EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
There are some social workers who have ASIST training. The regional directors are putting a plan together to have ASIST training for the social workers who don’t have the ASIST training that is coming this fall.
Question 223 – 4(2): Pathway for Adult Secondary School (Rumbolt)
Earlier during the Minister’s Statement, the minister stated that the Pathway for Adult Secondary School program, which is being offered this fall, will have 52 students enrolled and will be delivered in six communities.
Can the minister provide members with a little more information as to which communities will be receiving this program?
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Minister of Education, Hon. Minister Mr. Quassa.
Hon. Paul Quassa (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank my colleague for asking a very good question.
Iqaluit, Sanikiluaq, Gjoa Haven, Rankin Inlet, Cape Dorset, and Kimmirut are the six communities that I was referring to in my Minister’s Statement.
I thank the minister for his information.
Mr. Speaker, from reading the Minister’s Statement on the PASS program, it seems to be a great way to have more educated people in our communities.
Can the minister explain why this program is only being offered in six communities and not all Nunavut communities?
These six communities have requested this program to be offered in their municipalities. I want everyone to know that these programs are available throughout Nunavut, so they are available.
However, in this calendar year, we have only received the six requests from these communities, but it’s open to all Nunavut communities.
For example, the program is for anybody aged 19 years and over or anyone who would like to upgrade their education level. It’s open to all communities.
Question 224 – 4(2): Long-term Economic Planning for Baker Lake (Mikkungwak)
Mr. Speaker, as the minister is very much aware, the operations of the Meadowbank mine near my constituency of Baker Lake have had a profoundly positive impact on the community, and I again pay tribute to the hard work and partnerships that have been the foundation of this success.
However, residents of the community understand very well that the mine’s lifespan is scheduled to end in 2017 and that work needs to start now to address the long-term economic future of the community.
Can the minister indicate what steps his department is taking to help the community of Baker Lake begin planning for the post-Meadowbank era?
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. I say “good day” to my fellow Nunavummiut.
Mr. Speaker, with respect to economic development in Nunavut communities, the Department of Economic Development will always look at economic opportunities across Nunavut.
We’re going to remain in support of the communities.
I know that there is going to be a lot more development.
Whether a new mine is opening or one is closing, it will have an impact on the communities.
However, we can’t work on these issues alone. It’s going to be up to the community, the hamlet council, and other entities to work together and plan for the “post-Meadowbank era.”
The Kiggavik mine project has recently taken some important steps forward.
Can the minister confirm that this government will support measures to ensure that residents of Baker Lake and neighbouring communities receive priority consideration for jobs, training, and contracting opportunities at the mine?
In regard to mining projects, it’s a huge economic opportunity for people of Nunavut and for employment in the region, including the mine near Baker Lake.
They’ve had that mine for quite a number of years now.
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated earlier, there are a lot of plans that we have to look at.
As I also indicated earlier, we will have to work together with the communities, the governments, and the other entities to look at development and economic opportunities. The community governments, regional Inuit associations, and corporations will have to work together to look at economic opportunities.
Outside of Rankin Inlet, the Meliadine mine project is also moving forward. It’s similar to the Meadowbank mine project and it’s also moving forward.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Minister of Economic Development of Transportation, Hon. Minister Mr. Kuksuk.
As I indicated earlier, the community governments, hamlet councils, and regional Inuit associations will negotiate to make sure that the Inuit are representative in the operating mines. It’s the community leaders, regional Inuit associations, and organizations that have to work together to create those economic opportunities. I would like the member to be well aware of that.
Question 225 – 4(2): Support for Parents (Enook)
I thought question period was going to be over before I got to ask questions, as Mr. Mikkungwak was going to have two chances.
Mr. Speaker, before I ask my question, good afternoon to the people of Pond Inlet and Nunavut.
I would like to go back to the question that I brought up yesterday and I would like to direct my questions to the Minister of Family Services.
I will be looking at the Hansard just to make sure I got this straight. This is the Hansard for October 24, 2014.
Mr. Speaker, I know that these are just the Blues and they are not final yet.
When I was directing my question to the hon. minister yesterday, which I will read from the excerpt from the Hansard, her response was, “This issue is very complex, as it’s case by case.”
Mr. Speaker, I asked questions yesterday about whether the parents get counselling when their children are taken away.
My question was answered by the minister stating that “The reasons vary, depending on each case...” What does she mean by that statement?
Hon. Jeannie Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank the Member for Tununiq for that question.
Yesterday, you didn’t ask me any questions because it was Sunday.
I believe you are referring to Friday.
When children are apprehended by social services, it is done so under different circumstances.
There can be a voluntary agreement between the Department of Family Services and the parents.
The second one is the plan of care, where the parents and social service workers have meetings to look at the support services that are out there. Parents can receive counselling that way and they decide whether the child is going to be under the care of social services.
The third one is going through the court system where the children can be apprehended from their parents.
It is at the court’s discretion whether the child will be under the care of social services for a certain number of months or if they are going to be under temporary warrant.
As a last resort, the Department of Family Services asks the court if the child can be under permanent ward.
That is the last resort taken by social services.
Those are the different avenues we use as a department when it comes to children and their apprehension, and that’s what I was referring to yesterday.
I can’t stop my mind from working overtime.
I asked this question the day before yesterday and I apologize if I made a mistake. I must have been thinking about it too much. It seems like yesterday, but apparently it’s not.
Mr. Speaker, let me ask this question. There are apparently three different routes that the Department of Family Services uses.
Using those three ways, is there one way where the parents are just forgotten about right away?
The Department of Family Services does not have any policies of not doing anything about children.
Let me ask it this way instead so that it will hopefully make it easier to respond.
When children are taken away from their parents, does the Department of Family Services have a policy where the children are allowed to go back to their parents?
Thank you for requesting clarification on the process to return children to their parents.
When a child is apprehended by workers, the first priority is to determine the possible return date of the child.
However, when the process includes a lawyer appointed by the family, the investigation is closed to the public by the social worker.
The investigator has the ability to use whichever process they prefer, such as (interpretation ends) family court. (interpretation) The social service workers don’t have the discretion to choose the process. Only the investigator has the ability to choose which process will be used.
This is generally based on the lawyer’s advice.
Question 226 – 4(2): Laboratory Contract Services (Mapsalak)
I will direct my question to the Minister of Health.
Mr. Speaker, on Thursday, October 23, I questioned the minister about blood samples collected by health centres from medical patients for testing by laboratories in the south via shipments.
I wasn’t clear enough in my line of questioning. To remedy that, I will try to be much clearer with my question.
Mr. Speaker, when samples are approved for shipment, as an example, from my constituency community of Repulse Bay, they are sent to Ontario for testing.
This is a vast distance between the two places. Why was this set up in this manner, where the testing is done quite far from the communities? Does the minister know why such long-distance arrangements were undertaken?
Hon. Monica Ell (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the member for the question on this current system.
At the time when blood sample testing and the process for collecting blood samples was set up here in Nunavut, the previous set-up was changed, as the testing was done closer at hand with samples sent to Edmonton.
The set-up was changed to Ontario when the transportation routes were reviewed to ensure the speediest route to southern locations.
It became clear that the fastest way was through First Air, as they have a daily flight to southern locations like Ottawa.
In terms of the logistics of sending blood samples, it seemed much easier to use the daily flights to reach the laboratories earlier.
There is still freedom to send samples to other laboratories, especially in urgent cases or emergencies, so they do have that ability to do that.
That may be, but I live in Repulse Bay and it is also one of my constituency communities within the Kivalliq region, including Coral Harbour. Repulse Bay is only served by one airline, that is, Calm Air, as they are now the only airline flying into Repulse Bay. Additionally, the flight arrives late at night.
However, I would like to know if there isn’t a blood sample testing laboratory in Manitoba.
Is it due to not having this service available in Manitoba that it is sent elsewhere?
Hon. Monica Ell (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also thank the member.
The health system isn’t very fast in processing these types of samples. The member raised that question last week and I committed to looking into the matter regarding Winnipeg as well as the history of sending samples in the past. I’m still looking into this matter.
Question 227 – 4(2): Crime Prevention Programs (Angnakak)
I didn’t think I would get the second question.
As the minister is aware, the government’s Community Justice Program has a responsibility to establish crime prevention programs in all communities.
Mr. Speaker, in the 2014-17 business plan, one of the department’s priorities for the current fiscal year has been to “Develop a crime prevention strategy for Nunavut and [deliver] crime prevention programs in all regions of Nunavut.”
Can the minister provide an update on the status of this crime prevention strategy?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am pleased to say that the meetings in all communities were attended very well. We compiled a lot of information that we can use to put the plans together.
However, I can’t fully respond to the question.
Only after everything has been reviewed will I be able to provide more information.
Ensuring the rehabilitation of inmates may prevent individuals from reoffending once they have been released from a correctional facility.
One way to improve rehabilitation measures within the correctional system would be to provide more services to address mental illness and addictions.
The Northwest Territories and the Yukon have both established wellness courts to address such issues in their own jurisdictions.
Members were recently informed by the department that the department has been considering establishing a wellness court within the Nunavut justice system.
Can the minister describe what specific actions his department is taking to establish a wellness court within Nunavut?
This matter is very serious and we can’t just jump into it. We will have to review the Corrections Act to see how we can input Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit.
We’re working closely with the Department of Health to see how the inmates with mental illness can be assisted further.
The new facility, Makigiarvik, is going to be opening to help people with mental issues that have to be confined.
This matter is very difficult to work with, but we’re still reviewing it.
Information provided by the department indicates that as of February 2013, 74 percent of male offenders in Nunavut committed crimes after being released from the correctional facilities.
Mental illness and addictions can be significant factors in an individual’s decision to reoffend after being released from correctional facilities.
Can the minister specify what service his department is currently providing to address addictions and mental health issues within the territory’s correctional system?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I stated earlier, we will be reviewing the law some more to see how we can improve the way we handle inmates to better accommodate them.
The review will start this coming year.
We have to look to see how we can further help people who have mental illness and addiction.
Hon. Minister Mr. Mike.
I seek unanimous consent to go back to (interpretation ends) Item 5 (interpretation) in the Orders of the Day.
Speaker (interpretation): The member is seeking unanimous consent to go back to (interpretation ends) Item 5. (interpretation) Are there any nays?
Hon. Johnny Mike (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank my colleagues for providing this opportunity.
The people I wish to recognize are very important pieces of my life and they are currently visiting the Gallery. I want to recognize my wife and daughter.
I ask that they be welcomed into the House and to be acknowledged.
I am also quite pleased that my daughter was able to visit us here in Iqaluit, as I call her (interpretation ends) my little girl Panik.
(interpretation) I also want it known that I share the title of minister with my wife, Reverend Mike.
Speaker (interpretation): I welcome the visitors to the Gallery.
Mr. Savikataaq. (interpretation) I’m sorry. Mr. Hickes.
Committee Report 002 – 4(2): Presentation of the Report of the Standing Committee on the Review of the Report of the Auditor General of Canada to the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut on the 2014 Follow-up Report on Child and Family Services in Nunavut (Hickes)
I think Mr. Savikataaq is very pleased that you made that correction.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to present the report of the Standing Committee on Oversight of Government Operations and Public Accounts on its review of the Report of the Auditor General of Canada to the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut on the 2014 Follow-up Report on Child and Family Services in Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, as you will recall, the Auditor General’s report was tabled in the House on March 18, 2014 and was subsequently considered by the Standing Committee on Oversight of Government  Operations and Public Accounts.
*See Appendix for full text of Committee Report 2 – 4(2).
Mr. Speaker, the standing committee held its hearings on the Auditor General’s reports on September 16 and 17, 2014.
The hearings were televised live across Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, the committee was very pleased to welcome Mr. Ronnie Campbell, Assistant Auditor General, and Ms. Michelle Salvail, Principal, from the Office of the Auditor General to our hearings.
Both of these individuals have worked extensively on Nunavut audits in recent years and their expertise and input are much appreciated.
Mr. Speaker, I would further like to acknowledge the participation of witnesses from the Government of Nunavut’s Department of Family Services during our hearings.
Mr. MacDonald, the Acting Deputy Minister of Family Services, Mr. Mark Arnold, the Deputy Director of the Child and Family Services Division, and Mr. Ambrose Ojah, the department’s Child Protection Specialist, appeared on behalf of the Department of Family Services.
Mr. Speaker, the standing committee was extremely disappointed that the director of child and family services did not attend the hearings, as his experience and direct involvement in exercising the specific authorities and duties required to implement the government’s Child and Family Services Act could have afforded the committee greater insight to
and perspective on the challenges facing the Department of Family Services in meeting its obligations to the children and youth of Nunavut.
The absence of the director of child and family services from the hearings raised some concerns.
Mr. Speaker, it is important to consider the historical context of the Auditor General’s most recent audit on Nunavut’s child and family services.
The 2014 audit was a follow-up to the Auditor General’s 2011 Report on Children, Youth and Family Programs and Services in Nunavut.
The objective of the 2011 audit was to evaluate the GN’s performance in carrying out its own procedures and following its own laws in a number of areas relating to child, youth, and family programs and services in Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, the 2011 Auditor General’s report included 20 recommendations with 14 recommendations addressing services relating to children and youth, 3 recommendations addressing adoption, 2 relating to public health, and 1 regarding program coordination between departments.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to note the committee’s disappointment with the lack of progress made by the government in addressing recommendations that were brought forward in 2011 with respect to concerns about services for children, youth, and families in Nunavut.
It is important to keep in mind that no matter which Government of Nunavut department now has the mandate to provide services to children and youth in Nunavut, no matter how many changes may occur in reporting structures and no matter how many changes there are in personnel or infrastructure, the statutory requirements of the legislation, in this case the Child and Family Services Act, must still be met.
As demonstrated in the Auditor General’s 2014 Follow-up Report on Child and Family Services in Nunavut, the level of compliance by the government in meeting its legislated requirements should be much higher than it is.
Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General’s 2014 Follow-up Report on Child and Family Services in Nunavut presented six specific recommendations to the government which bring greater focus to issues addressed in the 14 recommendations of the Auditor General’s 2011 report.
The recommendations in the 2014 follow-up report address the following thematic areas:
Staffing issues;
Meeting the standards of service delivery;
Collecting and using information and data; and
Engaging parents and communities.
Mr. Speaker, during the committee’s proceedings, members raised many important issues and questions concerning the government’s policies and practices relating to the delivery of services for children and youth in Nunavut and a number of themes and issues emerged during the standing committee’s review of the Auditor General’s most recent report to the Legislative Assembly.
Accordingly, the standing committee makes the following nine recommendations:
That the Government of Nunavut as a whole ensure that action plans which are developed to address issues raised by the Auditor General of Canada be provided to the Standing Committee on Oversight of Government Operations and Public Accounts at the earliest opportunity.
That action plans produced by the Government of Nunavut to address such issues as those raised in the reports of the Auditor General of Canada are updated on a regular and consistent basis and that those updates be tabled in the Legislative Assembly on a regular and consistent basis.
Mr. Speaker, the standing committee wishes to stress the importance of providing ongoing updates on the government’s progress in achieving the objectives proposed in its action plans.
The majority of actions proposed in the government’s 2011 action plan are still “live” and the standing committee encourages the government to provide updates on progress achieved in other areas addressed in its 2011 action plan, such as the review of its adoption legislation, as soon as practicable.
That the Department of Family Services provide to the standing committee in a timely manner copies of all documentation and information that departmental witnesses committed to provide during their appearance before the standing committee on September 16 and 17.
That the Department of Family Services work closely with other Government of Nunavut entities to address staffing needs at the community and regional levels.  That the Department of Family Services take the necessary steps to ensure that all community social worker staff have the mandatory training required by law.
That the Department of Family Services continue to work towards developing and establishing key metrics and benchmarks by which to evaluate workloads faced by social workers and establish relevant and appropriate workload standards by 2015.
That the Department of Family Services continue to work towards developing and establishing an electronic case management system by which to collect, consolidate, and analyze information on children and youth requiring and receiving protection and care services.
Mr. Speaker, the standing committee would note that this issue was not only addressed in its previous report on its review of the Auditor General’s 2011 Report on Children, Youth and Family Programs and Services in Nunavut, but was also highlighted in the standing committee’s report on its review of the Auditor General’s 2011 report.
The committee is extremely disappointed at the lack of progress in this area.
That the Government of Nunavut continue to work towards developing policies and practices to establish privacy safeguards for personal information that is provided in accordance with the law to entities such as designated Inuit organizations in the course of implementing the Child and Family Services Act or the Adoption Act.
Further, that the government review the necessity and effectiveness of the current statutory provisions in the Child and Family Services Act and the Adoption Act which involve entities such as designated Inuit organizations in the implementation of the legislation.
That the Department of Family Services give further consideration to developing programs and allocating resources to engage parents, families, and communities in finding solutions and strategies for keeping children safe, protected, comfortable, and secure within their home communities.
Mr. Speaker, given the importance of the family dynamic within Inuit societal values and society as a whole, it is critical that family and community members are involved in determining the best ways to deliver child and youth services in Nunavut and to ensure the safety of our children.
Mr. Speaker, in recent deliberations in the Legislative Assembly, the Minister of Family Services herself noted that this is an area which requires further implementation.
The standing committee looks forward to seeing progress in this area in the near future.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) The member has moved that the report of the standing committee be received by the House and entered into the record as read.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) The report has been received by the House and will be entered into the record as read.
Motion 011 – 4(2): Extended Sitting Hours and Days (Mikkungwak)