EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
We were advised then that there would be an over-expenditure in medical travel of $6,400,000, and also in agency nurses of $7,900,000 which would be partially offset by an overall surplus in compensation and benefits of approximately $10,000,000.
Did the department give any explanation as to why at such a late date like that that’s only when they realized that they were going to be over-expended?
I will refer that to the Minister of Health.
On the 11th of May I was notified by the financial director at the time of the deficit and simply he just did not know. The information for processing medical travel, as an example, is initiated through the health centres of the 25 communities in Nunavut and transferring that data to the regions to data enter was all done manually until this year. April 1, for the first time, we have a better system to track medical travel expenditures to be able to know where we are at.
But at March, during the standing committee meetings, I was advised that we looked like we would be at a positive bearing by the director of the day and come May, we were advised that we were over in expenditure as described by the Minister of Finance.
I can understand that it would take some time to get that stuff, especially if done manually for medical travel. You’d think they would know as the Department of Health that there is only a certain area in the department, I would imagine, that orders agency nurses, and so I’m wondering what happened there. Is that something they should have been more on top of, instead of $7.9 million over in agency nurses?
It is a pretty substantial amount to not realize until after year end.
Maybe it is a process thing there, too. Could I get an explanation from either the Minister of Finance or the Minister of Health and Social Services?
In the area of…overall the department had an under-expenditure of $10,300,000 in compensation and that was offset by the $7,900,000.
We knew at the time there was a need to hire agency nurses to cover the vacancies in the communities.
Much of the way head office for Department of Health and Social Services, back a year when I took over the portfolio, everything was centralized to the headquarter office in Iqaluit for processing, which meant that all the data in the communities would than have to transported to be received by this office.
That caused a lot of delays in capturing the information from the regions and…but since then we’ve changed the process to allow the regional offices to make the commitments immediately around contracts for agency nurses.
At the same time, the data system that we’ve established for medical travel is now in place.
A better system is now in place that will be able to come to some assessment as to analyzing the data but the information was just slow in coming to head office first and that was overseeing the finance division of the day.
The minister indicated that there is $7,900,000 over-expended and over budget in agency nurses’ division category or line item. I don’t know what you want to call it. What was the total amount that they spent on agency nurses for that year?
Just hang on. I am just checking to see that. Thank you.
The information that I have does not capture the total for that. Under the contracted funding category for the department we went over expenditure on the contract line item by $7.9 million, which is offset by the salary that we didn’t spend in the vacancies that we had within the department and there was a positive variance in the salary of $10.3 million offsetting the over-expenditure that needed to hire agency nurses to cover off our vacancies.
Maybe the Minister of Finance has that information.
What the total amount that was spent on agency nurses for that year?
Hon. David Simailak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The actual expenditures for contracts for agency nurses 2005-06 was $12,960,248.
That’s like a 120 percent over-budget if you look at it.
If there was an original budget amount of…still over budget $7.9 million and the total amount spent was $12.9 million with an original budget amount of $5.9 million.
I’m just wondering if it was off that much, what kinds of things led to that. I thought we were doing well at getting nurses into our communities. Why does it seem like we’re off that much in figuring out how much it’s going to cost us to hire agency nurses to fill vacant positions throughout the territory?
I’ll refer that to the Minister of Health.
The over-expenditure for the contract area for agency nurses was $7.9 million, not $12 million. Total in the budget for the Department of Health for contract services, from what I understand, is $12 million. That was approved in the House to spend.
We were over by $7.9 million for agency nurses. $10.3 million surpluses, I believe, was covering under salary and O&M to offset the over-expenditure in the department is how I understand the calculations.
Mr. Tootoo: I think I’m confused, Mr. Chairman. I think she had indicated they were $7.9 million over-expended in the contract nurses area, and I think the Minister of Finance indicated that there was $12.9 million in total, spent on agency nurses.
If I get that calculation, if you are over $7.9 million and you spent $12.9 million, then the budgeted amount probably should have been like $5 million. And that’s where I’m getting that from.
Now, after the minister’s comment, I’m just wondering, with that over-expenditure, was the total amount actually spent on agency nurses, a little over $20 million, is that correct?
I just want to know which one is the right one. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don’t know if someone could respond to that.
Once again, the actual expenditure in 2005-06 for agency nurses was $12,960,248.
There was an over-expenditure in agency nurses of $7.9 million.
So that means the amount actually budgeted for 2005-06 would have been about $5 million.
That’s what I thought, and then I was just wondering, how could we be out that much in the budgeting? If we know we won’t have...were these new vacant positions? I’m just wondering; how could it be out that much?
That’s out $7.9 million, which is over double of what it was originally budgeted for.
We can’t afford to continue to be out like that.
So I’m just wondering if they’ve looked at indications as to why that happened, and hopefully, to prevent that from happening again in the future.
Hon. David Simailak: As the minister indicated, Health and Social Services has improved its system of watching over those costs and are getting their numbers on a timelier basis now, and that should help in the future.
Perhaps, the Minister of Health has more that she could add to that.
I apologize for the confusion. I don’t have the supp bills in front of me. I’ve been trying to wave.
I don’t believe the supp bills were distributed to us, other than the actual bill.
In terms of initiatives that were taken in the department to try and capture the spending on our medivacs, a couple of things: the increase in the medivac and medical travel; there is an increased need to ship people to outside the territory facilities, as well as within the territory. We have seen an increase in the number of patients being shipped to the facilities outside of their communities, resulting in more medivacs, and an over-expenditure of $6.4 million.
The other initiative that we are undertaking within the Department of Health is to try and address more services in the community where there is less of a need for travel, with examples such as portable ultrasound screening equipment tests for the false labour in pregnant women, on which I made statement in the House; at the same time, to provide more specialized clinics and rehabilitation therapy services within the territory.
So there are initiatives to try and address more services in the communities to reduce the need for travel: new heart testing equipment for the communities, portable heart monitoring systems, and X-Ray machines in the communities.
So those are initiatives that are being approved under the wait-time reduction funds which are before the committee as well, that will hopefully down the road offset some of the need to travel from outside the community.
In terms of the agency nurses, there has been a need to fill some of the vacancies in our communities, and we have really no other alternative but to go to agency nurses because we cannot stop providing health care services when people are sick because of budget.
We have to continue providing the service, unfortunately.
But, to try and capture some of those increasing costs, we are again, with our recruitment and trying to hire our graduates within in our program to try and avoid increasing levels of cost around medical travel as well as agency nurses as an example.
If I could just add that Health and Social Services and Finance have been working together to review and do more improvements to the whole financial process as part of the idea of strengthening financial management within government, so the two departments are working together to improve things even more within the Department of Health.
I appreciate that, and I know that my point of how we’re looking to reducing it, but it’s just the fact that there was such a big discrepancy over what was budgeted and what was actually spent.
I think when you’re off by half, or you budget less than half of what you actually spend, should be cause for concern of looking at trying to identify and how they identify what the potential need will be out there.
I guess now they’re looking at it and hopefully we won’t have surprises like this again next year.
I think that was more of a comment than a question, but I’ll let Mr. Simailak respond to it. Mr. Simailak.
Again, I just want to reiterate the fact that we are working with the Department of Health and Social Services to improve the financial processes as we are with other departments that require our help as needed.
Mr. Arvaluk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to make two comments.
As they stated, for transportation of medical travel, that’s why they overspent of $6,400,000.
That’s how much they spent for medical travel in Pond Inlet.
They did a pilot project and they invited a chiropractor and they sent a chiropractor to the community instead of the patients leaving the community. I think we already know what it costs for accommodation, we travel on First Air and we know how expensive it is to travel by airline.
I think they saved a large sum of money with that pilot project.
I want to ask, once you find out about this pilot project, once the results come in will you expand that to the other communities like sending ophthalmologists out to the communities rather than sending the patients out to Iqaluit, send the specialists to the communities instead.
That is the idea with many of the initiatives that we are trying to undertake within the Department of Health, another example is to deliver the mid-wives, the training of mid-wives in the communities instead of sending patients out and spending two, three weeks, to a month at a time in boarding homes in the south, as an example. And in responding to Tootoo’s question, I had listed some other initiatives such as the portable ultrasound screening for pregnant women to go to the communities.
We are trying to develop more programs to reduce our costs. Other examples outside of medical travel but within the whole Department of Health and Social Services is what Minister Simailak had mentioned and that’s the assessment of our services to be more efficient in the delivery of our services without the, we need to review where there’s duplications and processes.
In working with Finance, we are trying to improve that flow of information and reporting and so on to try and capture these kinds of situations at an earlier stage as well to look at ways where we can save, such as in our pharmacy contracts as an example.
In respect to over spending, $7.9 million for agency nursing, I know how to save your money.
We are not taking the nursing courses seriously like we did with Akitsiraq Law School, and I think the government will have to review and recommend to the cabinet and Financial Management Board that we will have to take a drastic action in revitalizing or changing the approach or policy that the government has taken on the Nurse Training Program.
Let’s scrap this program using Arctic College Financial Assistance for Nunavut Students system, Financial Assistance Program and independently fund it so that the nurse training students can be comfortable and happy with their families wherever the quota’s being taken without having to scrounge for money and try to live off the meager allowances to get their nursing degrees.
That way you can probably save more than $7.9 million if the shortage of nursing is no longer a question.
So I would like to ask the minister, that if she will review and recommend to the Cabinet to revamp the whole program of nurses course?
I thank the member for raising that again. I had committed to reviewing that during, I believe, it was question period when he brought up the issue of examining that. I need to sit down with my colleague, the Minister of Education responsible for the delivery of the nursing program on that and see where we can look at options as he suggested.
I think in looking at $7.9 million in the short-term, we would still require an investment in the student salary money going to school, and to cover off our vacancies. So in the short-term, there’s probably not a savings, but in the long-term there is.
I want to look at that option closely with my colleague based on the suggestions that the member is making to this House.
We are dealing with Bill 23.
Various as amended. $3,779,000.
Chairman: Not previously authorized.
Total as amended. $3,779,000.
Chairman: Back to page 2.
As Amended. $3,779,000.
Chairman: Go to Bill 23 of your white legislation binders.
As Amended.
Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) Act #4, 2005-06.
Chairman: Does the committee agree to Bill 23 as amended?
Chairman: Are you agreed that Bill 23 is ready for third reading as amended?
Chairman: Page 2. Schedule.
Supplementary Amount Appropriated for the Fiscal Year Ending March 31, 2006. Vote 1.
Operations and Maintenance. Total. Operations and Maintenance. $3,779,000.
Chairman: Total Supplementary Appropriation. $3,779,000.
Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) Act #2, 2006-07.
Turn to page 4.
Bill 24. Page 4.
Finance. Operations and Maintenance.
Here it says that they’re providing $5,160,000 to the Qulliq Energy Corporation to recognize the funding deficiency for 2005-06.
I guess my question to the minister, I know the Minister of Energy, I don’t know if it was him, or the Qulliq Energy Corporation put out this little, fancy, nice little energy facts, and figures.
I know a number of years ago they were talking about bailing out the Qulliq Energy Corporation, and we have in the past.
In there it states, “The Qulliq Energy Corporation occasionally receives financial contributions from the Government of Nunavut.” I’m just wondering if the minister could indicate if this $5,160,000 is their occasional annual amount that they need to be bailed out for.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Tootoo. Minister Simailak.
I will refer that to the Minister of Energy.
First of all, I resent the member using the word like ‘bailout’ because it’s not a bailout. Basically, what we see here in the sup is a decision made by the URRC that the member is quite aware of. Indeed, the URRC Report was tabled in the House, and of course, it was made known to the public, and it has been quite well talked about.
The URRC recommended that in the last rate increase for the Power Corporation; the Power Corporation asked for 6.1 percent, as you know, and the URRC came back and said, “No, you can’t get 6.1; you can have 5.91 percent effective October 1.”
Also, the URRC recommended that the GN pay the 5.91 percent that was not corrected for the 18 months between February 2005 URRC Report and the QEC request for the 6.1 percent. That total is 5.91 percent.
The Government of Nunavut accepted the recommendations of the URRC, increased their base rate by 5.91 percent, and in this sup, we see the amount of $5.16 million for the Power Corporation.
So it’s not a bailout, it is in lieu of a rate increase that was not to be charged back to the consumer base for that 18-month period.
I guess you should have used bridge financing. That’s a different word, but I guess my other question, where the minister stated in the pamphlet that they put out that Qulliq Energy Corporation occasionally receives financial contributions from the government. Would the minister indicate that this is an occasional annual contribution?
I would prefer to stick to the supplemental bill before us and not on advertisements or brochures that the Power Corporation put out, given the timeframe that we’re under, but given that Mr. Tootoo has asked that question, the answer is no.
Centrally Administered Funds. Not previously authorized. $5,409,000.
Chairman: Total Centrally Administered Funds. $5,409,000.
Chairman: Total Department. $5,409,000.
Not previously authorized. $603,000.
I know the minister didn’t get a lot of chance to answer questions during Question Period, so maybe we can make up for it here.
Through the Minister of Finance, have they determined how this $603,000 is going to be distributed amongst the licensed daycare facilities throughout the territory?
This is the second instalment of the original trust set-up by the good Liberal government prior to the last federal election and at that time, we weren’t able to work out and make an arrangement with Mr. Dryden on the per capita funding that the member remembers the debate in the house and indeed we had strong support in the House and a motion to that affect.
The $600,000 is a cost plus amount meaning the total amount of money distributed by the Department of Education to the member daycares in Nunavut totals the total amount of the expenditure.
It is to go towards the O&M cost of operating our member daycares as well as provide for curriculum resources and so on.
The way the money was divided up was based on the size of the member daycare and the number of students enrolled in the Daycare Program and the requests that come forward from the daycares. It followed on the monies that we had given out last year. I can say very strongly all the daycares across Nunavut had been very…this has been well welcomed to the member daycares in Nunavut.
Chairman: Early and Childhood Services. $603,000.
Chairman: Total Department. $603,000.
Treatment. Special Warrant.
On this page it says there is an interdepartmental transfer of $193,000 from Operations and Maintenance to Capital. I am wondering if the Minister of Finance can indicate where exactly that funding is being transferred out of from O&M to Capital.
I don’t have the information about exactly which category of the O&M that is coming from.
Could I get a commitment for the minister to provide me that information to us at a future date or by correspondence?
We will commit to providing that information.
Page 5. Bill 24. Page 6.
Operations and Maintenance. Treatment.
Special Warrant. $917,000.
Chairman: Not previously authorized. $109,000.
Chairman: Total Treatment.
Chairman: Not previously authorized $109,000.
Not previously authorized. $109,000.
Not previously authorized. -$120,000.
Chairman: Total Program Development. -$120,000.
Chairman: Total Department. -$120,000.
Not previously authorized. $5 million.
Chairman: Total Directorate. $5 million.
Chairman: Government Services.
Not previously authorized. $3,752,000.
Chairman: Total Government Services.
Chairman: Total Department. $8,752,000.
Not previously authorized. $1,867,000.
It seems to state that for fuel and utilities there is an increase from 5.19 percent increase to the community-based power effective October 1, 2006.
We have no other choice but to pay it. And $1,867,000 under Environment; we just approved $120,000.
I’d like to ask the Department of Environment: are they going to be requesting for a supplementary appropriation in representing the hunters who don’t have full-time jobs so they can get some funding through this in this way?
Hon. David Simailak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will refer that to the Minister of Environment, whether they are going to ask for more in regard to emergencies. He is asking about emergencies.
Minister of Energy, Minister Picco.
Just very quickly on the amount that’s being charged out here to the Housing Corporation. This is the housing portfolio, which means staff housing.
As the members know, the hunters, or any person who is given social housing units in Nunavut, the power rate has not increased since 1996; it is still at six cents a kilowatt hour. So that hasn’t changed.
The money that the member is talking about for the emergencies is a totally different amount of money. Again if there was a request by the department then that would be brought forward in the spring, during the O&M budget of the department, which would be a new fiscal year.
Before we go on, the Minister of Environment, Mr. Netser.
I think the monies that Mr. Arvaluk is referring to isn’t for hunters and trappers; it’s for our renewable, or conservation officers in all our Nunavut communities.
We dealt with that on page 7. A couple of pages ago.
I understand that. I am referring to page 9 using page 7 as an example. He is the only minister who understands me very well.
Thank you, Minister Netser.
Although he didn’t answer directly that there would be some kind of relief for hunters and trappers who hunt full time, that cannot afford right now to go distance to go harvesting.
My question was: will there be some kind of money requested from this House to assist those hunters?
This deals with the emergency suits we were going to spend this year, but because we could not find a supplier, we did not spend that money.
We’re not talking about turning back any money for hunters and trappers like he thinks we are.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister. Page 9.
Not Previously Authorized. $1,867,000.
Chairman: Total Nunavut Housing Corporation. $1,867,000.
Chairman: Go back to page 2. Schedule. Page 2.
Appropriation. $17,537,000.
Chairman: Go to Bill 24 in your white Legislation binder.
Bill 24. Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) Act #2, 2006-07.
Chairman: Go to schedule, page 3 of the Bill. Page 3. Schedule.
Bill 24. Page 3.
The title is; Schedule. Schedule. Supplementary Amounts Appropriated for the Fiscal Year Ending March 31, 2007.
Vote 1. Operations and Maintenance. Total Operations and Maintenance. $17,537,000.
Chairman: Total Supplementary Appropriation. $17,537,000.
Chairman: Go back to clause 3, page 1.
Chairman: And, Clause 7.
Chairman: Does the committee agree to Bill 24 as a whole?
Chairman: Is the committee agreed that Bill 24 is ready for third reading?
Next item is Bill 25, Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act #2, 2006-07.
Go to page 4 of the Bill.
Directorate. Special Warrants. $1,608,000.
Chairman: Not previously authorized. $193,000.
Special Warrants. $1,608,000.
Not previously authorized. $193,000.
Not previously authorized. $5,795,000.
Schedule. Schedule 1.
Capital. Total Appropriation.
Capital Appropriation. $7,596,000.
Chairman: Now, go to Bill 25 again in your legislation binder.
Bill 25, Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act #2, 2006-07.
Chairman: Now, go to page 2. Schedule on page 2.
Total Capital. $7,596,000.
Chairman: Total Supplementary Appropriation. $7,596,000.
Chairman: Go back to page 1.
Chairman: Does the committee agree to Bill 25 as a whole?
Chairman: Does the committee agree that Bill 25 is ready for third reading?
Chairman: Thank you. (interpretation) Thank you, Minister Simailak, Ms. Keenainak, and Mr. Ma. If you have any closing remarks, Mr. Simailak.
Hon. David Simailak (interpretation): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman: I would now like to ask the Minister responsible for Finance to make his opening remarks.
We’re dealing with Bills 28 and 29.
Bill 28 – Deficit Reduction Act – Review in Committee
Bill 29 – An Act to Amend the Income Tax Act – Review in Committee
I am pleased to appear before members to speak to Bills 28 and 29.