HOUSING

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson (Gerry McAlpine): The committee will now continue with consideration of the Estimates of the Department of Housing.

Is the Minister of Housing and the critic for Housing--will it be the will of the committee that we recess for five minutes until 10:13 p.m.? Leave? To leave the clock going?

An Honourable Member: No.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: We will resume here at 10:13 p.m. Committee recess.

The committee recessed at 10:08 p.m.

________

After Recess

The committee resumed at 10:15.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: When this section of the Committee of Supply, sitting in Room 255, last sat considering the Estimates of the Department of Housing the committee was discussing line item 1. Administration and Finance (b) Executive Support (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $364,800, on page 93 of the main Estimates book.

Ms. Rosann Wowchuk (Swan River): Mr. Chair, our Housing critic is not here yet, but I would like to take this opportunity to raise a few issues as they relate to some of the policies that the government has.

In particular, I want to ask the minister about a decision that was made a couple of years ago to cancel the regional housing authorities and move to a different system. That was not received very well in the communities. People were not happy to have that change made. They felt that when they had the regional housing authorities, they had the ability to be much closer and they felt they were having much better service. In particular, I was very concerned to have the housing authority in Swan River discontinued and have that service moved to Roblin.

Can the minister give an assessment of what he feels the status of service is now that he has moved to Regional Housing offices?

Hon. Jack Reimer (Minister of Housing): Mr. Chairman, the member for Swan River is correct in stating that there was an amalgamation of the boards back in May of 1992, where we brought the number from 98 down to one board with 13 districts. There are now nine rural districts and four urban districts, if you want to call it.

In looking at the logistics of size and the scale of management, it is a lot more efficient to look at a more comprehensive board in a sense. The 13 districts, the board that is set up now has a representative from each of these districts, so there is still input and there still is the availability of community participation on a decision-making quality regarding the board make up.

I think the member has to recognize that this direction and this decision was taken with the idea of efficiencies, of trying to take away some of the duplication that has come about through the various districts and just the common sense of trying to bring a closer cohesiveness of direction within the department by the amalgamation. It makes it much easier to administer. There is more direct contact in a sense of decision making now. There is a sense of oneness. In fact, other provinces have looked with serious overtures towards what we are doing here in Manitoba with the idea of following the same type of model for the various districts in their area.

As mentioned, we have the four urban areas here in the city of Winnipeg, and then with the nine rural districts, there is still the availability of representation within the nine areas for their services that they give through the Manitoba Housing Authority.

In all, the efficiencies and the cost of bringing things together under a more cohesive group was the idea behind bringing it from, like I say, almost a hundred down to what we have at present.

* (2220)

Ms. Wowchuk: The minister said that the purpose of this was to bring services closer, to make it more cohesive and more direct contact. I have to disagree with the minister because this, in fact, has not resulted in more direct contact, and I look at our region, where the regional office was placed in Roblin, and Swan River has a large number of housing units.

I cannot remember the exact number right now, but, certainly, there is not a more direct contact, and I have to say to the minister that I do not believe that services have improved. I have talked to many of the tenants who are in housing, and this is their feeling, that there is not a better service, that there is less contact.

When you think that a large portion of the people who are residents are senior people, I have to say that I do not believe that this is a better service, but I wonder if the minister can indicate--he said it is streamlining. Can the minister give any indication as to what the saving has been for the department? Has it resulted in spending less money, and, if so, what percentage are we saving by going to this system?

Mr. Reimer: The member for Swan River brings up some interesting comments in her assessment of what is happening in that area.

I should point out to the member, recognizing Swan River, as she has mentioned, with its social housing in and around the area, we do have a maintenance co-ordinator stationed right in Swan River, so there is a presence there of continuity and contact regarding the Housing Authority. We recognize that there is a contribution within the Swan River area for contact for some of the problems associated that she has mentioned.

I should point out, too, that the savings that I alluded to regarding the co-ordination of all the services is maybe a bit involved with the fact that at the same time, there were other directions taken. There was a computerization that was brought into effect at that time. There were other amalgamations brought forth within the department, and at that time, there was an additional direction of costs within the amalgamation. So to look at one specific area of the province and say, well, what did we save in this particular area, it is hard to say.

In the area of Swan River, we have a total of 189 units that are under sponsored management within that area. So there is a significant area, as she has mentioned, and this is one of the reasons why we have a maintenance co-ordinator right in that area, to be on top of those units.

Ms. Wowchuk: Can the minister indicate whether there has been a change in policy with regard to caretakers? Again, I understand in some of the units there are caretakers who reside right in the unit and maintain. Has there been a change in policy and a directive to reduce the number of caretakers?

Mr. Reimer: Mr. Chairperson, there is no program of reducing the caretakers' participation in the housing units. I think that what does happen sometimes is there is a sharing of buildings, if you want to call it, for one or two caretakers, so that is ongoing. I should point out that if there is a specific problem or area of concern that the member has regarding some of the units or one particular unit or something that has been brought to her attention, we will certainly take notice of it and try to look at it in a constructive manner.

Ms. Wowchuk: Can the minister indicate if it is normal policy if there is a caretaker in a facility to tender out that position for other people to apply for it? Is this happening quite often? Is it a policy to tender out units when there is a caretaker in place?

Mr. Reimer: Depending on the circumstances regarding the individual position, sometimes there are competitive bids asked if it is a steady position. If it is a union position, well, then there is the natural process of selection on that too. If it is a long-term position, then there is a bidding process or a selection process involved with that too, yes.

Ms. Wowchuk: I will make the minister aware of a particular case where there is someone who is a caretaker--and the facility is the Rainbow Lodge in Swan River--who had been working there for I believe four years and residing right there, and for some reason that position has been tendered out now. The person who is in the facility feels that they are being treated very unfairly. So if the minister's staff could check into that and let me know why this is happening, then I would appreciate it, because the person who is being put in this awkward position is not quite sure what is going on.

With respect to the housing units, can the minister indicate what the vacancy rate is in Manitoba Housing units at the present time?

Mr. Reimer: Overall, throughout all of Manitoba, it is just over 8 percent which is very, very close to the national average.

Ms. Wowchuk: Can the minister indicate, in comparison to the national average, what the standard would be of the quality of the home of the Manitoba Housing units here in Manitoba, whether they meet the national average or whether we are falling behind the national average?

Mr. Reimer: It should be recognized that the quality of the stock of housing here in Manitoba is reflected to a degree on the participation which is involved with the federal government. There is a strong participation by the federal government when the housing stock was set up. Now that the federal government has pulled out of all of its funding for new stock, what has happened is it puts more of an emphasis on the maintenance and the upkeep of the buildings and the housing. So we are very, very concerned with the fact that the federal government has shown by its direction that they are seriously looking at a withdrawal of funding of sorts from the Housing department that it is going to put a severe strain on trying to maintain and improve on the existing stock of what we have here in Manitoba.

In general terms, the maintenance program, the conscious effort by the people involved and the attitude of trying to provide adequate housing and accommodations to the people have prevailed, and in general our stock is of the quality that is recognized on an average within Canada. So we are on a stringent maintenance program of analyzing where the needs are, an ongoing basis of inspection by Manitoba Housing. So it is not as if there is an abandonment of our objectives, but we have to recognize that the limiting of funding that has been initiated by the federal government has made it harder and it will make it more challenging for the department to look at the priorities of spending and the direction that we will take.

* (2230)

I look forward to the First Ministers' Conference along with the Minister of Housing, Mr. Dingwall, for the federal government. There is a conference coming up in the early part of July which the department and myself are looking forward to with anticipation to bringing forth our views as Manitobans as to what we feel is important and where we are concerned about the direction that the federal government is taking the money. I expect some strong dialogue and some healthy dialogue with the minister when we get to Newfoundland, which is in the early part of July. So those are of high priority and of high importance by our government to get some sort of commitment by the federal government as to what and how they are doing. So the conference will be very productive for us, we believe.

Ms. Wowchuk: Mr. Chair, the minister seems to indicate that our housing stock is very good and he is very happy with the quality of the housing units, but some of the statistics that have come up recently, I tend not to want to believe those numbers.

The minister also indicated that the federal government would not be putting any more funding into new housing. Can the minister indicate through this department whether there are funds available or whether there are plans to build units, or are we just in a program now of repairing existing units?

Mr. Reimer: The member would appreciate that with any type of scenario that is put forth because of the fact of funding, all priorities under the direction of expenditures are recognized as to where the money should be going or what is available, and we have to be very cognizant of this in our evaluation of funding. I could point out that we are spending--like last year I believe it was over $14 million just on maintenance of our units, and we are looking at managing approximately 13,000 units. That is a significant amount of money that is put into just the maintenance budget for that.

As the member mentioned, I guess there is always the perception that more would make it better, but at the same time I think there is the realization that a lot of money that is spent is on an ongoing basis because of the fact that we are looking at some fairly old stock, if you want to call it, in the market, and the maintenance on it does go up.

Ms. Diane McGifford (Osborne): Mr. Chair, I wonder if I might ask the minister a couple of questions that are related to the constituency of Osborne which I represent.

Two of the large apartment blocks in Osborne are Fred Tipping and also the Centre for the Deaf. I heard the minister earlier comment on the vacancy rate in Manitoba as being somewhere in the region of 8 percent, yet my experience, I must confess during the election, in Fred Tipping was that the vacancy rate there is probably much higher than 8 percent.

I wonder if that is true, and if it is, if there is any explanation for its being so.

Mr. Reimer: When I mention a figure of around 8 percent, I am talking about all of Manitoba, and it is about 8.5 actually in March. In the family projects, which are the ones that maybe the member is referring to, it is averaging about 6.3 percent and in the unit that the member for Osborne is referring to, Fred Tipping Place. In the seniors or the elderly projects, and here again these are all the projects, it is just over 10 percent, almost 11 percent, 10.8 percent. While there are pockets of high vacancies that I think the member is aware of, it is generally improving and it is similar to the private market in a sense.

The biggest problem we have for vacancy units is in the bachelor suites where it is well over 13 percent, but in various regions they will vary. The member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli) the other day was asking about her particular area, and there is a low there of only 3 percent in that particular area because of the mix of the units that are available.

In the Fred Tipping Place, the best figures that we have available at the present time, we are talking about 205 units, and the vacancy rate is 39 units, so that is about 20 percent, I guess, 19 percent.

Ms. McGifford: Twenty or 19 percent seems to me to be quite high. I understand the minister's comment that the vacancy rate is particularly high in the bachelor suites, and I have certainly heard that the bachelor suites are becoming increasingly unattractive. Having spent a lot of time in that apartment block, I realize that the bachelor suites are very small, but I wonder if there is anything that could be done to make those bachelor suites larger. Could the walls be knocked out? Is this a possibility, and has it been considered?

Mr. Reimer: I guess we can go back a little when the projects first came into being, and at that particular time the emphasis and the demand was for single-unit apartments. When the building started and the building of all these units started, there was a high concentration of bachelor units. As time progressed, what we are looking at now, as the member for Osborne is pointing out, is we are now to a point where some of these units are becoming vacant and a high vacancy rate and the suggestion of moving walls and things like that. These are some of the considerations that the department has. At the same time, on a trial basis or a demonstration basis, we are also looking at adding single people into the bachelor suites on four projects to pick up some of the vacancy rate in these seniors complexes.

* (2240)

Ms. McGifford: I think that the minister has partially answered my next question, and that is that having gone through Fred Tipping again--Fred Tipping, for example--it seems to me that the seniors block is almost a thing of the past, because although seniors may predominate in the block, there are a lot of other people who are not quite so senior living in that apartment. One of the things that I heard from the seniors in that apartment was that they had moved into Fred Tipping because they wanted a seniors block, and they felt I think a measure of safety and comfort because of that. Now a lot of different kinds of people were moving in, and that was a problem for some of them.

I wonder if my perception that the seniors block is on its way out is accurate. If it is, then it is probably important to guide seniors, at least give them that knowledge before they move in.

Mr. Reimer: The so-called seniors block, as has been alluded to, is not on the way out, as the member for Osborne was saying there. They are part of the housing stock that is there. Where there have been chronic vacancies of units, this is where there has been this mix of trying to rent the bachelor units. The emphasis on seniors blocks has not been to have less of them or to diminish their importance.

Ms. McGifford: Mr. Chair, one of the things that folks in Fred Tipping talked to me about was a buzzer. I think the buzzer is a safety feature and is designed for people to ring if they are unsafe or if they need some, I suppose, medical help or whatever.

Apparently the buzzer used to be free, so I was told. Now folks are paying $6 for it, which is a problem for many of the people in an apartment like Fred Tipping, people living on fixed incomes and all that sort of thing. I wonder if there is any way of getting rid of the cost.

Mr. Reimer: Mr. Chairman, the fee that the member is referring to is a service fee for the monitoring of a help line, if you want to call it, for the individuals. At $4 a month it is a relatively inexpensive 24-hour monitor. For the value that it adds in a sense of security and well-being to the individual--it may sound like it is a service fee in a sense, but for $4 on a monthly basis it is fairly inexpensive for the services that are provided on a 24-hour basis.

Ms. McGifford: I stand corrected. I thought it was $6; so it is $4.

There are two problems that residents identified. One was that they did not have any choice, and the second one was it was only useful if they happened to be having their heart attack near the buzzer. Things do not usually happen that way.

Mr. Reimer: I guess nobody wants to have a heart attack really, whether you are by the buzzer or you are not by the buzzer.

I should point out too that in the private sector, monitors of that source can range anywhere between $15 and $20 a month for a monitoring of sorts on a 24-hour basis. Hopefully, a monitor is there not to be used. It is like fire insurance. You hope you never have to use it, but at the same time you do have the policy for the protection and the peace of mind that in case something does happen you have people there to help you. Because it is a 24-hour monitoring system, that sense of security I think buys a lot of peace of mind. The anxiousness that some people have of living alone that they have a contact in case they do get sick, it serves a useful purpose that way.

Ms. McGifford: As I said, many people told me that it did not serve a useful purpose. I think the difference between the private sector cost that the minister referred to and this one is that this one is imposed, and, in the private sector, I assume you have a choice.

If I could just move on, I have one other question. That is about the Mayfair and Stradbrook development. Again, when I was visiting people there during the recent election, a lot of people complained about safety. I do not know if the minister is familiar with the design, but there are several apartments where you actually go down into a well in order to ring the doorbell. For anyone who has done any work in safety audits, I think it is quite apparent that it is quite dangerous in design. I suppose there is not a direct question so much as an implicit one. I wonder if there is any way of making it safer.

Mr. Reimer: I think, as the member for Osborne has indicated, it is a concern on her part. By bringing it to our attention, we can take note of it and see whether there is any type of problem that we can try to look at it in a corrective manner. Bringing it forward at this time is, I believe, the proper manner that we can look at it that way.

Ms. Marianne Cerilli (Radisson): I just want to clarify that I have agreed to have the MLA for Inkster ask questions for about 15 or 20 minutes, and then I will resume the questioning actually on the line issue that the member for Osborne (Ms. McGifford) was just dealing with.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Item 1. Administration and Finance (b) Executive Support (1) Salaries and Employee Benefits $364,800.

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Inkster): Mr. Chairperson, thank you to the member for Radisson.

I had given some notice to the Minister of Housing with reference to the MHRC-Qualico deal with Meadows West Phase 2. It was just a few minutes ago in Urban Affairs that I was talking about this particular agreement. Now that we are, in fact, in the right department, I am wondering, first and foremost, if the minister can provide an actual copy of the agreement that was reached between MHRC and Qualico.

* (2250)

I know, as I indicated earlier, with the Ladco-MHRC deal, I was provided a copy of it a few years back, shortly after its actually being signed. Is it something that is possible to get a copy of?

Mr. Reimer: I think the member for Inkster can recognize that because we are bound by the legal documentation and the legalese of a development between MHRC and Qualico that the parameters of reference have to be addressed between the two parties. If there is no problem with the release--he mentioned, I believe, when he talked about the Ladco development that the agreement was made available. If there are no impediments that are seen, we will certainly provide him with a copy of that agreement.

I should point out to him just for his information that there are approximately 750 residential lots that will be developed over the next eight years. The estimated value is about $7 million, with MHRC's share estimated in excess of $5 million. Application for subdivision has been made under the name Keewatin Meadows Development Corporation, and the earliest possible date for start-up of the development is--we are looking at very, very shortly, which is summer of '95. As I mentioned, we will make every effort to make sure that he gets a copy of that agreement.

Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Chairperson, I would appreciate that, and if in fact for some reason we are not allowed to have a copy of the agreement, information such as time lines, information in terms of how decisions are made, for example--I know in the Ladco, there were representatives from MHRC and Ladco that sat on a management--or that administered the project, if you will. I cannot recall offhand all of the details of it, but anything that might be able to facilitate me having a better understanding of this particular agreement would be much appreciated.

I know with respect to the Meadows West residents association, Qualico has made an attempt to go out and talk to the residents association. That is something which again was appreciated, and it was through, actually, the co-operation of the Department of Housing that we were able to get some of that co-operation with Qualico. The purpose of this is to try to provide the residents of Meadows West input in terms of the overall development of the Meadows West Phase 2 , because there is a great deal of concern for things such as schools, community clubs, and they want to make sure that those concerns are in fact being addressed in any proposal before they actually get underway.

In fact at the last, most recent, Meadows West general meeting I was at, I believe they actually had some of the architectural designs. There is a significant amount of concern with respect to the density, in terms of the possibility of row housing and so forth. The feeling of the residents that I have perceived thus far is that they want to see nothing less than single detached homes being built in the Meadows West Phase 2. I know that Qualico has requested, I believe--I cannot really recall the exact terminology that is being used--zoning that would allow for row houses of different sorts to be constructed. That has raised some concern with a lot of the residents. There are other aspects where there are concerns which I believe virtually could be overcome if in fact the residents were provided the opportunity to have direct input.

I have indicated to the association that if need be, if there are concerns, we can bring them right to the department direct. I would anticipate that, and if in fact in the future there are some problems, the minister will likely hear from the Meadows West residents association.

The minister will want to comment on that, and then I will move on to the other section.

Mr. Reimer: Yes, the member for Inkster is right in his concerns regarding where the development agreement is and the implications for the area. I can tell him, through the knowledge that has been provided to me, it is before the city in the sense that the public have access to presentations at this particular time regarding the Meadows West development, so we are more or less into the process right now as we talk, that this is being evaluated by the city. So the development agreement is open for public scrutiny right at this present time, right now, from what I understand. We will keep the member informed with the agreement as we get it for his use also.

Mr. Lamoureux: Again, Mr. Chairperson, that would be appreciated along with--I know that there was a draft proposal in terms of what the Meadows West Phase 2 was going to look at. They had built in the cul-de-sacs, the bays and so forth. If there are modifications, because no doubt there is a board that oversees the whole development or the management committee that oversees the whole development, if I could be put or placed onto a mailing list that would see these modifications to changes, again it would be definitely beneficial for me, in terms of the meetings that I go to in Meadows West, to be included on that.

Otherwise, I would like to move on to another area of constituency concern to me, that being the Gilbert Park housing complex. It is one of the largest nonprofit housing complexes in the province. I have found that in the past, in particular, the former Minister of Housing was very sympathetic to the need to try to move more towards tenant management in that particular nonprofit housing complex.

We have seen individuals like Amie Chartrand, and the executive as a whole, who have really attempted to do what they can, in a volunteer capacity, to try to get tenants more involved in the complex in trying to get a better understanding of what it takes to run a complex of this nature. Ultimately, they would like to be able to move towards that control over the internal affairs of the Gilbert Park complex.

I have always believed that this is ultimately the way that we need to go as another form of an alternative to nonprofit housing. An ideal scenario, I would like to say, another 10 years from now, five years from now, it would be virtually run as a housing co-op would be run, thereby allowing the tenant, as opposed to being in a tenant-landlord relationship, to be more of a resident of a community. I just see phenomenal benefits with the Minister of Housing if the Minister of Housing were to move in that direction.

The former minister had gone as far as saying that she was prepared to see this as a pilot project of sorts where they would do what they can to promote and encourage tenant management being implemented in this particular complex. The minister actually drove out. I was the chauffeur for the day, drove the Minister of Housing out into the complex to show her first-hand, meet with some of the personalities with respect to Gilbert Park and the local elementary school.

* (2300)

I would extend the same offer to this Minister of Housing because I do believe that, if properly handled and administered, the personalities are there to make this project work. I would hope that this minister would see fit to continue in some form of a pilot project of sorts in ensuring that movement is made towards ultimate tenant management.

I would ask the minister just to comment in terms of what he feels the potential over at Gilbert Park could be or just some thoughts on the record from this particular minister.

Mr. Reimer: Since taking on the portfolio of Housing, the name Gilbert Park has come up quite a few times, an example of how, when people get involved on sort of a grassroots level, and they have the energy and the commitment to make their place a better source and centre of living, changes can happen.

The member is right in his assumption that Gilbert Park has the strength of a strong community-based initiative by some people that are in that area, and that led to numerous changes in the structure of Gilbert Park: the tenant relations officer, playground equipment that has been put in, the general cleanup itself of the grounds in the immediate area environmentally, the pride that has been put forth by the maintenance work that is carried out on a priority and the cost and the budget factors that are involved with it. They have even got into the furniture and toy recycling as an initiative for the existing and the new tenants and also a clothing club and a sewing club and training in aboriginal crafts, the fact that they have a Winnipeg Boys and Girls Club as a full-time community development to initiate youth programs and training. An aboriginal child and family support worker is now very active in the development. These are a lot of very, very powerful and very positive initiatives that are in essence spearheaded and put forth by the people in Gilbert Park themselves.

This is why a tenants association and a strong tenants association involvement is so much part of a stronger complex, because as pointed out, we are talking about 254 units in that complex which was started away back in 1963 and 1970. So it has taken awhile and it is the asset assessment of the community that makes these happen. It is an interesting scenario, because there was an article in the paper--I guess it was about a couple of weeks ago, well, maybe about a month ago--where there was a conference held here in Winnipeg.

One of the keynote speakers was talking about how you revitalize housing projects and certain areas of the city that have become sort of decayed or in a downward spiral. They call it an asset assessment basis and look at who you have in the community, the strengths of the community, building on those strengths of the community, finding leadership within the community, delegating the authority and the responsibility of support to the individual or group of people and have them come forth with the initiative to make things happen. These are the ways success stories happen.

Gilbert Park is a very good example of how this has happened. The member mentioned one particular individual in there, Mr. Chartrand. I have not had the pleasure of meeting the gentleman, but I have heard his name mentioned quite a few times, so I guess I am going to have to make a point of getting over there and saying hello to him anyway, so that I can put the face to the name, if you want to call it.

It is that type of initiative that really puts a project on its feet, in a sense, and it becomes a pride of living in the area with the supports that they provide from within themselves, the strength within themselves to make things happen. These are a lot of the things that government cannot provide, because government cannot be the total facilitator of all things that have to change or have to happen within a certain housing authority.

The member is right that the commitment that we have demonstrated by being part of the Gilbert Park has been picked up a lot by the people involved with the community themselves, and you can only hope that other areas of Winnipeg that have large tracts, if you want to call it, or concentrations of units, would look to this as a model and partly look at this as a way to revitalize their particular area where there is high vandalism and problems with drugs or alcohol or other types of vandalism and crime and try to come to some sort of resolve with it.

Mr. Lamoureux: Mr. Chairperson, I am quite pleased with the minister's response, and I am sure I am not stepping over across the line by Mr. Chartrand, or Amie, by making that open invitation. I am sure that he would welcome the opportunity to have the Minister of Housing come by, and I can indicate to him that he will find that the treatment he will receive would be quite well. If he talks to the former Minister of Housing, I do not know if he provided bannock. I believe he did provide some bannock and some good grub when she came down for a visit. It was kind of a nice, informal discussion.

I would extend to this minister, as I extended to the former minister, my full co-operation in this particular area. I want to be as creative in trying to assist in coming up with solutions in this whole area as much as possible. He will find that I can be extremely co-operative and, in fact, would be more than happy to do as I did to the former minister and take a drive out with him and make sure that he gets a very good idea in terms of what Gilbert Park is all about. He might want to continue it on in terms of a pilot project.

Having said that, Housing is an area in which I used to be the critic a number of years ago and have a lot of concerns in a lot of different areas of housing. We got to very briefly talk about that when we were in the Estimates of Urban Affairs, but for this time around I am going to forgo the number of questions that I could be asking and wait until the next year's Estimates come up and look forward to working with the minister with respect to the Gilbert Park project in my area and also to receiving information with respect to the MHRC-Qualico so that the residents of Meadows West will be kept informed in terms of what is happening in the Meadows West area. I appreciate the member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli) being patient. Thank you.

Ms. Cerilli: Mr. Chairperson, when we left off the other day, we were having a discussion about vacancy rates. I know that has also been discussed briefly here tonight.

Quickly, though, I would just like to conclude that area of discussion by asking the minister what the government's strategy is to fill the vacant suites or the vacant units of the Manitoba Housing Authority properties.

Mr. Reimer: To do what?

Ms. Cerilli: Your strategy for filling the vacant suites.

Mr. Reimer: There are various aspects regarding trying to fill the vacancies. As mentioned before, the biggest problem with vacancies is in the bachelor units. The bachelor units themselves are the ones that are posing the biggest problem with trying to fill the vacancies.

* (2310)

I guess some of the things that we have to look at are the upgrading and the renovation of common spaces and the suites and the projects themselves. There is always that type of evaluation that is going. There is the awareness that there should be, or there could be, the addressing of the conversion of bachelor units into one-bedroom units, which we alluded to before. There is the possibility of a rental differentiation between bachelor units and one-bedrooms for the sake of renting. There is the provision possibly of additional services that could be looked at and then alternative use as elderly seniors housing units.

Ms. Cerilli: Just to clarify then, that was for the bachelor suites.

Mr. Reimer: Yes, it was for bachelor suites that I was talking about.

Ms. Cerilli: To clarify that, am I understanding correctly that there are actually waiting lists for public housing for larger units, for family-size dwellings, for greater than two or three bedrooms?

I have a report done by the Canada Housing and Renewal association that believes there are 200,000 families in Canada on waiting lists. I am wondering how many of those are in Manitoba.

Mr. Reimer: The member has to recognize that there are vacant two- and three-bedroom units even here in Winnipeg. In certain areas there are vacancies. There is also the recognition that it is a matter of choice for a lot of people whether they want to move to that particular area or that particular complex where these suites are available.

I guess there is always the preference of wanting to locate in certain areas because of convenience or because of family or because of job location or the social amenities that are associated with a certain area. In those areas, usually there is a waiting list possibly in some of those complexes. In general, there are vacancies available in two- and three-bedroom units.

It was just pointed out that even in the complex I was just talking about recently, Gilbert Park, we have units in there that are upwards of four bedrooms and five bedrooms that are vacant. It is just that people may not want to be in that particular area or they feel that is not the position that they are wanting to be in.

It has just been pointed out, too, that there is a turnover in units. For example, in the elderly one-bedrooms, we have applications on hand; we have 111 units and the vacancy rate is 149. So there is room; it is just that it depends on the mix and the location of the people and where they want to be.

Ms. Cerilli: The minister is saying that in some parts of the city there are no waiting lists, even for upwards of three-bedroom units in apartments, townhouses or single-standing houses.

Mr. Reimer: The member is right. As mentioned, on three-bedroom units, there are applications on hand of just over 230 and there is a vacancy of just over 130. There are approximately a hundred that cannot be accommodated. That is in the three-bedroom units. That is just in the city of Winnipeg.

In certain areas of the city, like one area, north Winnipeg, you have 36 applicants and you have 102 units. You have a vacancy in there of almost 60 units, a lot of surplus stock. It all depends on the area of the city that you want to go to.

Ms. Cerilli: Maybe I could deal with this in a different way, too. Rather than just talking about waiting lists, talk about the time it takes for someone to actually go from applying to moving in and living in social housing in Manitoba. What is the range in the amount of time that it takes in different parts of the city and the rural areas as well?

Mr. Reimer: I may sound repetitive when I say that it depends on the part of the city, but it does really, because in the north end there is a very short waiting list of wanting to get in, and in other areas, for example, like St. Boniface, you can wait upwards of a year or more maybe to try to be in that particular area of the city. It is the adage of where do people want to be and what is available. It can vary.

Ms. Cerilli: I want to move now to the issues I was raising today in the House. We have had a couple of very disconcerting incidents of children falling through ill-maintained windows in public housing units in the province. It was interesting, when I was reading the Estimates from '92, the minister then talked about how most Manitoba social housing rental stock is getting older, that the majority of the housing was built in the '70s and it has now reached the point where significant ongoing maintenance is required. This is a direct quote: "As our housing ages the costs of modernization and improvement also mount. The challenge to my department will be to manage more efficiently in order to generate increased funds for proper maintenance of the housing stock."

My concern is that the department is not meeting this challenge, that the budget for maintenance is not keeping up with the demand of the deteriorating housing stock. That is compounded, I guess, by the decrease in transfer from the federal government of over $270 million over the next few years.

I am wanting the minister to specify for me what the amount to the budget has been. I have tried to find that by looking at the charts in the back of the Estimates book. I know that the minister back in '92 said that there was $15 million allocated for modernization and maintenance. Can the minister tell us what that line is this year?

Mr. Reimer: $14 million.

Ms. Cerilli: So there has been a $1-million reduction from the last two years in maintenance budget for social housing.

A number of questions could flow from that: how that is translating into choices that are made in what gets done and what does not get done, how that has affected staffing for such things as on-site caretaker and maintenance. I will start there.

Mr. Reimer: I should point out that we are talking about a budget of around $14 million for approximately 13,000 units. It should be pointed out, too, that some units have come off--the number is going down because there has been the so-called sell-off of some units that are no longer in the housing market. The budget item of $14 million is still a strong commitment to try to renovate and revitalize the existing stock in the parameters of trying to be aware of where the priorities should be and where the funding should be and where there is a need. It is still a significant amount of money.

Ms. Cerilli: My two subsequent questions were--first of all, how, then, is that allocated; how does the budget break down for maintenance?

* (2320)

Mr. Reimer: I just point out to the member for Radisson (Ms. Cerilli) that there are actually two different areas of expenditures within the Housing department. One, as was just alluded to, is the $14 million; it is an operational fund for the sort of day-to-day maintenance. This is allocated by the various districts throughout Manitoba. You have $14 million for that. You also have about another $14 million for capital improvements within the housing stock. The capital improvements would be something like a roof restructuring or something that is of a major area for improvement.

The maintenance of $14 million, the capital improvement of $14 million, you are looking at $28 million for, as I say, 13,000 units. That is a lot of money that is committed to that type of endeavour.

Ms. Cerilli: I want to clarify, then, if I am finding this budget line on page 33 of the Supplementary Estimates book. Under Other Expenditures, there is Other Operating, and it says $13.5 million as the estimate for '95-96.

Mr. Reimer: Is that 33 in the yellow?

Ms. Cerilli: Right. If that is not where I should find it, where can I find it?

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: I would just like to inquire of the committee, are we--my understanding is that we were going line by line. That was at the outset of the--just for clarification, then, the committee is agreed to have general discussion on the total Estimates? [agreed]

Mr. Reimer: I believe that page 38 would give a better indication where the funding allocation is. What we are talking about is on page 38, not page 33.

The $14 million that I alluded to for the maintenance and repair would be on this page, and the $14 million for capital improvements would go through a capital supply bill, which is not included on this page or in this book.

Ms. Cerilli: There is a section here, Housing Operations Subsidy, Private Nonprofit, $13,982,700.

Mr. Reimer: Yes, correct.

Ms. Cerilli: Then there is another $6 million there. [interjection] I appreciate that.

The issue being, though, that we are looking at a housing stock that has deteriorated. I want to try and maybe use some specific examples. I know of the Keenleyside housing complex in my constituency that had major renovations over the last year or so. We are still waiting to have the landscaping done. How much did that cost?

Mr. Reimer: I have been informed that project, which was started way back in 1972, has gone through a complete face lifting and renovation for approximately $1.8 million. The landscaping is in the final phases of coming together, and that will be the final part of the project itself.

Ms. Cerilli: The minister is not suggesting that $1.8 million was from this 1972 budget? What budget was that from?

Mr. Reimer: No, I certainly did not imply that that was since 1972. I just mentioned that as a matter of record, how long the complex had been around. But, no, the funding has only been in the last two years, $1.8 million.

Ms. Cerilli: That provides me a good benchmark since I am quite familiar with that housing development.

Two other issues then with respect to this $14 million for maintenance and the $14 million for capital in this year, the minister had said that is for 13,000 units, but I am of the understanding there are over 21,000 units of social housing in the province, so what is the difference in those two figures in terms of the money being allocated for maintenance?

* (2330)

Mr. Reimer: The member is alluding to different factors regarding the housing. There are sponsored units also that make up the number that she is referring to, the 20,000 units. There are also the nonprofit units that are managed. The 13,000 are the units that we manage directly under the Manitoba Housing Authority, and the total nonprofit units that are directly managed and sponsored are just over 16,000 or 16,870 units, page 67 in that green book, I believe it is.

Ms. Cerilli: The annual report?

Mr. Reimer: Yes, the green book.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Referring to the Annual Report for Housing?

Mr. Reimer: If we look on the next page, we have the total private nonprofit units and then the rental supplement units that are on those pages too.

Ms. Cerilli: I thank the minister for that. What I am not clear about is how the $14 million then is actually spent and how we are going to decide to spend that money, if that money is paying the staff that do the maintenance work or if that is entirely to go to tender to contractors to do the work. The $14 million that is part of the operating, what is that covering?

Mr. Reimer: Yes, out of that operational budget, there is room for maintenance by people on staff. They have the opportunity to do it. If the maintenance requires an outside type of professional like for door handling or for spraying of cockroaches or something like that, then we will call in outside experts to look after the operations and to handle that type of--[interjection] It has been pointed out to me that, approximately, maybe about $10 million of the $14 million is contracted out to different people, but that is just a rough estimate as to the amount of money that goes out.

Ms. Cerilli: Then am I correct to assume that $4 million of that is going to pay salaried staff through the Manitoba Housing Authority, who are the onsite maintenance people, caretakers?

Mr. Reimer: The member must remember that there is the purchase of supplies, there is the purchase of locks and doors and other things and apparatuses that are needed within the parameters of that operational budget too, so the monies are not all just salaries. There is a lot of merchandise too that has to be purchased with that too.

Ms. Cerilli: How many onsite caretakers are there, and what is the formula for determining the unit ratio for onsite caretaking?

Mr. Reimer: There are currently 288 employees and 104 contract caretakers working within the present MHA. They are salaried, it was pointed out to me. Out of that 288, there are also salaried caretakers in there. The black numbers are not with us at this particular time. We can get those numbers for the member to break out of that 288 because there are caretakers in that number, too.

Ms. Cerilli: If I wanted to do some figuring, I could just work that into the 13,000 units or the 21,000 units and we could get some sense of how that works out, or I could look at the table because some of those units are going to be side by side and they would not have someone onsite. Maybe the minister could help me out here.

I am trying to get a sense of the workload for these people for looking at--and that is why I was asking for the formula to try to identify the demands being put on these people. I am interested in knowing too the difference between someone being contracted and someone being salaried, but I am just trying to get a sense because we are trying to address this issue of having someone respond promptly, as the current cases we have had made public recently where people are saying they have made calls and they have not been responded to, and they have then finally been given the screws to fix the window themselves. We want to make sure that people are going to be getting good service and having the properties that they are living in properly maintained.

Mr. Reimer: I have been informed that part of the direction as to the allocation of caretakers within units and the workload that is carried forth by the caretakers to a degree--not to a degree, but is covered to a large extent by the union contract that covers the employees.

We have MGEU employees in Selkirk, Brandon, The Pas, Portage la Prairie, Dauphin and Churchill, and then we have another union, the IUOE, covering the Winnipeg inside workers and also another branch of the IUOE covering the Winnipeg outside workers. The negotiation with the union more or less is a factor in the allocation and the workload for caretakers, so it becomes not a definitive formula of saying that when they look after a certain amount of units, why they then become caretaker controlled, or whether they get to a certain point, then they take over another. It depends on the union contract that covers that particular area and that particular worker that is covered by the different--you have three unions actually involved. Then you also have nonunion locations which are in Gimli, Altona and Roblin. That is quite a mix match of different conditions.

* (2340)

Ms. Cerilli: What the minister is telling me is the allocation of caretakers per number of units that they are responsible for is something that is dealt with under the collective agreement with the employees. There is no formula that is set out in policy from the Manitoba Housing Authority. That is something that has just sort of been worked out through negotiations.

Mr. Reimer: Just as a further clarification on it, it has been pointed out that there is a broad guideline in a sense of looking at the criteria of a caretaker. What comes into effect is a lot of times the mechanical responsibilities of a building, the heating or the cooling of a building, the amount of hallways that are in the building, the amount of units in the building. There is a fair amount of parameters that come into effect when there is an analysis of whether a caretaker is necessary.

In general terms, they look at a criterion of somewhere around 75 to 100 units, and then there is the warrant of a consideration for a caretaker when it gets to that, and at the same time the consideration of, like I mentioned, the garbage requirements of where it has to be hauled and how far it has to be hauled and whether there is a compactor involved with the building, the amount of floors and hall space. There are variables involved, but usually in the area of 75 to 100 units is where the caretaker allocation comes in.

Ms. Cerilli: We are getting somewhere here. There are two ways of approaching this. The problem is that we have aging, deteriorating housing stock. We have a certain amount of money which sounds like a reasonable amount of money, $28-million total, to try and maintain and repair this housing stock.

One way we can go at it then is to look if we have the staff resources and the personnel to do it to ensure that repairs are done promptly and that there is going to be the person power there to do that. I guess the other side of it is looking at the value of the properties and the costs that are incurred to maintain them.

I was noticing when I was reading the comments by the former minister, he was talking about being careful, that we are not going to get to the point where it is going to be so costly to repair social housing that we are not going to recover the cost. It is not going to become cost effective, I guess is what I am getting at. I am wondering if there are certain units, blocks, complexes where we are reaching that point, in the minister's opinion, and what kind of process the Housing Authority goes through in deciding how they are going to spend the money, how they are going to prioritize those major capital repairs and work that is being done.

Mr. Reimer: Mr. Chairman, I guess one of the first priorities that Manitoba Housing has when they are looking at supplying accommodation and housing for people is the fact of the health and the safety of the individual in going into any type of building, because that is of primary importance.

The funding that the member for Radisson mentioned is a concern. I repeat myself when I say that the way the indications are with the federal government and their cutting back of funding is of a great concern by this government and this minister in trying to maintain the stock of housing, because her concerns are echoed in my concerns in the fact that we are looking at aging buildings and aging accommodations and the upkeep on them but nothing to go up, so we have to look very stringently at the federal government for their commitment for the continued maintenance on these programs.

I look forward quite optimistically in bringing forth our case to the Ministers of Housing conference that is coming up in the early part of July and also with the minister on the federal scene, Mr. Dingwall, in conveying our concerns to him with the utmost urgency that the funding is maintained or there is the equivalency of funding transfers so we can be in a position to continue to provide this funding. This is one of the things that this government and this minister will take forth quite emphatically to the federal government, that we look very, very strongly on a commitment to social housing not only in Canada but particularly in Manitoba.

Ms. Cerilli: The minister talked about anticipating a cross-Canada ministers conference on housing. I am wondering if he knows now the anticipated impact of the $270-million reduction to the provinces for social housing from the federal government, what portion of that is a reduction for Manitoba this year. How much has the budget been reduced this year?

Mr. Reimer: In looking at a global amount of reduction for Manitoba there are a couple of factors that have to be recognized. What the federal government has said is they are reducing that amount of money that the member for Radisson mentioned, $240 million or whatever it was, globally across Canada. For Manitoba that will amount to about $5 million less.

What they have done is they have indicated, because of refinancing of monies that are borrowed and at a lower rate, that there should be no significant impact on the amount of money that is being transferred to Winnipeg, but at the same time the savings that were indicated were supposed to be reallocated back into the housing market.

The federal government, with their decision making and their direction, have decided that saving they would keep. In essence they have refinanced, they have saved money and they are not allocating that money back into the housing stock where it should be going. This is a concern on our part.

* (2350)

Ms. Cerilli: So we are losing five million bucks.

Mr. Reimer: Right.

Ms. Cerilli: That is this year.

Mr. Reimer: Yes.

Ms. Cerilli: How is that going to be absorbed in the department? I see we are not showing a reduction, we are actually showing approximately an almost $3-million increase this year for the estimate.

Mr. Reimer: The analysis that has been brought forth is the fact that the savings that were realized and were supposed to flow to Manitoba are $5 million less than what was anticipated, and because of the federal position as mentioned, of refinancing, that is the money that we are not getting now, see, and it is $5 million less that we would have to put into the system for any type of programs or expenditures or renewing of our existing stock or improvement of our stock, so it is a savings that was realized federally but not given back to us provincially.

Ms. Cerilli: I guess what I am getting at is this year it looks like from the budget that you have absorbed it, that you have added in the money at Manitoba's expense. Am I correct in that?

Mr. Reimer: I guess what has been pointed out is the fact that the--I believe the member is looking at the two lines on page 38 regarding the funding. We have been able to, through the efficiencies of the department, maintain our commitment to the program within the framework of the Manitoba Housing Authority, and this is why there is that slight increase of funding that is noticed in that particular comparison between '94-95 and '95-96, so this is where the efficiencies come in and the fact--[interjection] That is right too. It has been pointed out to me too that we are looking at a time lag of projects that are coming on stream now that were initiated a couple of years ago. This is why the budget line is like that, has the implications that it has right now. Most of it is in the second-bottom line there, the CMHC-administered units, in that particular contribution line. There are more units coming on stream in northern Manitoba.

Ms. Cerilli: If I am understanding this correctly, we are not going to see the impact yet because there are a couple of year time lags. There were new units that were approved and the money has been sitting there for those and now that is coming and flowing through the budget. That is why we are seeing that there has not been a reduction. The province has not actually increased its allocation over the last year to the department through the Manitoba Housing and Renewal Corporation. It is simply that the money that was allocated in previous years from Canada Mortgage and Housing is now starting to flow through. Comprende.

Coming down the road though are we going to see then an impact on new projects? I notice from '92 there was $27 million allocated for new construction. Now we are seeing that. What are the projections? I think there have been major cuts, particularly for remote northern reserve communities. I know I have something somewhere that talks about a 50 percent reduction from about 1,200 units to 600 units. So within two years we are going to start feeling the effect of this in Manitoba. Is that what I am to understand?

Mr. Reimer: I should point out that actually it has been since 1994 that there has been no commitment for any new housing starts. What is coming to fruition, if you want to call it that, is the fact that these units that are coming on now were previous commitments and as they come on stream there are no new ones being initiated and none since 1994.

Ms. Cerilli: I knew there had not been any new ones since '94. I have a really good document that I am going to refer to. It is called Housing and Sustainability: An Action Guide for Community Leaders. It is part of the Good Ideas series that is put out by the rural and small town program at Mount Allison University--worth reading. It talks about a housing policy in Ontario, a province of Ontario policy statement on land use and planning for housing, and if my memory serves me correctly, I think it has a recommendation here that provides for--policy to enable at least 25 percent of new residential units to be affordable housing.

Mr. Assistant Deputy Chairperson: Order, please. The hour being twelve midnight, committee rise.