Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Feb. 13th, 2007

[Sharon Matthews]

I'd have to get you that, but it's a very small percentage of the Canadian population.

[Brian Storseth, Conservative, Westlock—St. Paul, AB]

I just want to touch on one other--

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Thank you. You have run out of time. Sorry.

Mr. Lévesque, please.

[Yvon Lévesque, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

In her presentation, Ms. Dansereau said that $261 million are provided for housing in the north by the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs and by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation. Ms. Matthews referred to a figure of $300 million.

As we know, there has been a demographic explosion among the aboriginals and Inuit. Efforts are being made to repair the houses. They are over-crowded, there is mould in them and people are developing respiratory illnesses. The houses are being renovated, but the same number of people will continue living in them.

Do you not think that we are wasting money at the moment? Do you not think it would be preferable to commit major funding, to upgrade the houses and to maintain them in the future? Since the houses would be in better condition, the costs related to health care and renovations would be lower.

Have the various departments and the CMHC looked at this? Last year, the CMHC had a surplus of $4 billion. Could some $400 million of this $4 billion in profit not be invested to upgrade the housing, rather than the current sum of $261 million? The housing could be upgraded quickly, and in the future, the maintenance required would return to a normal level.

I would like to hear what you have to say about that.

[Claire Dansereau]

Your questions are not easy ones. These are the questions we ask ourselves every day. How can we go about correcting the situation?

In the past, people said that they would deal with the problem once and for all by building houses for everyone. However, that is not such an easy thing to do. The population is changing, and there are not enough lots available for building houses. People come and go. People are constantly moving back and forth between the reserve and the city. The figures are not always accurate. People are aging, some elders go live with their children, while others cannot do that.

It is impossible that one amount of money would deal with the problem once and for all, particularly if we do not factor in the ability to protect the houses. The average age of the houses on a number of reserves is about 17 years. So we have to find ways of protecting the existing houses and not always build new ones.

For us, these issues are all interrelated. There's the question of housing, but there is also the question of water. We must invest in water supply systems and in education. Investments are required in many areas. Solving a single problem without taking into account the others is not the right approach.

[Yvon Lévesque, Bloc, Abitibi—Baie-James—Nunavik—Eeyou, QC]

I'm going to stop you right there, Ms. Dansereau. At the moment, to do everything you mentioned, an amount of $261 million or $300 million has been set aside. Let us say it is $300 million. That is not adequate. Of course, the population will continue to grow, but can we upgrade the housing immediately, and then do another evaluation to see what maintenance is required for the houses? That would cost quite a bit less because the houses would not be damaged because of overcrowding. All we would have to do then is maintain the houses.

[Claire Dansereau]

All I can say is that we are working with the first nations to try to find solutions.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Mr. Albrecht, please.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you to the witnesses for appearing today.

I don't think there's anybody in this room who doesn't wish we were further along in addressing the shortages of housing on reserves and off reserves, for all Canadians. We share that, and we can continue to be frustrated about the past and continue to blame others or point fingers, but I think today our objective as a committee is to look forward and to see what we can do to advance the cause.

I'm really encouraged by the presentation by Ms. Dansereau, on page 2, where she talks about some of the initiatives that are occurring. She outlines, for example, the Mohawk in the Bay of Quinte, where 80% of the homes are owned by occupants. Then there is the Lac La Ronge Indian Band, using the proceeds of sales toward the creation of new housing.

I ask the question, how can we share these success stories more broadly with a view to having these replicated in other areas? We have to respect the Indian Act and all of the issues that we currently deal with, but how can we share these more broadly and get them implemented all across Canada?

[Claire Dansereau]

Thank you, and I agree with you. There is hope. I have that conversation with many chiefs when I go across the country, about those who are really making progress and have real successes, and I ask them to share those stories. There is some of that, and obviously the AFN last week had its forum on housing, where some of these success stories were discussed. Just a few weeks ago there was a socio-economic forum in Saskatoon, where many of these types of stories were discussed. I think that's how we start making progress, through the education work that CMHC is doing and that we're doing.

I think we're on the brink of making some real progress on this, because as successes start to happen, other people learn from them.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

I guess that's the question. Are you getting some updates from communities who are experiencing severe problems, where they see these success stories and say, look, we can use this idea from that particular band and this idea from another one and make it fit our local situation?

[Claire Dansereau]

To some extent, yes, and more so in the conversations that we have on community planning, because a lot of the new policy work requires that we do housing plans and that kind of planning. So we can bring in new tools as they are developed and as we get to know them. The work of this committee and the work of the Auditor General clearly identify that all the agencies that have some responsibility for housing for first nations work together. This is not something that's necessarily evident at the committee, but the interdepartmental work is really strong at the moment. That I think is how we will make sure there's no redundancy and we're making progress.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

On a different note, the issue of mould certainly has been very public in most Canadians' eyes. We want to see that issue addressed.

What kind of technical advances are being made in the kinds of building materials and ventilation systems being used to help mitigate that problem? I've just recently become aware of a material called insulated concrete forms. These kinds of new initiatives that the building industry is picking up on, are they being implemented as well? It may not be on your radar screen yet, but it is something I would hope we would be open to.

[Deborah Taylor, Director, Aboriginal Housing, Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation]

In fact several innovative techniques are at use in first nations communities across the country. You mentioned insulated concrete foundations. They are being used in Wikwemikong, which is on Manitoulin Island in Ontario. At the AFN conference last week that Ms. Dansereau mentioned, the first nation presented to their colleagues, which is a significant way in which to get the message across, for the communities to talk about the successes they've had and the challenges they've faced along the way.

[Harold Albrecht, Conservative, Kitchener—Conestoga, ON]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Madam Crowder.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

I have just a couple of questions. I will keep them succinct and leave the floor open for you to answer.

I saw some numbers recently that said that capital expenditures were actually decreased, which has resulted in a lack of ability to build infrastructure that would support housing. I'm just going to ask all the questions, and then you can answer them. So that's question number one. Was the capital money decreased?

Number two, in the housing funds that went to provincial and northern governments, were there specific targets and timeframes set to build first nation, Métis, and Inuit housing? And if so, what were they?

Number three, given the size of the current shelter allowance, how would the current shelter allowance assist in building market housing?

Number four, in the Sustainable Housing Joint Forum Summary Report from Kamloops in 2005, there was a specific recommendation to integrate first nations values into INAC's and CMHC's modern housing policies. Has that been done?

So take it away.

[Claire Dansereau]

I'll answer the last one first, and my colleagues around the table will answer as well.

Certainly we do. As I actually stated in my notes, in 1996 there was a change in policy with respect to how decisions were made regarding housing in first nations communities. The big switch there was towards giving agreement-type funding to first nations for them to utilize in the way they saw fit.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

This report is from 2005. So could you address it from 2005? The 1996 policy doesn't look like it has worked.

[Claire Dansereau]

Well, it has worked in many communities, and it's within the funding agreement that it's done. As I said before, more than 80% of the communities have those agreements. They decide how the funding is spent. I'm not sure how much more culturally appropriate that money can be, because they make those kinds of decisions.

I leave it to my colleague to answer the question with regard to off-reserve.

[Sharon Matthews]

I'll also comment on the integrated values. I can give you a couple of examples of where I think it really has been working well.

For example, under CMHC programs, we work with the community. They design their own housing. We no longer put plans on the table and say that it has to be built this way. So we have some quite innovative, different designs. There is a community out west where we just built some housing, under our non-profit program, that is actually designed for six or seven families to live in. So it is very reflective of the cultural values and of listening to the community.

Another example would be our allocation processes. We don't allocate the funding in isolation. We sit down and work with the aboriginal community at a national level--with the AFN, with our colleagues at INAC. Then at a regional level, there are liaison committees right across this country that are working. There is aboriginal representation on all those committees.

So there are lots of examples, I think, of where those values are integrated with how we deal with things.

In terms of your question on capital funding, I can tell you, from a CMHC budget perspective, that we got an increase in the 2005 budget of about $103 million over five years, which was a nice boost. But other than that, by and large we are able to renovate about 1,000 units, give or take 100 or so, and do non-profit of, again, around 1,000 or so each year. That's been fairly constant, frankly, for the last 10 years. If you looked at an expenditure kind of plan and the commitments in units, it's been fairly constant. There have been ups and downs, but by and large we typically can do, as I said, about 1,000 renovations and about 1,000 non-profits. Last year we did 1,300 renovations, and we've managed to get about 915 or so non-profits.

So again, it depends. You have design issues. There is lots of flexibility. So you never know, when you have your budget, exactly how many units you'll be able to make work. But typically we're on par over the last 10 years.

[Fred Caron, Assistant Deputy Minister, Office of the Federal Interlocutor, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development]

If I may address the question on off-reserve housing, there was no specific target set, so the money was just transferred for this general purpose. But certain provinces have started discussions with the aboriginal groups on the ground in terms of how that money would be spent.

I should also mention that under the federal interlocutor's office, we're responsible for the urban aboriginal strategy. What we try to do there is bring together groups in the city, including the province and the municipalities, which are at that table, to try to concentrate on how we might bring all the efforts together to help those situations. And housing is obviously an issue that's been identified as something that needs to be fixed.

[The Chair, Conservative, Colin Mayes]

Thank you.

Could we go to the government side now? Mr. Bruinooge.

[Rod Bruinooge, Conservative, Winnipeg South, MB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I apologize for my voice. I probably sound like Brian Mulroney right now, but that's not a bad thing.

I'll pose my questions mostly to CMHC.

I just wanted to get your opinion on the recent Supreme Court of Canada ruling in favour of McDiarmid Lumber Ltd. in relation to their court case with the God’s Lake First Nation. I'm not sure if you're familiar with that case, but it allowed for McDiarmid Lumber to garnish the bank account of God's Lake First Nation for the sake of going after some accounts that they chose not to pay. Do you think this ruling, and perhaps some time for it to make its way into the consciousness of Canada, could allow for, perhaps, further lending on-reserve?

[Sharon Matthews]

I have to apologize; I'm not familiar enough with the case to be able to make a good judgment here and give you any comment. I'm not sure if it would have implications or not.