The Committee met at 6:00 p.m. in the Assembly Chamber.

CHAIR (Littlejohn): Ladies and gentlemen, good evening. Welcome to the Social Services Committee, and I would like to welcome the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation this evening.

Just some general comments before we start. Minister, for Hansard, when you are speaking, wait for the red light to come on in front of you folks and then speak and please say your name for the record.

Minister, we will allow you some opening remarks once we get to that, if you so chose to do that. So, you can think about that for a little bit.

At this point in time, I would like to introduce the Committee. My name is Glenn Littlejohn. I am the MHA for the Port de Grave district and the Chair of the Social Services Committee.

MS ENGLISH: Dana English, Researcher with the Official Opposition.

MR. JOYCE: Eddie Joyce, Bay of Islands.

MS ROGERS: Gerry Rogers, MHA for St. John's Centre.

MS WILLIAMS: Susan Williams, Researcher.

MR. CRUMMELL: Dan Crummell, MHA, St. John's West.

MR. LITTLE: Glen Little, from the beautiful District of Bonavista South.

MR. CORNECT: Tony Cornect, the cultural District of Port au Port.

CHAIR: Bill, can we call the first heading, please.

CLERK (Mr. MacKenzie): Subhead 1.1.01.

CHAIR: Subhead 1.1.01.

Minister, if you would like to introduce your staff and then have some opening remarks, feel free.

MR. HEDDERSON: I am going to ask them to speak themselves. Myself, Minister Tom Hedderson, Member for Harbour Main, Minister of Transportation and Works and the Minister Responsible for the Housing Corporation.

MR. SIMMS: Len Simms, CEO of the Housing Corporation.

MS MOFFATT: Kate Moffatt, Executive Director of Program Delivery and Planning with Newfoundland and Labrador Housing.

MR. KENDELL: Dennis Kendell, Executive Director of Regional Operations with Newfoundland and Labrador Housing.

MR. LINSTEAD: Morley Linstead, Team Leader of the Policy, Research and Monitoring Department at Housing.

MR. LAWRENCE: Tom Lawrence, Chief Financial Officer, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing.

MS VOKEY: Sharon Vokey, Executive Assistant to Minister Hedderson.

MR. CARD: Jason Card, Director of Communications.

MS TIMMINS: Emily Timmins, Communications Manager.

CHAIR: Minister.

MR. HEDDERSON: Again, welcome to my colleagues and, of course, members of the Housing Corporation, my staff, and political staff on the Opposition side as well.

It is hard to believe that another year has gone by, but here we are. Again, a very good year for the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corp, as they carried out their business in a manner which I think was certainly excellent. Their mandate is about social housing and making sure that we are responding to the needs for social housing throughout Newfoundland and Labrador. I think you will see, as we go through the Estimates tonight, that we have strategically placed our money into programs that have proven to be successful. We are looking forward to a discussion or a question and answer back and forth.

In the interest of time, I will stop there because it is getting on in time and we want to really get to the reason why we are here. I will pass it back to the Chair and we will begin.

CHAIR: Thank you, Minister.

Eddie.

MR. JOYCE: Thank you, Minister, and thank you to all of the staff for coming over.

First of all, Minister, I just wanted to acknowledge all of the staff for Newfoundland and Labrador Housing across Newfoundland and Labrador. For a number of years I have dealt with a lot of them in Corner Brook. They are top-notch people who work in the system to help people out. I truly believe they all try to do their best. I just wanted to pass that on about the staff.

The second thing I want to do is congratulate Newfoundland and Labrador Housing on the Universal Design across Canada for social housing. I mentioned in the House a person who was brought up. I was part of the Canadian Paraplegic Association for years, and still am, and one of the things we tried to push all across Canada was universal housing. It is good to see that Newfoundland and Labrador has led the country in that. It is good for me now when I go to the meetings to beat our chest and say that we took the step. Congratulations for pushing to get that done. I have to acknowledge that before I do anything on that. Good job to everybody who was involved with that.

As we know and as was mentioned in the House also, there are no Estimates. Can we get a copy of the salaries for employees and the number of employees? I am not sure if it is being done for everybody, but in most departments, we ask for it in the Estimates – the number of employees and the temporary employees and have that forwarded.

MR. HEDDERSON: Yes, I understand the Minister of Finance was collating that all together for distribution.

MR. JOYCE: He may be, yes. I am not sure.

MR. HEDDERSON: That was my understanding, but I will check on that – from your standpoint, Len.

MR. SIMMS: Just to be clear, it is the salary of the positions, not the individuals. Is that what you mean?

MR. JOYCE: No, not the individuals, the number of positions and the temporary positions. It was always in the budget, but this year it was not in the Estimates.

MR. SIMMS: Yes, I believe I heard that or saw something on TV. I did hear the Minister of Finance say he was going to have it ready in a few days. I do not know if he has contacted us or not, frankly.

MR. JOYCE: Well, if he cannot, we would appreciate it.

MR. SIMMS: While I still have the microphone, can I just comment on your earlier remarks?

MR. JOYCE: Oh, sure.

MR. SIMMS: I do want to first of all hope I can pass along your thanks to the staff in the Corner Brook office because I know they would appreciate hearing that. It is a boost for them to know that as an MHA you feel they are giving you very good service and helping you in the best way you can.

On the other point, the Universal Design one, I did know you were involved with the Canadian Paraplegic Association. Believe me; this was a little bit of a challenge at the beginning because we thought we were going to get a lot of pushback from the developers. It means they had to develop the land and the houses so they are ground level. Not all developers own land that is ground level. If there is a bit of a slide on the land, they might be upset. It turns out there were only a couple who really felt that way of all the ones we approved.

It was a great thing we did. The CHRA Congress, in fact, acknowledged that and the fact that we are the first ones in Canada to bring it about. We work closely with the Disability Office and appreciate those comments as well. We will pass those on.

MR. JOYCE: The Home Repair Program – in Budget 2012, you mentioned there is $8 million for the program for low-income homeowners. What is the amount now for the level that people can receive it? Do you have any wait-lists of people looking for the Home Repair Program?

MR. HEDDERSON: It is one of the most successful programs we have run over the years. Take-up is excellent. As well, it is going a long way to keeping some of our people in their homes, especially our seniors. We have over the last number of years been able to almost get it into real time. I am going to get Len just to go down through the numbers. What I mean by real time is that we have certainly cut down on the wait-list. I know when I first came in 1999 we were dealing with 5,000 or 6,000, which meant it was probably five years down the road before any new would – and we have made significant differences there.

I am going to pass it on to Len or one of your staff just to go down through the numbers.

MR. SIMMS: Thank you, Minister.

Just to be specific, in 2006 on the wait-list for the Home Repair Program were 4,376 applicants. Today it is less than 2,400. It has been basically cut in half. Approximately half of those are first-time applicants.

The program right now, you can reapply after five years. A lot of people reapply. It means an awful lot of people have been helped through this program. You would know it from your own earlier days and now as well – I know it from way back when I was around – that it is a pretty popular program for MHAs. Ninety-five per cent of the funding under PHRP goes to rural parts of the Province, that is, outside of St. John's.

MR. JOYCE: What is the cut off? Is it $32,000 now?

MR. SIMMS: The income limit?

MR. JOYCE: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: The household limit is $32,500 still, yes, for the Home Repair Program.

What happened was back in 2006 when it was 4,376 on the wait-list, one of the requests we made to government at the time was that we really need to try to cut down the wait-list. We would like to get sooner rather than later to the point where you are just delivering it to the current applicants, which might be a couple thousand every year.

They doubled the funding at the time, their share of the funding, because this is a cost-share program with the federal government. It used to be $4 million for each, the Province and the feds. When we said, look, we need to do something with the wait-list here. The Province doubled their contribution from $4 million to $8 million. What was supposed to be a 75-25 federal program has now turned out to be a 70-30, roughly, provincial program. It is serving a purpose, no question about it. It is very positive stuff.

MR. JOYCE: Yes.

I am just going to get a bit of clarification here with the Affordable Housing Program. There was about $5.4 million in affordable housing initiatives to enable about 245 additional affordable housing units. There was also recorded in the Budget $2.7 million.

Is this because you are counting the federal cost in the provincial government investment part? In March, $5.8 million was announced to construct forty-seven units. There is a bit of discrepancy of the amount that you can build with a certain amount of money.

MR. SIMMS: No, the way the program works is each time there is an agreement it is for a three-year period. We have had four agreements now since back in 2003.

The reason it is a three-year period is because we provide funding, in our case here in this Province, all for affordable housing in partnership with the private sector to build seniors' units, as there has been over your way. I guess you would be familiar with that. Also, we spend half of it in partnership with the supportive living non-profit groups. They get a higher amount for funding because they are all volunteers. They do not have the same kind of capacity.

What happens is because they are volunteers it takes them a lot longer to finish their projects, and we see that quite often. That is why it is a three-year agreement. It has been the same way for the four agreements that it has held, and the agreements are the same everywhere in the country. Every jurisdiction gets agreements based on their per capita.

MR. JOYCE: Yes. My point here is there is $5.4 million for 245 additional affordable units.

MR. HEDDERSON: That was our contribution, was it not?

MR. SIMMS: I am not sure.

MR. HEDDERSON: Where are you reading it from?

MR. JOYCE: Then it says here, there is $5.8 million for 47 units. There is a bit of a discrepancy.

MR. SIMMS: I do know $2.7 million a year for three years. Maybe two years would be $5.4 million, there you go.

The way the funding is provided to the program is the Province and the federal government cost-share it equal amounts for the three years. The agreement was $16.2 million, our share of that is $2.7 million a year, last year, this year, and next year.

MR. JOYCE: How many units would you get with that funding per year?

MR. SIMMS: Well, it is not per year, it is only one allocation of the funding at the beginning, $16.2 million. We will get 244 units out of this particular agreement.

MR. JOYCE: That is for three years?

MR. SIMMS: Yes, for the three years.

MR. JOYCE: How much money is left in that now? Is there any there for 2013-2014?

MR. SIMMS: No.

What happens is we allocate the entire amount. Last fall when we had a public proposal call we allocated and approved, through the internal process that we have, the amount of funding we had for as many applicants as could take up the money that we had, which was $16 million, approximately. That is good for three years. Actually, they will have two years left now to finish and complete their project.

MR. JOYCE: Okay.

I know it may be a bit early, but are there any talks of extending the agreement or having a new agreement?

MR. SIMMS: Yes, when you get through the middle of the agreement, that is when the talk all starts. I am on a deputy ministers' committee across the country, the minister is on a ministers' committee, and that is always one of the big topics of talk, to try to negotiate a new agreement that will begin in March of 2014, we hope. That would be the next one that would be expected.

MR. JOYCE: A lot of those units where the money was allocated are not built yet?

MR. SIMMS: Yes, that is right.

MR. JOYCE: The money is allocated, say, for so many units.

MR. SIMMS: Money has been approved, yes.

MR. JOYCE: Approved?

MR. SIMMS: Conditionally approved, yes.

MR. JOYCE: Conditionally approved, the units. So there will be more units built in the next year or two years.

MR. HEDDERSON: There is another (inaudible) in this one.

MR. SIMMS: Yes. Most of those 244 that were approved in the call last fall probably not very many of them are yet constructed. The private sector ones mostly will be done this coming year. The non-profit ones probably will not be finished until –

MR. JOYCE: Okay. Do you have a breakdown for the non-profit ones as compared to the social housing? Can we get a copy of that?

MR. SIMMS: Sure, that is not a problem. They were publicly announced, actually.

MR. HEDDERSON: (Inaudible) that is last years.

MR. SIMMS: You are looking for the list of the 244 projects, right?

MR. JOYCE: Yes. I am sure there are some non-profit, there are some affordable housing, and there are some more that you would probably get into a business partnership with. Just a breakdown of those three categories, because I know out in Corner Brook –

MR. SIMMS: There is an affordable housing list. I think it is on our Web site. Yes, probably. Susan says yes, she has seen it. We will send it to you anyway. It is not a problem.

MR. JOYCE: Okay.

Because I know out in Corner Brook there are some businesses that are in partnership with Newfoundland and Labrador Housing and build the units. I know a lot of people who live there, and it is a pretty good program.

MR. SIMMS: Yes. That is the Affordable Housing Program. We give half, as I said, to the private sector, like the people you mentioned. We give the other half to the non-profit sector.

Interestingly enough, the last agreement, by the way, was changed. Some of the criteria were changed as a result of some of the provinces asking to have more flexibility to use that funding for other purposes. When I say other purposes, I mean other housing purposes. That was written into the agreement to allow provinces, and some have done so, to use the affordable housing money to fix up their own unit, which is a major, major concern across the country, or to use it for rent supplements; although I cannot understand why because at the end of the three years you would not have the money to continue with.

Nevertheless, we chose not to go that route. We chose to stay the route we were always on, which is to provide the funding to the non-profit groups and to the private sector to build housing for seniors, people with disabilities, and so on.

MR. JOYCE: When the funding comes in and the requests comes in, say, for non-profit or business partnership, is there a committee set up?

MR. SIMMS: Yes, if I may?

MR. JOYCE: Sure.

MR. SIMMS: We have an internal committee that has always done the evaluation of all the projects that come in. There is an engineer who is our executive director responsible for IT, Clyde Thornhill. Either the current finance team leader or the immediate past finance team leader have helped out. They will look at it from the financial perspective. The engineer looks at it from the engineering perspective. You might get an application in one day saying they want to build four units. When the engineer looks at it, there is only enough land to build two, so they give them a point score – it is all point scored. Then, the third person on it is the Manager of Affordable Housing, Madonna Walsh.

They are the ones who do the evaluation of all the proposals, and then when they get to the point where the $8 million for the private sector is reached, well then that is the end. They are sent up to the minister for a signature – not for approval, because I have never yet, in the four years I have been there, had any of them changed or anything of that nature. So, that is the way the process works.

MR. JOYCE: In this program, are there still some more private-public partnerships still going to be built this year or next year out of the funding?

MR. SIMMS: Yes, they will all be built, because none of them really have been built yet.

MR. JOYCE: Okay.

Can you send me a breakdown of which ones are built, not built?

MR. SIMMS: We can tell you that, yes.

CHAIR: Eddie.

MR. JOYCE: I have just one more question (inaudible).

CHAIR: Okay.

MR. JOYCE: In the Provincial Homelessness Fund –

MR. SIMMS: Can I just interrupt?

MR. JOYCE: Oh, sorry.

MR. SIMMS: Do you mean just for this last group, or you mean ever since the beginning?

MR. JOYCE: No, no, just the last group, and the ones that are for the next two or three years that are not built.

MR. SIMMS: Yes, we can get that for you, not a problem.

MR. JOYCE: No, not way back.

MR. SIMMS: Okay.

OFFICIAL: It is on our Web site.

MR. JOYCE: Well, I am not sure it is on the Web site, because Len said some of them are not approved yet. There are some that may not be approved for the next –

MR. HEDDERSON: Current ones, some of them I am still signing off on as a matter of fact, because we put it out and they have to do due diligence – in the sense, accept it.

MR. JOYCE: Okay.

MR. HEDDERSON: So the selection has been done and the names have been sent out and they will send back and say yes, we accept this and go on. That is going to happen over this year, because I think most of them are getting out. Like Len said, it could be two years before these are finished.

MR. JOYCE: In the Budget there is $1 million there for the Homelessness Fund?

MR. HEDDERSON: Yes. This is one of the new funds that we have put together – we are in our third year, I believe, now.

OFFICIAL: Three years (inaudible).

MR. HEDDERSON: Three years. This, again, came about from our consultations and is attached to our strategy, our Secure Foundations document, and it allows us – it does not allow us, it allows various groups to make representation to us for capital funding, as well as this year we changed it. Len will talk more about it, because we have opened it up a little bit more. It does provide the capital for things as simple as stoves, and pots and pans, and that sort of thing for areas where they are serving meals. It does allow larger ones, like the non-profit groups, to even now provide some space for emergency housing.

I will pass it over to Len just to go a little bit more in detail.

MR. SIMMS: Yes, it is a capital fund and it is meant to be in addition to the Affordable Housing Program we just finished talking about. A lot of those non-profit groups that got money to build units for dealing with people with complex needs or whatever the case might be can also access money from this fund to help do further interior renovations, if you want, for offices. A lot of those groups do outreach services, out around the city, out around the towns, or wherever they are. Those funds are meant to help them in a capital way to provide what is called, in the business, wraparound services. In addition to that, that was the initial plan to set it up.

Generally what happened then was that the larger organizations, those that had more capacity and were better organized, would easily be able to access the funding, but some of the smaller groups who did not have as much experience, staffing, or whatever the case might have been were missing out on it.

In addition to that, we expanded the definition to allow – this is a great opportunity and I am glad you asked the question because I am always preaching it – for small groups in your area, in your constituency, or in anybody's area, like a church that might offer a soup kitchen once a month, or they might have a small food bank in their small community, and the church or the service organization who is holding these kinds of events might need to have some renovations done worth $10,000 to put some shelving up or to build a room to put the food in and keep it there. Or, in some cases, to expand their facility, their parish hall, or whatever, to allow them to have this soup kitchen for seniors or people who are at risk of homelessness and that sort of thing. So we expanded it.

MR. JOYCE: Where can you obtain applications? Are they on the Web site?

MR. SIMMS: They are on the Web site, yes.

MR. JOYCE: When I saw this fund, I was not aware –

MR. SIMMS: No, it is on the Web site. It is a pretty simple application.

MR. JOYCE: The reason why I ask that is because I think the Salvation Army in Corner Brook just had to do some renovations in the kitchen. It is not even in the Bay of Islands.

MR. SIMMS: Yes, there are quite a few.

MR. HEDDERSON: The Wiseman Centre here in St. John's and Helping Hands out in Bay Roberts, for example.

MR. JOYCE: So you can get an application right off the Web site?

MR. SIMMS: Right off the Web site. We encourage it.

MR. HEDDERSON: It is pretty simple in a sense, just to identify a need and give us some sort of a concept of what it would cost.

MR. SIMMS: You do not have to spend $5,000 to get an architect to draft it up for you.

CHAIR: One at a time, gentlemen. I know you are anxious. Hansard is trying to keep up with you.

Thank you, Eddie.

I am going to move on to Gerry.

MS ROGERS: I just want to say thank you very much for coming this evening. I want to congratulate you on the wonderful work you do. I know you have excellent staff at Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation and that they do a lot of volunteer work as well. There are just great work and great programs. You have a big challenge as well. We will talk a little bit about some of those challenges as well.

I want to congratulate you on some specific things. I think you know that you have the support of Living Community Partnership under your auspices. People out there working in the area are really happy about that. Congratulations on the partnership with Marguerite's Place. That was a great opening. Again, congratulations on the CHRA conference. It was wonderful to see all those people here in St. John's. I know there is a lot of excitement about some of the innovative things people are doing away and what we are doing here as well. This whole supportive living component you are dealing with is a great and wonderful thing. Universal Design – again, I would like to add my kudos for that. That is pretty exciting and wonderful.

I just want to look at the Estimates here in line 1.1.02 Grants and Subsidies. I see in 2011-2012 there was $1.2 million and we do not have that in 2012-2013.

Could you explain what that is, please?

MR. SIMMS: Specifically last year there was funding in there to build two new duplexes or units in Hopedale, Labrador. There is none in there this year. That is all that is basically.

MS ROGERS: Okay, thank you.

We have an increase of $3.684 million. Can you explain what that might cover? What is the increase? Are there particular new programs?

MR. SIMMS: Up until this year, the Supportive Living Community Partnership Program, the SLCPP as it was known then – we now have changed it to SLP, by the way, to the delight of all those groups we work with.

MS ROGERS: It is great to make it shorter.

MR. SIMMS: That program had been delivered, as you are probably aware, by the former HRLE department. This year the program has been transferred to Newfoundland and Labrador Housing to deliver, mostly because we have the Homelessness Fund and the Affordable Housing fund. All of these kinds of programs match and fit together.

The program budget for that program, which was $4.8 million, has been transferred to our budget. That is the reason for the essential difference in last year's total amount of the provincial grant and this year's total amount of the provincial grant.

MS ROGERS: Does that mean then there was also a reduction in that program?

MR. SIMMS: A reduction?

MS ROGERS: Well, if it was $4.8 million, and we see an increase of $3.6 million, where do we see a reduction, or –

MR. SIMMS: Oh, okay. No, that is the 3 per cent. That is the difference, the 3 per cent.

MS ROGERS: That nasty old 3 per cent.

MR. SIMMS: Yes.

The $4.8 million, by the way, is quadruple the amount that it was four years ago when the program started.

MS ROGERS: Great. Okay.

MR. SIMMS: The $4.8 million was moved here. Then we had to find, as every department did, 3 per cent savings. That is why there is – we did not take anything out of that program, let's put it that way.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Where did you find that 3 per cent?

MR. SIMMS: We found it in two or three areas. One in particular, we had planned to do – we were going to install video conferencing in our regional offices to hopefully cut down on some expenditures or whatever, and maybe create better communication. I just forget the exact amount, but it was over $100,000. So, we had set that aside.

What we did was instead of doing twenty-eight or twenty-nine – whatever the number is – projects this year, the home repair work that we do on our units?

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: We are going to do twenty-seven. We just sort of knocked off a couple there. Those were generally the areas where the funding was – we did not layoff any employees. There was no significant reduction to programs, nothing that we would be too concerned about. We were fortunate enough to be able to find it within our existing budget in other areas.

We had some savings in our own expenditures, in postal expenditures, telephone expenditures, and little things like that. It all sort of added up in the end. The difference was $1.7 million that we found. That is why there is a difference there between the total.

MS ROGERS: Great. Thank you.

The Provincial Home Repair Program, I think some of the questions have been answered there. Now, what is the average wait time for that?

MR. SIMMS: Most of our regional offices now are servicing people who are, at the longest last year, as opposed to probably four years, maybe four or five years ago.

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: What we are trying to aim for is to eliminate what we would call the wait-list, which would mean, in essence, we would be dealing with the current applications for that year. So, we are getting close, but there is still a ways to go and work to do on it. We are making progress on it, I have to say.

MS ROGERS: Can we have a list of the number of projects that were successful last year?

MR. SIMMS: Well, we can give you the numbers.

MS ROGERS: Okay. Sure.

MR. SIMMS: For the Home Repair Program, do you remember how many we had approved, 500 or 600 or something like that?

OFFICIAL: I do not remember.

MR. SIMMS: We can get it for you anyway.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Then the total Budget, there is an average –

MR. SIMMS: Sorry, go ahead.

MS ROGERS: There is a ceiling to the application. Are most of them at the ceiling? Do people apply for the full amount?

MR. SIMMS: The grant ceiling on the Island is $5,000. In Labrador it is $6,500, is it?

OFFICIAL: Six thousand five hundred.

MR. SIMMS: Yes.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MR. SIMMS: I know the average grant is around $4,000.

MS ROGERS: Okay, great.

MR. SIMMS: The average, some are up to $5,000 and some are below that, depending what they get done and what work is provided.

MS ROGERS: Okay, great.

You may be able to eliminate your wait-list this year, do you think?

MR. SIMMS: This year? No, I do not think it will be eliminated this year. That would be misleading.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MR. SIMMS: It took us since 2006 to cut it in half. I think you are looking at a longer-term project, but it is part of our planning prospects. I would say we are probably looking at another two or three years before we get to addressing current applications only. We are down to 1,300 now first-timers. So we will need a bit more time maybe to get that down to zero. That is where we are heading.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

The Rental/Rooming House RRAP, the RRA Program, how many units or landlords were served last year under that program?

MR. SIMMS: Under what program?

MS ROGERS: The Rental/Rooming House RRAP, the repair program.

MR. SIMMS: Rental RRAP, is that the one you are talking about?

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: Okay.

How many? Kate will dig that up while you ask –

MS ROGERS: Okay.

I have one of these. Would you like one of these?

MR. SIMMS: No, I do not have one. It is hard to hear.

MS ROGERS: I know we can get you one. Let me get you one. It is hard to hear.

MR. SIMMS: Yes. I think we have $1 million, by the way, for the rental RRA Program. That much I remember.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MR. SIMMS: I am not sure how many projects. I think we give $12,000 to a landlord who wishes – and we agree with after we inspect – to fix up what may be dilapidated apartment units, if they wish to apply. We allocate $12,000 per unit.

MS ROGERS: Per unit?

MR. SIMMS: We give them a maximum, because otherwise they would come in and take it all. We try to spread it out and so on in that $1 million. I am not sure how many – do you have it there?

OFFICIAL: (Inaudible).

MR. SIMMS: Yes, that is the other thing. The agreement that we have with these landlords is they must take people from our waiting list. That is the other good thing.

MS ROGERS: Okay, great.

So would some of these people be on subsidies?

MR. SIMMS: On what?

MS ROGERS: On subsidies.

MR. SIMMS: No, not necessarily. It would not have anything to do with that part of the program.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

It is about $1 million this year?

MR. SIMMS: I'm sorry, what was your last question again?

MS ROGERS: The funds for this year are about $1 million?

MR. SIMMS: Yes, for rental RRAP.

MS ROGERS: Great.

The RRAP Conversion, the conversion from commercial, is that program still in effect?

MR. SIMMS: Yes, but it is not a large program, I don't think. It is not a very big program.

MS ROGERS: How is that working then? Is there money in that program for this year?

MR. SIMMS: You go ahead and answer it, Kate.

MS MOFFATT: I wish I had the stats for that one now. I think it was $1 million. It was only $500,000 for Shelter Enhancement, and Conversion.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Also, for the Provincial Home Repair Program, is it possible to get a list of what areas in the Province the money was spent?

MR. SIMMS: Which one?

MS ROGERS: The first one, the Provincial Home Repair Program.

MR. SIMMS: Absolutely.

MS ROGERS: Great.

CHAIR: Gerry, the last question for this round, please.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

CHAIR: Thank you.

MS ROGERS: The Home Modification Program, how did it go this year in 2011? The number of clients, what was the uptake like, is there a wait-list, and how much is budgeted for this year?

MR. SIMMS: The amount in the budget is $3 million. It had pretty well a full uptake during this past year of approximately $3 million. For that particular program, as you know, there is a focus on persons with disabilities again.

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: I would say more than half of that $3 million was spent to assist somebody with a significant disability, perhaps needed a ramp, or perhaps needed a fully-accessible unit. Their home made fully-accessible if they are in a wheelchair or whatever the case might be.

Perhaps a third of that $3 million was spent to help mostly seniors who have mobility issues in their homes. They may not need the entire fully accessible renovations, but they might need a walk-in shower, they might need grab bars on the side of the bathroom wall, they might need a door widened, those kinds of things. The take-up was good and of course we provide $7,500 per grant under that program for those who require that significant accessible work.

MS ROGERS: That can go to landlords as well, can it?

MR. SIMMS: No, this is an individual application. It is similar to the Home Repair Program in a way. It works in the same kind of way.

MS ROGERS: Last year it was $3 million and this year it will be $3 million?

MR. SIMMS: Yes.

MS ROGERS: Is there a wait-list for this one?

MR. SIMMS: No, I do not think so. I think we managed to cover everybody. If we do not get it from there, we will probably get a bit from the Home Repair Program if we have to help somebody. Generally speaking, it was just a little over $3 million that was spent this year. This was really the first year for that program.

CHAIR: Thank you, Gerry.

Mr. Crummell, you want a couple of questions?

MR. CRUMMELL: Yes, I do.

CHAIR: Dan Crummell, please.

Thank you.

MR. CRUMMELL: It is unusual, certainly in Committee meetings, for ourselves to ask a few questions, but I do take a keen interest in housing and I have since I ran for election. I just want to thank the minister and his staff for being here this evening.

Obviously, I live in and represent St. John's West. We know in this boom economy that there are a few issues out there. I know your staff and your organization is doing fabulous work out there and kudos to everybody for sure. There are a few questions because I am still trying to get my head around a few things myself as I learn about what you guys do and what needs to be done going forward, so just a couple of quick ones.

Again, I think this year's Budget was a great Budget for housing and for Newfoundlanders and Labradorians in general. I am really pleased and elated in a year of austerity to see increases. I just want to put that out there as well, Minister, and good work getting some more money for this great cause.

One million dollars in additional funding to expand the Rent Supplement Program – and I just want to fully understand how the Rent Supplement Program works. I have rented to many constituents who were very pleased and very happy to be part of that. It makes their lives much easier and better. I have also rented to people who are obviously on the wait-list.

What is the criterion on how you make that decision? What are the thresholds? Is it broken down by jurisdiction in the Province? Can you get $1,000 towards a month's rent, $500, or $300? I do not quite understand that piece. So, can I ask that question?

MR. SIMMS: It requires a lengthy answer. First of all, you have to go through the application process. The application process, as I have shown to your caucus, and to your caucus, has twenty-five protocols. Whatever is on the person's application, they are then placed in a particular category, assuming we have all the information. Sometimes you find out two months later they have a medical situation and they did not give us the info. Generally speaking, we have a protocol list. The top one is the victim of violence, and then you have medical A, and so on down the line.

What happens then is a person applies and is placed in the priority. When they apply, they apply for housing. We do not have an application for rent supplement. They apply for housing, and the people in our organization throughout the Province who select the people for placement, that is actually done basically through a computer process. All of the information is fed into the computer. If somebody says I only want a one bedroom and I only want it on Anspach Street in St. John's, well, they are likely to be on the wait-list for quite awhile. If they say we will take a place anywhere because we are desperate and so on, and I will take a three-bedroom or I need a three-bedroom, there is a chance they will get served earlier than somebody who just specifically picks one street, one part of town, a two-bedroom, and so on and so forth. There are a lot of situations.

When the name pops up it on the computer and it happens to be a one-bedroom need – somebody only needs a one-bedroom – we do not have very many, but the place we get them is through the Rent Supplement Program with private landlords. They have one-bedrooms and two-bedrooms, generally speaking, more than anybody else. We will place a lot of them through the Rent Supplement Program, and that is up to the individual offices when they are doing the selection. They do not have a unit to give to that person, but if that person is next on the list then you use a rent supplement and find a place for them because they are next on the list. That is as easy as I can explain it.

MR. CRUMMELL: What are the thresholds? How much would a rent supplement average, $300 –

MR. SIMMS: Oh, I am sorry.

MR. CRUMMELL: What are the thresholds and how does that work?

MR. SIMMS: The way that works is we do agreements with landlords, and we have more agreements now than we ever have before, of course. The agreement with the landlord is we will pay the difference between what the applicant can afford, which for example might be $350, up to an $800 rental maximum. We would pay the other $450. If it is above that, then the applicant has to find that somehow from wherever, family, friends, or so on and so forth.

Most of our applicants are finding places to stay below the $800 rental average because most of them are single people – a lot of them are single people. The highest number on our wait-list is single.

MR. CRUMMELL: Yes.

Often, we get constituents who are looking for a rent supplement or they are looking for housing. They are very specific at many times, but you are saying it goes on that one list and it goes from there. Okay, I get that.

MR. SIMMS: I think the important thing is, if anybody is talking to you, they have to get an application in.

MR. CRUMMELL: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: A lot of people do not put in an application or whatever, or do not understand that they have to do it. We make it as easy as we can. If they do not get on the wait-list, we would not even know they were looking, if they are looking. I think that is the most important advice I would pass on.

MR. CRUMMELL: Just another quick question here. The eight Newfoundland and Labrador Housing community centres in eleven neighbourhoods – I am assuming that most of them are in the greater St. John's region – there is $900,000 approximately allocated for that. How is that money used?

Because I know I worked very closely with the Barachois parents' association, and they do have a community centre there. I know they do receive funding and I attend a scattered meeting with them as well. How do you determine how that money is spent and what is it used for? I know that the people that I sit with on occasion on these committees are very pleased with that program, and I am just trying to understand how that money is used or what it is –

MR. SIMMS: We have eight community centres; these are the ones that receive the bulk of funding from the corporation. The funding that we provide to them is meant to enable them to pay for the salary of the executive director, for example, and probably another staffer. We have doubled that funding in the last four years. I think each of the community centres get $150,000. There is one in Corner Brook. There is one in Grand Falls. There is one down in Marystown, and there are five here in the St. John's area.

MR. CRUMMELL: Okay.

MR. SIMMS: As for accountability, they are required to provide – at the end of every year, we do an audit with them to ensure that they are spending their funding wisely. Understand as well, though, of course, they then can access other programs from other agencies, the federal government. Maybe they will hire another staff person, or they will look for more money for other things that they do.

In addition to that we have ten neighbourhood centres. They would be in smaller areas like Chalker Place, for example; we have a neighbourhood centre down there and so on. We give them a smaller amount of money. This time for the first time they are getting $10,000. Up until then, they never got very much at all.

So, while they are smaller, they all deliver the same kinds of programs: Homework Haven, well-baby clinics, cooking classes, all kinds of fabulous projects. In fact, there is one down on Eric Street and McKay Street. Last year, I believe they were chosen as Citizen of the Year or something of that nature.

OFFICIAL: City of St. John's.

MR. SIMMS: By the City of St. John's, in that particular case. You are right, they do fabulous work; everybody knows it.

In fact, when we had the Canadian Congress last year, our staff took a bunch of the mainlanders out on a tour of some of the projects. We took them up to – mostly in your area, now that I think about it – Froude Avenue to see all of the regeneration work that has been done there over time, and more to do of course.

We showed them the new little units that we built a couple of years ago, those fabulous little two bedrooms – that is the new design for low-income housing these days. We went over to Marguerite's Place, of course, showed them that project, and brought them down to Buckmasters Circle Community Centre where Bonnie and her staff and the few tenants who were around provided them with little pieces of chocolate and little gifts and little doodads that they had done up. They really could not get over it, frankly, and they were really impressed with the projects: Marguerite's Place and all these other projects that are on the go.

They do fabulous work. There is no much question about that, and that is why the government gave us the funding to double their – we went to bat for them of course, and the minister and his predecessors went to bat and got the extra money. It is worthwhile. I am sure the Member for Bay of Islands is well aware of the old Dunfield Park – well, it is still called Dunfield Park Community Centre even though we are trying to get away from the name of the area, calling it Crestview area now.

MR. JOYCE: (Inaudible) it is hard.

MR. SIMMS: Yes, it is hard yes. It is all to do with the stigma.

MR. CRUMMELL: A final question for you – the home renovation program, I understand it is about $4,000 per household is an average? Is that right? Is it $4,000 or did I hear $12,000 –

MR. HEDDERSON: Five thousand is the –

MR. CRUMMELL: Five thousand?

MR. SIMMS: Five thousand is the limit.

MR. HEDDERSON: The average is $4,000.

MR. CRUMMELL: The average is $4,000, okay. I heard from a few of my colleagues that the majority of them home renovations are happening in rural Newfoundland, is that correct?

MR. SIMMS: Yes, 95 per cent.

MR. CRUMMELL: So coming from an urban district, what can I do to change that to get some of that money? I am only throwing it out there.

MR. HEDDERSON: It is all about applications.

MR. CRUMMELL: It is all about applications.

MR. SIMMS: Yes, the application is on the Web site.

MR. CRUMMELL: It is on the Web site, yes.

MR. SIMMS: If you qualify from the income level perspective – anybody can apply, it just happens that most of the people who live in their own homes and own their homes are living out in the smaller areas, in the rural areas. Most of those people own their own homes. This helps keeps them in their homes.

In fact, if you think about it, the number of projects that were approved over the last twenty-five years is somewhere in the area of 50,000.

MR. CRUMMELL: Wow.

MR. SIMMS: That is a lot of projects and it has helped keep a lot of people in their homes, which is a segment of affordable housing. Obviously, if people can stay in their own homes, the better for them. Then we brought in REEP, which is the other energy efficiency program, which a lot of rural areas also apply for as well. If they qualify, they just need to apply.

MR. CRUMMELL: That is a fabulous program – certainly in my next householder I will have that identified and in people's mailboxes, and you will probably get a few more applications from my district, so fair enough.

MR. HEDDERSON: On that as well, is attached to those, the same way with the modification one, is that there is a low-interest loan up to $10,000 that you can attach to those grants as well. These are reasonably put over time. So, if you matched up both of them, possibly you could get up to $15,000, which could be a significant upgrade to a home. That is available for both those programs.

MR. CRUMMELL: Just one last comment or just a question, I guess is –

CHAIR: Quickly.

MR. CRUMMELL: Quickly, yes.

I hear on occasion from different media sources and from people working in the service and the not-for-profit sector that we are leaders in probably Canada in terms of poverty reduction and in housing. Would I be correct in saying that? We are right there as an example, perhaps, and moving forward, even though there are more challenges to deal with. Would that be correct in saying that?

MR. HEDDERSON: Well, I have humble people next to me –

MR. CRUMMELL: Yes, I hear you.

MR. HEDDERSON: I tell you, I networked around the congress last week, and let me tell you there are a lot of people that came up to me and were envious of what is happening here in this Province with regard to housing. They made no bones about it. Len and Kate and company might talk a little bit more about it. I certainly felt very proud that the congress was here, but also that we were on the leading edge of a number of programs, especially with the Universal Design, as we have already talked about.

MR. CRUMMELL: Okay, thank you very much.

CHAIR: Thank you, Dan.

Eddie.

MR. JOYCE: (Inaudible) these Estimates too political, but of course some people started it. If this is so good, as the member just said, why do we always get so many cases – and it is growing and growing – of more people looking for housing, and more homeless people in Newfoundland and Labrador? We hear about the wait-list is going down, yet we hear of more people looking for affordable housing. It just does not jive that if you are saying the list is going down, but in Newfoundland and Labrador the people looking for it is going up. So, are they just not putting in applications?

MR. HEDDERSON: Well, you have to separate two things, too, because out there right now is about social or affordable housing, which we are talking about now, but often it gets clouded by housing affordability, especially in a time where our economy is growing.

As well, you have to quantify, and the only way that we can quantify with regard to social housing is to be making sure that we are recording and collating all the requests that come in. We must look at our wait-list. These are people who are on the front line, and we are trying to adjust our programs to make sure that the safety net is ever increasing.

With regard to the numbers – and it is a complex issue, I would say to the hon. member because it is about homelessness and it is about affordable housing, housing affordability, and it is all clambered together. Sometimes what we are looking at is more symptoms than anything else, because look at the non-profits and the work that they are doing with people who are coming out of very vulnerable situations.

Really, from my perspective, if there is one person out there without a roof over the heads, that, to me, is something that we have to address. Oftentimes, it is about individuals rather than the whole picture.

MR. JOYCE: Is the number of people applying for Newfoundland and Labrador Housing or rent subsidies going up or down?

MR. HEDDERSON: Len.

MR. SIMMS: The number of applications in 2009 was 2,300. The number of applications in 2010 was 2,200. The number of applications in 2011 was 2,100.

MR. JOYCE: How many people are still on the list? You might have applicants, but are they new applicants? Because once you get on the list, you are not counted as a new applicant.

MR. SIMMS: There is 1,035 or so on the wait-list now. You have to understand, we did a turnover last year of 934. Most of the people on the wait-list, 80 per cent to 90 per cent, generally will get placed within the year. It has been like that for basically quite a while, going way back even. It is kind of stable in that sense.

In March of 2010 our wait-list was 2,214. Today it is 1,035 or 1,036, somewhere in that area right now. Those are the facts, but it is still too many. I acknowledge that. It is a challenge to give everybody a home, but like I said 90 per cent or thereabouts, in the last couple of years in particular, we have done a number of placements, roughly over 900 both years. So with 1,000 or 1,100 on the wait-list –

MR. JOYCE: In Newfoundland – and I have mentioned this to the minister before – there is a lot of three and four-bedroom apartments. I think 70 per cent or 80 per cent.

MR. HEDDERSON: Three to four?

MR. JOYCE: Three or four bedrooms.

MR. SIMMS: Oh, the number, yes.

MR. JOYCE: I know that most of the requests are one and two bedrooms. What can be done there? Is there anything that can be done? Is there money being put towards that to bring it down so people who need one or two bedrooms can get one or two bedrooms instead of the three and four?

MR. SIMMS: Yes.

Well, if I may, that is probably one of the biggest challenges we face, to be honest. Because the demographics are totally turned around from what they were back in my day, let's say. From the days when there were large families and they needed three and four, to one and two bedroom needs, tops.

Ten per cent of our applicants, I would say, need a three bedroom or more, 90 per cent need a two bedroom or one bedroom. That is the way it has been. What can we do about it? Well, that is part of what we are trying to figure out ourselves, I guess is the best way to answer the question straightforwardly.

We have done a couple of pilot projects under what we call a reconfiguration pilot. One is in Mundy Pond Road, right up behind the Tim Hortons there, where we had a duplex. We took the duplex, moved the family somewhere where they were happy to go, and literally cut the duplex in four. We quartered it and made four single apartments to add to our portfolio, which we did not have. That is a small step but it worked out magnificently. They are wonderful apartments.

We did the same thing in Corner Brook. Does anybody remember the name of that road, Wheelers Road or something?

MR. JOYCE: Wheelers Road, yes.

MR. SIMMS: I think so. Right up on the end, the far house on the left. I was over and looked at the project myself. Where we did something similar, except on the top we cut it in half and made two single apartments. On the bottom we used it for a fully-accessible unit, which is always helpful and needed in the portfolio. Things like that can be done.

We actually were chastised one time by the Auditor General because we had one or two people living in a four-bedroom house and that sort of thing. I went over and met with him, and tried to figure out what he was saying. That I should move your family and her family into the same house, or what? That did not work. We all know, we have lots of people who have raised their families and they have lived with us for years. Housing was supposed to be a transitional process. It never turned out that way. You cannot very well kick people out of their homes. That is the way I believe.

One thing we did do is we allowed our applicant processors, our housing officers in each of the regional offices, the opportunity, if what comes up on the computer is only a two-bedroom need and we have a three-bedroom unit, they are allowed to go one up and put a two-bedroom need in a three-bedroom house. If they are the next ones on the list that pop up, give them the three-bedroom house.

So, those are the kinds of things we can do.

MR. JOYCE: It is a tough one, yes.

MR. SIMMS: It is a challenge, yes.

MR. JOYCE: The other thing out in Corner Brook that I find, and it is always a headache, is that when you get someone to move out it takes so long to get the place ready for the new occupant.

MR. SIMMS: Yes.

MR. JOYCE: I know personally, because I drive – I am talking four and five, six. I do not know if it is a staffing issue, I do not know if it is damage to the place. I know cases where it takes a long while to get the unit. What happens is you see people going by who have their application in, well such and such is still open and no one there.

MR. SIMMS: They will call us.

MR. JOYCE: Pardon?

MR. SIMMS: They will call us, you can be sure of that.

I will try to explain it as best I can, and we have worked on this. The vacancy turnover time frame, believe it or not, is twenty-one days, workdays. That is four weeks, basically. It really depends on the state of the unit, if I can put it that way.

Believe it or not, some units will take you four or five months to fix up. That is about all I can say about that, but there were 100 units that have been for years sitting on the back burner because they were what they call major repair units. They had significant problems to the foundation or whatever. It would cost you $40,000 to repair it, whereas to turn over a regular vacancy would be, maybe $5,000, $7,000. So, the money was never put into those. They were just left there. There are lots of them. Like you say, there are about 100 of them around the Province. We put a plan in place two years ago, there are now thirty.

So, we have made some progress in that area to get those units back in the portfolio, obviously. Sometimes it takes longer; sometimes it only takes a couple of weeks. You will never see them all because –

MR. JOYCE: About twenty-one days is the shortest I have ever heard. I have yet to see that out around, because you see it – and I do not know if it is the damage to the place or it is a staffing issue or something.

MR. SIMMS: No, not really a staffing issue. We have vacancy crews who do nothing only turn units over. It depends on how many you get. Sometimes you might get a lot more vacancies than you – well, like I said, last year we had 900 turnovers. So, there were 900 that moved out. Sometimes it is because of the situation with respect to the unit or so. What kind of condition it has been left in and so on and so forth. No, twenty-one days; we did a survey and a study on this and tried to get the actual number.

MR. JOYCE: I am just going ask one more question.

MR. SIMMS: Yes.

MR. JOYCE: The other thing, any information that you send, can you send me a copy of what Gerry asked and whatever I ask you can send a copy to Gerry, if you do not mind.

MR. SIMMS: How about we send it to all the members on the committee?

OFFICIAL: Everyone gets it.

MR. JOYCE: Yes. Sure.

The last question I was going to ask and I know it is a touchy situation, and I am sure it was looked at. Are people being able to transfer? It is a tough issue.

MR. SIMMS: You mean within existing…

MR. JOYCE: In the existing units, yes.

I do not know how to get around it, but I know people – especially when some kids are being bullied in certain areas in Corner Brook and you are trying to get them transferred, yet you almost have to get the man above to come down to get it done. You keep on documenting; you keep on putting in the information. I do not know if there is some way to find help with that in special circumstances, because it is a tough one.

MR. SIMMS: Yes, it is a tough one. On the other hand, I think we have 100 applications for a transfer out of 5,500. So you have to put it in context I guess, but nevertheless –

MR. JOYCE: You can put it in context, but I know the ones I deal with –

MR. SIMMS: Well, that is what I was going to say.

MR. JOYCE: - and I know I dealt with some. You can put it in context but the ones that I had, and I dealt with them personally.

MR. SIMMS: Oh yes.

MR. JOYCE: I am talking you had to get affidavits, I am talking about you had to get doctors letters, you had to get letters from principals. When you put it in context, when you sit it down to an individual, when I deal with it and I have dealt with three or four recently, no matter what the context is these people are real and these people have to go through it.

MR. SIMMS: I did not finish my sentence. What I was saying is you have to put it in context so that people know there are only 100 that have transfer applications in place. We are compassionate, as far as I know.

I do not know of any particular situation that you brought to somebody's attention in the Corner Brook office, but I would be happy to follow up anytime for you. If there is a reason, a medical reason or something like that, we generally go out of our way to try to find a way to place them.

Other people want transfers for other reasons. They are not quite as serious as maybe the ones you have just described, but if there are situations like you have just described and you are having a difficulty like that, then by all means, contact me and I will do what I can.

MR. JOYCE: I do not mean people want to move because they do not like the location.

MR. SIMMS: Right.

MR. JOYCE: I know in one particular case this kid was being bullied, so we documented from the constabulary actually, from the doctor, from the school, and I still do not know if it is done.

MR. SIMMS: Well, if you would like to speak to me after and give me the name, I will check it out for you.

MR. JOYCE: No, I will go back and speak to the parents and see what…

MR. SIMMS: Okay. Then let me know if you need me to pursue it because that is definitely the kind of one that we would go out of our way to accommodate.

MR. JOYCE: Yes. Okay.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Gerry.

MS ROGERS: Okay, thank you.

If we could go back to the REEP, can we have some stats on how much money has been allocated and how many homes have been served? Also, what would the budget be this year?

MR. HEDDERSON: Len.

MR. SIMMS: REEP has a budget of $4 million. REEP serves 1,000 households every year. There is no wait-list and that is because we started the program without a wait-list at the beginning. We have so much money, you apply this year, and if somebody applies after the 1,000 have been approved, usually around April or so, we would just say: Sorry, the funding is gone for this year so reapply next year. You get away from that wait-list problem and issue.

MS ROGERS: Right.

MR. SIMMS: We do 1,000 every year, and we have ever since we had the program in place, which is three years now, I think. It is a fabulous program. The savings – and it has been proven by the energy auditors, who go into the homes first. After the work is done, they go back and check the stats again, after doing their thing. The results have been, to answer in a short few seconds, a savings of 35 per cent, factual, and related to about $800 a year in savings. The average household income from the person applying or the home applying is about $19,000, so you can appreciate that is a heck of a lot of money for that kind of household – an $800 savings.

MS ROGERS: Is this going to be a permanent program?

MR. SIMMS: Well, we did it for two years as a pilot. The pilot was successful, so we made the presentation and so on and so forth. Government approved for a further three years, a continuation of the program out of the pilot area. The idea is to try to get into a situation where every three years you can review your programs and make sure they are being effective, all that sort of thing. I am pretty confident, or at least hopeful, that this is a program that will stay around for a while because it is serving a lot of people.

MS ROGERS: Are landlords eligible for it?

MR. SIMMS: No, this is for private homeowners.

MS ROGERS: Right.

Is there any intention of looking at the possibility of extending it so that tenants can take advantage of it?

MR. SIMMS: No, not at this point in time because we have lots of applications with very little publicity. These programs, including Home Repair and all of the rest of them, are generally fuelled by family, friends, and word of mouth. We have heard that suggestion being made. A good personal friend of yours and mine has bent my ear on that one.

MS ROGERS: We have not talked about that one.

MR. SIMMS: Oh, haven't you?

Anyway, we have talked about it and looked at it, but there are too many others who are now eligible for it. We are going to stick with that for now. It is very successful.

MS ROGERS: Often, you see cases where people who are renting are perhaps lower earners and often they are in horribly drafty apartments and paying exorbitantly.

MR. SIMMS: Unfortunately if you give them the money, it does not go to them. It goes to the landlord. The landlord benefits, but the person who is living there might not because they may move away next week or something. Do you know what I mean?

MS ROGERS: Right.

MR. SIMMS: I think that is one of the downsides to it. If you only have a certain amount of money, you put it where it is doing the most good right now. You can always have more and you can always do more with more, but there are realities as well.

MS ROGERS: Okay, thank you.

How is the status of the programs – because I know NLHC is programming with Choices to help. How is that going?

MR. SIMMS: That is the training for trades program you are talking about?

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: It is going very well.

MS ROGERS: Great.

MR. SIMMS: We did not lose it in the Budgetary process this year or anything like that. When I did the Sleep Out 120, I was fortunate enough to have Sheldon Pollett, the Executive Director of Choices, lie in the sleeping bag next to me and he chewed my ear until 2:00 or 3:00 o'clock in the morning. That is one of his pride and joys. They just won a national award for that program, by the way.

MS ROGERS: That is a great thing.

MR. SIMMS: Yes, it is a great idea. These are youth at risk who Choices work with, and I must say some of the kids I have met have gone back to school and do their trade or whatever; it is just great. Last year they did sixty housing units for us, where they went in and did insulation. We paid them a salary, so they earned a salary. They did sixty houses for us, putting insulation in our homes. We benefited from that as well. That is still on track for this year.

MS ROGERS: It is a great partnership.

MR. SIMMS: It is a great partnership, yes.

MS ROGERS: Everybody is winning there.

MR. SIMMS: Yes, absolutely.

MS ROGERS: The maintenance and renovation, how much is in your 2012 budget for this year?

MR. SIMMS: M&I?

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: There is $12 million.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MR. SIMMS: That is the same amount as there has been since it was tripled back in 2009 – thank God. You see the work every day around your area for sure –

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: – and I am sure Mr. Joyce does too.

Our units now, in terms of their condition, I would say 65 per cent to 70 per cent of them are in condition one, which is the best you can get – the exterior end. I can see that there has not been a lot done on the interior in the fifty years since they have built, except for the last few years, we started to put a little plan in place. We kept our seasonal workers on over the winter so they can go in and do flooring, bathrooms, and that sort of thing. Really badly needed, but is probably a twenty-five-year project. Nothing has ever been done on the interior, but the exterior I think there has been a lot of great work done by our workers as well as others.

MS ROGERS: The Affordable Housing Initiative – there were some great applications that were turned down, and I know that is a problem of success, but also there is such a great need, particularly in the areas where there housing for people with complex needs and seniors.

Can we have a list of the number of applications, the amount of money, and then the number of successful ones, and the amount of money in that?

MR. SIMMS: Yes. That is all on our Web site too, by the way. I think the minister announced it.

I can tell you, in short, in terms of the applications we had for supportive living, we approved everyone we got who was eligible, so there was nobody turned down on that side of it. We try to make sure that they get approval, so I think there seven of those. There were a couple of others that applied, but they did not exactly fit the criteria. So we had enough money for all seven that had applied.

On the private sector side, those that are building units mostly for seniors or people with disabilities, there were probably seventy applications and we had enough money maybe for twenty-five or twenty-six projects. Now, some of those seventy did not fit the criteria either. So the cut-off point is where the $8 million is met and there is probably another ten or fifteen projects that were probably good projects, but we just could not fund them.

We offered to those that did not get approved, a chance to come in and sit down with our team, the group that does the evaluation, to try to explain to them where they went wrong so that the next time maybe it will be more helpful to them. Some of the successful ones, probably the lowest score point was the high eighties.

MS ROGERS: So the next call for proposals, if this program goes ahead, takes us a number of years down the road, really.

MR. SIMMS: Two years now.

MS ROGERS: Two years, but then by the time something actually gets into production is –

MR. SIMMS: We will 244 more new ones probably by the middle of 2014, which will give us 1,133 since 2003, which is not bad.

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: So then there will be another call in 2014, you are right, and that will take another three years to build.

MS ROGERS: Do we know if that is going to happen for sure, the 2014 call?

MR. SIMMS: We do not know for sure. I suspect the Province is willing, but you never know what the federal government is going to do, dare I say that. Anyway, I said it now, if you know what I mean.

MS ROGERS: There is no guarantee on that.

MR. SIMMS: There is no guarantee. All provinces negotiate with CMHC. That is the arm of the federal government that we have to negotiate with.

MS ROGERS: Is there any willingness or movement on the Province to do a unilateral funding program at this point, at least to advance some of these very good applications?

MR. SIMMS: No, not at the moment. The primary applications that we were really interested in where the supportive living ones, and they were all approved. As for the private sector ones, there is no intention, at the moment, to do a provincial one because we have to come up with the money in two years' time to do a federal-provincial one.

MS ROGERS: In this latest round, the latest approvals, there were not many then for seniors if it was mostly supportive living?

MR. SIMMS: The private sector ones were for seniors, yes, but the supportive living ones were for complex needs people.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

I have a question now, because I know for the private ones that after ten years they are no longer required to go to the affordable housing rents according to CMHC. What happens then?

MR. SIMMS: According to CMHC, their experience, because that program has been around longer than we have been involved in it.

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: According to their experience, the units in ten year's time are ten years older, number one. Number two, they found the landlords have been people who have gotten to be very close to the tenants, because they are seniors and so on. They have not seen any significant change after the ten years in terms of significant rent increases or anything of that nature. As a matter of fact, many of the landlords we have in the Province are people who go and do the snow clearing for them and do not charge them any extra. It is that kind of a relationship.

I found that in several of the projects, in Corner Brook and Holyrood and places like that, that the landlords develop a relationship with the tenants. CMHC says that is what the facts are. We have not been there yet. So it is hard to answer from our perspective.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

There was no uptake in the Province with assistance to use any of the Affordable Housing Initiative for home ownership?

MR. SIMMS: Sorry?

MS ROGERS: There was no uptake in the Affordable Housing Initiative. I think there were possibilities to do a home ownership for low and moderate income. No?

MR. SIMMS: No.

MS ROGERS: With this program?

MR. SIMMS: No.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MR. SIMMS: That is something we are looking at or are thinking about and have talked about for quite a while now. We are trying to develop something to give options to the government to have a look at.

MS ROGERS: One of the things I came across that was surprising to me is that our seniors are not eligible for emergency housing, because once they turn sixty-five –

MR. SIMMS: That would be in another department, I suspect.

MS ROGERS: Yes, I know that, but once they turn sixty-five they are no longer under AES, or the former –

MR. SIMMS: HRLE.

MS ROGERS: Yes. Is there anything particular – also, in a lot of the calls we get it is about the real desperate situation that a lot of seniors find themselves in. For instance, two calls today, both seniors – and this is just sort of an example of what we are seeing. For instance, there is a woman who is seventy-three years old, and she does have a rent subsidy. She received a letter from the landlord saying her increase is going to be $50.

MR. HEDDERSON: Where is the rent subsidy coming from?

MS ROGERS: From Newfoundland and Labrador Housing. I find this interesting, it is curious. Again, I would like to ask you a few questions about how the rent subsidies work.

MR. SIMMS: If you are going to talk about an individual case, I really cannot comment on that but generally I can get into it.

MS ROGERS: Right. It is generally in terms of – what surprised me was that she is told the maximum that the rent subsidy is but that the landlord has increased the rent. From what I understood that the rent subsidies were – can you tell me a little bit about that? Who is the contract with? Can landlords increase rent? How long is their contract, their lease with Newfoundland and Labrador Housing? How does that work?

MR. SIMMS: The lease is one year. The agreement is one year.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MR. SIMMS: It is a signed agreement. The limit that we will supplement is up to $800 rent.

MS ROGERS: Yes, I understand that.

MR. SIMMS: Landlords can raise rent under the Residential Tenancy Act once a year, as long as they give notice and all those other sorts of things that are outlined in that act.

MS ROGERS: Rents are skyrocketing in a number of places around the Province. When we look at the number of seniors who are in rental units, some who get subsidy, some who are not yet getting subsidies and the rents are going up. Is there a plan to somehow address that? Because if the maximum subsidy is $800 –

MR. SIMMS: Right.

MS ROGERS: I had two calls alone today from seniors, from apartment buildings in town.

MR. SIMMS: Do they have an application in with us, or are they now getting a subsidy? Is that what you are saying?

MS ROGERS: One is getting a subsidy and one is not yet getting a subsidy.

My basic question is that we are seeing increases in rents and they are going up quickly because there is such a shortage of rental properties. Some of the people who are affected by this are seniors. I am just wondering…

MR. SIMMS: We just put it up to $800 not long ago, actually. It was at $700 a year-and-a-half ago, but that is not to dismiss the issue. I am just saying that.

The other point is we deal with those who have applications with us on our wait-list; 13 per cent of the applicants are seniors.

MS ROGERS: Only 13 per cent?

MR. SIMMS: Only 13 per cent, surprising.

MS ROGERS: Yes, and some of our most complex calls that we get are from seniors.

MR. SIMMS: Yes. Well, the first issue you raised is beyond us. We are not involved in that part of it. That is AES.

If their name comes up on the list, as I tried to explain earlier how the process works, and they are a senior and are eligible for a rent subsidy, then they would be the ones who would be selected and informed, but they have to be on the wait-list.

MS ROGERS: Your contract with the landlord is a year?

MR. SIMMS: Yes. Then what happens in a year's time we try to renew the contract with the landlord or we do not renew the contract with the landlord, depending on the relationship we have had, or the landlord will not renew the contract with us because we are not providing enough funding.

MS ROGERS: Right. Then landlords, in fact, do not have separate agreements with a tenant. The agreement is with you.

MR. SIMMS: Correct, yes. It is with us.

The Department of AES also provides rental allowances, as you know, and pay rents to people, about 13,000, if I remember the last time I saw the numbers. With our program, it is an agreement with the landlord. If somebody moves, wants to move or whatever, we can take a rent subsidy from a landlord and put it somewhere else if we have to, and we have done that. We are flexible enough to be able to do that.

MS ROGERS: Right.

Are you finding, though, that landlords are increasing the rent and that you have to move on with some of subsidies?

MR. SIMMS: No, not particularly. Not that I have been made aware of. Fifty dollars, maybe – I know they have raised $25 or $30. We raised our own up in Pleasantville not long ago, even though they are not social housing. No, I do not think we are really finding a lot of that difficulty just yet.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

I know there was a two-year commitment for rent subsidies, an increase of $1 million a year, and this is the second year. Where are we now with the rent subsidies? Are there any available? Are they are all subscribed for the year?

MR. SIMMS: No. The Rent Supplement Program funding has been doubled. It went from $4 million now to $8 million since 2009. We have been lucky.

There are 1,732 rent supplements that we have available. Remember the old program had 1,000. They are always there because there are people who move on from those. We have those to work with as well.

The new ones, we gave 130 of them to Stella Burry Community Services and the Canadian Mental Health Association. We have a staff person who works with them to find landlords for people with complex needs. It is not an easy task.

MS ROGERS: Right.

MR. SIMMS: In terms of the current year, rent supplements this year are allocated to each regional office in terms of what is on their wait-list, what the demand is like in their area, and so on and so forth. The offices themselves then use them and determine who is going to get one as their name comes up on the system.

MS ROGERS: Right.

MR. SIMMS: So, they would not be all used yet, because they were only there since the first of April.

MS ROGERS: Right. There is not a waiting list for rent supplements at this point and –

MR. SIMMS: You cannot make an application for a rent supplement.

MS ROGERS: Right, you make an application for housing.

MR. SIMMS: For the housing, yes.

MS ROGERS: There are still unused supplements.

MR. SIMMS: Yes. What happens is that our application people, our wait-list people who administer the wait-list and so on, if a person comes up on the wait-list, as I say, and there is no accommodation for them right now or one that fits their needs but they are the next one of the list, then we will use the rent supplement.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MR. SIMMS: Or, we will contact somebody who is on the wait-list now, up until the end of March, and maybe their landlords would be willing to enter into a rent supplement. That will help them get off the wait-list and move on.

MS ROGERS: Okay, great. Thank you.

Is there any plan for an expanded role for the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation now in the whole area of housing? I know we do not have a division of housing, but when we are looking at the issue of housing affordability and some of the great challenges that we see in different parts of the Province, in terms of housing –

MR. SIMMS: I am not quite sure, and I have never really understood, and maybe this is a good opportunity. You could perhaps help me understand what it is that a new division would do. Most of the programs we have are administered by us.

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: We already do that now as – we are a 400-member corporation. That is bigger than most departments. I am just trying to get my head around exactly what a new division would do, and then maybe I can go from there.

MS ROGERS: Yes. I am not talking about a huge, new division to duplicate anything. Somewhere there is a focus that would apply a housing lens to different departments and areas, the same like as we look at the Women's Policy Office.

MR. SIMMS: We already do that, by the way.

MS ROGERS: Okay, that is what I am asking.

MR. SIMMS: Yes, there is a housing lens now. Government had agreed with the housing lens last year when we had our stakeholders meeting, that was one of their recommendations. We submitted it through the Social Housing Plan and government agreed that they would apply a housing lens to all papers and that sort of thing.

MS ROGERS: That comes from Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, is it?

MR. SIMMS: No, it comes from Cabinet Secretariat to apply the housing lens.

MS ROGERS: I see.

MR. SIMMS: What will happen is anything that comes up that would have a housing impact or issue –

MS ROGERS: So, for instance resource development.

MR. SIMMS: Yes, all departments that would have any interest in that area would have to put forward their comments and suggestions.

The other thing we have done, by the way – and this is in consultation with yours and my good friend, if you know who I am talking about, he is a very strong advocate. Bruce Pierce, I am talking about. One of the things we did in trying to respond to making sure we were doing a scan of all housing issues, not just social housing issues, we and Cabinet just approved back in our Social Housing Plan presentation in January or February, the hiring of another senior policy analyst who will work in Morley's department. He is the team leader of the Policy, Research and Monitoring Department.

There are three analysts there now. They basically do a lot of that research anyway, but this person is going to be primarily a go-to person for the community, if they want to get some information or advice or guidance or suggestions. We are going to have a new housing policy analyst who will be working out of that department. That is a little bit of a stretch beyond the specific mandate. That was an attempt to try to help find a place for people to go to if they want to get help or information. So, we are doing that.

Interestingly enough, when we were at the congress last week, if I can comment on this, I presented on a panel with the Assistant Deputy Minister Responsible for Housing in Alberta, and also the Deputy Minister from Saskatchewan. Their presentation primarily was all about housing affordability. They want to get more houses built out in their area.

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: My presentation was all about social housing and people with complex needs and so on. They said to me afterwards: you know we really should be doing more of that in our area. They were focusing more on just getting more housing built because they have an influx of people and that sort of thing. They kind of indicated that they were not spending as much time on social housing issues. The big issues, complex needs, the ones that we all worry about mostly I think.

That was kind of interesting I found, but there is no movement that I know of, the minister perhaps is the one who would – that is more from a policy perspective, but I am not aware of any movement to do anything different.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MR. SIMMS: Some of the other issues I have heard addressed, by the way, raised, had to do with issues that are relevant to the Residential Tenancies legislation.

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: The relationship between a landlord and a tenant and those kinds of issues. I assume that would have been something you would have been talking about too, that might have been looked at under this.

MS ROGERS: Yes, getting there.

MR. SIMMS: Okay.

Anyway, what I was going to say is that there already is a division, of course, of government that looks into that. They have a full division in Service Newfoundland for that kind of issue.

MS ROGERS: That is right. It is in Service Newfoundland, yes.

MR. SIMMS: I do not know if that answers your question.

MS ROGERS: Yes, but I think we need both. We need that policy piece that looks at the overall situation of housing, as well as social housing and housing for people with complex needs in supportive housing. Particularly, in our new found prosperity when we see the challenges that come along with large resource development projects.

MR. SIMMS: Yes. What you have described is exactly what we are doing. It is what I mentioned about the new senior policy analyst who will be doing what you are suggesting. So, that is good.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

I cannot remember if I asked this, back to rent supplements. Do we know how many – yes, you mentioned how many were received last year.

MR. SIMMS: After this year now, we will have 1,732.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Land is one of the major blocks to developing housing in some ways. Is there any plan afoot to look at some of the land that is available that is owned by the Province for affordable housing?

MR. SIMMS: Yes. There is not a lot of land for residential that the government owns. A lot of it is commercial land or whatever. In fact, we are going through a process now with the Department of Transportation and Works for a piece of land. I will not say where just yet.

MS ROGERS: Oh, come on.

MR. SIMMS: No, I cannot do that. Well, it is up in Pleasantville.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MR. SIMMS: Anyway, they own a piece of land up there. What they do, we have a process in place and it is administered by the minister's other deputy, the Deputy Minister of Transportation and Works. If there is piece of land that becomes available, they send a message around to all deputy ministers. They say: look, we have this piece of land, some outside parties might be interested in, is there anybody in the government that would be interested in it? Anytime we see a message like that and it is in a residential area, we say yes. So, we will take the land.

We do not have a lot of other land in residential areas. As you know, back fifteen years ago or so, I think it was, there was an agreement done with twenty-two municipalities around the Province where Newfoundland and Labrador Housing passed on their holdings to municipalities and let them deal with it. When they sell it they give half to the Housing Corporation, they keep half themselves. The other piece of private land that we have mostly is up in the Southlands area, as you know.

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: We have been selling that off because we were directed to do it by the previous government and the current government.

MS ROGERS: Was any of that potential for residential land?

MR. SIMMS: It is all residential in Southlands, as you know, but this year, for the first time, we have a tender coming in the paper on Saturday for four subdivisions of land up there in Southlands that we are trying to get rid of. We have made a criterion in this tender, for the first time ever, that 100 of the houses that are built by the successful bidder and developer will have to be affordable housing.

MS ROGERS: That was going to be my question.

MR. SIMMS: We got legal advice. We could not put in there you cannot charge more than $225,000, but we can put in there that you must build 100 that are built in either duplexes or rows, quads or something of that nature, sprinkle it throughout the development and build two-bedroom to a maximum of 800 square feet, a three-bedroom to a maximum of 1,000 square feet which should keep the price at a reasonable price –

MS ROGERS: You cannot do the stipulation of CMHC's affordable housing?

MR. SIMMS: No, it is nothing to do with CMHC.

MS ROGERS: I know, but they set the bar for the rates for affordable housing, right? Is it not true?

MR. HEDDERSON: This is to sell houses.

MS ROGERS: Yes, I know that, but in terms of –

MR. SIMMS: We are just selling the land. We are not building the houses –

MS ROGERS: Yes, I know that.

MR. SIMMS: It is probably a different kind of issue, I guess.

I did mention that at the congress, and I have to say we received a lot of response to it. It was pretty positive. We had never done that before.

MS ROGERS: Great.

There was some talk about the possibility of implementing a low-income homeownership program.

MR. SIMMS: You mentioned that earlier, but we really have not gone there yet.

MR. HEDDERSON: Part of it is, of course, the analyst that we have over there now will start to do some cross-jurisdictional work. Again, I am the policy person, I guess, and that will be fed into me and from there we will go to see – we have made a commitment in our Blue Book to follow that up, and that will be followed up in due time.

MS ROGERS: That would sit in Transportation and Works?

MR. HEDDERSON: No, basically where it sits is in Housing in the sense of that is where I am going to get all my information that I need to put a policy together, as you just asked, and to then I will bring it through the government process and where we go from there.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Is there any movement at all in regard to the vacant housing on the base in Happy Valley-Goose Bay, in terms of the Province playing any kind of role there in negotiating or speaking with the federal government?

MR. HEDDERSON: It is not housing for us in the sense that that is a federal and municipal relationship, and I understand that they are negotiating or should be negotiating to see where that goes.

MS ROGERS: So the Province is not involved at all there?

MR. HEDDERSON: No.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

The housing support workers, the housing development workers, how is that program going?

MR. SIMMS: Less the Supportive Living Program that we just took over a month ago.

MS ROGERS: Yes, but the workers that are spread throughout the region.

MR. SIMMS: With the CABs?

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: I have been around the last two months to five of the ten CABs and met with all their collation groups in Labrador West, Goose Bay, Corner Brook, Stephenville, and Marystown. I am doing the other five in the next four weeks. I have met several of the housing support workers; they seem to be working pretty good.

MS ROGERS: What kinds of challenges do they seem to be having?

MR. SIMMS: Well, it is exactly what they were hired for – we pay the salaries; we provide the funding for the salaries. They find people perhaps who are homeless or have gone through addiction situations and are looking for a place to live. They will help find those places to live. Then they will go and they will find furniture for them. They will find clothes for them. That is the kind of work that they do, which we do not do as a corporation, but we do provide the funding to them to do it. I think we funded eight of those support workers in ten of those CABs.

Again, we just got the program a month ago, so I have only had one briefing on the program actually. As far as I know, there is still work going on and work continues. We have the same person who ran the program or was involved in the program in the old department who came down with us as well. All of the groups know that person, have great respect for her; Annette Breen is her name. She is working.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

Single housing is one of the biggest challenges.

MR. SIMMS: Yes, no question.

MS ROGERS: In Lab West I know that there was a change in the eligibility criteria. Are there any other new initiatives or anything to address some of the challenges that they have there?

MR. SIMMS: You do not mean just in Lab West, do you?

MS ROGERS: Well, I am thinking particularly in some of the areas in Labrador – the North Coast, there are some problems there in Labrador in terms of real challenges.

MR. SIMMS: On the North Coast we just built, as you know, four new units in Nain and four in Hopedale, so that is a bit of help.

I have been up and met with the coalition in Lab West in January, when we made these changes – supported by the coalition publicly by the way, which was great because we had to take some pretty difficult decisions at the time. The income level in Lab West, as CMHC has identified, is well beyond the income limit that we use in the rest of the Province – $65,000. The funny thing is we did that in January. Today, the wait-list in Lab West is seventeen.

MS ROGERS: So what is happening?

MR. SIMMS: The problem is not with social housing or low-income housing. Their problem is with this other housing affordability issue.

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: They acknowledged that, the committee did; in fact, I was up there three weeks ago and did the presentation that I gave to your caucus some time ago, the same presentation, and they acknowledged the same thing then. There was somebody there from the mines, they had somebody who looks after housing, but they are looking at a different kind of housing. So that is what the difference is there. That is not the issue.

In Goose Bay it is a little different, but again the wait-list in Goose Bay is twenty-five. It is part of a problem, but it is not the whole problem. They have a lot of problems with complex needs people, by the way, you probably know that.

MS ROGERS: They do, yes. There are no emergency shelters aside from the transition houses.

MR. SIMMS: Well, except for the Mokami one that we just built under the Affordable Housing Program, ten new units, which they are delighted with and about to open next month, by the way.

MS ROGERS: That is great.

MR. SIMMS: Yes, it is great, but they have some other issues there on the side, private ones, as you may be aware of.

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: The development worker up there, I just met with her last week when she was down for the congress and had a meeting with here for two-and-a-half or three hours and went over all of our programs and so on. She is still new at the job; she is learning and so on and so forth.

Up in that area of Labrador, the total wait-list for low-income housing in all of Labrador is fifty-nine. It is not to downplay the issue because there is obviously an issue and a need for it, but relative to Corner Brook where is 100 on the wait-list or here in St. John's where there are 350 on the wait-list, it is different everywhere basically, I guess. In Marystown, we have one.

MS ROGERS: Perhaps some of those numbers do not reflect entirely the real housing challenge that a lot of people face, because people who are not eligible for Newfoundland and Labrador Housing are having housing affordability problems.

MR. SIMMS: Oh, no question – absolutely.

MS ROGERS: In terms of the wait-list that might be the concrete, very real wait-list for Newfoundland and Labrador Housing –

MR. SIMMS: Are low income.

MS ROGERS: – does not really reflect again that challenge.

MR. SIMMS: No.

MS ROGERS: It reflects perhaps that level of people who fall under the eligibility requirements ceiling.

MR. SIMMS: It does reflect low income, people with complex needs, the poor, and the most vulnerable. That is our focus, but it does not reflect housing affordability issues. That is a totally different issue. I agree with you.

MS ROGERS: Right.

CHAIR: Gerry, excuse me.

Tony has a couple of questions, are you just about finished? If not, I will –

MS ROGERS: I am just about finished.

CHAIR: Just about?

MS ROGERS: Yes, I am just about finished.

CHAIR: Are we close?

Tony, can we let Gerry finish? Then you will have your two questions.

Are you not happy with that?

Okay. Tony, you go ahead. Gerry, you take a break.

Thank you.

MR. CORNECT: Thank you.

I just want to make a couple of comments and ask a couple of questions. I was glad to hear Mr. Minister that the PHRP, the Provincial Home Repair Program, the wait-list is down. I know in my district a lot of residents avail of this program, and I am very happy to see.

I know the program has many facets to it. The money is used for electrical upgrades, replacements, septic upgrades, roof repairs, siding, windows, doors, replacement and foundation repairs, et cetera. For the wait-list to go down – because I know not that long ago the wait- list out home was five years. So you are doing something right. You are doing something good. Share with us, what have you done to bring this list down?

MR. SIMMS: To be perfectly frank, the thing that helped us was the doubling of the funding in 2006-2007, from $4,300 down to $2,600. It only can happen one way; that is if we had more funding. The government doubled its funding in the program back in 2009 or somewhere around that period of time, 2008-2009. Because of the extra funding, we are able to obviously address more applicants. That is how the wait-list was reduced.

MR. CORNECT: When you say more funding, where was it then and where is it now in the matter of total dollars?

MR. SIMMS: The program grew to be – it was originally 75-25 program, supposed to be federal funding. Then a few years back, five years ago it became $4 million for the Province. They actually doubled their funding then to $4 million.

In 2007-2008 or 2008-2009, I cannot remember all of the dates right now, but we went to the present government and indicated there is a huge wait-list, only one way to resolve it, more money. We kind of hoped that we would get another $2 million. They came back and gave us another $4 million. So they doubled their contribution to $8 million.

The federal government's contribution is $4 million. It no longer is a 75-25 program. In reality, it is now 67 per cent provincial and 33 per cent federal, or something along those lines. It was the funding that makes the huge difference.

MR. CORNECT: Would there be a combination of extra staff working as well, like inspectors to process this quicker, a quicker turnaround for applications?

MR. SIMMS: I think we maybe added an extra staff person or two around the regional offices.

OFFICIAL: One in Corner Brook.

MR. SIMMS: Yes. One or two extra staff, but our existing staff complement was able to deal with it. They were happy to be able to deal with it, to tell you the truth, to help reduce the wait-list.

MR. CORNECT: It is a great news story. It is welcomed news.

The other question I had is, if a person is applying for PHRP and your maximum contribution would be $5,000, what if a person was $6,000 or $7,500 it cost, or $8,000 it cost to get the job done, do you have any other programs that could assist residents?

MR. SIMMS: Yes. We have for anybody who applies, if they wish – if the $5,000 does not cover their cost of the work that they need to have done, and our inspectors work with them to identify that need, they can apply as well for a low-interest loan, a spread out repayment over ten years or whatever it is. It is pretty low interest and low cost, so they do not have to pay a lot.

We have about 750 of those loans still on our books that we collect from every month and so on and so forth. We have a small collection section in the Housing Corporation that collects outstanding rent or outstanding loan payments, things of that nature. What was your question?

MR. CORNECT: Another question to follow up to that as well. When a homeowner goes into the small loan program, is that payment based on a percentage or is it based on what the homeowner can afford?

MR. SIMMS: What they can afford. We work out a repayment schedule with them. We do not –

MR. CORNECT: That is great.

Thank you.

CHAIR: Thank you, Tony.

Gerry.

MS ROGERS: Back to the assistance for home ownership. Is there a time frame on that, when you see that there might be something developed?

CHAIR: Minister.

MR. HEDDERSON: Obviously, we have done it for this term. It is in our Blue Book. We are beginning the homework part of it. Again, I am not putting a date on when we are going to be able to go forward. We are looking at not only that but any options that are out there that could help us. Again, it would be a decision of government as to where we would go.

MS ROGERS: You are looking at it this year but you do not see coming up with a definitive plan, program?

MR. HEDDERSON: I am just saying that we are beginning. We have made a commitment. I have a responsibility to do the due diligence to make sure we do the research, perhaps some consultations, across jurisdictional comparisons, et cetera, so that I will be able to put forward to government perhaps some options where we could go forward and somehow or another assist people in the purchase of homes.

MS ROGERS: Okay, but not to actually have a program that is implemented this year?

MR. HEDDERSON: Again, you are asking me to get ahead of ourselves, which I am not going to do.

MS ROGERS: Right.

MR. HEDDERSON: I cannot do it.

MS ROGERS: No, just a point of clarification there.

MR. HEDDERSON: As you know, the budget is all ready. That might answer your question.

MS ROGERS: Right.

That was not a part of the budget?

MR. HEDDERSON: No, but part of the budget was to put in place the personnel that I need in housing to do the work for me. That way we can move forward with it.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

How much is the budget for that to explore the home ownership program?

MR. SIMMS: It is part of our planning and research department.

MR. HEDDERSON: That is the extra analyst that we have added.

MS ROGERS: One analyst?

Okay. Thank you.

MR. HEDDERSON: Yes, you had better clarify it.

MR. SIMMS: I might want to add something there.

It is not a question of needing more resources to do the research and so on. We have the staff to do that now. We have a department within the corporation.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MR. SIMMS: They are doing the research on this idea not only across Canada, because we talk to lots of people across Canada every week, but we are looking into other jurisdictions. In Europe, there is some significant ideas there related to finding a home assistance program for that gap we all talk about, those making $40,000 to $65,000.

MS ROGERS: Right.

MR. SIMMS: That is the kind of work that we have been directed by the minister to do and to put something forward to him at an appropriate time that he can bring to his colleagues at some time.

MS ROGERS: Okay, great.

Thank you very much.

Again, that whole issue of housing affordability. Does that sit anywhere in the government?

MR. HEDDERSON: We just told you where it sits, where we are going forward with options.

As well, we pointed out that we are tweaking our call for proposals for land which might give the chance for contractors themselves. As well, we are open to partnerships with municipalities, with groups and so on and so forth. That is always there as well, but for right now I have a responsibility and a commitment that we are going to go forward and look at not only one option but options as to where we may be able to go with this.

MR. SIMMS: She is talking about housing affordability.

MR. HEDDERSON: Housing affordability, yes.

MR. SIMMS: Not the (inaudible). Is that what you were –

MR. HEDDERSON: That is part of it.

MR. SIMMS: (Inaudible).

MR. HEDDERSON: Go ahead.

MR. SIMMS: I am trying to figure out what the question was. Was it: Who is responsible for housing affordability? Is that the idea?

MS ROGERS: Again, looking at some of the great challenges then that we have with housing affordability in the Province. I know that you are looking at the assistance in the home ownership, but just the great challenges that people seem to be having.

MR. HEDDERSON: Again, when it comes to housing affordability you have to look at what government has made a commitment to do, and that is what is contained in the Blue Book. We are going to look at some options as to how we can assist people perhaps in being able to afford to buy a house, whether it is through a down payment, a grant, or so on and so forth. So that is where it rests.

Housing affordability, of course, is not only our responsibility as a government, but it is the responsibility of other groups, municipalities and so on, to try to come up with ways in which we can help and assist people in buying a house, if that is what you are talking about.

MS ROGERS: The Home Share program –

CHAIR: The Home Share program – is that the question, Gerry?

MS ROGERS: Yes, the Home Share program. I do not know if you folks are involved with the Home Share program – the one with seniors and students.

MR. SIMMS: I can comment on that; I would love to.

CHAIR: Len.

MR. SIMMS: We are familiar with that. We have had people involved in the public meetings that have been held and been part of a group that has been looking at the issue. We, in fact, hired social worker students to interview individuals who live in a three-bedroom home or a four-bedroom home, where there is only one or two of them and they are seniors. I think of the 300 we interviewed one person was interested.

MS ROGERS: Is that right?

MR. SIMMS: Yes, it is just not there.

MS ROGERS: It is not there.

Another issue that we have been dealing with is when a family breaks up and then both parents have joint custody and each needing a house. I know that is a huge challenge. How are you dealing with that?

CHAIR: Len.

MR. SIMMS: We deal with it as we do with every other issue on a daily basis. We look at the situation and our staff have a lot of compassion and try to help people. We have that situation already in existence in some places, especially if it is court ordered and those sorts of things. It is a challenge because you have probably a single person on the one hand, in one house, who may be gets child for a couple of weeks or whatever and then it goes back to the other parent.

MS ROGERS: Or a few days.

MR. SIMMS: Meanwhile, we have two houses taken up and there are other people on the wait-list. At the same time, we recognize that is a fact of life. If they are eligible, if they are low income, and they have a need and that sort of thing, then we do not sort of discriminate, and we do do it.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MR. SIMMS: We do not have a lot, by the way, but we do do that.

MS ROGERS: Yes, I have only had a few cases come to us like that.

Co-ops, is there any –

MR. SIMMS: Co-ops?

MS ROGERS: Yes, is there any future –

MR. SIMMS: We have a very small co-op profile; we only have 400 units in the whole Province. Some of them are in here, some of them are in Grand Falls, and some are in Corner Brook.

We fund them. Financially, we provide monies to them if they run short of rental income, enough to pay their operational costs. We help them if they have to capital works. In fact, we just two years ago spent $7 million on the partner-managed groups, including the co-ops, to fix up their houses. That was the first time in decades that kind of money was injected. So, a lot of their units, they are all number one in terms of modernization and improvements.

MS ROGERS: Great.

Is there any plan for any further developments of co-ops?

MR. SIMMS: Not at the moment, no.

MS ROGERS: Okay.

MR. SIMMS: These, by the way, were inherited by the NLHC from CMHC years ago through a social housing agreement.

MS ROGERS: I can remember the heyday of co-ops.

MR. SIMMS: Yes.

MS ROGERS: Some worked so very well.

MR. SIMMS: Well, some of them work pretty well now –

MS ROGERS: Yes.

MR. SIMMS: – but they are not very many.

MS ROGERS: Right.

Is there any great wish list?

MR. SIMMS: Any great wish list? I wish we could help everybody.

MS ROGERS: We know some of the greatest challenges then is, again, your one and two-bedroom units.

MR. SIMMS: Yes, demographic change. It is the same thing across Canada, by the way, not just here.

MS ROGERS: Right, yes.

I do not think I have any other further questions. I would like to thank you again, and the wonderful work that everybody is doing, with the great challenges.

CHAIR: Thank you, Gerry. Thank you, Eddie. Thank you, Committee.

Just a reminder to the Committee, the next sitting of the Social Services Committee is on Wednesday, May 16, in the morning here in the House, and it is a continuation with the Department of Education. So, that is just a reminder to the Committee for that.

As well, just before I make the call, we have the minutes of our morning meeting with the Department of Child, Youth and Family Services. Can I have a mover to approve these minutes, please?

MS ROGERS: So moved.

CHAIR: Moved by Gerry.

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Contra- minded?

Carried.

On motion, minutes adopted as circulated.

CHAIR: Thank you.

Clerk, can we call the subhead inclusive, please?

CLERK: Subhead 1.1.01.

CHAIR: Shall 1.1.01 carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

CHAIR: Contra-minded?

Carried.

On motion, subhead 1.1.01 carried.

CLERK: The total, $56,123,600.

CHAIR: Shall the total carry?

All those in favour, ‘aye'.

SOME HON. MEMBERS: Aye.

Carried.

On motion, Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation, total heads, carried.

On motion, Estimates of the Newfoundland and Labrador Housing Corporation carried without amendment.

CHAIR: Motion to adjourn?

Just before I use the motion to adjourn, though, I am sorry, Minister –

MR. HEDDERSON: I would like to, first of all, thank my colleagues for coming forward tonight. I know it is not easy after a long day, and I understand from Gerry that some of you are on your second one today. I have been on that side too and I know how taxing it could be, but, again, very thankful for the questions that you put forth. It helps us to understand as well as you to understand.

I would like to thank you for the kind words you expressed in the great work that has been carried out in the Housing Corp. I am just asking: Can I instruct my CEO to pass those along from all of you? I just need the nod. I see a nod in agreement, so I would hope that you would take it back and make sure, perhaps in your newsletter or something, that you comment on the great comments that came back as to the great work that you do.

Again, Mr. Chair, thank you and the Committee again for –

CHAIR: We thank you, sir, and your staff for your frankness and openness tonight and we certainly appreciate your time.

With that said, I call for adjournment.

MR. CORNECT: So moved.

CHAIR: Moved by Mr. Cornect. We are adjourned.

Thank you so much.

On motion, the Committee adjourned.