EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
The department’s proposed 2011-12 main estimates include $2.5 million in funding for the Mobile Equipment Block Funding Program.
This program “Provides annual core funding to assist communities in mobile equipment lifecycle planning, procurement and maintenance.”
The standing committee was pleased to see an increase in the funding allocated for this program and encourages the department to continually review this program to ensure that adequate funding is provided to communities for their mobile equipment needs.
Mr. Chairman, the department’s proposed 2011-12 main estimates include $850,000 in funding for the Municipal Insurance Exchange to “offset incremental costs associated with municipal insurance coverage and to implement loss control program initiatives with focus on such critical areas as fire training and fire prevention.”
The standing committee supports the government’s ongoing support of NAMIX until such time as the system can become self-funding and looks forward to ongoing updates on this issue.
The department’s 2010-13 business plan indicated that a draft report has been developed concerning the “open-market feasibility study which develops sealift re-supply policy options.”
On June 2, 2010, the Minister of Community and Government Services tabled the Considerations Regarding an Open-Market System for Annual Sealift – Summary Report December 2009 in the Legislative Assembly.
During the minister’s recent appearance before standing committee, members were informed that the department will be given direction by cabinet regarding the sealift resupply contract.
The standing committee looks forward to receiving an update on this important issue.
The standing committee also notes the department’s recent announcement concerning the award of the sealift resupply for the Kivalliq region to Nunavut Sealink and Supply Incorporated and encourages the department to work with sealift suppliers to ensure that the best possible service is provided to all communities.
The department’s proposed 2011-12 main estimates include $500,000 in annual funding to provide training to search and rescue organizations and assistance with the purchase of equipment.
The standing committee also encourages the minister to table the outstanding annual reports which are required by law to be tabled in the Legislative Assembly under the territorial Emergency Measures Act.
Mr. Chairman, the department’s 2011-14 business plan provides an update on the status of one of its priorities for the Office of the Fire Marshal.
It indicates that the “New Fire Prevention Strategy has been drafted for review with communities.”
The standing committee looks forward to the tabling of a new strategy in the Legislative Assembly at the earliest opportunity.
The standing committee notes that the proposed budget for the department’s Capital Planning and Technical Services Branch is increasing from $32,370,000 in 2010-11 to $33,671,000 in 2011-12. Most of this increase is due to a $1.3 million increase in the budget for building maintenance.
Mr. Chairman, the department’s draft 2011-14 business plan indicates that one of its priorities for the upcoming fiscal year is to “Continue to work with the Nunavut Water Board and Indian and Northern Affairs Canada for licensing compliance in the Territory” and “Create an environmental work plan toward implementation of the Municipal Waste Water Effluent Strategy.”
The standing committee notes the recent news coverage regarding Nunavut communities and their lack of compliance in respect to the water licences issued by the Nunavut Water Board.
MLAs have spoken on a number of occasions in the Legislative Assembly on the importance of drinking water quality and safety in Nunavut.
The standing committee continues to recommend that the department prepare and table in the Legislative Assembly a comprehensive report on water quality in all of Nunavut’s communities.
The standing committee also notes that the Department of Environment and the Department of Community and Government Services are currently reviewing waste management options for Nunavut.
Members look forward to receiving ongoing updates on this important issue and encourage both departments to continue working with communities to ensure that they are compliant with all territorial and federal legislation regarding waste management in Nunavut.
The department’s proposed 2011-12 main estimates indicate that the department’s Petroleum Products Revolving Fund will have a deficit of $7,567,000 in 2011-12. The standing committee encourages the department to closely monitor this issue.
The department’s draft 2011-14 business plan provides an update on the status of one of its previous priorities, which indicated that “Tank farm specification updates to incorporate the latest environmental regulations have begun.”
During the minister’s appearance before the standing committee, members raised questions on the status of this issue and how much it will cost the GN to become compliant with the latest federal environmental regulations.
Although the minister provided some information, it was not clear exactly how much it would cost the government to become compliant with the environmental regulations.
The standing committee encourages the department to provide further clarification on the potential costs associated with upgrading all tank farms in Nunavut.
Members also note that the department’s business plan indicates that one of its priorities is to “Complete an inventory and condition assessment of all tank farm assets and establish a 20-year replacement plan for all tank farm assets.”
Members look forward to ongoing updates on this issue.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my opening comments on the 2011-12 main estimates and 2011-14 business plan of the Department of Community and Government Services.
I will now open the floor for general comments. Please save your detailed questions for the page-by-page review. Any comments?
I thank the minister for the increases that he mentioned for the communities.
We were asked to make ourselves brief and concise, so I’ll do that.
I have nothing for general comments, but I would like to ask the minister a question. Sometimes municipalities go into deficit situations and it can’t be helped.
You mentioned WAN/LAN/MAN. Do you think that WAN/LAN/MAN will help decrease the deficit situation in the communities?
It’s included in his opening comments and that’s why I’m asking the question.
Thank you, Mr. Ningark, for asking that question.
That program will not introduce any increases and will not impact the hamlets as it is intended only for our government.
Mr. Ningark (interpretation): Perhaps I was not understood.
Will this WAN/LAN/MAN help hamlets keep track of whether they are in deficit or will this provide more support for the hamlets’ financial management under the system?
For example, (interpretation ends) strengthening financial management by CGS for the municipalities across Nunavut.
I understood what you were trying to say.
This WAN/LAN/MAN is a computer program that allows communication within the Nunavut-wide government.
It’s not for municipalities and will not have an impact on them.
This is for the Government of Nunavut’s computer system to increase the speed of communication.
If it were to provide benefits, then that is where it would show up, but this will not impact any hamlet computer system as it is not set up for them.
It would be good to help the communities in doing their financial work.
There used to be an evaluation of municipalities in the past.
I thought this program was going to help in evaluating the communities.
I apologize if I was mistaken, Mr. Chairman.
You want to comment on it, Minister Kusugak?
I know you just made a comment, but as I mentioned earlier, there is going to be additional funding for the municipalities for O&M and I’m sure that it’s going to help them.
Our employees are always working with the hamlet offices on how to decrease their deficit situations.
We’re going to keep working with the hamlets to help them stay out of deficit situations.
The Inuktitut pages are numbered but the English is not.
Counting the cover sheet, I guess it is page 3 where you talk about MTO.
I think this program has been in existence now for about close to ten years, for sure. You say you continue 6,500 training days a year.
Is the demand for this program increasing or is it constant or is it on the decrease?
It’s good to see that there are some programs that are out there available for municipalities that they keep wanting and because of their success, this is one of them.
Mr. Chairman, it seemed like it was increasing and now it’s kind of peaked, but it’s constant.
Every day the municipalities are taking advantage of this very worthwhile training organization.
Mr. Rumbolt: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I agree with the minister. It is a very good program and it is nice to see it in the communities.
My next question is on the same subject of MTO training.
As the program progresses, are we seeing more community specific training or are we still seeing a lot of regional training happening?
Yes, those are good points.
Right now, we seem to be seeing a trend. Constantly, financial management training is always there, but we’re also seeing a lot more of fire prevention, firefighting, and emergency preparedness, that kind of training, a lot more happening in those areas as well, Mr. Chairman.
On another page, I’m not sure where it is, but you talked about your initiatives to maintain fuel prices at their current level.
In the House the other day, I think you mentioned something about 30 or 40 percent of your fuel has been purchased.
Given today’s market for oil, do you think it’s possible to maintain the same level with the way the fuel prices are going right now?
It would be nice to say yes, but it’s one of those things that change every day.
I think we purchased approximately one-third of our petroleum needs right now.
We’re in the process of working on purchasing gasoline products.
Once all of the products are purchased, that’s about the only time we will know exactly the details in terms of if there is going to be an increase or decrease or if we’re going to stay the same.
I wouldn’t hazard a guess, but we’re going to do the best that we can to ensure that we don’t have an increase in price.
We will shoot for that and anything below that would be a bonus.
It’s really hard to answer it right now, Mr. Chairman, but come June or July, we will have a lot better idea of prices and effects and we should be able to hazard a guess better at that time.
I just want to remind members that whatever is in the minister’s opening comments is in the page by page. So if you could save a lot of those questions for then, but if you have any other ones, you can go ahead.
I’ll just ask one more question.
One of my next questions was going to be when you anticipate having all of the fuel purchased, but you said in June or July, so that’s fine.
Is your department doing anything to increase their bulk buying earlier in the year when prices are lower?
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: We do what we can in terms of purchasing early. We have to remember that we have to store the fuel products when we purchase them, so we do as early as we can.
The fuel we did purchase so far, if we purchased it today, would cost us about $2 million more than it did when we purchased it a couple of months ago. So we do try to purchase it at the earliest convenience.
One of things that we have to keep in mind with petroleum products is they do have a shelf life and we do have to store them and try to consume them before the expiry date. So that’s how it works, Mr. Chairman.
I don’t have anybody else on my list here, so we will go page by page.
We will go to J-4. Community and Government Services. Branch Summary.
Directorate. Any questions?
Chairman: We will go to J-5.
Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $64,927,000.
I think Mr. Ningeongan had his hand up first.
On page 162 of your list of priorities for your department in terms of the increase in the continual work with the MTO and communities to advance priorities in training within the communities, I know at times, the mayors bring up the concerns about mechanic training and the ability of people in the community to work on the equipment that is being purchased, with the mobile equipment, and the newer technologies.
I’m just wondering: what’s your department doing to help assist that concern for the mayors?
We’re constantly working with different departments within governments and possible people to give training in that field and working with the staff of the Municipal Training Organization to address the needs, and that is one of the many needs that we have.
We’re finding that we have a growing need for heavy equipment mechanics. We have a growing need for licensed heavy equipment operators.
So we’re working with MTO and the municipalities to try addressing those needs, Mr. Chairman.
It’s good to see, with the opening of the Nunavut Trade School, that maybe we could begin to tackle some of those needs with different training departments within our government and MTO to address those.
I just want to remind members that when they’re asking detailed questions, they have to ask them on the page we’re on, not on the previous page or anything.
Mr. Elliott: Okay, I’m sorry.
I thought we were on page J-5.
In terms of the Municipal Funding Policy, there was an increase from $35,063,000 in 2010-11 to $40,194,000 in 2011-12.
I think that’s the $4.4 million increase that you were talking about.
I’m just wondering: how do you divide up the funding that goes to each community in terms of a breakdown? Is it per capita, or how is it broken down?
This is strictly the consumer price index across the board.
There’s a formula involved in it and that’s how that was done.
So in terms of the $40,194,000, it’s going out to the communities. It’s my understanding that that’s the money that the communities or all of the hamlets use to do their core operations within them. It’s divided between every community in Nunavut.
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Yes, there is a formula in place to deal with that and divide it up between communities.
I was just wondering in terms of some of the reading that we had done. It seemed like some of the smaller communities are actually faring worse in terms of staying afloat without running into deficits.
I was wondering if some of it had to do with the fact that the funding formula is… . If it’s on per capita basis, obviously I could see them not being able to keep up and struggling, but you had said it wasn’t on a per capita basis.
Maybe you could speak to that point about if a hamlet is struggling what services you provide to help them.
That formula, which we are reviewing at the moment, is not quite simply based on population, it includes population, the kind of infrastructure, the kind of equipment they have in the community.
It’s a little more complex than counting heads and dividing the funds or adding funds, it’s a lot more complicated than that.
Our department has seen the need over the past while to increase funding for municipalities and we have pushed to do that in this budget.
In terms of dealing with municipalities that may run into financial situations, I think almost all communities have come across that path, unfortunately, over the years. Our department has worked very hard with each municipality to address the deficit situations without cutting too much of any programs or staff from municipalities.
In some cases, they were able to do that.
In some other cases, it’s a little more trying, but we do our best.
I know my staff does work very hard in order to make sure that the municipalities don’t run into deficits and when they do, they try to get them out of the deficits with the least impact on the community as possible.
I wanted to ask specifically about the funding for municipal liaison officers. Is this a specific contribution agreement between CGS and the hamlets?
Is the way that that position is funded part of this Municipal Funding Policy where this is their operating dollars and if they want to assign a position for that, then they pay it out of that fund?
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: Yes, Mr. Chairman, you are correct, it’s funded through the Municipal Funding Program.
In terms of the $2.5 million that’s being allocated for the mobile equipment block funding, how much does each community get for that?
Unlike the complex funding formula for the municipalities where it’s based on a whole bunch of things, this is not based on anything other than dividing the money evenly, regardless of the size of population.
In this case, it’s $104,000 per municipality, Mr. Chairman.
One of the priorities for the department on page 162 of the business plan is to assist hamlets with the implementation of the Inuit Language Protection Act and do an assessment of the different signs that are required by the hamlet.
I’m just wondering: what type of assistance are you giving the hamlets?
Are you helping them with a database? Are you looking at the overall strategy where every community has stop signs and then you’re going to design the sign of how it should look in standardized form or is that a combination of working with CLEY? Just maybe explain how that’s going to be working and how you’re working with hamlets to work towards that goal.
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: We’re working closely with the hamlets on this through standing offers and things like that.
What we’re currently doing is inventory of signage in municipalities and working towards international signage so we don’t have all different kinds of signs in all different kinds of municipalities.
We’re working towards international signage for all municipalities and we’re working with them to address those.
That really helps because I wouldn’t want to see different signs for every community.
It’s definitely a big cost-saving measure where you can order a large number of signs for all of the communities and do that in one shot, and then save money there, as the Minister of Finance keeps trying to find ways to save money.
My next question was about the $320 million of federal funding that is helping to assist in building infrastructure in the territory that you had mentioned, which are projects that are going into our communities.
I’m just wondering: in terms of capital carryover projects, how are we doing with that?
In terms of rolling out programs, are they on time or are they falling behind?
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: Mr. Chairman, I think it’s an interesting question. For the most part, I think we’re on time. Again, it depends on different parameters and different projects.
Sometimes we get a project going and we find that a municipality may want to have changes to some infrastructure and that holds us up. Sometimes we have issues, such as shipping, that may hold us up. So it depends very much on what project, where, and when.
For the most part, aside from those kinds of hiccups, they are pretty much on time if there is no reason for it not to be like change in design, maybe shipping, or things like that.
But overall, there is no issue of lapsing federal funding at this time, if that’s where he’s headed to.
No, I was actually asking because it was leading into something that… . When the Minister of Finance was doing his Budget Address, he mentioned the idea of not slowing down on capital projects.
One of the ideas that I thought might be interesting to ask your department was the idea of, in terms of capital dollars for one fiscal year, doing a bare minimum and not staring new projects and seeing how that works, and then having time to catch up on them.
From the Budget Address, it seems like that’s not an approach that the Government of Nunavut wants to go.
I’m not sure if the minister wanted to comment on that.
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: The only thing I would comment on that if I could, Mr. Chairman, is that if we did that, we could then end up running into problems of trying to spend more money or trying to expend all of the federal funds because they have sunsets.
I think that if we keep going the course we are now, we should be okay. I’ll leave it at that, Mr. Chairman.
My next question is very specific to Resolute Bay in terms of the utilidor system.
It might seem like it’s a capital question but it’s really an O&M question because of the dollars that go into the funding for providing water for the communities.
I know one of the issues that the communities brought to me in terms of hamlet council members and also community members is the fact that the utilidor system costs them so much it actually is driving them into a deficit where they heat water to travel throughout the utilidor, which incurs the cost for heat, and then it travels throughout the system where there are lots of leaks, so they are actually heating more water than they actually use.
I’m just wondering: in terms of solutions, do you think one possible solution is increasing the rates for water for community members?
It’s kind of a Catch-22: you drop the heat of the water and now you’re repairing the utilidor all over again, so it’s damned if you do and damned if you don’t.
In terms of possibilities like increasing rates, that would be left to the municipality and not me.
Yes, I know that community members don’t want to spend any more costs on utilities, so that’s not an option that I think the hamlet wants to go, but is there a specific process that the hamlet has to go through for increasing or is it just a matter of passing a motion at hamlet council and they’re done, they could raise the rates?
Do they have to go through negotiations with CG&S to just determine a particular rate or a certain amount of an increase?
No, there is a process. There are municipal by-laws that they have to abide by. During that process, I believe the appropriate minister of the day would have to approve whatever increases or decreases they may be asking for in their rates.
I just want to warn everyone to be careful on some of the language that is used that might not be quite appropriate in the House.
Mr. Ningeongan: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation) I wanted to first ask about this as most hamlet councillors are usually not up to date on the Municipal Mobile Equipment Block Funding Policy. When the funds are allocated to the hamlets, does the regulations or criteria get included in the contribution?
Yes, we do provide information if the councillors are unaware as to why we are signing a contribution agreement with them.
It identifies the purpose of the funds and what they are to be used for.
The reason why I asked that question was an SAO is usually the one person who knows the details and what I have noticed is that usually only the SAOs know about these policies.
I was asked to bring this question up with the department about the (interpretation ends) Municipal Mobile Equipment Block Funding Policy. (interpretation) They were wondering if you can provide the policy, along with the block funding, so that they understand the purpose for the funding so that it can be a guide for them.
The other question that I have is from reading the department’s (interpretation ends) Municipal Mobile Equipment Block Funding Policy, (interpretation) I understood further that communities are required to establish a mobile equipment reserve and to set up a separate bank account.
Do the municipalities have an opportunity to accumulate funds over a period of several years before spending the funds on equipment?
If they are given that opportunity, can the interest be accrued to increase their funds once they have the bank account?
I was asking about several years, not a single year, for example, three years. If they want to purchase a loader or other equipment but their current equipment is still useful, could the municipalities accumulate interest on these funds during that period?
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: Before I respond to my colleague from Nanulik, I want to apologize if I used inappropriate language. I was warned of that in standing committee. I did it here again.
(interpretation) Yes, as per your earlier statement about the policies related to the Mobile Equipment Block Fund, these funds for heavy equipment or snow clearing equipment can include this policy.