Housing on Saskatchewan's native reserves is on the mind of the Saskatchewan government. So much so, the province is thinking about funding housing on reserves.

Houses on reserves in Saskatchewan are twice as crowded as the Canadian average, many homes are in disrepair and toxic block mould is relatively common.

How is this possible Blame the system and lack of home ownership.

The Department of Indian Affairs and the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC) transfer money directly to native band councils. From there it is up to the Chief and council to determine who gets a new house or repairs.

As past auditor general reports note, there is a fundamental problem in this relationship. The three main players - Indian Affairs, CMHC and native bands - cannot agree on their roles and responsibilities. Adding another player - Saskatchewan - to the mix may only make things more complicated. Furthermore, according to Department of Indian Affairs internal audits some native governments fail to account properly for existing responsibilities and funding.

Even well-intentioned native leaders have difficulty fulfilling their oversight responsibilities. For instance, band councils are supposed to ensure that any new housing meets National Building Code standards. But bands often have no way to ensure new housing meets these codes, which helps explain the high percentage of substandard housing.

Moreover, land on a native reserve is owned by the Crown and controlled collectively by the native band council, not by individuals. As a result, native Canadians living on reserves do not own their houses in fee simple, that is to say "outright". As the well-known expression goes, no one ever paid money to wash a rented car. This leads to a lack of desire on the part of native Canadians to maintain, repair, or renovate their homes.

Needless to say, this is not a reflection of native Canadians themselves, but rather an indictment of our government's native policy: Federal law does not permit those who live on Indian reserves to own their homes. Since they cannot sell their houses to recover their investments, residents have no economic incentive to spend money on improvements. For the same reason, there is no reason for housing developers and other entrepreneurs to create new building stock for private buyers.

Because fee-simple ownership of reserve land is forbidden, systems of what may be called "quasi-ownership" have emerged; for example, the use of Certificates of Possessions (COP).

When a band issues a COP, the landholder is deemed to have an interest in the property he inhabits. This interest may then be used to apply for mortgage financing. In return for a loan, a holder of a COP transfers his certificate back to the issuing band as collateral. The band then enters into an agreement with CMHC by which it pledges to assume the mortgage in the event of a default. Since COP holders can be dispossessed if they do not meet their repayment schedule, they will generally be motivated to comply with the terms of their loan. Once the mortgage is paid off, the certificate is transferred back to the individual.

Provincial funding is not the answer. Home ownership coupled with a better system to implement housing needs to be established; a system where all parties know and understand their responsibilities. Only then will the lack of housing be eliminated.