EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Mr. Speaker, I ask all members to join me in congratulating my constituents on their success and in expressing appreciation to the Municipal Training Organization, the Kakivak Association, the community learning centre, and the Municipality of Arctic Bay for their innovative and successful partnership.
Member’s Statement 428 – 3(3): Search and Rescue in Pond Inlet (Enook)
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to recognize and acknowledge those residents of Pond Inlet who are active in search and rescue activities in the community.
Mr. Speaker, a number of my colleagues have spoken during our current sitting on the importance of search and rescue in Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, when incidents occur that involve community residents, many of my constituents are quick to respond.
I pay tribute to their sense of responsibility and willingness to risk their own lives to come to the aid of others.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Mr. Speaker, I understand that the Civil Air Search and Rescue Association will be offering training next month to residents of Pond Inlet who are interested in volunteering with this organization.
I am pleased to see such initiatives taking place and I encourage CASARA to work closely with the community’s current search and rescue organizations.
Mr. Speaker, awareness of the importance of search and rescue is growing by the day.
I ask all members to join me in paying tribute to the residents of Pond Inlet who help make Nunavut a safer place.
Member’s Statement 429 – 3(3): Tribute to Martha Michael (Ell)
I rise today to pay tribute to a constituent and an elder, Martha Michael, a beloved community member who passed away recently.
My heart is with her and her family and Iqalummiut as they are laying her to rest this afternoon.
Martha was a devoted wife and mother.
A much valued pillar of her community and Nunavut, Martha was involved in various community activities over the years, sitting on different boards in communities, tackling social and health issues.
Some of my colleagues may remember that Mrs. Michael was an honorary elder who lit the Qulliq at the swearing-in ceremony during the first sitting of the Nunavut Legislative Assembly on April 1, 1999.
Born on the land, Martha witnessed and lived through great changes during her lifetime, making her passionate about retaining and imparting Inuit culture and values.
Martha was a true Inuk, a genuine and straightforward person with a gentle nature.
Just last year, Mrs. Michael was awarded a Diamond Jubilee Medal in the field of heritage and history.
A respected elder, Martha was most recently appointed a member of the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Katimajiit and was looking forward to providing guidance and to sharing her wealth of traditional knowledge.
Those who knew Martha will remember her fondly.
I can still her distinctive voice and laughter.
Her passing is a great loss, not only to her family but to Nunavummiut as a whole.
Mr. Speaker, I ask my colleagues in the Chamber to join me in expressing our sincere condolences to the Michael family on their loss.
Member’s Statement 430 – 3(3): A Canadian Success to Defeat the Up-listing of Polar Bears under CITES (Curley)
Good afternoon, people of Rankin Inlet and Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, it is a privilege and honour to represent Canada and Nunavut.
It is very good to be home to Canada.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to tell the people of Nunavut about the CITES convention held in Bangkok, Thailand. It was a privilege and honour to represent Canada and Nunavut as one of the delegates attending the CITES convention in Bangkok, Thailand, opposing the up-listing of polar bears to Appendix I, the endangered species category, from Appendix II, the special concern category.
I would like Nunavutmiut to know that I wish to thank my good friend and colleague in this Assembly, the Minister of Environment, Hon. James Arreak, who invited me to join me in this difficult and challenging mission.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, our Canadian team included our federal government officials, the Nunavut government, the NWT government, ITK, NTI, and the wildlife organizations from Inuvialuit, Nunavik, Nunatsiavut, and our own NGOs and Inuit wildlife organizations were all part of the team.
Mr. Speaker, all of our team members defended the Canadian position with passion and determined resolve to, number one, first of all, defeat the US proposal and secondly, to tell the world that the Canadian and the north’s relationship on the harvesting rights of the polar bears for centuries was fair, respectful, and that it included our rigorous wildlife regulations, including proper population surveys, and our regulated quota system was pretty fair in Canada.
The world did not know that.
Mr. Speaker, as you have heard by now, the result of our fight, the Canadian team was successful.
Speaker: Mr. Curley, your time is up. Would you like to seek unanimous consent to conclude your statement?
Mr. Curley: I do, Mr. Speaker.
Speaker: Thank you, Mr. Curley. The member is seeking unanimous consent to conclude his statement. Are there any nays?
There are none. Please proceed, Mr. Curley.
Mr. Speaker, it is important from my perspective that most of our audience, Nunavutmiut communities, are given a bit of a story of our fight.
Mr. Speaker, as I said, as you have heard by now, the result of our fight, the Canadian team was successful in defending two very difficult proposals.
The first one I did comment on earlier was the United States proposal.
Why was it difficult? Because it involved 170 nations to vote and the majority was in favour of the Canadian position.
Our team, the Canadians, had the fight of our lives with our pride and reputation pretty much at stake.
We had formidable opponents, Mr. Speaker.
There was one of the greatest nations on the face of the earth, United States, opposing our position, including Russia, the European Union, and some states in South America, as well as mostly pretty active were some Middle East nations, which were not as large as the other nations.
Along with the other host counties that opposed our position were countries from South America, Pacific nations, Eastern Asia, the Middle East, and African nations.
(interpretation) Mr. Speaker, in short, I am proud and humble to say to Nunavutmiut that our Canadian team won the battle and defeated the two proposals. We were very humble.
The two proposals I mentioned were to convince our government to manage and protect polar bears with the Canadian jurisdiction, the federal government, the Government of Nunavut’s polar bear management system, and our co-management partners with the regional wildlife organizations and our local hunters and trappers organizations.
The world did not know that there was a close working relationship between the Canadian institutions, governments, wildlife organizations, and HTOs.
Again, we had to tell the world out there about the co-management system that the Nunavut government uses.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, I mentioned that the Canadian team faced two very difficult versions of proposal, which required 117 nations to vote in two proposals.
The first proposal was to up-list the polar bear to Appendix I, which means that they were endangered and therefore, banned commercial trade for all that matter, including the sport hunts of polar bears.
This proposal required a vote of 50 plus 1 to pass.
When the debate began, US lead the pack vigorously. They made it quite clear that our system was not adequate, that polar bears were endangered, and the research that Canadians conducted was not acceptable to them.
Mr. Speaker, early in the debate, the US proposal and the European Union, which includes 30 nations, put forward an amendment on the US proposal.
The proposed amendment presented by the European Union was not acceptable to the Canadian position either because to the Canadian delegation, it was not an amendment, but a new proposal.
The rules of the United Nations Convention were, in my view, weird. It should not have been accepted as an amendment nor presented for nations to debate. One nation in particular supported Canada that the European Union proposal should not have been accepted.
That position was vigorously presented by the nation of Israel.
It said that it did not fit the criteria for an amendment. That amendment, Mr. Speaker, would have put Canada completely in a very difficult position about the management of polar bears.
We would have abdicated and passed the responsibility for surveys and management of polar bears, and commercial quotas to the United Nations Polar Bear Secretariat. That would be unacceptable.
This version of the amendment requires two-thirds of CITES members to be accepted as an amendment.
I am proud to say, Mr. Speaker, that even our own delegation, the deputy minister presented a vigorous, defensive Canadian position when speaking to the amendment.
I spoke on the US proposal earlier.
The Canadian government also spoke vigorously in opposing the amendment by the European proposal.
So, Mr. Speaker, we are proud, including all of our non-governmental spokespeople down there, particularly I am grateful for Terry Audla, President of ITK, who passionately spoke and defended Inuit. Thereby, along with the whole Canadian team, turned the tide in favour and the two votes that were presented did not pass as a result of the vigorous Canadian passionate position.
Mr. Speaker, our mission was successful and we have work to do for the next three years to put our proposals and our system in a better management system. (interpretation) Thank you.
Last week, I came here and introduced 15 people from the Department of Community and Government Services, and I got bombarded with questions.
This time, I bring 15 of our finest bantam hockey players in Nunavut and they are here to support us today.
Mr. Speaker, it’s my privilege to introduce the 2013 Bantam Hockey Tournament champions from Rankin Inlet. I would like to introduce the following:
My buddy, Stephan Nukapiak;
Jakob Voisey;
Bubba Muktar;
Randall Qiyuq;
Ethan Mukpah;
Wager Tatty;
Ian Paniyuk;
Nik Deagle;
Sidney Nichol;
Kaelan Collier;
Tyrese Dias;
Kalaa Tartuk;
Nicholas Mukpah;
Issaluk Tattuinee;
Jaden Sigurdson.
And their fine coaches:
Darren Nichol;
Eric Nukappiak; and
General Manager Craig Collier.
Also the parents:
Christine Nukappiak, who is also the grandmother of my grandson, and the other grandfather is over there, Eric Nukappiak;
Lewis Voisey Jr., (interpretation) my father; and
Noah Paniyuk.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, I welcome the Rankin Inlet hockey team, hockey moms and parents to the Legislative Assembly.
We have some of the best hockey coaching and volunteers in Rankin Inlet.
I encourage them to keep up the hard work because they produce champions.
Mr. Speaker, I would also like to mention that these fine young hockey players are relying on us to help them get a new arena in Rankin Inlet.
My colleagues, let’s welcome the Rankin Inlet Bantam Team.
Speaker: Thank you, Mr. Kusugak. Congratulations to all of you and welcome to the Gallery.
I also thank the Bantam hockey players representing the winning team.
I would love to see my fellow residents in their place if they were to start earlier in their hockey careers.
Mr. Speaker, I wish to recognize a visitor to the Gallery, although he was recognized earlier. I wish to put another hat on his head and recognize him in that capacity.
I have worked with this person in the past, especially when I was the chairperson of the Pangnirtung Fisheries for about six years. I would like my colleagues to welcome him to the Gallery.
Although he is here in his capacity as a hockey coach, he does have a full-time job elsewhere.
I want my colleagues to share my recognition of Darren Nichols, who is also the president of the Nunavut Development Corporation.
Welcome again to the Gallery, Mr. Nichols. Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. These players were already mentioned by my colleague from Rankin Inlet as to their trip here to Iqaluit.
As a member for Rankin Inlet North, I rarely have the chance to welcome people from my constituency and some of the players’ parents live in my constituency.
Noah and the boy sitting next to him are both sons of my constituents.
As to the other sons of various parents, I want you to know that you are in this tournament due to your hard work. (interpretation ends) You make us proud.
Question 550 – 3(3): Budget Address Announcement Concerning Sustainable Development Committee (Aupaluktuq)
I am glad that people from the Kivalliq are here.
I watch hockey regularly.
I say “hello” to the people of Baker Lake.
Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Finance.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, in his recent Budget Address, the Minister of Finance indicated that “nine departments and agencies take part in environmental assessments for major mining projects.”
The minister’s Budget Address subsequently announced that the government will provide “additional funding of $1.4 million” to the Sustainable Development Committee in order to “enable the government to participate continuously in assessments for major mining projects conducted by the Nunavut Impact Review Board.”
Can the minister clarify what the total budget for the Sustainable Development Committee will be during the 2013-14 fiscal year?
Mr. Chairman, as Mr. Aupaluktuq is well aware, there are major mining projects currently in the very stages of exploration and proceeding through the environmental process.
The Government of Nunavut supports major initiatives. We wish to participate at the hearings as much as we can.
It was determined that to facilitate this, the government would increase the funding and spread it through all the departments, there are nine departments, increase the funding by $1,426,000 to enable us to participate meaningfully and actively at these hearings and expedite the processing of the hearings.
I appreciate that response as well because, no doubt, the people of Baker Lake and other potential mines are all in support of employment and opportunities for employment.
As well, with that in mind, there is also respect for the environment and resources, such as the animals that are there.
Mr. Speaker, during my time last week at the meeting of the Prospectors and Developers Association of Canada, I noted that the issue of regulatory processes and reform is always a topic of concern.
Can the minister explain what problems with the current system of environmental assessments led the government to decide that its Sustainable Development Committee required additional funding of $1.4 million to fulfill its responsibilities?
Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, I wasn’t at the PDAC last week. I appreciate my colleague was there.
I know mining is a great interest to all Nunavummiut. It has to be done properly. We don’t want inappropriate development of our resources in Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, I have to apologize. I am not the Minister of Environment nor am I the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation; I am the Minister of Finance.
Perhaps the member would like to ask the appropriate minister that question.
I appreciate the redirection as well and I will follow up with the appropriate department.
As the Minister of Finance, I just want to ask: can the minister indicate how the figure of $1.4 million was determined?
Hon. Keith Peterson: Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Aupaluktuq for the question.
Mr. Speaker, I could take the member through a long, convoluted process from start to finish.
It takes five or six months.
I don’t know if he wishes that today if we have enough time in question period.
Mr. Speaker, the departments know their responsibilities, their priorities, and they develop business cases that are submitted to the Department of Finance, and then the deputies have regular meetings to determine what the priorities are within the department.
An appropriate department made a very solid case that they needed additional funding, but the funding would be spread through all the departments. So it’s not just for one department; it’s spread through all departments so all of the nine departments can all participate. They have funding to participate meaningfully at these hearings.
So if it was a solid case, it’s a priority for the government. The FMB and then ultimately this House would be approving it through the Committee of the Whole process, hopefully.
I very much appreciate the communication from the Minister of Finance.
Mr. Speaker, I guess, to avoid the convoluted process and also to enhance on the participation in meaningful dialogue between the agencies, I want to ask: can the minister indicate how this additional funding will be used by the Sustainable Development Committee?
Mr. Speaker, every department will get a portion of the funding. It will either fund PYs or research into the particular project so that when hearings are scheduled, the departments can participate at the hearings and be quite active and get the message across to all the other participants at the hearings.
Question 551 – 3(3): Government of Nunavut’s Intervention Respecting Senate Reform Reference Questions (Elliott)
My questions are for the Minister of Justice in his capacity as the Attorney General for Nunavut.
Last month, the Government of Canada submitted a number of reference questions to the Supreme Court concerning the issue of Senate reform.
The reference questions concern a number of options and issues related to reform of the Senate.
On Tuesday of last week, Nunavut’s Attorney General joined a number of other provinces and territories in filing a notice of intervention concerning this matter.
For the benefit of Nunavummiut who are following our proceedings today, can the minister explain why our government wishes to intervene in this matter?
I would like to take that question as notice right now.
Question 552 – 3(3): Status of Gjoa Haven Sewage Lagoon (Ugyuk)
I say “good day” to the people of Nattilik. Just so that the people watching the televised proceedings can know, it sure smells like a hockey dressing room since it smells sweaty.
Yes, I sympathize with the young hockey players who are here and I hope they have a good tournament.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Community and Government Services.
Mr. Speaker, the sewage lagoon for the community of Gjoa Haven is located on a high ridge very close to the community’s runway. There are often many birds in the area which can pose a significant risk to airplanes taking off or landing.
Can the minister provide an update on what consideration was given to the placement of Gjoa Haven’s sewage lagoon?
Whenever there is work ongoing in any water reservoir or sewage lagoon, the municipal governments are consulted on the proposed project, especially when reviewing possible sites for these facilities. They look at potential spillways or leaks. That is what the hamlets are consulted on for these types of projects.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) It is my understanding that some additional engineering work was required in order to expand the Gjoa Haven sewage lagoon.
Can the minister clearly explain what consideration was given to the location of the lagoon and why it is still so close to the runway?
As I stated earlier, whenever these types of projects are planned for construction, the SAO and community leaders of the hamlet are consulted regarding the potential location.
I don’t have the information in front of me as to why a certain site was chosen, especially as to why that location is abutting the airstrip or within close proximity.
I don’t have the information to respond to the question, Mr. Speaker.
Yes, he partially answered my question, but I have another question to direct to him. (interpretation ends) Can the minister provide an update of what kind of community consultation was undertaken with respect to expanding the Gjoa Haven sewage lagoon?
I have stated this several times now, but whenever a sewage lagoon is being constructed within a community, the hamlet council is consulted, including participation of the Department of Environment, when deliberating upon the potential site of the sewage lagoon. This includes any potential problems or conflicts that may have arisen over the review of the project.
The capital projects are never constructed by picking any old location since there are potential environmental hazards associated with the project. (interpretation ends) There are very good consultations that are done within the municipality to ensure that it is not put into a dangerous place.
Mr. Speaker, there are consultations that happen with the municipal council, the municipality, and others that they may need input from before putting such a facility near the community.
I thank the minister for his responses. (interpretation ends) Gjoa Haven residents are concerned that the expansion of Gjoa Haven’s sewage lagoon poses additional risks for the community.
Will the minister commit to looking into these issues and providing me and the community with an update on his findings?
This is the first time I have heard about any potential concerns.
I have met with the mayor during the Kitikmeot Mayors’ Forum and this was never mentioned as a possible concern.
Since this is the first time I have heard about this concern, I will check to see what status this project is at and what the problems are.
Question 553 – 3(3): Communications with DEAs (Ningeongan)
Prior to asking my question, I want to mention that today is my younger daughter’s birthday. I wish you a wonderful birthday, Faith, and tell you that I love you.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Education.
Mr. Speaker, representatives from the DEAs in my constituency have approached me with some concerns regarding their roles, duties, obligations, and budget.
On November 7, 2012, correspondence from the DEA coalition was sent to the Minister of Education requesting clarification in a number of areas.
I am confident that DEA representatives from across Nunavut are interested in her reply.
For the benefit of the listening public, I would like to ask the minister if she can confirm whether or not she received this letter from the DEA coalition regarding a number of DEA issues and, if so, when does she expect to provide a response?
We will move on in Oral Questions.
Question 554 – 3(3): Help for Homeowners under Age 60 (Ningark)
Subsequent to my Member’s Statement in regard to the importance of providing help for Nunavut homeowners, I’m not quite sure who would be the lead minister to ask.
The Senior Fuel Subsidy Program is administered by the Department of Education.
The homeowner fuel rebate is by the finance department.
I spoke to the fact that some Inuit private homeowners who haven’t quite attained the age of 60 who are due to the upsurge in prices related to the cost of living are severely challenged in keeping up maintenance of their homes, especially heating fuel and utility bills, such as power bills. Many homeowners are faced with hardship in trying to keep up with these rising costs.
Perhaps I can direct my question to the Minister responsible for Housing and if I have misdirected my question, Mr. Speaker, please correct my mistake.
To whom can these private homeowners turn to? I speak of people who haven’t quite reached the age of 60 and don’t qualify for a subsidy. Some people are struggling to pay for these heating fuel and utility bills for their private homes.
I, myself, am not sure who you’re directing… . Ningark, sorry. You got me confused.
You mentioned three ministers, so if you can indicate which minister you would like to direct that question to.
I was asking for direction which minister I should be asking this question, but I will choose the Minister of Nunavut Housing Corporation for now.
Mr. Speaker, through the Nunavut Housing Corporation, we promote the programs, we administer the programs and look at applications, but through the criteria that are required in these applications, we then evaluate, analyze, then approve accordingly through the corporate managers.