EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I would be very keen to find out if he would have available for me an instance or instances where a SPOT device was actually activated and not reacted to until many hours had elapsed.
We keep a very close detailed tally on when an activation happened and when it was reacted to. If there is a glitch in that, I would really like to know that so we could solve that issue.
In terms of if there is actual training on how to use the SPOT device, I would have to check our information to see how often, if any, training was provided with that funding.
I would like to assure the minister that I am going on the basis of receiving an email yesterday from my home community of Coral Harbour from one of the search and rescue members.
Can the minister indicate how his department will evaluate the success of its SPOT distribution program?
I did not question whether the information he asked about was true or not.
We just want to be as prompt as possible when responding to these very important emergency situations, and we would like to make sure that our programs are in place to ensure that response is done immediately.
Mr. Speaker, our SPOT devices have been sent to the communities and there seems to be a growing a need for them. The more we speak about it here and the more people find out about how good and efficient they are the more people are taking them out.
I think it will be important in the coming months or years to increase the number of devices there are.
Question 572 – 3(3): Location of Jet A-1 Fuel Drums in Grise Fiord (Elliott)
Yesterday, I tabled photographs in the Legislative Assembly that depicted the location of jet A-1 fuel drums in Grise Fiord.
As I noted during my tabling, safety concerns have been raised from the community about their location near the wildlife office, as the drums are not in a secure facility.
There has also been confusion as to which department is responsible for the fuel. Can the minister advise me if his department is in communication with the municipality and the Petroleum Products Division of the Department of CGS to resolve this issue?
I thank the Member for Quttiktuq for asking the question.
The fuel drums are being taken care of by our staff and we’re checking to see where they can be relocated. We have informed the Hamlet of Grise Fiord about what we’re trying to do.
There are millions of drums or old drums that have been moved to Nunavut and we haven’t seen anything that is serious, but we’re working with the community and government services department and also the local hamlet councils.
Can the minister indicate when the fuel drums will be moved to a more secure location that is protected by berms?
The fuel drums will be relocated to a more secure location and they will be moved to where they have selected the location.
We haven’t discussed whether we’re going to be putting in berms, but we will be relocating those fuel drums to a selected site.
Can the minister indicate how his department plans to use the fuel that has been delivered to Grise Fiord?
We have wildlife and environmental assessments. We’re going to use a protocol to deal with that. We’re doing research on caribou and those few are going to be used for the research that we’re doing around there.
In some respects, I find it quite alarming because this is the Department of Environment that you would think would be the department most on top of trying to preserve the environment and keep the environment clean, yet how has his department allowed close to, I would say, about fourteen 45-gallon drums of jet A-1 fuel to be delivered to one of our communities across the territory, which there might be more, without having a proper storage space or facility for those drums?
The Department of Environment follows the standard protocol for safe storage of drummed fuel and the use of drums.
The fuel will be removed and positioned to sites where it’s requested under research within the coming weeks and the fuel drums are on pallets and strapped, which prevents accidental damage and rusting due to contact with the ground. I think we have very safe storage for our drums up there.
Question 573 – 3(3): Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and Cultural Immersion Day (Enook)
Good morning, people of Pond Inlet and my fellow Nunavummiut.
Mr. Speaker, to be clear, I will speak in Inuktitut.
This was discussed yesterday regarding Inuit societal values and the implementation of it within the government system, and whether it is just paying lip service or if it is of importance to the government, Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and societal values’ goals and objectives.
We do not all work for the Government of Nunavut, of course. If we do not ask for information, we do not get it. Can the minister use an example of what these are going to include?
Regarding Inuit societal values and Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, the government employees can set aside one day for IQ. I think we are all aware of that.
IQ day is set aside, but also for other non-government organizations.
For example, Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated sets aside an IQ day.
On that day, some would like to take the day to go out on the land, possibly by boat or snowmobile, or use some type of transportation mode to go out after they have decided how they are going to use that day.
They do not just use it for pleasure, it also teaches about Inuit traditions. For example, some of them have igloo building days, or talk about Inuit traditions and societal values. They can have different discussion and show the Inuit traditions.
Those are just some of the examples, and some just stay in their office, but invite the public so that they can interact and promote Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and Inuit societal values, invite an elder who will make a presentation to the people who come in.
Those are just examples. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The minister indicated that there are people who go out on the land.
I think that is part of the problem for some of us.
Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and Inuit societal values are not only for pleasure, it is of hardship also.
Regarding IQ days and if they are going to be going out on the land, who participates?
I didn’t indicate that. They just go for outings and such.
I also indicated that they do use it to promote Inuit societal values and IQ days.
The department has to make a decision on what kind of a team they would use on that day.
There are also people who stay behind. Some people may decide that they would just like to make it a regular day, if they wanted.
Nobody is forced to take those IQ days.
They can just use it as a regular day and do their normal daily routine.
Yes, it is nice to go out there on an outing.
We like going out there on an outing and we can also use that day to teach what kind of clothing would be appropriate on whatever exercise they are using.
It is at the discretion of the employees whether they want to participate or not.
That is part of the problem that some of us have.
When the government talks about implementing Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit or Inuit societal values, it is at your discretion if you want to participate in the program or not.
As my colleague indicated earlier, as long as they show it but it is at the discretion of the employees if they want to participate or not.
It is just hurtful.
Why do they make it a discretionary program?
We cannot force anyone to go on a snowmobile outing, for example, or to go fishing. We cannot force them to participate on those types of outings. They can have many reasons for not wanting to participate, for example, if they have physical problems.
There can be many reasons.
They may not have the proper clothing.
We cannot force anyone to go on those cultural immersion days, but they can go about it in a different way and learn about the culture in an office, for example.
They can invite an elder who can teach them about Inuit culture.
The way I understand it, it is beneficial no matter how you use those cultural immersion days.
That is what I have been trying to say and that is what we have been trying to say.
Even though there are laws, it is always at the discretion of the employee.
They might have a reason for not wanting to participate. We all know that, but if it is discretionary and in the Minister’s Statement in the directives, it would not be any good.
Who is going to be informed about whether the communities are participating in the cultural immersion days?
They are going to be going through the department heads, then in turn, they will report to our department.
Question 574 – 3(3): Status of Cape Dorset Sewage Lagoon (Schell)
As the minister is aware, Cape Dorset’s new sewage lagoon was constructed six years ago. However, this much needed new facility has still not been commissioned and brought into operation.
During the 2012 spring sitting of the Legislative Assembly, the House approved a capital carryover to address problems at the facility, including leaking berms.
Can the minister advise the House if these funds were spent?
I’ll have to check and get back to my colleague to see of those specific dollars were spent on that.
Can the minister provide an updated timeline on when the Cape Dorset Sewage Lagoon will start operating and confirm the existence of the report?
The last I heard about it, the department has confirmed with a dye test that there is a leak in the berm.
Arrangements are being made with the contractor to complete the work that was identified.
Can the minister advise the House if this department will be introducing additional requests for capital carryover spending to address the problems at the Cape Dorset Sewage Lagoon?
If our department cannot do the work with existing funds, we will have to find extra money if we need to.
As the minister will recall, the issue of territorial compliance with water licensing requirements in respect to wastewater treatment has been a major issue in a number of communities, including Cape Dorset.
At one point, there was talk of the federal government taking us to court.
Can the minister indicate what steps have been taken to ensure that the new Cape Dorset facility will meet all the applicable regulatory requirements, including those of the Nunavut Water Board?
In Nunavut, all sewage lagoon sites are very important to us. It is quite expensive to do repairs or work.
We’re working with Dalhousie University on waste treatment plants and sewage lagoons.
It will become operational, but I’m sure that the repair time will take a while.
Question 575 – 3(3): AREVA’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Aupaluktuq)
My questions are for the Minister for Mines, the Hon. Minister Taptuna.
With mining and exploration, the employment potential is great and the local economy and private sector will, no doubt, benefit.
There are many young adults, hunters, and some who have not had an opportunity to express their views. My constituents who are not in the private sector or business circle have asked me to express their views.
Mr. Speaker, my question to the minister is: AREVA’s draft environmental impact statement, or DEIS, for the proposed Kiggavik uranium mine is currently undergoing a technical review.
In June of 2012, the Government of Nunavut submitted information requests to AREVA Resources Canada.
In the cover letter, the Government of Nunavut said, “There’s consensus across the government departments reviewing the draft EIS that the documentation has not met the GN’s expectations in terms of level of detail regarding commitments to project design, mitigation, nor analysis.”
The letter also states that the quality of mapping methods and analyses used by AREVA for studying wildlife and habitat, “Are not sufficient to allow the GN to conduct a technical review of the draft EIS at the moment.”
Has the GN reviewed AREVA’s response as to information requests and, if so, are AREVA’s responses sufficient for the government to conduct a technical review of the draft EIS?
Minister responsible for Economic Development and Transportation with the responsibility for Mines, Minister Taptuna.
Mr. Speaker, yes, with the sustainable development advisory group that participates in the reviews, we contributed and submitted responses, which is going to be leading up to the May technical meetings in which all interveners have responded to.
Mr. Speaker, all of the Nunavut Impact Review Board proceedings on all the reviews are fully transparent and on public record. Any individual or organization interested in the proceedings of the environmental assessment of the projects, it is all on the Nunavut Impact Review Board’s website.
Speaker: Thank you, Minister Taptuna. Your first supplementary, Mr. Aupaluktuq.
It is a privilege to be able to share information locally and I’m sure the other community members and groups, such as the municipalities or any of those interest groups, especially the youth and young adults, will also entertain to make sure that they review the documents that are transparent.
Mr. Speaker, the draft environmental impact statement for the Kiggavik mine has repeatedly run into issues. AREVA submitted the DEIS in January of 2012, but it failed NIRB’s conformity test.
AREVA resubmitted in April of 2012, but as the GN’s information requests show, this resubmission was still entirely inadequate.
Does the government believe AREVA is taking the environmental review process seriously?
Mr. Speaker, AREVA continued to support the regulatory process through the Nunavut Impact Review Board.
It is comprehensive, inclusive, and an effective means of conducting environmental assessments on proposed projects.
Mr. Speaker, as the government continues to participate in these reviews on this project and other major projects that are happening within Nunavut, the government asserts its responsibilities within our jurisdictional mandate. It would be through the mining strategy or the uranium policy that was approved last year.
The environmental impact statement from the communities, just as a concern and to state for the record, there are many projects that are potentially in place, such as exploration, and the impacts will be great, whether it will be pro in terms of stimulus of economy as well as employment as well as con in regard to see whether or not there are adequate resources to ensure that the environment, such as the animals, are well-protected.
In terms of the Minister of Mines and through the AREVA process, has the GN noted any concern in regard to the impact statement in respect to the caribou calving ground?
Minister responsible for Economic Development and Transportation with the responsibility of Mines, Minister Taptuna.
Mr. Speaker, as the Minister responsible for Economic Development and Transportation and Mines, I do not get into the level of detail of the environmental processes.
There are certain protocols that are set within the land claims that determine the outcome of the processes that are out there, whether there is major impact on wildlife or environment. That is to be determined throughout the review process.
Before we go on with our orders of the day, I would just like to remind all members and ministers to try and keep your preambles short and responses to the point, as there were a couple of members that did not get an opportunity to ask questions within the allotted time, just out of courtesy for all members to be able to have an opportunity to ask questions.
We will move in our orders of the day.
We will move on to the next item in our orders of the day.
Committee Report 025 – 3(3): Bill 54, An Act to Amend the Income Tax Act (Ningeongan)
I wish to report that Bill 54, An Act to Amend the Income Tax Act, has been reviewed by the Standing Committee on Legislation and that the bill is ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 68(6) and have Bill 54 immediately moved into Committee of the Whole.
There is a request for unanimous consent to waive Rule 68(6) so that Bill 54 can be immediately referred to Committee of the Whole. Are there any nays?
Bill 54 is therefore, as a result of no nays, moved to Committee of the Whole.
Committee Report 026 – 3(3): Bill 56, Write-off of Assets Act, No. 1, 2011-2012 (Ningeongan)
I wish to report that Bill 56, Write-off of Assets Act, No. 1, 2011-2012, has been reviewed by the Standing Committee on Legislation and that the bill is ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 68(6) and have Bill 56 immediately moved into Committee of the Whole.
There is a request for a unanimous consent to waive Rule 68(6) so that Bill 56 can be immediately referred to Committee of the Whole.
There are none. As a result, Bill 56 will be immediately referred to Committee of the Whole.
Tabled Document 336 – 3(3): Correspondence Regarding Repulse Bay Housing Needs (Ningark)
I wish to table a correspondence from Repulse Bay local housing organization concerning Repulse Bay housing needs.
Tabled Document 337 – 3(3): 2013-2016 Business Plan of the Office of the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut (Speaker)
Tabled Document 338 – 3(3): 2013-2016 Business Plan of the Office of the Languages Commissioner of Nunavut (Speaker)
Members, I have two documents that they wish tabled today.
I wish to table the 2013-16 Business Plan of the Office of the Legislative Assembly as well as the 2013-16 Business Plan of the Office of the Languages Commissioner of Nunavut.
Motion 046 – 3(3): Extended Adjournment – Notice
I give notice that on Monday, March 18, I will move the following motion:
I move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Rankin Inlet South and Whale Cove, that pursuant to the provision of Rule 3 that when the House concludes its winter 2013 sitting, it shall be adjourned until May 7, 2013.
Item 15 in our Orders of the Day.
Bill 52 – An Act to Amend the Nunavut Teachers Association Act – Notice
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Monday, March 18, 2013, that Bill 52, An Act to Amend the Nunavut Teachers Association Act, be read for the first time.
Bill 57 – Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2013 – Notice
I give notice that on Monday, March 18, 2013, that Bill 57, Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2013, be read for the first time.
Bill 58 – Public Service Act – Notice
I give notice that on Monday, March 18, 2013, that Bill 58, Public Service Act, will be read for the first time.
Bill 59 – Collaboration for Poverty Reduction Act – Notice
I give notice that on Monday, March 18, 2013, that Bill 59, Collaboration for Poverty Reduction Act, will be read for the first time.
Bill 60 – An Act Respecting the Nunavut Law Foundation – Notice
I give notice that on Monday, March 18, 2013, that Bill 60, Annual Reporting Validation (Nunavut Law Foundation Act) An Act to Amend the Legal Services Act, be read for the first time.
Notices of Motions for First Reading of Bills. Moving on in our orders of the day.
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters. Bills 47, 48, 49, 50, 54, and 56 with Mr. Enook in the Chair.
Before we proceed to Committee of the Whole, we will take a lunch break and report back to start at 1:30.
>>House recessed at 11:41 and Committee resumed at 13:30
We are so glad that you are able to join us while we are sitting.
In Committee of the Whole, we have the following items to deal with: Bills 47, 48, 49, 50, 54, and 56.
We wish to commence with the clause-by-clause review of Bill 50. Once completed, we will continue with the review of the main estimates for the Department of Economic Development and Transportation, followed by the review of the following departments: Nunavut Arctic College, the Nunavut Housing Corporation, Culture and Heritage, Environment, and the Legislative Assembly.
We will first deal with Bill 50.
I would like the Speaker to come to the witness table.
Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the Speaker to the witness table.
You can proceed any time, Mr. Speaker.
Bill 50 – An Act to Amend the Nunavut Elections Act – Consideration in Committee
I am pleased to have the opportunity to appear today before the Committee of the Whole on the occasion of its consideration of Bill 50, An Act to Amend the Nunavut Elections Act.
Bill 50 implements the recommendations contained in the 2011-12 Annual Report of the Chief Electoral Officer to the Legislative Assembly.
Bill 50 amends the Nunavut Elections Act to formally define “campaigning” and to use that definition wherever possible.
The Act will limit campaigning and the making of contributions to persons, groups, and corporations who are resident in Nunavut or who have a legal presence in Nunavut.
An exception is allowed for non-resident persons or entities that make good faith personal statements of support for a candidate and general statements on issues of public policy.
I would note that these provisions are consistent with decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada concerning campaign practices.
The provisions in the Nunavut Elections Act on identifying the sponsor of campaign material are amended to deal with different forms of media and to provide more information to the public about the sponsor of the material.
This will enhance the transparency of campaign practices during general elections and by-elections.
The provisions in the Nunavut Elections Act restricting the use of the voters list are amended to allow voter information to be used in an authorized manner during a plebiscite and/or a federal referendum held in Nunavut.
The provisions in the Nunavut Elections Act applicable to who may be present during the counting of the ballots are amended to allow additional authorized election personnel to be present.
The provisions in the Nunavut Elections Act applicable to how to validly mark a ballot and when to reject a ballot are amended to allow more flexibility in marking ballots.
This amendment is consistent with the goal of respecting voter intent and will help to avoid the unnecessary rejection of ballots.
A few minor housekeeping amendments to correct references to nominations and typographical errors are also included in Bill 50.
I look forward to responding to any comments or questions that my colleagues may have.
As we proceed with this bill, do you wish to have witnesses with you, Mr. Speaker?
I have a couple of witnesses that I would like to bring to the witness table, with your permission.
Speaker: Mr. Chairman, it is with great pleasure today that I have an opportunity to introduce the witnesses who are at the table with me.
To my right is Ms. Sandy Kusugak. She is the chief electoral officer for Nunavut. To my left is Mr. Patrick Orr, who is the Legal Counsel for Elections Nunavut.
Are there any general comments regarding the Speaker’s opening comments?
Mr. Chairman, although we did coverage during our caucus meeting the other day as to who is now allowed to campaign or issue materials promoting or opposing a candidate, my statements in general will be based on sections 2 and 3 of the proposed Act.
I think it is very important that before we vote on the bill that we are fully aware of what the changes are.
It means that non-residents will not be able to contribute to a candidate financially.
It also means, as I understand it, reading the bill on section 2, which we will get to the clause [later]… . My point is that the definition included in the bill of “campaign” means to make public statements or promoting a candidate, probably by way of material.
Many of the northern communities don’t have vendors that produce a lot of campaign material.
If we go down to section 3, in my general assessment of the bill, before we get to the details, it says that those who are not residents are not able to promote or contribute towards that.
Even voluntarily, if a vendor contributes, whether it be an airline or printing material or producing buttons, many of them are based outside of Nunavut, outside of the territory, in most cases. So I will be asking specifically, exactly, whether these vendors are prevented if they are directly contracted or asked to produce. Maybe there is a loophole where we can use a middleman to get our campaign material produced.
So I will be asking specific questions when we get to those sections. That will be my opening comments.
Are there any other general comments to the opening comments?
If not, please find Bill 50 in your binder.