EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Now today in our current business plan again it states, “Complete planning work for remediation and removal of decommissioned airport buildings in” these four communities.
It’s like you’re copying from one year to the next and it is the same thing appearing in each business plan.
Can you tell me today what work has been done in this area in the last three years?
I believe we need to keep putting it in our business plan year after year so that decommissioning of old airports, such as Sanikiluaq, Coral Harbour, Qikiqtarjuaq, and Resolute Bay, keep being on the books because we are trying every year to move these projects forward.
We have to apply for the funding, although, as the member knows, we have done environmental assessments for all of these four sites, the Sanikiluaq old air terminal building, Qikiqtarjuaq’s old air terminal building, Coral Harbour’s old airport garage, and Resolute Bay’s old airport garage.
The department has requested capital funding required to move forward with the removal of these buildings in 2017-18.
However, the funding was denied.
We will keep continuing to put this project forward for the capital funding process.
Again, in your business plan you state that you had a cost estimate for the work required in Sanikiluaq.
Can you let us know how much that project would cost for remediation?
Hon Monica Ell-Kanayuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The cost of decommissioning is estimated to be approximately $400,000.
Is this $400,000 just for Sanikiluaq or is this for all the communities?
That cost estimate is for Sanikiluaq only.
Earlier you stated that you had put a request for capital funding for this project to cabinet.
Did you put a request forward for all the communities or just for Sanikiluaq?
We put in a request individually for all four projects.
The minister also stated that the request was denied. I have been after this now for that past eight years.
Did the department give any particular reasons why these requests for financing were denied?
Where you stated it would cost about $400,000 to do Sanikiluaq alone, I wonder if you can explain to us exactly what process will need to take place.
Will the building have to be completely taken apart by hand, packaged up, and sent out of the community or would only certain parts of the building have to be sent out and the rest go to landfill?
Parts of the building will have to be taken apart by hand. There will be designated substances.
They will be shipped out and the rest of it can be “landfilled.”
I know your request for funding was denied for the project. When do you anticipate putting the next request forward for funding to make this project move forward?
Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk: For the next capital planning process.
Maybe just a comment, I know that funding for different projects are hard to come by. I think my next step will probably be to write a letter to the powers that be and see if I can help along in order to obtain funding for this building in my community because it’s just abandoned.
There are no windows left in it, the doors are just hanging, the siding is falling off, and the building is just beginning to fall apart on its own.
I have been after this for the past eight years. I think something needs to be done fairly soon in order to remediate this building.
That was just a comment, but the floor is yours, Minister Ell-Kanayuk.
Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the member for that.
We would welcome a letter like that.
Are we on Vi-6 in Inuktitut?
Chairman (interpretation): Yes, Vi-6.
Mr. Shooyook (interpretation): I welcome the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation and her officials, although I cannot pronounce their names. Welcome.
In your 2017-2020 business plan you describe new plans for navigational aids that will be installed in Arviat, Pangnirtung, Qikiqtarjuaq, and Kimmirut to improve approach and instrument landing systems in bad weather.
Are these navigational aids being installed now or in which years will that work be completed in those four communities?
They have been installed in three communities and the work has been completed, but we still have to put in proposals to NAV CANADA.
I’m going to ask a three-part question.
There are five other airports that have been identified for navigational aids.
Which five communities are you talking about?
The communities are Arctic Bay, Cambridge Bay, Cape Dorset, Clyde River, Coral Harbour, Hall Beach, Kimmirut, Pangnirtung, and Qikiqtarjuaq.
Mr. Shooyook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the clarification. Also for the third one, it’s my understanding that there will be no infrastructure improvements in ten other communities.
What other infrastructure work does that talk about?
Which airports require infrastructure improvements?
Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk (interpretation): The runways for the last ten airports will need to be improved. (interpretation ends) Ten airports can be redesigned after the runway certifications are upgraded. (interpretation) The airport improvements are future projects for Baker Lake, Chesterfield Inlet, [Gjoa Haven], Igloolik, Kugaaruk, Kugluktuk, Pond Inlet, Naujaat, Taloyoak, and Whale Cove.
Will they be adding new surface gravel on these ten runways?
Are they going to resurface them with gravel or is this for other work?
What type of work will they be doing?
Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk (interpretation): Yes, it is for (interpretation ends) gravel, (interpretation) small stones.
What’s the term for them? I apologize for forgetting the correct term, Mr. Chairman.
It’s not primarily for that purpose, but it’s for other improvements that are needed at the airports.
That’s what’s indicated here.
This question has been asked for a long time and I would like to ask it again.
This is about driver’s licences under (interpretation ends) Motor Vehicles, (interpretation) which is included in there under (interpretation ends) Transportation. (interpretation) As I said, this has been a long-standing issue and past ministers have responded to it.
More than one member of the legislature has commented on the long waiting periods for driver’s licences. Some wait as long as one year or more. I don’t know what the reason is.
However, I would like to use my constituency as an example.
I have been told that people who apply for licences go through the GLO and then their application is sent to Rankin Inlet.
I’m wondering if the delays are primarily at the regional office in Rankin Inlet.
That office deals with numerous administrative tasks in the region and I believe the chief administrative officer there sometimes ends up working alone. That might be a large part of the reason why the delays happen.
Is the minister aware if the reason is they have an inadequate number of staff at the regional office? Applicants wait far too long for their driver’s licences.
That may be part of the reason, but there are other reasons.
Some of the staff work for Community and Government Services and many do excellent work.
Some of them have not completed their training. Some applicants send in incomplete information, such as copies of their birth certificates.
That’s just an example. There could be other documentation that’s missing.
Another reason could be that we’re trying to improve the system.
The equipment is very old.
In the upcoming year for 2018, all communities will have new equipment.
That is also part of the reason.
Right now applications are not sent electronically or by fax. They are sent through the mail and the licences are then returned through the mail.
That process is slow and is a part of what is causing delays, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman (Mr. Akoak): Mr. Mapsalak.
The government liaison officer is a new position.
They are fully trained and very capable.
Perhaps the equipment still hasn’t been upgraded in the Kivalliq region. Maybe it’s the cameras. How many cameras are there and how many GLOs have new cameras in the Kivalliq?
Can the minister provide that information?
I don’t have that information in front of me. They should all have new equipment.
I don’t know the condition of the equipment, but we can get that information for the member at a later date.
I know some equipment causes some of the problems.
There are water truck drivers or heavy equipment operators who presently hold driver’s licences.
Some clients have been waiting for over a year, yet they can only work with a valid driver’s licence, especially to operate heavy equipment.
I’m sure they’re given temporary licences.
I don’t think that there should be any reason for delays other than having to send their applications to Rankin Inlet, which has staffing issues.
With that being the case, what is being done to determine the cause of delays?
Does the department ensure the Kivalliq regional office in Rankin Inlet has adequate staff?
How does the department go about ensuring the staffing situation is adequately addressed?
I thank the member for asking about that process. Further, I would invite him to our offices to provide some background in order to come to a common understanding on what the reasons are for the delay and we would be on the same page.
Regarding the licensees who have been waiting for extended periods of time for their heavy equipment licence, we would want to get the details in order to ensure that we can resolve the challenges and find out what the reasons are for the delays.
Having said that, with respect to the staffing situation in Rankin Inlet, they have a full complement of staff who work with all the communities.
Our department would welcome any suggestions to ensure we collaboratively resolve these problems.
Mr. Mapsalak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also thank the minister for her response.
Yes, that is the case. We are continually told by ministers and we have heard this brought up more than once every year in the Legislative Assembly about the long waiting periods.
We are repeatedly told that they are working on it and that it will improve so that clients won’t have to wait for so long.
With that being the case, we are always looking forward to how it will be improved, especially when there are many people who don’t have driver’s licences and have been waiting for far too long.
As I stated during question period, the hamlet’s senior administrative officer was concerned that many licences have expired and they still haven’t received their renewed licences for extended periods of time.
The hamlet is having a hard time finding drivers.
I would like them to look into that.
It’s not a question; it’s more of a general comment.
It was just a comment, but if Minister Ell-Kanayuk would like to respond.
In the past members approved the (interpretation ends) Motor Vehicle Information System, (interpretation) which is a computer system to process various types of licences.
They are currently installing the connections in all communities so that they will be using this system by 2018.
Also, not all communities have government liaison officers. Some of the communities have municipal liaison officers, but they are not part of our government system.
This applies in the communities that have program transfer agreements. We don’t have control over their operations as it is governed by the agreements with hamlets.
Some communities still use these transfer agreements.
In order to be clear with my questions, so I’ll be asking my questions in English as I know I have good interpreters.
I would like to ask my first question to the minister, but I would also like to welcome the minister and her officials.
(interpretation ends) Your department’s draft 2017-2020 business plan indicates that one of your department’s priorities for the 2017-18 fiscal year is to “Manage one-time Community Transportation Initiatives Program increase.”
The budget for this program is proposed to be increased from $1.5 million to $4 million.
During the 2015-16 fiscal year your department only spent $1,421,000 out of its $1.5 million budget for this program.
What are the specific factors to justify the proposed increase in the program’s budget?
This is due to some of the projects that were provided that were not done.
Mr. Qirngnuq: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Your department’s Community Transportation Initiatives Program Policy currently provides that the maximum contribution for any specific project is $300,000.
Are you considering increasing this amount?
Mr. Qirngnuq: As of today, how many applicants for funding under the Community Transportation Initiatives Program have been received by your department during the 2016-17 fiscal year?
We have 21 that applied for this funding for 2016-17.
I think the next question was already touched on, but to get clarification, how many of these applications have been approved and how many of these applications have been denied?
During 2015 the department received over $3,199,000 in application requests from 19 communities. These 21 applicants were all approved. What they wanted in terms of the amounts may have been decreased.
If the minister could answer my next question or if not, what is the purpose for denial and what is the purpose for approval?
There were no denials.
The proposals have to meet a program objective and they need to have the capacity in the community to carry out the work, and the extent to which the community is prepared to contribute its own resources and the extent to which the local labour and municipal equipment is used.
I know that my colleague, Mr. Shooyook, was asking questions in this regard, but I would like to get more clarification.
I have been requesting the navigational aids and the (interpretation ends) GPS approach (interpretation) for aircrafts for Baker Lake. What is happening with the GPS approach request for Baker Lake?
The Baker Lake approach is currently a GPS LPV approach.
It is the best approach that can be implemented in that community right now until some civil work is done; some obstructions or obstacles are removed and some additional civil works.
There are a lot of things that happen on the ground that have to be in place before the instrument approach, which is in the air, can be put in place to its full capability.
When we look at the civil works for the community of Baker Lake regarding the runway GPS approach and all, do you have an idea of what costs we’re looking at?
We’re talking in the millions.
I know we would certainly require a large sum of money for this, but would it be funded by the Nunavut government or the federal government or would it be a combination of the federal government and GN cost sharing?
This would have to come from the Nunavut government’s budget. It’s not eligible for ACAP.
The minister just stated that they are not eligible for ACAP, but how are you going to work to install it there?
As I stated earlier, for the ACAP, or the (interpretation ends) [Airports] Capital Assistance Program, (interpretation) we are unable to apply. (interpretation ends) It’s not eligible.
I know that the minister is indicating that it’s not eligible at this time.
What is the reason why it’s not eligible at this time?
Chairman: Minister Ell-Kanayuk
Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, I would like Mr. Hawkins to respond to the question.
The ACAP (Airports Capital Assistance Program) is available to airports to maintain their certification at its current level. These changes that we’re talking about would be an increase in the certification level of the airport.
In order to change the level of certification, how can the Baker Lake runway… ?
Would there have to be initial assessments or modifications, or what work would really have to be done to get to that next level of certification?
I’ll ask Mr. Hawkins to answer that question.
The improvements are typically widening of the graded areas around the runway, removal of obstacles around the airport out to about five miles or so, it can be as far as that, and improvements to the lighting systems.
Those all sort of make up the certification part of it that’s on the ground that gives a higher level of certification, and then the approach can be designed around that.
While we’re still talking about airports, I guess my next question here would be: I do recall there was a proposal submitted regarding the renovation of the current Baker Lake terminal building.
What is that status on that?
We will have to get back to the member on that.
I’ll wait for that information.
Will that information be provided to me in writing?
This matter was referenced earlier by my colleague, Mr. Mapsalak, in his questioning about the heavy equipment licensing issues in the Kivalliq, as some drivers in Baker Lake have also had to wait far too long.
What I want to ask about relates to a previous response by the minister about the forms that are filled out, which are sent out via the postal system down to Rankin Inlet.
Is this using the faster postal rate?
What seems to slow this process down obviously is that they only send out the applications when they have a certain number as a batch. I wonder if they should send them in as cargo.
Once we have the Motor Vehicle Information System in place, the documents will be able to be sent electronically. Currently they are mailed.
Once they’re able to send them out electronically, would this system be in place this year and are we going to have the cameras and everything also upgraded?
MVIS will be up and running by the end of 2018 and it will include new equipment and cameras.
With that being the case, some people wait for quite a while.
I’ll use myself as an example. I’ve had a driver’s licence for many years.
It has my house number, mailing address, and other required information, including my height and weight, which has never changed much.
When it’s time to renew a driver’s licence, I wonder what the differences are between categories like class 1, class 2, class 3, class 5, and class 7, even though they’re obviously in some order.
I wonder if your department considered simplifying classification, such as class 1, class 2, and class 3, in such a way to improve the whole process for driver’s licences, for example, if you have a class 1, to be able to use that same licence for three years.
The reason I ask is that the Canadian firearms certificate was changed and it’s now good for five years and ten years, I think.
Is it not possible to consider extending the life of those licences?
The classes that the member referred to, class 1, 2, and so forth, some of those require medical examination and that is why they have to be a certain time frame, because of the medical exam that is required.
I understand the minister’s response. So that the Motor Vehicles Division is not bombarded with so many applications on a yearly basis, maybe it could be the reverse.
For people who do not need to have the medical examination, could they not attain the driver’s licence for maybe two years instead of just having it for one year?
I guess that is my question.
The class 5 driver’s licence, the regular driver’s licence, right now has five years, but we can look into the other classes that require a medical examination.
Right now we will have to look at that.
I don’t have very many questions, just so you know. I do want to talk a little bit about the Iqaluit airport.
I read on page 215 in your business plan, you talk about monitoring the P3 partner’s compliance. I wonder if you could talk a little bit about who monitors the compliance provisions on behalf of the Government of Nunavut.
Furthermore, what concerns have been raised by the partners or to the partners?
At the end of all of that, is there somebody that goes over the numbers and such to make sure that things are running the way that they are supposed to be?
I’ll try to answer all her questions.
The project steering committee consists of the deputy ministers of Economic Development and Transportation, Community and Government and Services, and Finance.
As the project is large and has many regulatory and technical aspects, it is being delivered under a complex project agreement.
The steering committee has been ensuring that the proper technical advisory and legal resources are in place to ensure its long-term success.
In terms of her question as to who goes through the numbers, we have staff that actually work with the proponents.
My middle question, I think, may have gotten lost in there about what concerns have been raised by any of the parties and how have they been addressed.
I would like my Assistant Deputy Minister, Mr. Hawkins, to respond to the question.
We meet with them regularly, weekly, monthly, and we go through all of the plans that they bring to us, operational plans, we go through anything that is from changing the initial design, we go through Inuit employment numbers, Inuit business engagement, and we go through all those things. Anything that’s come to concern have been in… .
They have a lot of flexibility in how they build the thing.
We monitor them to make sure that they are building it to the initial proposal that they gave us.
We do reviews of their Inuit engagement in the project and annual reviews.
Their spending is not really an issue that we monitor because that’s their business. …any environmental cleanup of the site to make sure that it was done as that project agreement has required.
When you are monitoring such things as making sure the building is being built the way it’s supposed to or environmental cleanup, do you have any expertise on your side to ensure that those provisions are being met?
We have internal and external expertise to assist us.
If you have a situation where the parties can’t agree on something, do you have an appeals provision or something like that? How do you settle disagreements?
There is a dispute process as set out in the agreement.
Can the minister tell us?
I’ll have Mr. Hawkins elaborate.
Chairman: Mr. Hawkins
There are several processes in the dispute process. The initial review of one will be done with a referee.
That’s a relatively simple process.
Then it would go into an arbitration type of process. From there, if it were not resolved in either of those processes, it would end up in a litigation process.
Has any disagreement ever reached the arbitration process?
There has been one referee type process.
Of course that sparked my interest now.
What was the issue about?
I may not have heard her question, but if she asked about the referee performance, the answer is that there was one issue with an accounting performance.
I want to talk a little about the road going to the airport that has been a little bit of a problem, I think, where all sides, being the city, the government, and I guess the company building the airport, everybody is saying that everybody else is responsible for paving the road.
I’m not sure why it wasn’t included as part of the overall package of building the airport.
I can’t see a road in that condition the way it is, where you sometimes feel like you’re on a boat going over waves.
Is it going to be that much good after the first year of use with all of that increased traffic?
I wonder if the minister can elaborate a little about what’s going on there and how we’re going to solve this issue.
Perhaps I can refer the question to my Deputy Minister, Ms. Rowe.
The road going out to the airport is a city road.
For roads that are in the community, that’s the Department of Community and Government Services that looks after those roads, but it’s the City of Iqaluit’s road.
What we’re trying to do is have everyone work together to try to come up with some solutions for this road.
How far along are you on with those discussions and is the city involved at this point in time?
Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk (interpretation): I would like to refer this again to Ms. Rowe.
My understanding is that Community and Government Services has been meeting with the City of Iqaluit.
Is ED&T not a part of those meetings?
Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I’ll have Ms. Rowe answer that question.
Currently we have not been involved in that discussion.
If you’re not involved, how are the parties trying to work together?
You oversee a huge project. I would kind of like to also know where the proponents of the airport, who are building the airport, stand on this too.
I think it’s a really important issue and it really does need to be address now.