EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
That is the difference between a government department, or even in the case of the college, a Crown corporation, which has a different set of parameters to work in.
However, because of the recommendations of the URRC, the power corporation, because of the capital stabilization rider, which, as I said earlier, and I go to Hansard and see it… . It has not been determined what that amount is or how that structure will be, because the corporation has 90 days to respond back to the minister.
From that point on there will be a public process where the public and indeed the members would see what the capital plan of the corporation is, because they have to bring forward a rider to finance that plan.
So, the quick answer for the member is that the plan will, from April 1 onward, become public, because of the process under the stabilization rider.
That’s my understanding of that process.
Question 313 – 2(2): Update on the Shipment of Fuel
I would like to ask the question to the minister of transportation.
Many people in the Kivalliq region have small boats, but after an accident that happened a few years ago, inspections have been made mandatory, which I believe are carried out by Transport Canada. This has caused some concern.
I would like to ask the minister what stage this is in.
Speaker (interpretation): Minister of transportation, Mr. Simailak
I have no knowledge right now, at the present time, of what has been done, but I will look into the member’s question and get back to him.
Mr. Netser (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I thank the minister for his response.
I have a little bit of knowledge of this: in Winnipeg there are officials that I’ve talked to, and they gave me a brief explanation of their rules.
Perhaps, after the minister gets some information from the federal government, he can get back to me.
I will look into the member’s question and find out what their answers are.
Question 314 – 2(2): Update on the Additive for Bad Gasoline
I would like to address the minister responsible for bad gasoline.
In my constituency of Sanikiluaq, the people have informed me of their concerns. There are about 21 of them with four-wheelers that have had problems with their machines because of the gasoline.
Has there been anything done to bring those additives to the retail outlets?
Hon. Peter Kilabuk (interpretation): There has not been anything done to date because of the weather in the Kivalliq region; they couldn’t deliver those additives for the gasoline.
They have not made any deliveries.
I wonder if the minister can inform me when these products will be delivered.
Hon. Peter Kilabuk (interpretation): Mr. Speaker, yes, I would like to smile at the member because he was the previous bad gasoline minister.
I’m sorry that they have delayed this delivery of those additives for the gasoline, but perhaps they were supposed to be finished at the end of this month.
This is what the Kivalliq officer has told me.
I’d like to tell the member that it’s about a week late, but they’ll make the delivery soon.
Speaker (interpretation): Supplementary, Mr. Kattuk,
Perhaps the two Peters can’t agree with each other.
Will the government be doing a study or some research on the machine breakdowns in the communities?
I informed the House that I will be going to the communities to find out which machinery had broken down, but I don’t want to leave out anybody; I want to include everybody.
We would like to travel to the communities and ask how many people have had their machinery break down.
There was supposed to some research, and the people that are doing the research have not got back to me yet.
What I have to do is find out from each community what machinery has broken down.
After that I will find out whether there is going to be any compensation or not.
I have not received the information that I have requested yet.
I have no answer for that right now.
Speaker (interpretation): Question period is over.
Tabled Document 104 – 2(2): Petition 4-2(2) Co-op Refunds and Income Support
I wish to table the response to Petition 4-2(2), on behalf of the Minister of Education, Thank you.
Motion 017 – 2(2): Marine Service Fees – Notice
Mr. Curley (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker: I’d like to give notice that on March 21, 2005, I will be making a motion.
I will read it in English. (interpretation ends) I give notice that on Monday, March 21, 2005, I will move the following motion:
NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the Honourable Member for Iqaluit Centre, that the Legislative Assembly call on the Government of Nunavut to lobby the federal government to exempt all vessels providing sealift services operating North of 60˚, and to provide retroactive reimbursement of fees charged to the Canadian Coast Guard and paid to date.
Mr. Speaker, I will be asking for unanimous consent to deal with the motion today.
Item 15. Item 16. Motions.
I seek consent to deal with my motion today because the Minister for the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs will be coming up soon.
The member is asking to deal with this motion today.
Motion 017 – 2(2): Marine Service Fees
WHEREAS the annual sealift is a lifeline for Nunavut’s communities;
AND WHEREAS the Marine Service Fees collected by the Canadian Coast Guard are applied unfairly;
AND WHEREAS this inequity results in increased costs of providing sealift service and those costs, in turn, are passed on to consumers;
AND WHEREAS the cost of living in Nunavut is the highest in Canada;
AND WHEREAS the federal government depends on the communities and residents of Nunavut to maintain and exert Arctic sovereignty;
NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the Honourable Member for Iqaluit Centre, that the Legislative Assembly call on the Government of Nunavut to lobby the federal government to exempt all vessels providing sealift services operating North of 60˚, and to provide retroactive reimbursement of fees charged by the Canadian Coast Guard and paid to date.
Mr. Speaker, we were discussing this during the committee that the Canadian Coast Guard, in the 1970’s, established fees to vessels who have to use Coast Guard icebreakers around the St. Lawrence Seaway and the Great Lakes, and those fees were to be renewed in 1997.
But, around 2000, it was determined that vessels to north of 60˚ are to be exempt from the fee.
The problem, however, is that some vessels ply in waters both north of 60˚ and south of 60˚, so they extended the exemption to vessels around the Great Lakes. They then claimed those vessels in the north of 60˚ don’t leave from the north, so Nunavut doesn’t apply.
Now, the Canadian Coast Guard is saying that they can’t do too much, but they had offered the Great Lakes that they are exempt from this service fee.
Yet, they say they can’t apply that to Nunavut so, that is not fair and so the Indian and Northern Affairs Minister definitely have to be told about this.
We don’t have any other alternative, but around the Great Lakes, they have highways, they have alternatives.
This is getting too hard on the vessels and the high cost of construction and for major assets like vehicles.
We will be asking for support from the members and I want a recorded vote so the message will get across to the Canadian Coast Guard.
Mr. Speaker, I’m very pleased to speak to this motion.
Over the years, I’ve always been an advocate that we are treated unfairly and we pay more than our fair share, as I had indicated yesterday, on the GST tax.
We all know that the federal government is sitting around trying to figure out how to spend it’s huge surplus and that the Canadian Coast Guard, due to the cuts that it faced, is charging us fees for services that are going to impact us in Nunavut, again unfairly, something that does not affect southern Canadians.
They get all their stuff on the road for most part, or by plane.
To me, it’s another example of urban rule where the larger legislation and regulations and things are done for the larger urban centers, much like the Gun Control Bill, without thinking about or caring about the impact that it has on other jurisdictions like ourselves that has a huge detrimental impact.
The people in Nunavut, for the most part, are the people that can afford it the least.
This government is doing the best that we can to try and provide the services and programs that Nunavutmiut need with the limited resources again that we get from the federal government and yet here’s another way where they’re taking more of that back from us.
I urge all members to support this motion and call on again the federal government to show a little more acknowledgement and responsibility to the people of Nunavut.
I want to acknowledge that we have been trying to address this.
I’ve written to two different Prime Ministers on this matter and my colleagues have written to their respective ministers as well.
We will continue to press this matter, but I appreciate the support that we’ll get from the House so that when we write to our colleagues that this issue is not just a government issue, but is for all of Nunavut.
So, I appreciate the support that we’ll be getting from our colleagues on this matter.
The mover, you have the final closing comments.
I think it is important to make a statement to the federal government.
I know that they recently, even as early as today made a series of announcements.
I consider them to be just dipping into the cookie jar and saying how good a cookie it is.
They talk about the $90 million, and so on.
I would like to say to the Minister of Indian Affairs who is coming up here, including our MP, Nancy Karetak-Lindell, now here is an opportunity to make a statement, to make an announcement that the Marine Services Fee are creating exorbitant prices that we don’t need.
The Canadian Coast Guard must provide a service to this part of the world because we are after all Canadians without alternative transportation.
I would like you all to support this motion because it is important statement to the federal government.
Speaker (interpretation): Order.
There is a motion on the floor and we have to vote on it.
For those who are in favour, you will rise.
When I say your name, please sit down.
Item18.
Consideration in Committee of the Whole in Bills and Other Matters.
Tabled documents 52-2(2).
Bill 8, Bill 9, Bill 10, Bill 11, Bill 12, Bill 13 and Bill14.
With Mr. Evygotailak in the chair.
>>House recessed at15:56 and resumed at 16:33
Chairman: I would like to call the Committee to order.
In Committee of the Whole we have the following items to deal with Tabled Document 52 – 2(2), Bill 8, Bill 9, Bill 10, Bill 11, Bill 12, Bill 13, and Bill 14.
Mr. Mapsalak
We wish to continue with Bill 8 and commence the review of the Main Estimates for Human Resources.
We will do this review concurrently with Tabled Document 52 – 2(2) and the appropriate Hansard.
If time permits, we will proceed to review the Department of Environment.
Mr. Tapardjuk, do you have witnesses you would like to bring to the table?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Tapardjuk welcome.
Minister Tapardjuk please introduce your witnesses.
Mr. Tapardjuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
On my left is Kathy Okpik, the Deputy Minister for the Department of Human Resources.
Tom Thompson, who is the Assistant Deputy Minister.
They’ll be here with me.
Chairman: Ms. Okpik, Mr. Thompson, welcome.
Members, please note on the desk is a grey folder marked Tabled Document 52-2(2), also in the folder is an extract from the December 1st Hansard.
As we proceed with Mr. Tapardjuk you can refer to those documents at the same time.
According to Rule 77(1), you have ten minutes to speak, and according to rule 77(2), subject to discretion of the chair.
A member may speak more then once to the matter under discussion, but not until every member who wishes to speak has spoken.
I suggest to the members, that wherever possible you ask your detailed question during the page by page review of the departmental estimates.
I believe I touched on a lot of issues on my opening comments as a chair for the committee yesterday.
There were some comments in the minister’s opening comments on some of the progresses that they have been making.
As we go through it, I will be having questions on all three or four if you count the Business Plan documents that are here before us and to try and identify strengths and weaknesses that may or may not be within the department to try and find ways that we can help to improve the delivery of service in that department.
For myself, I have heard numerous complaints over the years on the timing that it takes to go through the whole process in when someone puts in an application in a year.
I know cases where people have waited months and never got a response at all, and when they finally did get back to them they said I don’t want to work for an organization that takes that long to get back to me.
I think that it’s imperative that we can identify these areas where they may be problems so that good people that do want to work for the government get the opportunity to.
We’re not scaring them off by some of the things that they’ve encountered through out the whole recruitment process.
With that type of methodology in thinking in mind is how I’ll be approaching my questioning during the department.
I just wanted to let the members and minister and the staff be aware of that, what we want to do is improve, do what we can to improve the service delivery of the department of this government.
I would like to welcome the minister, the deputy minister, and the assistant deputy minister.
I just wanted to make a comment.
Well, we are improving on the issue of the Land Claims Agreement and Article 23, and I realize the government is working hard to meet their obligations under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement and Article 23.
In Rankin Inlet, I went to tell the minister that there are quite a number of people and there has been an increase in the Inuit hire; it’s approximately 51 percent in Rankin Inlet and I hope to see an increase in the numbers over the years.
I would like to congratulate you on the Inuit hire percentage.
I will be identifying the concerns we have when we go page-by-page.
I would also like to urge the minister and his staff to work on those and to make improvements, and if possible, we don’t want to get into the details, but we do have to tow the line.
I have seen a lot of managers who are not towing the line.
There’s no teamwork in some areas, but if everybody towed the line, there would be strong movement.
I would like to tell the minister and his staff that there has to be an improvement in the teamwork within the department.
I identified that as one of the priorities this summer when an individual almost resigned from his or her position because of those challenges.
I thank the department and the manager.
What I am trying to say is that there’s an Inuk and a Qallunaaq, I think it was Article 41 in the Collective Agreement, I am not sure what you call it, it was in the issue of assault.
(interpretation ends) Well, it’s not only teamwork, its building trust and respecting one another because, of course, we can’t figure everything out with criteria.
So it needs work.
I would like to urge the minister and the staff to work towards those and I do know that the minister is working very hard on those issues and the staffs are diligent about meeting their needs.
I think that there should be meetings with the regions to find out what the concerns are.
As Members of the Legislative Assembly we were contacted by the public.
We are not in any particular department and sometimes it’s quite hard when we talk with the supervisors and they say they will look into it.
Of course, you don’t want to interfere as a politician.
I am very pleased to see the Department of Human Resources here.
One thing I realized that just about every recommendation in the Footprints I and II have been implemented.
The departments have been established, and the decentralization has been completed.
We’ve implemented all of these so far from the Footprints I and II. I’d like to keep it like that.
As such, today, and I’m very pleased that they have been implemented.
Footprints identified which departments were going to be decentralized and because we’re a new government, we can’t implement everything all at the same time.
There are the regulations and the policies that had to be established.
Under the Footprints, the whole Government of Nunavut would be completely established within 15 years.
So, we have quite a leeway to work with.
But, I’m a bit concerned and something that is not fully understood is that the Collective Agreement is an agreement for the public servants and then there’s the Nunavut Teacher’s Association where there is an agreement among the educators.
So, that’s the difference between these two.
There is the public servants who are trying to adhere to the rules that apply to them and doing the best they can to conduct themselves properly in the work place.
We hear about the teachers, who abuse or threaten children and then they have to go through the whole court process and disciplinary action.
It doesn’t quite make sense if we have to follow the regulations and the policies.
We hear of teachers and because of course they deal with children every day.
In different behavioural patterns they can’t scold the children, they can’t yell at the children because of course it’s in the policies and the employees have to adhere to those, so there is a difference.
There is the Public Service Agreement and then there are the rules that are applied.
Possibly the Minister of Human Resources and the Minister of Education should get together and iron out those problems.
Looking at the whole picture and while we’re preparing for the future, and working towards the goal of a fully established, I think we are on target in the process point of view.
That’s from my personal point of view.
I’m pleased that we are on target.
The Inuit didn’t have anything 50 years ago but we have progressed so much over the years and we have promised to have a government that is fully established and functioning within 15 years.
I wanted to make that comment.
We’re on page D-5, Human Resources Branch Summary.
Operations and Maintenance, $2,067,000.
One of the things that I look at in a lot of the departments and I know I’ve raised it in the past is the increase in PY’s in departments.
The Directorate Division has remained stable since last year.
There are 13 PY’s, they’re the three at the Deputy Minister’s office, eight in Corporate Services and two in Policy and Planning.
I am just wondering if the minister can give us an outline of what those positions do for the department.
My Deputy Minister will respond to that, Ms. Okpik.
I will talk about the number of PY’s at the headquarters.
Within the Deputy Minister’s office, there is myself and our receptionist.
In the Finance part, there are six PY’s, with the Manager and Finance Comptroller, and there are four other finance officers, for example, when they first get a government job, they have to be moved, so these two individuals are responsible for transportation and moving of new staff.
Also we have a Human Resource Coordinator dealing with employment.
The two positions are going to work with P2K.
Also in Policy and Planning we have three PY’s.
In the Main Estimates on D-5, it says the Director is responsible for the overall direction of the department and for the monitoring and reporting on the government’s initiatives related to Article 23.
It provides the leadership and carriers including policy research and development, financial management and the human resource system.
When they are looking at policy development, are there any issues that arise that any department has to come to the Department of Human Resources for advice on, or anything like that.
Does that flow through up to this position within the department?
Within the department, each department has their own policies.
Each department is responsible for their own policies.
When the departments have a particular request for assistance then as a department, we provide support and assistance to the other departments in that way.
That is when we work with the other departments.
The minister had indicated that each of the departments has their own policies.
It is my understanding that Department of Human Resources has developed guidelines and processes to ensure consistency and fairness throughout the whole staffing process, and that managers in the department are required to comply with those policies and procedures.
That would be looking at all government departments.
My question is aside from the policies and procedures that are developed within the Department of Human Resources.
Do the departments have other hiring policies and practices that they follow aside from that one?
I will try and make it clear.
It states in the Public Service Act that the public service for the government...like for example, the minister’s authority has been given to the deputy minister, and it states in the Public Service Act that the minister’s authority on employment has been given to the Department of Health and to the Department of Education.
Having said that, the departments do the hiring themselves because the authority has been given to the Department of Education and also in the other departments that authority is given to the deputy ministers.
In spite of that, our department, when the other departments ask for assistance from other departments in any way or form, we are asked to make sure that they comply with the Act or the policy.
I believe that clarifies.
So any department other than the Department of Education and the Department of Health have to or is required to follow the policies and procedures for staffing set out by the Department of Human Resources.
When they are in the process of hiring staff, there’s a guideline and there’s a policy that has to be followed by all of the departments.
At this time, we are still working on the guidelines.
Once we amend the...I believe that all of the departments that operate within the government’s funding, whether it be the Department of Health or Education that they would follow the new amended guidelines and processes.
I believe as a Human Resources Department I believe that all of the departments have to have the same policy and procedures.
So we are going to amend the guidelines.
Once they are completed, we expect that those two departments will also be together will the rest of the departments.
Does the minister or his staff have any idea of when these new guidelines are going to be in place and if you could outline any specific changes that the things they have identified that need addressing under the current policies and procedures?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Yes, though we have a policy and procedures, but they need to be worked on and amended again.
Just to update them, we have to comply with the Land Claims’ Article 23 and it states that we have to treat all employees of government equally and fairly.
What I stated was that...like for example, if I am trying to get a job, the departments have guidelines. Those guidelines were inherited from Government of the Northwest Territories.
Since we did not make those guidelines ourselves, although there’s a guideline there, we need to make improvements and Nunavutize it, so therefore we will have to consider this since there not included, since Article 23 is not included in the guideline and the policies, they don’t include anything new.
We need to make amendments, though we have guidelines and policies, they are outdated so were just going to update it.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you Minister Tapardjuk.
In the minister’s response, he indicated that they’re mostly changing things, that there is policies that we inherited from the Northwest Territories and changing them to conform with Nunavut and with our obligations with our land claim agreement’s Article 23.
Just to ask the minister, are these policies and procedures that there reviewing right now, is that what is considered to be the human resource manual for the Government of Nunavut?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Yes, you are correct; yes that’s what it is.