chair, I will give (interpretation ends) Madam Premier (interpretation) an opportunity to recognize visitors in the Gallery. (interpretation ends) Madam Premier.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you very much.
Good morning. I thank my colleagues for giving me the opportunity to acknowledge these students since we value our students throughout Nunavut.
At this time, we have visiting students from outside of Nunavut. I will make my acknowledgement in English.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Chairman, I would like to take this opportunity to welcome 31 young musicians who are part of the YMCA Youth Exchange Program. Mr. Chairman, 16 of these young people from OrKidstra, an Ottawa music program for inner-city children, are here in Iqaluit for the first part of a musical and cultural exchange with children from Iqaluit Fiddle Club, as well as experiencing all aspects of Nunavut culture.
Tonight at 7:30 at the Nakashuk School, they will be taking part in the Eighth Annual Choral Festival Concert featuring all the Iqaluit and Apex school choirs and community choir, the fiddlers, and the closing mass choir of more than 200 singers.
Mr. Chairman, next month, Iqaluit youth fiddlers will be travelling to Ottawa, where their visit will involve a series of workshops and rehearsals culminating in two performances with the National Arts Centre Orchestra.
(interpretation) Mr. Chairman, I want to warmly welcome our visitors to Nunavut here in the Gallery. (interpretation ends) Please join me in welcoming to the Assembly these talented young people. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman: Qujannamiik, Madam Premier. (interpretation) Are we in agreement to continue on from where we left off yesterday with main estimates for the Nunavut Housing Corporation?
Does the committee agree to bring in Minister Taptuna and his witnesses?
Chairman: Minister Taptuna and your officials from yesterday, you may proceed. (interpretation) Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the witnesses in.
Good morning, Minister Taptuna.
Good morning, committee members and colleagues.
Mr. Chairman, on my right is President and CEO Alain Barriault and on my left is Lori Kimball, Chief Financial Officer and COO.
We’re on page L-3.
I want to start my questions off on page NHC-9 of the business plan, territorial corporations, 2013-16.
One of the priorities for 2013-14 is to “Develop an implementation and financial plan for the GN Comprehensive Long Term Housing Strategy, in collaboration with GN departments.”
I was just wondering: in terms of some of the planning that’s going on with that, are some of the phases and some of the different changes as a result of the Office of the Auditor General’s recommendations the last time they were here in the House?
Mr. Chairman, if I can with your permission, I’ll have the President, Mr. Alain Barriault, to respond to that question in detail.
Some of the changes that the Nunavut Housing Corporation has made in response to the OAG performance audit of the housing corporation have been, well, to begin with, the relocation of the finance division from our Arviat office to Iqaluit and the successful filling of a number of positions.
So recruitment continues in a very successful fashion.
As well, we are proceeding, with the help of our colleagues at Community and Government Services, with the development of requests for proposals for financial management and property management software system solutions for both the Nunavut Housing Corporation and our local housing organizations.
So we’re making quite a bit of progress and advancement.
The finances of the housing corporation are in good order.
As well, in terms of how this ties into the housing strategy, this is ongoing work with our colleagues in the Department of Finance to look for new solutions, including the involvement of the private sector, in terms of financing housing solutions.
One of the concerns that has been brought up, actually, in all three of the communities in the High Arctic is some of the structures are very old and most of them are built along the shoreline.
One of the questions or concerns that I was hoping to find an answer for was: at what point… ?
I think this fits into the long-term strategy because we must have a lot of aging infrastructure across the territory.
At what point do they either say that the house is not liveable anymore and then, I guess, at that point, a determination is made?
So what is put into effect to decide whether the house is still inhabitable?
With you permission, Alain Barriault will respond to that in detail.
One of the terms that we have used in the past has been to determine that a house is beyond economic repair, meaning that it’s not economically feasible to repair it any further, that we’re putting good money after bad at some point.
Unfortunately, due to our very large housing shortfall, that point of no return is getting further and further away. As such, as long as it’s more economical to keep repairing a home, we will keep doing so rather than paying the much higher cost of replacing it at this point.
Normally, if we had the luxury of being able to determine that houses were too old and outdated to keep, we would be doing so and replacing them, but we will only be able to really start considering that as a regular option once our housing gap is decreased much further.
Again, in speaking to that, once it’s determined that it’s not economically feasible to keep the building, is the plan or usual intent to demolish the structure and then build in the same area?
I think one of the concerns that a lot of residents in the High Arctic have is, like any other area across Canada, the waterfront area is the prime real estate because your boats and whatnot may have access to the shoreline.
People are concerned with what’s happening.
Once a house is no longer usable, is it the intent of the housing corporation to demolish it and then rebuild on that specific location?
Mr. Chairman, I’ll have the president respond to that in detail.
Waterfront lots are, indeed, in high demand. If we look at public housing tenants, even, who are asking for moves of convenience, many do want to access those lots where they can pull their boats right up to their houses and whatnot.
In cases where the housing corporation would have to remove a house for any reason, whether it’s a fire or otherwise, we will look at what our options are for best use of that lot.
As I have stated before in this House, the intention of the housing corporation under the Public Housing program is not to be building more single-family detached houses as they are the most expensive form of housing to build, but there are options, especially under homeownership programs, whereby we could make use of these lots.
These lots, in many cases, could be turned over to a homeowner at a much lower cost than new equity leases of newly developed land.
At this time, the intent is not to leave Nunavut Housing houses that are deemed unliveable to just sit for long or extended periods of time. The intent is to free those lots up either for more public housing or use by private owners.
In terms of long-term planning, one of the issues I would like to know is whether the Nunavut Housing Corporation is considering, and we would like to find out how this would affect them, the recent talks about the possibility of owning land and municipalities taking over ownership of the land and administering.
I’m assuming there would be fees involved.
Right now, if their land lease is with the federal government, it’s my understanding, and if there was a change in that type of a policy where municipalities actually had ownership of the parcels of land and the housing corporation was able to sell them back and forth, is this a money-making opportunity for the housing corporation?
I understand that there is going to be a referendum on that on March 15 of 2015.
Mr. Chairman, it’s quite complicated. If I can, Mr. Chairman, I’ll have the president respond to that question in detail.
As many of you will recall, there was a municipal land referendum that took place in March of 1995 and, if I have my dates right, that was for a 20-year period and it should be due for a new referendum in March of 2015.
The decision that was made at that time was whether or not municipalities would continue to provide land on a leasehold basis or whether they would revert to a fee simple basis whereby you have effective ownership of the land as a homeowner or as a building owner.
That decision will have to be made by referendum.
Again, it will be the decision of all Nunavummiut as to which direction this will go and what comes out of that will probably be worked out between municipalities, Community and Government Services, and a number of other stakeholders.
Currently, all land is administered within municipalities by the municipalities themselves. About two years ago, all of the Commissioner’s Land that was administered through Community and Government Services was transferred to municipalities for their administration.
Thanks for the history.
My understanding is that that’s what is happening.
I’m saying that in terms of long-term planning, if we’re planning ahead to the future and if it… . Again, I know we’re dealing with an assumption, but when you’re doing long-term planning, you have to deal with assumptions. If it goes either way and you don’t plan both ways, then in essence, sometimes you’re left high and dry.
So my thinking would be, if it does go that the municipalities become landowners, then they might be thinking that they will be able to charge land taxes and those taxes would then be passed onto the Nunavut Housing Corporation, which then would incur a huge cost, which we already have been briefed on in terms of municipalities increasing water rates across the territory, which, in turn, means the Nunavut Housing Corporation budget would increase because you’re one of the biggest landlords.
I guess that’s what I’m trying to say.
Is there some thinking behind that as to how the housing corporation would deal with something like that?
Mr. Chairman, yes, the Nunavut Housing Corporation is always thinking long term. Whatever happens out there has a major impact on the Nunavut Housing Corporation’s operations.
If I can with your permission, Mr. Chairman, have Mr. Barriault go into detail about the question that the committee member posed.
One of the things that the housing corporation has to look at as well is the zoning of land that it’s currently leasing.
For example, if we did see an opportunity with land that was commercially zoned and we had the opportunity to sell it at a high return in order to purchase a larger number of residential building lots, then that’s something we would definitely consider.
In terms of communities going to a tax-based system, probably Community and Government Services could explain a bit better how that process works.
Iqaluit is currently the only community in Nunavut that is tax-based, whether it has to do with its city status or more complicated details that I’m not as familiar with.
Typically, to become tax-based, you need to have a population base to be able to support that.
So that’s probably not a viable option for most of our communities in the short term and even in the long term, but as pricing structures change, we will work with our colleagues in all of the departments as well as the municipalities to ensure that we’re properly positioned to react.
I don’t think I need to ask the Minister of CGS to clarify on that because it is 2015 that it’s working towards and I have faith that the Nunavut Housing Corporation will continue to work on dealing with this issue.
At the same time, I think one of the issues in terms of long-term planning for the Nunavut Housing Corporation would be its relationship with CMHC.
My understanding is that we have a stock of houses that are aging and every year, the costs to repair them are going up.
At the same time, on the other side of the scale, CMHC is cutting back on its assistance with maintaining and keeping those houses liveable.
I’m wondering: what are some of the possible solutions that the Nunavut Housing Corporation is working towards to correct this problem?
With your permission, I would like Mr. Barriault to respond to that in detail.
It is true that our funding from Canada Mortgage and Housing for aging stock is decreasing year by year. As per the terms of the Social Housing Agreement and Social Housing Transfer, all jurisdictions in Canada are facing a similar issue.
In their cases, public housing may make up 5 percent of their overall housing stock, not 50 percent, as is our case. We’re feeling the crunch a little bit more than many of our counterparts.
We are working in terms of lobbying from a provincial and territorial perspective jointly with CMHC on this issue. As well, I will be meeting with my colleagues in Whitehorse, a tri-territorial presidents of the housing corporations’, at the end of this month for some common lobbying efforts.
We continue ourselves, of course, to lobby with Canada Mortgage and Housing.
We have to keep working within government itself in terms of allocation of our resources, prioritizing of our funding, and finding ways to reduce costs so that our limited dollars do go further.
We are approaching this from a number of different angles.
Yesterday, some of you have referred to Igluliuqatigiilauqta, a framework towards a housing strategy.
More details will be forthcoming within the strategy itself and, more particularly, within the development of our action plan, which will be interdepartmental and involves collaboration not just within government, but with all of our public and private partners.
Next I would like to move on to the administration of the Nunavut Housing Trust Program.
Could the minister update the House on the delivery of the houses and whether that specific project, in terms of the administration, all the bills are paid and all the details are completed for that program?
The Nunavut Housing Trust is drawing to its conclusion. We have a few last units that we’re completing as we speak.
In Arviat, there are two single family houses, one is at 95 percent completion and the other is at 70 percent, which is at the drywall stage.
Grise Fiord has a duplex being completed, which is at 74 percent completion, and then in Gjoa Haven, we have a five-plex, a duplex, and one single-family house that are all at about 75 percent completion.
Everything should be completed this spring.
These last few houses fall under the 80-20 rule where 20 percent of your issues take up 80 percent of your time.
These were the last ones that had some complications and matters are coming to a close successfully.
So we’re very pleased because once these last 12 houses are completed, it will be 1,011 houses completed between the Nunavut Housing Trust and Canada’s Economic Action Plan.
Is it true that when the Nunavut Housing Corporation is constructing a new house, they usually purchase about 20 percent over what they’re buying just to make sure they have all the parts and pieces there in terms of two-by-fours, three-by-threes, or two-by-twos?
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Barriault can respond to that question in detail.
When you’re doing material take-offs, it’s common to allow for some wastage and for some additional material in case of damages in transportation.