EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I have a question on the minister’s opening comments and it’s probably just for clarification.
Let me preface that with a comment, Mr. Minister, related to the statements earlier today about the new lighting project, which is bright and energy efficient.
You stated that it is a pilot project in Iqaluit that will work its way into the other communities.
I wanted to inform you that Mr. Shooyook’s constituency as well as my constituency should be the priority due to dark season we experience in the High Arctic. I believe that our four communities experience the most darkness for the longest periods in the winter. We don’t see the sun for several months during the dark season.
I would ask that the department consider the communities that experience the greatest length of darkness when you are considering the transfer of the project outside of Iqaluit. That should be the first consideration.
I wish to get further clarification on this matter within the opening comments. I wanted to get clarification on “$660,000 to cover the net reduction in debt repayment...” I wanted to get some reasoning behind the language used in this sentence.
Hon. George Hickes: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for that question.
As we’re all aware and as I alluded to in an earlier response, CMHC funding is decreasing.
Every year, we get less and less funding. That is the amount under CMHC that we got, not clawed back, that’s not the right term, but decreased funding for this fiscal year. That funding will sunset in 2037 to a zero balance, so it’s going to keep steadily going down.
You may recall, during this appropriation, there is that $660,000 that is being contributed now by the Government of Nunavut to offset because the need isn’t going down, but the money we’re receiving from CMHC is going down.
That is another aspect of my negotiations and through the other territorial negotiations through CMHC to help to see and identify areas where we can somehow offset that decreasing amount over a period of time.
Basically, we’re getting a little over $14 million right now and by 2037, we will get zero.
Also in your opening comments, you mentioned operating costs of $26,000 per year per housing unit and that energy, water and sewage, and other costs go up.
What do you base your decisions on for budget estimates for how much you’re going to be spending? What do you base your decisions on when some of these costs suddenly go up? Take municipalities, for example, I believe they have some discretionary leeway within certain rules.
How do try to determine this type of uncertainty?
The most accurate numbers that we have are historical costs.
When we take our costs that occurred last year and divide them by the amount of units we’ve got, that’s what we base our numbers on.
Now, there have been some increases in some municipalities in water and sewer which caused the need to go back for that $3.6 million last year and increase our budget in that category for this year.
Ongoing communication with Community and Government Services and with the communities themselves to help address and do the best we can, as our tenants use the services and use the utilities and we have to pay for them.
As this is not written in a document, Mr. Chairman, if you allow me to ask a question.
We once had the former minister of the housing corporation at the witness table during our deliberations on housing last fall, I believe.
The discussion focused primarily on the agreement between the housing corporation and the local housing organizations.
It was mentioned more than once that they’re doing a review on this agreement.
Mr. Chairman, if you allow me to ask the question, when will this review be completed?
That review is ongoing.
It’s trying to work with every different LHO and come to a core agreement to still have controls and duties at the community level, which is what we fund them for.
To come to a fair funding model, to make sure that we’re doing the job properly, right now, we’re looking at completing most of the negotiations by the fall of this year and having an agreement finalized by 2017.
You said that you are negotiating at this point.
We have the boards of LHOs and the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Which of the directors of each local board is doing the negotiating?
Do they appoint somebody independent from the housing corporation or the department?
Hon. George Hickes: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the member for that question.
Through direction from the Nunavut Housing Corporation board, the staff at NHC at the district level and headquarters are working with LHOs to come to identifying areas where we can be of more assistance, specifically with some of the IT needs, HR needs, and legal ramifications.
We’re making sure that there are some core structures to these management agreements to alleviate a lot of unnecessary stresses.
We want to make sure that we’re doing this the right way the first time.
Minister, you have heard me on more than one occasion in the House and you have heard my colleagues about the agreement, which seems to be developed in favour of the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
It seems like the local housing authorities don’t have any power at all and we have said that in this House.
At the end of the day, no matter what is decided, it always has to be approved by the Nunavut Housing Corporation in virtually every aspect.
With your present negotiations, there’s the Nunavut Housing Corporation, but what about the boards of the local housing authorities? Who represents them?
Do they have an entity or do they delegate someone to be involved in the negotiations?
With all LHOs, whether they be authorities or associations, a lot of that discussion happens with the LHO manager.
That’s where you get the community representation.
Albeit, however it’s set up, the LHO still has representation across the territory.
I would just like to add onto that, that the LHOs do have a fair bit of autonomy as well.
We’ve had some challenges in the past where it has been necessary to take the steps of going into an authority basis. It’s not something that is taken lightly.
I have met with a number of different boards already and I don’t envy their jobs sometimes.
The challenge they have of living and working in a community and making some of the tough decisions that they have to make are not easy.
I hear lots of stories, as I’m sure you guys all do from your constituents. There are a lot of heartbreaking stories out there.
We want to help everyone in the best manner that we can and wherever possible, we try to leave that autonomy with the LHO.
I’m referring back to a comment made by the minister regarding the Canada Housing and Mortgage Corporation. They say that there is going to be a gradual decrease with a sunset clause in 2037.
Once we have reached that date, they likely won’t be providing any more money.
I would like to ask the minister if he has had an opportunity to meet with the Minister responsible for the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation about this issue and the fact that it is of a great concern to Nunavut.
Have you had this opportunity yet?
The Social Housing Agreement with CMHC is very high on our concern list, if you want to call it that. I haven’t had an opportunity to meet with Minister Duclos himself, but I have met with his staff in Ottawa.
It was a number of issues, ideas, concerns, and requests that was definitely very close to the top of the list because it is an ever-increasing concern. It’s going to become more of a concern year by year for the next 20 years.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. We are dealing with the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Following the list of names, Mr. Qirngnuq.
I would like to ask questions to the Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation.
It is not covered in your opening comments, but they build rental housing units in the communities and we talk about affordable and cost-effective housing. That is one of the priorities of the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
My question is in regard to the housing units that are sent to the communities for construction.
Usually, architectural drawings are followed to construct the houses.
Can these blueprints be adapted so that the constructed units are not as cold? I’m sure that’s factored in when you’re doing your architectural drawings.
My question is: are they adapted to the north?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) Hon. Minister of the Nunavut Housing Corporation, Mr. Hickes.
Yes, when we design new construction, it’s all to current building and fire codes.
Chairman: Thank you. Mr. Qirngnuq.
I don’t think the minister quite understood my question. Is it possible to build houses that are adapted to the north because it’s colder up here?
The Nunavut Housing Corporation usually constructs five-plexes and I’m sure it’s Nunavut-wide.
Unfortunately, these units suffer from the lack of circulation in addition to condensation occurring in winter. That causes mould after only a few years.
It’s caused by the season cycles of dryness in summer and then humidity caused by condensation in winter.
My question is if blueprints can factor in for circulation and condensation so that northern housing construction results in less condensation and less mould build-up.
I hope that is clearer, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
The member brings up a very valid point that we’re constructing these units in the Arctic.
In most southern jurisdictions, the ventilation system used in construction is a little…I don’t know. I call them whirlybirds because they’ve got a vent on the top of the house that keeps air circulating throughout the house.
Due to our climate, we’re unable to use that type of mitigation measure, so we use air exchange units in all of our new construction.
There have been examples in the past where it has been a challenge to find local contractors or maintenance people with the expertise to be able to maintain them.
Some tenants don’t report when they’re shut off. I heard even as recently as one of the community tours where somebody brought the topic forward that some people shut them off because they use power and power is so expensive.
I would deter that strenuously for the minute cost that it costs to run those air exchange units and for the amount of damage it can do by not having them on, they’re there for a reason.
Through our health and safety, there has been some training in mould and mould-training kits have been sent to some of the district offices.
I would just like to re-emphasize and part of our campaign in tenant engagement is to highlight the importance of keeping those air exchange units in good working order and to immediately report if there’s any malfunction with them so that the local maintenance staff can address the issue.
I also wish to ask about this matter related to heating systems as they currently use two distinctly different systems.
One is the forced air heater that sucks in air from the outside and heats it to disseminate the heat to the unit while the other uses liquid to heat the home by cycling the hot liquid.
We are aware that the boiler systems are more energy efficient, which I am sure is understood by the corporation. I would like to know which system has been found to be more energy efficient, if it has been researched.
I promised Mr. Audla that I would defer at least a couple of questions to him today, so I’ll ask Mr. Audla to respond to that if the Chairman may allow.
Mr. Audla.
Mr. Audla (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I held meetings with the managers for the housing associations in the Baffin region.
This was one of the questions raised about the efficiency of our heating systems and the problems they face and whether boilers or forced air heating systems are more efficient.
It seems obvious that the majority prefer the forced air heating system, as the costs to repair and replace the systems is the most cost-effective and their maintenance workers are more familiar with the forced air systems.
We are currently reviewing the different jurisdictions, such as the NWT that uses forced air heating systems due to the reason that they can’t repair the boiler systems.
Due to that same reason, we can take into consideration the needs based on the costs as it seems obvious that savings can be realized.
We also understood the preference of the managers in the Baffin region as forced air heating systems are easier for them. We will still be looking into this matter.
I would like to remind members that we’re not talking about capital estimates; we’re on main estimates.
Some of the questions I wanted to ask have already been asked, so I’ll leave it at this time.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) Following the list of names, Mr. Rumbolt.
In my opening comments, I again raised the issue of residency requirements for the Nunavut Housing Corporation’s down-payment assistance program. I have raised this issue on a number of occasions not only here but in my committee.
I’m going to ask two simple questions on the matter and hopefully we can get it clarified today and it doesn’t show up in any future opening comments.
As of today, people have to live in Nunavut for at least one year before being eligible to vote in general elections, which is the same for municipal elections in our communities, and that’s fair.
Can the minister explain how it is fair for people to be eligible for the Nunavut Downpayment Assistance Program without a similar residency requirement?
Chairman: Thank you. Hon. Minister of the Nunavut Housing Corporation, Mr. Hickes.
I am very familiar with the member bringing forward this issue and I may have even raised it myself a time or two over the last couple of years.
One thing I learned when I took over this portfolio was that - not so much learned, but maybe identified in a little bit different viewpoint - at the end of the day, we’re trying to promote homeownership in the territory.
We have a budget on an annual basis allocated to this need and we do have other criteria. We have to be the age of majority and not have rental arrears with an LHO or with NHC.
Until such time as our budget is fully taxed, it’s something that I’m going to remain very cognizant of if it comes to a point where we’ve got budget concerns with what we have allocated to promote homeownership. We’re not looking at making any immediate changes to it.
I don’t have the exact number with me right now, but it’s a very small amount, if any, of new residents that come into Nunavut and apply for this funding.
I do appreciate the fact that the housing corporation is trying to promote homeownership in the territory, but this residency requirement kind of bugs me in a way.
I’m just wondering: will the minister at least commit to looking into this a little further and get back to us at a later date and give us clear and definite reasons why it has to be this way, without a residency requirement?
I believe I don’t even have to commit to this because this will be part of the analysis when we’re doing our blueprint for action.
This will be one of the topics that come up on promoting homeownership and the housing continuum, alleviating pressure on staff housing and alleviating pressure on public housing, the ultimate goal being putting people in that are fiscally able to do so to put into private homeownership opportunities. With the blueprint for action, I will kind of commit on my behalf that this will be explored.
Chairman: Thank you. Following the list of names, Mr. Joanasie.
Welcome, Mr. Hickes, when you’re presenting your first budget. Welcome, gentlemen, your officials.
(interpretation) To start, I would like clarification on the fund of $26,200, which is an annual total of operations of one unit.
That is at least what we have heard. I wonder if this fund can be further broken down as to what expenses are allocated into this fund.
Perhaps if you just provided a rough estimate of costs, such as monthly costs over a 12-month period, what the actual expenditures are under this operation fund. What are the monthly costs that total slightly over $26,200?
(interpretation ends) I don’t know if he has that level of detail, (interpretation) but if he does, I would like that explanation first.
I don’t have exact numbers, but I can give the member generally what the percentages are that those costs entail.
Approximately one-third is water and sewer. Another one-third is other utilities; heat, electricity. There are also taxes for the property on there.
It’s an average of costs associated with maintaining units across the territory. Like I had mentioned earlier, over 70 percent of our stock was built prior to 1999.
Some units do take more maintenance costs than others. This is an average cost per unit; some are less and some are more.
Mr. Joanasie (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to voice my support to the housing corporation as well as the other items my colleagues mentioned.
Perhaps we can look at the energy ratings or hydroelectric options or consider technologies that are more energy efficient. I wonder if more research can be conducted, especially any method that can result in savings over our current expenditures.
Even though that is the case, there was another area I wanted to ask a question about. It is with respect to the $26,200 (interpretation ends) that is for public housing. Is that correct?
What about for staff housing? Is it the same amount? For government staff housing, does it cost that much to maintain each unit as well?
It does vary with staff housing.
It’s dependent upon the lease arrangements that are made to get those units.
Some tenants are responsible for water and sewer, as an example, or heating fuel or electricity, so it does vary according to the lease arrangement.
That being said and I’m just going by memory, so I’ll stand to be corrected.
It’s approximately about $14,000 a month.
It’s the number that I recall previously, but it’s something I will confirm and I will confirm with the member, but if I recall correctly, it’s about $14,000 per unit per year.
Mr. Joanasie (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) If I may use my calculator, on page 10 of your business plan, if I average it out, the lease for staff housing rental as well as operations, if I total that amount and divide it by the number of units, 1,480 into about 36,000, is there a better, accurate figure or am I just getting my math wrong?
Like I said, there are some variances depending upon how the lease is structured. At the same time, there is revenue offset from staff housing that people pay rents. That would offset some of those expenses.
That money goes to the Department of Finance.
The Nunavut Housing Corporation has public housing and the government has staff housing.
I would like to know how many people are on the waiting list for public housing and staff housing today.
Hon. George Hickes: Thank you.
To start off with public housing, there is an estimated 1,862 families across the territory, which would entail needing 372 new five-plex buildings to accommodate everyone on the current needs list for public housing.
I’m just gathering the documents on staff housing. Just a moment, please.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My apologies for the delay.
It’s a kind of a floating amount depending upon how many competitions are out and how many are being filled. I can give a rough estimate of approximately about 1,300 staff housing units are needed to meet the demand across the territory.
NHC’s Long-term Comprehensive Housing and Homelessness Strategy states, “Staff housing should provide new employees who move into market communities with a home until they become settled.
These employees should be encouraged to move into the private sector or discouraged from remaining in staff housing…” I would like to ask the minister what specific options are currently being considered to encourage employees to move out of staff housing.
It’s not an easy one to answer.
There are ongoing discussions. Do we increase our housing subsidy for GN employees from the 400 to a higher amount?
Do we increase staff housing rents to put more pressure on our staff to go into private rental markets or into homeownership opportunities?
The blueprint for action again will address a lot of these concerns and put action options behind the issue itself.
Through negotiation and through consultation with our stakeholders and with members of the public, we will identify all available options and we will be exploring.
I know that a number of years ago, there was an attempt to increase staff housing rates.
I believe it was across the territory, so it was a hindrance in a lot of communities and it was scaled back. From personal experience, it worked for me. I ended up having to buy a house because my rent kept getting higher and higher.
Once we identify more options through consultation with our stakeholders and members of the public, we will explore all options on how to do it as less dramatic as possible.
With the capacity issues we have overall in this government, we don’t want to deter employability in Nunavut.
We’ve got to really balance how we go about enforcing or engaging with our employees on how to move them out of the staff housing into the other aspects of the housing continuum.
I would also like to ask him: as the Minister responsible for NHC, what changes to the Staff Housing Policy do you support making in addition to what you have already discussed earlier?
To me, it’s almost a hypothetical question, but without knowledge, without an analysis of identifying the pros and cons of taking different actions, at this time, I wouldn’t be comfortable bringing forward any specific outcomes until we do a full analysis and I’m able to explore all options and potential ramifications of those decisions.
If he’s willing to answer hypothetical questions, maybe he will indulge me in what he thinks would happen if there was no Staff Housing Policy and public housing and staff housing were treated the same. What would happen in that scenario?
May I remind members that I will make a ruling if it’s a hypothetical question.
Right off the bat, it would totally change all public housing and the Staff Housing Policy itself. For public housing, you’re not even eligible unless you have been in the community for a period of time.
To look at hiring or importing professionals and skilled employees for the Government of Nunavut, I don’t think Minister Peterson would be too fond of me if I adapted the policy to that extreme.
I have one final question for today and it’s on rent scale reform.
As was pointed out, the rent scale was reformed to remove disincentives to employment. I would like to see: to what extent is the new public housing rent scale having an impact?
Maybe he has discussed it with the Minister of Family Services. Are there more people actually working now with this new policy reform?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That’s it for me. Thanks.
I’ll preface the response. I’ll ask Mr. Audla to give a detailed response on it.
I will preface it that I don’t personally have the statistics right now of what kind of impact it is having on the employability.
In layman’s terms, if I’m working, I’m bringing more money into the household, and I have more disposable income for that household at the end of the month after paying my rent, even if it does increase, to me, it is not a deterrent to employability. You’ve got more disposable income for your family.
If the Chairman would allow, I would like Mr. Audla to provide a detailed response.
Chairman: Thank you. Mr. Audla.
Mr. Audla: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Based on my briefings as to the public housing rent scale having been reviewed and revised in February of 2014, the question that the member had asked was specifically addressed in the sense that the changes that were made was to keep in mind that each unit will be based on two primary tenants.
If their income is less than $22,000, they would pay a minimum rent of $60 per month.
Any income that is above $22,000 to $40,000 will be 20 percent of annual income.
Anything above $40,000 to a maximum of $80,000, the rent increase will be 25 percent of annual income.
Lastly, anything above $80,000 will be 30 percent of annual income.