EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
There are 285 units that were constructed under that initiative and $50 million was added from our government to increase the number to 285 units.
I guess where I was getting confused is we’re now getting $100 million from the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. We’re only going to build 210 units and we’re being told that it has to be built in specific communities to save money and make sure that we’re ensuring that money is being spent properly.
I’m just wondering why there’s such a big discrepancy in the number of houses that can be constructed.
I responded to that question. Within our government, we added $50 million to the $100 million that’s the Affordable Housing Initiative that we got from the federal government in 2008.
For the over 210 units that we’re hoping to build, of course, as the member is well aware, the cost will rise substantially as the years go by. One of the cost factors for this is, of course, land and lots.
I guess I must have missed that in terms of I thought that there was only overspending. In terms of the way it was explained to us over the years, it was the Nunavut Housing Trust that had the overspending of money, but I guess you’re just clarifying today that the Affordable Housing Initiative actually had overspending of $50 million as well. Is that what he’s saying, Mr. Chairman?
I’ll try and clarify that. Mr. Chairman, it was an over-commitment rather than overspending of the amounts that we did put into the Affordable Housing Initiative.
Again I guess I’m confused because I thought the over-commitment that the minister of the day had, I guess he’s the one who coined the phrase, “over-commitment,” I thought that was just for the Nunavut Housing Trust, not for the Affordable Housing Initiative.
So that’s good to know and makes it even more prudent to be dealing with it in this way so that we don’t over-commit.
To make it easier for me to understand with smaller numbers, under the Affordable Housing Initiative, what was the cost per unit?
Was it $500,000? Is that what it ended up being?
Under Canada’s Economic Action Plan, funding was provided to the Nunavut Housing Corporation through the Affordable Housing Initiative of the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
That was the mechanism for transferring the money.
Under Canada’s Economic Action Plan, as you may recall, there were structural insulated panel, or SIP, houses that were built. These were three-bedroom, single-family homes.
There were also duplexes, seniors’ four-plexes, five-plexes, and a variety of other buildings that were built between the Nunavut Housing Trust and Canada’s Economic Action Plan.
If we want to look at cost per building, you almost have to break it down into building types to get a more accurate picture.
In fact, on top of this, there were escalating land development prices.
Some of the original building lots that were acquired under these construction initiatives were for existing land that had been developed many years ago by hamlets in many cases, by the Government of Nunavut in other cases, and even the Government of the Northwest Territories in some cases. These building lots were acquired at a much lower cost than newly developed land, which was being funded through municipalities.
There was a number of shifting and changing factors and, of course, price costs were increasing and things were changing from year to year.
In the Nunavut Housing Trust lessons learned document, which is on the Nunavut Housing Corporation’s website, we actually detail quite a few of these cost factors that did impact the overall cost of building in Nunavut and throughout the world.
For example, the price of copper went up significantly and the price of oil, which resulted in transportation cost increase, and so on.
There are many mitigating factors.
When these over-commitments were brought to light with my administration within the housing corporation, we did cease all construction activity, as you may or may not recall, and obtained additional funding through this government before proceeding with the completion of all construction.
That is why we’re referring to it as an over-commitment rather than overspending because construction activity and commitments did cease until additional budget was first acquired.
We thank this government very much for the investment in this much needed housing throughout Nunavut.
Under this new Canadian housing and mortgage corporation, is it safe to say that each unit is around $476,000? Is that correct?
We could simply take the number of houses we’re projecting and divide that into the overall funding, but that does not reflect a lot of the factors that we have to consider.
The shipping cost, for example, for a five-plex can vary by as much as $120,000 between some of our communities.
For example, if we look at the shipping cost to Arviat or the shipping cost to Taloyoak, there’s a sizable difference in freight costs.
As well, we see land costs varying, for example, on a five-plex lot in Arviat somewhere in the vicinity of $80,000 to Iqaluit in the $600,000 range or Rankin Inlet in the $300,000 range.
There are quite a few factors that very much impact the cost per unit in different communities. We still to address in order of greatest need first irrelevant of the cost.
Depending on where those needs are, the $100 million can be spent very quickly or a lot slower.
Again depending on all of these variable factors, cost per unit differs greatly between communities.
So you’re saying that need is definitely the No. 1 reason why it’s going to the communities it’s going to.
That’s what my question was going to be. If it’s so expensive to send them to Taloyoak, why are they going there if you’re trying to… ? Maybe just confirm that.
Again, the methodology is based on needs of the community rather than wants and political interference. The methodology is based on community needs to try and come up with a comparative equalization rate throughout all the communities in Nunavut.
In terms of going back to Mr. Schell’s concern about his community, his community has the need and I think Kugaaruk is another one that is always on the list.
You said that you got this information from the needs survey in 2010. There were three communities that I saw that were in need in 2010 that aren’t on the list of houses that will be allocated for this year.
Can the minister explain? I think you had explained a little bit about Mr. Schell’s community in terms of power generation, but I don’t think that has been rectified. For the other two communities, maybe you can explain why need was not the factor if that was, in fact, a factor.
I’ll try and explain, but I won’t because I can’t recall all of these percentages and numbers for it. We’re dealing with percentages that break down to even smaller percentages, so I’m going to have Mr. Lysy respond to that question.
Every community has a need.
What we’re talking about here are the relative needs. Some communities have a greater need than other communities.
When we look at the average waiting list percentage of the communities that are not allocated housing, it’s at 17 percent. When we look at the average waiting list percentage of communities that are allocated housing, it’s at 33.9 percent. So there’s quite a gap.
What we are trying to do through this fairness approach is to eliminate that gap so that all communities are on an equal basis.
I think that in some ways, it’s nice that we have put this Minister’s Statement into Committee of the Whole because it gives us a chance to maybe see some of the improvements that the Nunavut Housing Corporation has done over the years. One of them was definitely the recommendation by the Auditor General to set up the board of directors.
It’s nice to have the chairperson to be able to see that they are involved in the process.
One of the things that came out with the Nunavut Housing Trust and the Affordable Housing Initiative was we were told… . Going back to the minister saying that this is the process that’s going to be followed for the next while and if we get more funding, it would be nice to have it that way, but then there are all of these other factors that come into play.
We were told that the SIP houses were going to be the way that we were going to go, the prefab. I think there was $600,000 allocated for telehandlers that are sitting in the communities not being used.
I’m just wondering: are we still going with SIP houses or are we going away from that or what are these units that are coming up?
That’s why we have this document of the lessons learned and it’s within our website.
Mr. Chairman, we’re trying to find the most cost-effective and efficient way of providing units throughout Nunavut.
Mr. Chairman, if I can, I would like the president to respond to some of the details within the question.
The structural insulated panel houses, as I have noted to this House in past sessions, were found to be very costly in terms of shipping because we are, in fact, shipping Styrofoam panels. They take up a lot of volume and therefore, they’re very costly to ship. That has increased overall cost per unit an incredible amount.
Even though there are substantial energy savings in the houses as a result of the higher insulation values, the payback period is very long and, therefore, does not make it very feasible for us to continue with insulated panel housing.
Unless we can find a less costly way to ship structural insulated panels or a kind of insulation that takes up less volume, we don’t want to continue building these only because of cost.
Telehandlers are a tool that were purchased at the time of the structural insulated panel construction to assist in the building of this housing, but also because they’re one of the more useful tools that are in use in any construction site anywhere in the world.
They can eliminate the need to put up scaffolding on houses. It can be very cost effective in terms of many of the activities of our local housing organizations and many of them are making very good use of them.
I just wanted to note as well that we do have the needs survey information which we did take into consideration, but we also had to keep in mind that the Nunavut Housing Needs Survey took place in 2009-2010, which was still somewhat in the early years of the construction of the Nunavut Housing Trust, and before construction started under Canada’s Economic Action Plan.
Under those two initiatives, there were 1,011 houses that were constructed.
The numbers, as reflected on the housing needs survey, were very much affected by all the construction that took place after the needs survey was conducted. These numbers change and we did take that into consideration.
I know the community of Grise Fiord has written to the minister in regard to a lot of the older housing units on the beachfront that take up the space. A lot of them are really old.
I think they’re one of the first groups of housing units that have been built.
You’re saying how much it costs right now to prepare a lot to build on and the expense that’s going there. Is the Nunavut Housing Corporation looking at demolishing some of these older buildings and building on the lots that are already ready to be built on?
Is that a cost-saving measure, possibly, that they could be looking at?
We’re looking at all ways to try and become more effective in providing housing to Nunavummiut.
That will be determined down the line, but our first initial challenge is to try and deal with the housing shortage that we have here in Nunavut.
That’s our immediate plan. When we get to a later stage where we think that a replacement might be more efficient, cost effective, and provide better units to Nunavummiut, we will certainly take a look at that too.
Is it not costing more to maintain these houses and keeping them going?
Some of the members have mentioned and I know they have written about mould in some of the houses, maintenance of the houses, as well as the Canadian housing and mortgage corporation is decreasing the amount that it supports the housing units in the communities.
At some point, isn’t it going to actually be cheaper to demolish them and build new ones than actually have the older ones there?
Absolutely, yes, if it comes to that determination, if it’s more economical, certainly that’s going to be the way to go.
In terms of the 210 housing units that are going to be built for the 2013-14 budget, has any work been completed already in the communities that are supposed to be allocated housing units?
There’s ongoing work that’s taking place within the communities that were allocated units. Mr. Chairman, if I can, I would like Mr. Barriault to elaborate more on the question.
The Nunavut Housing Corporation is approaching this $100 million initiative in an organized fashion. This year, we have started with the acquisition of lots, working with municipalities to acquire building lots, and as well, for putting down gravel pads in communities where spaceframe foundations will be used.
Further to that, we put together a design-build tender for the community of Iqaluit for their 30 units that have been allocated.
We’re doing our tendering under a supply, ship, and erect contract in phases to ensure that we do not have over-commitments within this funding. Our first tender will be for the largest allocation of buildings, which is in the Kivalliq region, where six of seven communities are towards the top of the needs list.
Once those are allocated and we have a better feel for what contractor prices are coming in at, we will proceed with the following tender for the Kitikmeot and Qikiqtaaluk communities.
Once all of these tenders are completed and awarded and all of it is being done in a phased approached, we will see how much funding, if any, is remaining and then we would still have time to proceed with more tenders. Hopefully, we will be able to allocate and build more than 210 units.
We’re doing this in a phased approach to ensure that we do not over-commit and that we get some response from the contracting community and as well, from municipalities in terms of land development costs. That will give us a better picture as to how we can maximize this investment from the federal government.
In view of the time, I would like to move a motion to report progress. Thank you.
There is a motion on the floor and the motion is not debatable. Mr. Enook moved a motion to report progress.
I’m sorry. I was just informed and I wasn’t paying attention to members on this side. There was a majority in favour of the motion.
We will try to ensure we don’t forget members who already have a name on the list. If you want to place your name on the list, you will have an opportunity to speak to this tomorrow. We won’t forget the names as they stand.
Due to this reason, I will now rise to report progress as per the motion.
At this time, Minister Taptuna and your witnesses, I would like to inform you that the review isn’t completed and please remember that you will have to appear before the committee tomorrow. Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the witnesses out.
Your committee has been considering Minister’s Statement 299 – 3(3) and would like to report progress. Also, Mr. Speaker, I move that the Report of the Committee of the Whole be agreed to.
No. 22 in our Orders of the Day.
A reminder that there’s a meeting of the Standing Committee on Legislation tomorrow morning at nine o’clock in the Tuktu Boardroom.
Orders for the Day for September 10:
This House stands adjourned until Tuesday, September 10, at 1:30 p.m.
DAY 88
Tuesday, September 10, 2013
Pages 4824 – 4883
Opening Prayer 4824
Ministers’ Statements 4824
Members’ Statements 4828
Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery 4834
Oral Questions 4835
Revert to Item 5: Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery 4852
Reports of Standing and Special Committees on Bills and Other Matters 4852
Tabling of Documents 4852
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters 4854
Point of Order 4879
Report of the Committee of the Whole 4881
Third Reading of Bills 4882
Orders of the Day 4882
Tuesday, September 10, 2013 4824
312 – 3(3): Helicopter Crash in Arctic Ocean (Aariak) 4824
313 – 3(3): World Suicide Prevention Day (Peterson) 4824
314 – 3(3): Recap of NHC Accomplishments (Taptuna) 4825
315 – 3(3): Disability Grant - Financial Assistance for Nunavut Students (Ell) 4826
316 – 3(3): CMEC Meeting in Iqaluit (Aariak) 4826
317 – 3(3): Skills Canada Nunavut (Ell) 4827
318 – 3(3): Investment in Community Marine Facilities (Taptuna) 4828
544 – 3(3): Congratulations to Akulliq Graduates (Ningark) 4829
545 – 3(3): Improving Cancer Screening in Nunavut (Oshutapik) 4829
546 – 3(3): Nunavut’s Bilingual Education Models (Elliott) 4830
547 – 3(3): Funding for Improving Roads in Nunavut (Curley) 4831
548 – 3(3): Recent Achievements of the Hamlet of Arviat (Shewchuk) 4832
549 – 3(3): The Success of Kitikmeot Foods (Peterson) 4833
550 – 3(3): The Habitat for Humanity of Iqaluit (Aariak) 4833
711 – 3(3): The State of Housing in Nunavut (Curley) 4835
712 – 3(3): Access to Information and Protection of Privacy (Aupaluktuq) 4836
713 – 3(3): Improving Cancer Screening in Nunavut (Oshutapik) 4838
714 – 3(3): Nattilingmiut Language Curriculum (Ugyuk) 4839
715 – 3(3): Disaster Compensation Program (Enook) 4840
716 – 3(3): Nunavut’s High School Graduates (Schell) 4843
717 – 3(3): Bilingual Education Models in Our Schools (Elliott) 4844
718 – 3(3): Medical Travel Policy for Babysitters (Ningark) 4845
719 – 3(3): Measuring School Attendance (Schell) 4846
720 – 3(3): Status of Development Partnership Agreement with Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation (Enook) 4848
721 – 3(3): Outstanding Debt to GNWT (Elliott) 4850
Committee Report 040 – 3(3): Bill 64, An Act to Amend the Liquor Act (Ningeongan) 4852
395 – 3(3): Anconia Victory Lake Project (Aupaluktuq) 4852
396 – 3(3): 2012-2013 Annual Report - Nunavut Business Credit Corporation (Taptuna) 4853
397 – 3(3): Correspondence from a Concerned Parent (Elliott) 4853
398 – 3(3): CMAJ Article on Suicide (Elliott) 4853
399 – 3(3): Director of Child and Family Services Annual Report 2012-2013 (Ell) 4853
400 – 3(3): Nunavut Status of Women Council Annual Report 2011-2012 (Ell) 4853
401 – 3(3): Nunavut Status of Women Council Annual Report 2012-2013 (Ell) 4853
Minister’s Statement 299 – 3(3): NHC Receives $100 Million in Federal Government Funding – Consideration in Committee 4854
Bill 68 – Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 3, 2013-2014 – Consideration in Committee 4874
Bill 68 – Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 3, 2013-2014 – Third Reading 4882
Before we continue with today’s sitting, I would like to ask Ms. Ell to lead us off in a prayer, please.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Ms. Ell. (interpretation ends) We will move on in our orders of the day.
Minister’s Statement 312 – 3(3): Helicopter Crash in Arctic Ocean (Aariak)
Mr. Speaker, we recently received the terrible news that last night, a helicopter operated with the Canadian Coast Guard research icebreaker, Amundsen, crashed off the coast of Banks Island in the western Arctic.
On behalf of the Government of Nunavut, I offer my deepest condolences to those affected by this tragedy.
Our thoughts and prayers are with you during this very difficult time.
I’m sure all members pass on their condolences to the family members and co-workers.
Minister’s Statement 313 – 3(3): World Suicide Prevention Day (Peterson)
Hon. Keith Peterson: Mr. Speaker, today is World Suicide Prevention Day. This year’s international theme is focused on ending the stigma that presents a major barrier to suicide prevention.
I ask members and the public to join together to remember those who have lost their lives and to talk openly about suicide.
World Suicide Prevention Day annually reaffirms the opportunity to raise awareness in all of our communities.
We need to work collectively to change attitudes, reduce the isolation, strengthen our community networks, and keep those at risk safe.
Mr. Speaker, I want to acknowledge the hard work and dedication of Nunavummiut who work directly and indirectly on suicide prevention, from our mental health workers, social service providers, educators, justice workers, elders, community members, and the countless individuals, organizations, and volunteers who dedicate their time and relentless support to suicide intervention and prevention.
Mr. Speaker, this year, the Embrace Life Council is in Cambridge Bay organizing numerous events with elders, youth, and our community to raise awareness. I encourage all residents of Cambridge Bay to attend the Embrace Life Council’s candlelight vigil this evening and to take part in events this week.
We, as communities, government, organizations, and individuals, are committed to raising awareness and we recognize that there is still much work ahead.
Before I conclude, I would ask members and cabinet colleagues to join me in supporting the Embrace Life Council’s candlelight vigil in Iqaluit Square tonight at 8:00 p.m. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Minister’s Statement 314 – 3(3): Recap of NHC Accomplishments (Taptuna)
Mr. Speaker, this Assembly is nearing the end of its journey, and sometimes we get so involved in getting our projects done that we don’t take the time to sit back and reflect on our accomplishments.
Mr. Speaker, the past five years have seen a tremendous amount of work accomplished by the Nunavut Housing Corporation. It is important to reflect on these accomplishments because they have been focused on establishing a better for Nunavummiut.
In 2008, as you are aware, Mr. Speaker, the Nunavut Housing Corporation commissioned Nunavut’s first ever housing needs survey that was completed the fall of 2010. This landmark project has met all of the objectives set for it.
The Nunavut Housing Needs Survey has established a baseline of data for determining housing need in Nunavut.
With this data, we have been able to build sensible and measurable arguments for increased investments for Nunavut.
The housing needs survey was critical in developing the framework for the Government of Nunavut Long-term Comprehensive Housing and Homelessness Strategy and the business case for renewed federal investment in housing in Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, announced changes to Nunavut’s public housing rent scale were greatly influenced by the work done for the strategy.
Working to achieve another specific Tamapta objective, the Nunavut Housing Corporation approached this initiative with an eye on making effective changes that will have a direct impact on the lives of the majority of Nunavummiut.
Not only do the approved changes address the disincentive to work in the rent scale; the Nunavut Housing Corporation goes further to reduce the administrative burden on our local housing organizations, increasing local capacity to address housing issues.
Mr. Speaker, you will agree that these are significant achievements, made all the more impressive by the construction of 1,011 units, an internal restructure which saw the relocation of the corporation’s entire financial function, and the creation of the Nunavut Housing Corporation’s first board of directors.
You’re right, I do agree.
Minister’s Statement 315 – 3(3): Disability Grant - Financial Assistance for Nunavut Students (Ell)
One of the many changes that have been recently implemented to the FANS program is an additional benefit for Nunavummiut.
This new benefit is a disability grant that is available for individuals with documented permanent disabilities.
(interpretation) Mr. Speaker, this benefit is available for post-secondary students with disabilities and eligible Nunavut students are now able to apply for and receive up to $8,000 per year for full-time students and up to $1,000 per year for those undertaking distance education courses.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, all other FANS eligibility requirements remain and individuals interested in applying for this benefit need only mark on their FANS application that they are in receipt of disability benefits.
Once this has been noted, a disability grant package will automatically be sent to the applicant.
Minister’s Statement 316 – 3(3): CMEC Meeting in Iqaluit (Aariak)
For the first time ever, Nunavut hosted education ministers from across Canada at the 101st meeting of CMEC, Council of Ministers of Education Canada.