EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
The ozone layer is depleting and the public out there should be given some information on how to protect their skin.
The sun is getting a lot stronger. What they have to do is have good sunglasses to protect their eyes from ultraviolet rays.
You can buy those sunglasses that have ultraviolet protection.
If they are going to be in the sun for a long time, they should be able to have some sun block on their face and any exposed skin.
At a later date we can provide the people of Nunavut with some information on the protection of their skin from strong sunlight.
Can the minister tell us whether the nursing stations in the communities could provide the public with information on what kinds of skin creams and protection for the skin they could purchase?
This is a very sensitive issue, the protection of the people from the sun.
The nurses are aware of that, but we will make a little more information available to the people of Nunavut.
Speaker (interpretation): The Member for Iqaluit Centre, Mr. Tootoo.
Question 229 – 2(2): National Childcare Initiative
My question is for the Minister of Education, who I am sure, is very happy that his budget has been passed and that he is no longer sitting in the hot seat in the Committee of the Whole and can devote his entire attention to answering member’s questions during question period.
I think it was in the last couple of weeks, that I heard through the media, and the minister talked about it a little bit in the House in relation to the National Child Care Initiative, that they were meeting with his counterparts in Ottawa on that.
I had heard a report that Minister Dent, the minister responsible for child care in the Northwest Territories, had indicated that he would not likely sign on to this initiative the way that it is proposed right now, as a per capita, or per space, funding formula.
I am just wondering if the minister could concur that he would join in with his colleague in the Northwest Territories and lobby his colleague in the Yukon to oppose any type of per capita or per space allocations of those new federal dollars for child care.
In principle, I think that most jurisdictions across the country believe that the National Child Care Initiative by the federal government is a good one.
The federal government committed $5 billion over approximately five years for this initiative.
At the same time, off the top, they have cut about $400 million and dedicated that to First Nations.
This past Friday I had an opportunity to speak with Minister Dryden about the concerns of Nunavut.
I raised with him at that time, Mr. Ken Dryden, the issue around the fact that the money was being aboriginal specific and was exclusive of Inuit. Mr. Speaker, in this case we don’t have reserves and we are not First Nations on or off reserves. So, we fall through the cracks with that type of announcement.
We weren’t very pleased with that.
The second part was that myself, along Mr. Jenkins in the Yukon, Mr. Dent in the Northwest Territories, and the minister from Prince Edward Island, had an opportunity to work together in the last meeting about three weeks ago in Vancouver, where we asked for a base or floor for the small jurisdictions.
Right now, when I extrapolate the number for Nunavut, for every $1 billion that the federal government puts into the program, per capital dollars gives Nunavut $1 million.
I made that point to Mr. Dryden, and he understood where we were coming from.
The Premier has interceded on our behalf, also with the first ministers, and it’s something that they have raised with Mr. Handley and the premier in the Yukon, Dennis Fentie. With Premier Fentie and they’ve raised that issue also.
So, the quick answer to the member’s question is that we have raised the concern around per capita, the exclusion of Inuit under the First Nations on or off reserves, and, again, wanting a floor in that initiative.
We think it’s a good initiative, but there are some issues for us also.
I know and appreciate what the minister is saying, that it is a good initiative, and I think most Canadians would say it’s long overdue.
In the event that there is no change to the per capita funding or the per space allocations of that funding, and the minister has already indicated that they’re working very hard in trying to obtain some other base or floor or other way of distributing those funds… .
In the event that there is no change to it, will the minister join in with Mr. Dent and lobby the other leaders not sign on to it, if it’s something that isn’t really going to do us a whole heck of a lot of good.
I understand what the member is saying and I appreciate the support the member is giving myself and the Government of Nunavut.
When I spoke to Mr. Dryden last week, and we had, I think, a good conversation, Mr. Dryden acknowledged the concerns raised by myself and the other smaller jurisdictions.
However, he wasn’t in a position at that time to make a commitment on the base that may be available for the smaller jurisdictions.
So right now, it would be hypothetical to say would we sign on or not sign on.
I want to give Mr. Dryden an opportunity, and I told him that on the phone on Friday, to work with his cabinet colleagues, to see if there could be an arrangement for the smaller jurisdictions, and at the same time review the issue around funding for First Nations on or off reserves, because, again, 80 percent of our population is made up of Inuit.
We’ve been left behind again when it comes to this type of federal programming, so that’s our sticking point right there.
However, we do think it’s a good initiative.
But we want to be players; we want a level playing field.
We just want to get on the field and play.
Right now we’re sitting up in the stands.
We want to come down and get in the game.
So, that’s where we are right now with the process.
It’s good to hear the minister say that he doesn’t want to be a pawn in this whole thing and that he’s working with his counterparts in some of the jurisdictions, as well as our premier and his counterparts in the other smaller jurisdictions, to achieve something more fair and equitable for our jurisdiction.
My concern is, we’ve seen it in the past with the health care formula where everyone was on side for it except for the federal government in Ottawa, and it didn’t come in until a stand was taken.
The same thing, we’ve heard, “We’re starting up this new Inuit secretariat” and the federal government is saying that they are recognizing Inuit as distinct and separate from First Nations. Yet, we see a funding thing come out that, again, leaves Inuit out.
I’m glad that he’s optimistic, but you can see from the track record that I’m a little concerned. So, I guess my question, then, for the minister is, I wish him all the best of luck and will he continue to update the members of this House as any new developments come up on these negotiations?
I was with Premier Paul a couple of years ago at the first ministers’ meeting when we walked out on the Prime Minister. We held a conference.
Mr. Kakfwi was there and Mr. Fentie had just become the premier for the Yukon.
It was not pleasant, but we got the point across.
It was only when Mr. Martin came in as the new Prime Minister that I think we actually see things moving in a better direction.
The excise tax, for example, which allocates not just based on per capita, the health funding agreement that the Premier was able to negotiate, indicate a different type of willingness on behalf of this federal government.
So, I am optimistic that Mr. Martin will have an opportunity to review our situation again, and we will see where we will go with it.
At the end of the day, again, the federal government makes these allocations and we have to work with our member of parliament, Nancy Karetak-Lindell, to bring forward initiatives from Nunavut.
I would be prepared, in answer to the member’s question, to update the House once we have further information from our federal friends.
Written Question 027 – 2(2): Elders Center Floor Renovations
Mr. Barnabas (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My written question today is directed to the Minister of Health and Social Services.
Mr. Speaker, my question is in regard to the elders’ center in Iqaluit which is in need of floor renovations.
My question, first of all, is, when will there be renovations done to the elders’ facility?
How much money does the department have for the renovations of the elders’ facility here in Iqaluit?
Speaker (interpretation): Please pass the written question to the Clerk’s desk.
Written Question 028 – 2(2): Performance Bonuses, Settlements and Termination Pay for 2003-2004
My written question is for the minister responsible for the Senior and Personnel Secretariat, concerning performance bonuses, settlements, and termination pays, 2003 and 2004.
With respect to the 2003-2004 fiscal year, broken down by department and Crown agency, but not including names of specific individuals, how much was paid in performance bonuses to members of the Public Service of Nunavut and employees of Government of Nunavut Crown agencies
With respect to the 2003-2004 fiscal year, broken down by employing entity, but not including names of specific individuals, how many persons were eligible to be considered for performance bonuses to be paid by the Government of Nunavut?
With respect to the 2003-2004 fiscal year, broken down by employing entity, but not including names of specific individuals, how many persons were actually paid performance bonuses by the Government of Nunavut?
With respect to the 2003-2004 fiscal year, broken down by department and Crown agency, but not including names of specific individuals, how much was paid in termination pay, negotiated settlements, lump-sum payments or any other form of monetary payment or compensation to executive-level members of the Public Service of Nunavut who departed the Public Service?
Tabled Document 096 – 2(2): 2004 Environmental Rights Act Annual Report
I wish table the following document.
The 2005 Environmental Rights Act Annual Report.
Speaker (interpretation): Please pass the document to our Clerk.
Tabled Document 097 – 2(2): MTO Progress Report April 2004 to December 2004
The MTO Progress Report, April 2004-December 2004.
Bill 11 – Loans Authorization Act 2005/2006 – Notice
I give notice that on Thursday, March 10, that Bill 11, the Loans Authorization Act 2005/06 be read for the first time.
Bill 12 – Write Off of Assets and Debts Act 2004/2005 – Notice
I give notice that on Thursday, March 10, 2005, that Bill 12, Write Off of Assets and Debts Act 2004/05 be read for the first time.
I request consent of this Assembly to waive the two day notice requirement to allow for the first reading of Bill 12, Write Off of Assets and Debts Act, 2004/05.
The Minister is seeking unanimous consent to waive 62(1) to allow the first reading of Bill 12.
Bill 12 – Write Off of Assets and Debts Act 2004/2005 – First Reading
Hon. Leona Aglukkaq: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and my colleagues.
I move, seconded by the Honorable Member for Iqaluit East that Bill 12, the Write Off and Debt Act 2004/05, be read for the first time.
Bill 12 has been read for the first time.
I haven’t recognized you yet.
Did you raise your hand, Ms. Aglukkaq?
I request consent of this Assembly to waive the 2 day notice requirement to allow for the first reading of Bill 11.
Speaker (interpretation): The minister is seeking unanimous consent to waive Rule 62 – 2(2) to read the Bill for first reading.
Bill 11 – Loan Authorization Act 2005/2006 – First Reading
I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Baffin South that Bill 11, the Loan Authorization Act, 2005-2006 be read for the first time.
The Bill has been read for the first time.
Consideration in the Committee of the Whole of Bills and other Matters: Tabled Document 52-2(2); Return to Oral Question 84 and Bill 8, Appropriations.
In accordance with the authority vested in me by Motion 3-2(2) the Committee of the Whole will stay in session until it reports itself out.
>>House recessed at 15:27 and resumed at 16:00
Chairman (Mr. Netser): Thank you, for coming back.
In the Committee of the Whole we have the following items to deal with; Tabled document 52-2(2) and Bill 8.
We wish to continue our review of Bill 8 and the Main Estimates of the Department of Community and Government Services, followed by Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Mr. Chairman, if time permits, we would commence the review the Main Estimates for the Department of Justice.
Minister Kilabuk, do you have any witnesses.
Hon. Peter Kilabuk: Yes I do Mr. Chairman.
You can take your officials to the Witness Table.
For the record, Mr. Minister, could you please introduce your witnesses?
Although we’ve been here with them, to my left Mr. Tom Rich who is my Deputy Minister and to my right Mr. Mike Rafter, the Director of Policy and Planning.
We left off with J-6 and Mr. Alagalak was the next person to speak.
In viewing the Main Estimates for Community and Government Services. My first question is that in my community it’s becoming a concern not just in our community but we have been hearing from the surrounding communities that they are running out of granite or gravel.
They are running out of gravel.
We use gravel that has not been screened.
They are used for big foundations and it is usually put down at the doorway.
We are running out of gravel.
Though we have some gravel left over the airstrip, I was wondering if your department has considered this issue or will you be providing funding for granular work.
Thank you.  Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Alagalak.
I apologize to my colleague.
I don’t have any information on Capital Estimates but his concerns from his community, I’m sure we can work with the community and revisit it outside of this.
They are very close now and if you have any small plans within your department perhaps you can consult with the municipalities.
Do you have any plans to consult with the municipalities in regards to this?
Yes, I will look into this with the Municipality of Arviat sometime this week.
Also, while I’m asking questions, one issue that I’ve wanted to ask, again we were very pleased that the municipalities have been allocated increased funds.
They have increased their funding by $4 million for 2005/2006.
The larger municipalities and smaller municipalities, how much funding should they expect to see as an increase?
The allocation of the funds; they will increase the funding to be allocated that is usually distributed to the communities.
We will use the same method to allocate funding for the communities.
I do understand that you will be allocating by per capita, using the per capita system.
The communities have to find outside funds to run the municipal services.
I do understand that the larger communities will be receiving larger sums than the smaller communities.
The funding is going to support the municipalities’ operations.
They will also include the length of the roads and the cost of fuel and energy that are under the municipalities’ responsibilities.
We include those when we look at how much funding the municipality will be allocated.
Chairman (interpretation): Do you have any further questions, Mr. Alagalak?
While we are on this line item I do have another question.
I don’t see any line item for Community Support under page J-6, J-7, J-8.
Our municipality for a long time have wanted to see a long-term Capital Estimates and their offices in the municipality, according to our knowledge; it is not insulated well enough.
The wind goes right through the building and the Council Chamber is usually used for all sorts of meetings when outsiders come in.
We are running out of space in the Council Chamber.
I don’t see any funding to support the municipal offices.
What is the status of it now?
The issue that I have been raising that this coming spring, when we start visiting the communities with the municipal officials, when we consult with the communities, they will identify what their priorities are and what their needs are.
That time would be appropriate to identify what capital needs are in the other communities.
Also the Municipality of Arviat will have that opportunity to voice their concerns.
I know that they are coming to the community and I want to tell you that our community is growing in population the Department of Education and the Nunavut Housing Corporation has been decentralized there.
They get very nice offices and the officials that are coming from down south work in beautiful offices.
I don’t want to see them coming to our community and work in mediocre offices.
It is kind of embarrassing when you get your staff to come in and work in a mediocre building.
Within your plan to visit the communities, you didn’t tell me when you would be visiting the communities.
I know the issue about the municipal office since we visited the community, and I understand what situation that they are facing. They are running out of space within the municipal office.
That municipal office is deteriorating because of age and for planning stages.
Once we set our times and dates I will let my colleague know when we will be visiting Arviat.
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Alagalak
Mr. Alagalak (interpretation): We want to be notified ahead of time because I want to go to that community.
When you visit the community I would like officials in my community to be informed ahead of time.
So that concludes my general comments.
My question in dealing with the communities support the recall last year talking to the Minister and the department in the House, there was a commitment on their behalf to work with the City of Iqaluit to try and refine and re-jig the way in which the City is funded through the equalization amounts that the department gives the City.
In light of some of the increasing costs that everyone is facing, I am just wondering if the Minister could update us that if any advancements could have been made in that area?
In Iqaluit they will receive additional support and funding is going to increase.
If you don’t mind Mr. Chairman I would like my Deputy Minister to elaborate further about the cities.
Chairman: Mr. Rich
As the minister said the City of Iqaluit will benefit in the same way other communities are.
The budget shows the overall increase.
What we will be doing is we work through the formula and we apply that to the formula.
A segment of that will impact to be directed to the City of Iqaluit and they will benefit to the general sense and roughly to the same proportion as other communities benefit from the amount increase.
So that in the future years that will be directly reflected in the contributions that we do make which is the alternative contribution that we make to the City of Iqaluit.
Chairman: Thank you Mr. Rich
The Municipal Operating Assistance Program in my recollection in reading it is to assist the hamlets in meeting their operational costs.
In that, strictly dealing with the hamlet is my understanding and there is a J-7 equalization amount to assisting tax base authorities in Provision and Municipal Services.
If you look at the MOAP, when it has gone up to around $4 million, the water and sewer service block funding has gone up $348,000.
Those are for the Hamlet, yet the equalization amount for the tax base community which is the only one there is if Iqaluit has been stable.
There has not been any increase in there.
Can I just get an explanation as to why that is the case?
There is also another part of money that is geared for the cities.
I am sure that the member is well aware that there is an increase of $100,000.
There is a pot of money here that is for the cities.
Where about is that in here?
Is that under the communities support section of the budget?
Chairman: Please give him the information.
It is in J-7.
Mr. Chairman, looking at the equalization amounts and that’s been the same right from as far as it shows on here.
We’ve seen over the last little bit and this year that the funding for the same thing for the hamlets has increased but there’s been nothing for the City, as far as its operating costs.
I know that there is a tremendous challenge that the city faces in providing municipal services.
There were some concerns raised last year dealing with certain things that were entitled to be included in the formula and certain things that weren’t.
There are two programs that the City has scrapped over the last budget because they didn’t have the money to operate it, was the Recycling Program and the Public Transit Program.
I’m just wondering, as there was a commitment made last year to sit down and work with the City to try and identify things like that weren’t considered in the old formula that we inherited from the Northwest Territories, that could be included into a new revised formula for Nunavut?
In the increases under MOAP, the City of Iqaluit is also does benefit like the other hamlets.
In the purpose that we have here today under J-7, the equalization amounts have remained the same.
However, there are some adjustments to be made under that program but as of yet, we do not have the precise figures and as result are not reflected this time.
Like the other municipalities, Iqaluit too, will benefit from the MOAP increase.
I’m sure that the Mayor and the council and the administration will be happy to hear that.
We looked forward to finding out how much more they’re going to have to work with.
My question is, last year the Minister and his staff had committed to working with the City to try and identify areas that weren’t in the formula that the City may have felt that should be in the formula, like the Recycling Program and Provision of Garbage Services.
That was one thing that I don’t believe was considered to be funded through that formula.
I’m just wondering if the Minister could inform us of how many meetings they had to go over this with the City, if any?
What things were raised or identified or not identified as things that could be re-jigged into a revised formula to be more suitable for our current situation.
As I indicated earlier, to some of the factors that are used in determining the payments and how much the municipalities will get from the MOAP increase, the priority setting is done at either the hamlet or the City level.
The City will have the option of reviewing the programs and what they may want to assist with.
The discussions with the City are happening today too.
So, with that Mr. Chairman, for the benefit of my colleague, I’ll get my Deputy Minister to give a brief update on those thoughts.
We meet approximately monthly, some times more often with the City.
Up to this date, the discussions have been of a general nature with City about their needs and pressures.
Issues such as the Recycling Program, issues such operations and maintenance costs with regard to water and sewage systems of the City have been particular pressures that have been identified by the City.
The transportation issues have been identified.
The difficulty that they had in maintaining the transit system in the City, have been identified.
Because of the particular capital program issues that we have had with the City a lot of our discussions have actually focused around the immediate issues on the Capital Program.
Because we did not know until fairly recently that we would in fact be having additional funding, we delayed the specific discussions until now.
Now that we know the specific amount of the funding we are starting a process of meeting with the municipalities, including the City, to look at the overall formula.
In addition to that we have been gathering data and information through the Municipal Indicator’s Program to look at all of the pressures that are found on the City.
Over the next two month period of time we will finalize the Funding Formula.
That will include only the Funding Formula for the non-tax based committees but also the Funding Formula for Iqaluit.
In doing that we will consult additionally with the City of Iqaluit to make sure their major pressure points will be dealt with when we do that.
I look forward to meeting with our Council and hearing positive things in that area.
The other question that I have here is in the Grants in Lieu of Taxes, I am sure that in the last couple of years that the value of government assets has increased considerably here in Iqaluit.