EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
It may not affect people in Rankin Inlet, but it will affect people in Iqaluit and the Baffin.
In the Kitikmeot and Cambridge Bay residents have to fly through Yellowknife, so it will affect us one way or another.
Mr. Speaker, if the minister could tell us all on behalf of the residents of Cambridge Bay how the explosive detector installed in the airport in Yellowknife will affect Kitikmeot and Cambridge Bay residents in terms of flying north-south.
I haven’t heard of any exemptions being granted for any residents of Canada in any parts of Canada to not use such a piece of equipment for their luggage.
So, it would naturally affect every resident of Nunavut that flies through Yellowknife to head South.
It would affect also people from the Kivalliq, from the Baffin that fly south to Edmonton and Calgary, and west through the Edmonton-Yellowknife corridor.
So, it would drastically affect every resident that flies through there.
Yes, it’s already very difficult to travel south through Yellowknife; people in the Kitikmeot have to get off the plane in Yellowknife, take our luggage off, take all our baby carry-on stuff, you name it, get in the long lineup, go through the Yellowknife Airport, through security to get in the airplane in Yellowknife, and then go into Edmonton.
I can only imagine it’s going to get more difficult if we have to accompany our luggage because I’ve been through these systems in the south; you have to accompany your suitcases and put them through the luggage racks.
So, imagine if you have a family of eight, traveling with two pieces each.
I’m wondering if the minister could assure me that he will talk to his counterparts in Yellowknife to determine an easy flow system to allow Kitikmeot residents that fly through Yellowknife, since they’re already on the airplane, that they flow through and not unnecessarily delay them.
Speaker (interpretation): Please keep your questions to the point as I have other names on the list.
Hon. David Simailak: It is going to be a problem with every Nunavut resident that flies south, be it through Yellowknife or Iqaluit.
I have not heard yet from the federal people what kind of equipment will be necessary for the owners of the luggage to actually accompany their luggage, as their luggage is going through the detection equipment.
I will certainly find that out and have discussions with my federal transportation counterpart, and also my territorial counterpart in the Northwest Territories, on finding ways to make things easier for passengers.
When the minister is getting this information, could he find out how much additional financial cost travelers in Cambridge Bay and Nunavut are going to incur to travel through airports in Yellowknife to Edmonton.
Yes, I will find out that information and pass it onto my colleague.
Question 035 – 2(2): New Federal Funding Approach for Nunavut
My question again is for the Minister of Finance, related to her fiscal update report that she presented to us yesterday.
For her reference, I’ll be referring to page 3.
It talks about the new federal approach to funding and it states that this new approach will establish a floor for the transfers in 2004-05 and also an amount that the floor will be set at.
It goes on to state that this floor will grow by 3.5 percent a year.
I would just like to ask the minister how that percentage rate was agreed upon between the parties.
During the First Ministers’ meetings, the two First Ministers meetings that occurred in September and October, those figures were negotiated by the three territories as well as the provinces.
It’s a different approach to equalization.
I’m just wondering if any thought was given to how this compares with inflation rates.
I know in some schools, for example, and other places, utility budgets have gone up 40 to 50 percent over the last three years. If there is only going to be an increase of 3.5 percent, how far behind is that going to cut us again in the future?
The new funding we received this year is all incremental.
So, we could change it to the formula and the new floor approach to providing incremental funding to Nunavut.
It provides us with certainty; the floor is a figure that won’t change and will grow by 3.5 percent.
In terms of how it compares, when you are negotiating, you put forth your proposal. It’s always an exchange of positions, and that was what was agreed to, in terms of inflation.
That changes yearly as well.
How it compares today, tomorrow we will need to monitor that, but everything that we have received so far this fiscal year and forward is incremental and it will help us with our financial position.
I am glad you use the word floor instead of carpets, because I would hate to have the carpet pulled out from underneath us by the federal government again.
That 3.5 percent, if it turns out that we are going to be spiraling downhill because that is not enough funding for us to keep up with our forced growth and our ever-increasing costs... .
Is there a mechanism in place in the agreement for us to go back to that amount and renegotiate?
The new floor that has been established... . Again I say, it provides certainty that is guaranteed with the 3.5 percent increase of $2 billion forward.
In terms of opportunities to discuss the financial situation of the territory, that is always an open discussion.
As I mentioned as well, the Premier has initiated discussions with the Prime Minister on devolution and resource revenue sharing.
So those are other mechanisms in place to try to increase our revenue base.
At the same time, other departments have had discussions, like in Health, to try to increase the health funding, which we have, at the end of the day, will provide much needed support to operations.
The minister has indicated that there is always an open door and not an open floor when it comes to negotiating with Ottawa.
I am just wondering if this agreement has not been signed yet, and if there isn’t anything in writing that gives us the protection to be able to go back to them and renegotiate these for whatever circumstances that come up... .
Is it too late for our government to request, basically, that a clause like that be put into the agreement?
The new agreement will be signed by our government with the changes. In terms of opening the clause or closing the doors, I do not think the door is ever closed.
Just because you sign an agreement doesn’t mean the discussions are over, or if you sign an agreement and the key is thrown away.
It is not that straightforward.
The door is always open, like I mentioned; we will continue to try and work to increase our revenues for Nunavut territory, and we will look into that.
Question 036 – 2(2): Tabling of Coroner’s Report
This is part and partial to the questions that I posed yesterday regarding the safety of public buildings, or in this case, the elders’ facility.
Could Minister Brown give a copy of the coroner’s report or the doctor’s statements to the House, because we all want to know what the cause of that death was, and we want to make sure that all safety issues are covered.
We want to know all the details.
Could you table a report on the incident that took place in Arviat?
I’ll have to look into this first.
It’s taken as notice.
Question 037 – 2(2): Student and Family Accomodation for Arctic College Students
The minister is well aware that not only in the elementary schools but also in the Arctic Colleges the students have to be properly housed.
I don’t know exactly how many people or students are outside of their home communities attending school.
I would like to ask the minister when they will have family accommodations for students attending Arctic College.
Just very quickly on student accommodations and family accommodations, specifically a follow-up to Mr. Netser’s earlier question: we have the family accommodations in the supplementary capital plan for the Department of Education.
We had hoped to be in a position to move that forward.
Right now in Rankin Inlet there is housing available for single students’ accommodations, and that is adequate.
At the present time we need to be able to build about four units, is the request in Rankin Inlet.
Right now there is the issue of the lot being available.
So, Department of Community and Government Services as well as the Hamlet of Rankin Inlet have had negotiations, and they now have identified a lot where family units could be constructed.
So, we need to be able to look at the options on that and how we move forward on the development of the lot.
Again, there are plans within the supplemental capital budget to move forward.
On the issue of family accommodations throughout Nunavut: as I said earlier, there’s only 60 students in the program at Kivalliq Campus, over 200 at the Nunatta Campus, as an example, and it’s here where we’ve actually had to increase our student accommodations.
Most of the members know that we have the “Q” units here in Iqaluit as accommodation; those are all full, and as I said earlier we are also renting on the open market over 30 White Row housing units and other accommodations for student housing, for families to go to school.
We’ve had to turn down families where housing has not been available, and indeed we’ve accepted people who have not been able to come here for the program because there was no housing.
So, I hope that answer the members’ question.
There are private sectors that have housing available in the regions.
I’ll read this in English.
I just got it yesterday.
(interpretation ends): “I regret to inform you that I’m withdrawing from the management studies program at the Rankin Inlet Arctic College due to parental duties as a single parent, with my children needing me in all areas of my life.”
(interpretation): I believe the minister can help these students, because there are houses on the market that are available.
Is it possible for you to consider this option, because of course we will not be seeing those family units any time soon.
I understand the frustration of many of the students when it comes to acquiring accommodations.
But for me to go out to the open market and to be able to lease accommodations, I have to have that money available; that’s not the case.
We need to be able to develop our own accommodations. So, one of the things we are trying to do is to develop our own accommodations, as a campus and as a college, to help these students.
I will follow up on the member’s request. Indeed, over the next few weeks, we will have an opportunity in this House to discuss and debate the capital plan, not only for the Department of Education, but for the government as a whole.
Maybe that is a recommendation that members may want to make.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): Mr. Speaker, a supplementary to the minister’s response.
The minister stated that he would have to get money because they can’t borrow any money.
The government can borrow money.
They can borrow money from anywhere.
If you look at Iqaluit, government is leasing houses here.
Is it better for the person to get their education and have their families with them?
I think that was more urgent than the lack of money that the minister is talking about.
I have been involved in the pursuit of student accommodations for the college and I can speak to it here with some authority.
I remember when we actually built that accommodations in 1985 and 1986, doing the planning and actually put it in place in 1988.
There has been no new student accommodations built in this community for 16 years.
So that need is there.
The member is correct; we are out in the private market right now in this community, spending $3,000 and more a month to rent accommodations.
So, we need a long term plan to be able to develop student accommodations for students that are coming to Iqaluit and to Rankin Inlet and to Cambridge Bay to attend these major campuses.
Mr. Speaker, that is what we are trying to do, and at the same time, I need to have the money within the budget itself at the college to be able to go out to the open market and to be able to lease the housing that is available.
I accept the member’s point, and that is something that I will be able to speak about with the president of the college, and to see what plans are there to be able to alleviate that housing issue in the short term in Rankin Inlet; that seems to be a real issue.
At the same time, as I said earlier, we will have an opportunity to debate the capital budget, which includes student accommodations, in this House in the next couple of weeks.
I look forward to the members supporting me in the House and looking forward to avenues that we can access in addressing the issue of family accommodations for our students at Nunavut Arctic College.
Written Question 010 – 2(2): Staff Housing
My question is for the Hon. Peter Kilabuk, the Minister responsible for the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
The subject is staff housing.
As of November 1, 2004, broken down by community and size of unit, how many Government of Nunavut staff housing units are unoccupied?
Of these unoccupied units, how many unoccupied for:
six months or less;
six to twelve months;
one to two years; and
As of November 1, 2004, broken down by community and size of unit, how many staff housing units does the Government of Nunavut:
own; and
lease?
As of November 1, 2004 broken down by community, who is the legal owner of each leased unit and what is the term of each lease?
What is the monthly cost to the Government of Nunavut for each leased unit?
Written Question 011 – 2(2): Workers’ Compensation Board Investment Policies and Practices
This written question is for the hon. minister responsible for the Workers’ Compensation Board for Nunavut, Mr. Akesuk.
It has to do with the Workers’ Compensation Board’s investment policies and practices.
As of November 1, 2004, does the investment portfolio of the Workers' Compensation Board of Nunavut and the Northwest Territories contain any holdings in equities or in fixed-term investments or other instruments issued by the BMO Financial Group-Bank of Montreal?
Does the board investment policy permit investments in corporate entities that withdraw services and monies from residents of Nunavut and the Northwest Territories?
What ethical investing guidelines has the board’s investment policy followed with respect to industries involved in the manufacturing, distribution, and sale of tobacco products, and approximately what percentage of the board’s investment portfolio is composed of such holdings?
What ethical investing guidelines does the board’s investment policy follow with respect to the industries involved with the manufacturing, distribution, and sale of alcohol products, and approximately what percentage of the board’s investment portfolio is composed of such holdings?
What general ethical investing guidelines does the board’s investment policy follow?
Written Question 012 – 2(2): Rental Arrears and Tenant Damages
My question is, again, asked to the Hon. Peter Kilabuk, Minister responsible for the Nunavut Housing Corporation, regarding rental arrears and tenant damages:
As of November 1, 2004, what was the total amount of rental arrears borne to each local housing organization in Nunavut?
Broken down by community, what proportion of public housing tenants owe arrears?
What amounts did each local housing organization write off in both the 2002-03 and 2003-04 fiscal years?
What specific reasons account for the annual report for the Nunavut Housing Corporation that has not been tabled for the 2002-03 and 2003-04 fiscal years?
For each of the following fiscal years, what amount of rental arrears were collected by each local housing organization: a. 1999-2000 b. 2000-2001 c. 2001-2002 d. 2002-2003 e. 2003-2004 f. 2004-2005 to date, April 1, 2004 to September 30, 2004?
For each of the following fiscal years, what were each local housing organization’s expenditures to repair public housing tenant damages: a. 1999-2000 b. 2000-2001 c. 2001-2002 d. 2002-2003 e. 2003-2004 f. 2004-2005 to date, April 1, 2004 to September 30, 2004?
For each of the following years, how many public housing tenants were evicted from their units in each community due to rental arrears or other reasons: a. 1999-2000 b. 2000-2001 c. 2001-2002 d. 2002-2003 e. 2003-2004 f. 2004-2005 to date April 1, 2004 to September 30, 2004?
Tabled Document 012 – 2(2): Letters from the Elders’ Committee Regarding Senior Citizens Homes
I was pleased to note that in the first Throne Speech, the government will be establishing elders’ facilities in Nunavut communities.
As my colleague from Quttittuq stated, some communities have already identified their needs for elders’ facilities.
Today, I am tabling a letter from the elder’s committee of Kugluktuk which outlines the reasons for the elders’ facility to be established in that community.
I hope that the Minister of Health and Social Services will give due consideration to the needs expressed in this document.
Tabled Document 013 – 2(2): Environmental Rights Act Consolidated Annual Report, April 1999 to December 2003
Mr. Akesuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I wish to table the following document, the Environmental Rights Act Consolidated Annual Report for the period to April 1999, to December 2003.
Tabled Document 014 – 2(2): Letter from the Honourable Andy Scott, PC, MP
I wish to table, today, two letters I recently received from the Prime Minister and the Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs in response to my invitation to visit the dynamic Kitikmeot region of Nunavut.
Minister Scott’s response recognizes the exciting potential that we have for mineral development in the Kitikmeot, and he expresses his desire to come to Nunavut in the coming months.
I look forward to welcoming him to Cambridge Bay.
Tabling of documents.Going back to orders of the day.
I’m sorry. Mr. Peterson.
Tabled Document 015 – 2(2): Resolutions Passed from Education and Health Boards in Nunavut
I have one final document that I would like to table.
It is the resolutions from the Kitikmeot Inuit Association’s annual general meeting that was held in Kugluktuk last month.
I was in attendance.
There are four resolutions: one is education and health boards, the second is from the youth in the Kitikmeot, one is from the elders in the Kitikmeot, and the fourth is from the women of the Kitikmeot.
Item 16. Item 16.
Bill 4 – Appropriation (Capital) Act, 2005-06 – Second Reading
I move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Rankin Inlet South-Whale Cove, that Bill 4 – Appropriation (Capital) Act, 2005-06 be read for the second time.
The motion is carried and Bill 4 has had second reading, and Bill 4 is ready for the Committee of the Whole.
Bill 4, Appropriations Capital Act, with Mr. Netser in the Chair.
We will have a short break of 20 minutes.
>>House recessed at 15:18 and resumed at 15:46
Chairman: I would like to call the committee meeting to order.
In the Committee of the Whole we have the following item to deal with: Bill 4 – Appropriation (Capital) Act, 2005-2006.
We would like to commence our review of the capital estimates for the Department of Environment.
Chairman (interpretation): Do you agree that we deal with Bill 4?
(interpretation ends) The Minister of Environment, Mr. Akesuk, can make his opening remarks.
I am pleased to be here today to present my department’s capital plan for 2005-06 fiscal year.
Mr. Chairman, the Department of Environment’s proposed capital budget for 2005-2006 is $1,856,000.
My department has 23 capital projects that focus on two key areas: parks and conservation areas and wildlife management.
(interpretation ends) Nunavut Parks have a crucial role to play in the protection and promotion of some of Nunavut’s outstanding natural and cultural heritage, and in supporting positive recreation and tourism experiences.
Our parks are developed for the benefit of Nunavummiut and for visitors nationally and internationally.
In November of 2000, the Standing Committee on Community Empowerment and Sustainable Development accepted a report which summarized the status of facilities in our territorial parks.
The report identified several facility deficiencies that needed to be addressed in the interest of public safety, visitor satisfaction, and in ensuring these special are places are appropriately maintained.
With this in mind, we have structured our capital plan to include the installation of a new facility in Pangnirtung and includes upgrading and improving of facilities in numerous decentralized and non-decentralized communities, some of which will take place in Clyde River, Kugaaruk, and in Coral Harbour.
The largest projects within our 2005-06 capital plan are in the Wildlife Management Division, with a focus on maintaining present offices and building wildlife area offices in Chesterfield Inlet and Whale Cove.
The Department of Environment’s intent is to have a wildlife area office in each Nunavut community as outlined in the five-year fiscal plan.
Mr. Chairman, with the limited funds available to us, the Department of Environment’s Capital Plan is well balanced and focused in areas that clearly support the needs and priorities of the government as well as the needs of communities throughout Nunavut.
I am confident that my department will continue to ensure the protection, promotion, and sustainable use of our natural resources to the highest standard of performance and accountability.
Mr. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Akesuk.
Would you like to invite your officials to the witness table?
Mr. Chairman (interpretation): Thank you.
Does the committee agrees to bring in the witnesses?
Thank you. (interpretation) Sergeant-at-Arms, can you accompany the official witnesses to the witness table, please?
The official to my right is my deputy, Simon Awa, and to my left, Mr. Trevor Jarrett, Director of Corporate Services.
Mr. Chairman: (interpretation): Thank you, minister.
As the chair of the Standing Committee Ajauqtiit, I’m pleased to have this opportunity to make my opening remarks as we begin deliberations on the 2005-06 capital estimates.
Mr. Chairman, the Department of Environment has a capital budget of $1,856,000, representing 1.8 percent of the government’s overall capital budget.
These estimates will be used to upgrade territorial park facilities, provide for a new wildlife office-shop for Chesterfield Inlet, and to replace existing mobile equipment and purchase displays and exhibits.
Mr. Chairman, members expressed the need for more funding for important studies, such as environmental and contaminant studies as well as population studies for polar bears, musk oxen, and studies for the viability of developing fisheries in Nunavut. (interpretation ends) I’m very pleased to hear new reports that the department is proposing to increase the quota for harvesting polar bears as communities reported an increase in numbers of nuisance polar bears last year.
Members expect to be kept fully informed on this issue.
Members also expect to be kept fully informed with respect to how many Inuit Impact Benefit Agreements are outstanding and the status of their ongoing negotiations.
Members also expressed the need to develop fisheries in Nunavut.
Many communities have a very high rate of unemployment.
The department must support the development of innovative traditional employment opportunities for Nunavummiut that will also reduce the need for social assistance.
Mr. Chairman, while members do support the improvement plans for parks, park facilities, visitors’ centres, displays, and exhibits, members remain concerned that our territory’s tourism potential continues to remains underdeveloped.
Members urge the minister to work closely with his counterpart in the Department of Economic Development and Transportation, which has retained the responsibility for tourism.
I anticipate that individual members will have questions and comments as we proceed.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Mapsalak. (interpretation ends) Before we proceed, I would like to remind the members of the following: according to rule 77(1) you have 10 minutes to speak, and according to rule 77(2), subject to the discretion of myself, a member may speak more than once to a matter under discussion, but not until another member wishing to speak has spoken.