EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Can the minister indicate if his department has considered switching from the current non-instrument runways to instrument non-precision runways?
Mr. Chairman, if you do not mind I would like to get Jimmy Stevens to respond to that question and let the individual come to the witness table.
Chairman: Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the staff member, Mr. Stevens.
Mr. Stevens.
Mr. Stevens: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am not an expert myself on GPS approaches.
What I can tell the member is that yes, there is an improvement in service levels with a GPS-approved approach regime, and we are working with NAV Canada on that to, basically, prioritize which airports should get this, and we will update accordingly.
I recently received correspondence from a resident in my constituency.
The resident expressed concern about the current safety of crosswind takeoffs and landings for single engine aircraft.
It is my understanding that installing a short visual flight rule cross strip to the current runway may improve the safety of crosswind takeoffs and landing.
Can the minister indicate whether his department has considered developing a short cross strip runway in Baker Lake to address the issue of crosswinds?
According to my understanding of his question, we don’t have any plans in regard to the member’s question.
As the minister will be aware Baker Lake has one of the busiest airports in Nunavut.
With the expansion of mineral exploration in the community, air traffic will continue to increase.
Can the minister indicate if his department foresees any need to re-evaluate Baker Lake current airport safety management to accommodate increases in air traffic?
This is being reviewed, not just for Baker Lake, but we are reviewing other airports too. We are reviewing how busy the airports. We’re starting a review on that.
That is how I can respond.
I note in his business plan for 2014-17, one of the department’s priorities for the 2014-15 fiscal year is to undertake a comprehensive review of operational needs of Nunavut’s Airport Division.
Can the minister describe how local air carriers will be consulted when his department determines the operational needs of Nunavut’s Airport Division?
In regard to the member’s question on how local air carriers will be consulted, I would like Mr. Suvega to respond to it.
Mr. Suvega (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) The department will be consulting with a variety of affected stakeholders and partners as we undertake this research and review.
Given the size and scope of this review, it’s a little bit difficult to put a definable timeline on when and how they will be consulted. We will ensure to make sure that all major stakeholders that may be impacted by this activity will be consulted.
I also would like to note that some of the questions that I posed earlier also reflect air traffic regarding search and rescue.
As members may recall, there was a number searches just outside the vicinity of Baker Lake.
So all these questions I factored in also take into consideration of search and rescue.
With that being the case, can the minister or his officials consult with my community or further notify myself regarding my questions and how they are progressing?
Yes, to try and get this moving forward with my colleague and we can let his community know what our department is doing.
Next on my list. Mr. Mapsalak.
Welcome minister.
The question that I have been asking for awhile now, this is something new coming to me the question I’m going to be asking. It’s about the community access roads budget. Your community access roads budget.
I’ve always been saying that there isn’t enough money in there. When it’s very properly utilized in the two communities that I represent and we really needed to use that. We will really need to use money from that fund.
It will benefit the community. It will help the community and it will help people make money.
It will also help hunters as well. It will help in so many ways.
That budget is just too small. Once you start giving it out like right now, $25,000 or $35,000 at a time and that’s where the maximums usually are.
Mr. Chairman, we are quite well aware now that nothing is getting cheaper. Everything is getting more expensive.
The minister is very aware of this. We all know this.
We all know that nothing is getting less expensive. Everything that we need to use like fuel, the prices are all going up. All the equipment that you need to build roads with, they are all getting more expensive as well.
Can the minister respond to me? Tell me why isn’t the minister’s department looking at this carefully enough? The budget that is made available.
Is there something you can do about it? It hasn’t been increased in a very long time. That’s my first question.
Thank you for asking that question about access roads that our department provides funding for.
Mr. Chairman, the size of that budget and it has to be divided among the settlements as you stated.
It’s $25,000 or $35,000 up to $50,000 that the communities can request for.
Mr. Chairman, I agree with the member that the budget is always too small. We have had to set the maximum from $25,000 to thirty-something thousand. That is because of the amount of money that has been put into the budget annually.
There have been questions raised whether we should raise that or not, including my fellow MLA here.
We as a department can look into the matter.
However, in this fiscal year, there is really no way to move things around.
The capital has been gone through already but for future considerations, we can look into the possibility of increasing that.
The minister admits that the budget is too small.
Why are you not increasing it?
I found out once that in one previous year, they had a budget of $1 million for one year only and that money was properly utilized but then it was cut down and the minister already said that he knows that the budget is not enough.
Then why don’t you change it?
I would like to know that. Why, even though you know that it is not enough, why don’t you change it?
In regards to funding for access roads, that has to be divided among the communities.
I would like our finance director, Ms. Winmill to respond to that.
The number is correct. One year there was $1 million and $500,000 of that came from CANNOR, the federal government.
Like the minister has stated is, we do recognize that this program is under funded and going forward for the 2015-16 we plan on presenting the Department of Finance with a business case to increase that budget.
Especially with the non-decentralized communities, the two communities that I represent really rely on those funds because they really use those funds.
Right now, if the contribution is going to stay as small as it has been, the money is only good enough to get the project started and that’s about it because everything is so expensive.
Can the minister agree with me that the money that is distributed to the communities, even though the budget is that much, can’t you make it so that a community can request up to $100,000?
Can you agree with me on this?
As we stated earlier, how much money is in that budget up to now and Ms. Winmill explained some of it, the fact that in year 2015-16 we are planning to request for more money to be put into that budget for access roads.
However, that is all I can say to you right now.
I understand what you’re saying, that we can’t increase it now. Although you admit that the budget is not enough and the government knows it’s not enough, they don’t increase it right away, even though it would be so useful.
Who makes the decisions to set the limit imposed on the $500,000 budget? Why is the budget set at $500,000?
Is there a limit? Can one community request $500,000? Is there a request limit?
I would like to have Ms. Winmill provide a proper response as to the breakdown of the funding and if there are policies to follow.
Chairman: Ms Winmill.
The community could request $500,000, but it doesn’t mean that it would be accepted. I’m not sure if there’s a dollar amount in the policy that restricts.
From my understanding, what the department has tried to do is to provide some sort of funding to all of the communities, 20-something communities divided by $500,000, and that’s how the amounts are determined.
Also, it’s an application-based program.
The communities put in an application for a certain amount of dollars of what they think they can get done in the summer, kind of when the access roads are normally worked on.
Again, the department also agrees that this program is underfunded and plans to move forward in the next fiscal year.
I thank you for considering what I have been saying. I am fully aware of how it’s distributed to the communities in what amounts. As I stated, I used to be the SAO for the hamlet and I know that our hamlets have been requesting that all the time.
They usually get not even half of what they request, usually about 25 percent of what they request.
However, they really need it because it benefits the community and it helps with the lack of employment in our community.
It would benefit so many people and enable so many people.
That’s basically a general comment. I would really like you to put a lot of thought into the matter in giving more money to communities for access roads.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m done.
Chairman: Thank you. Just a comment. Next on the list, Mr. Joanasie.
The first question that I would like to ask is in respect to the 2014-17 business plan under Transportation Policy and Planning on page 179, the priorities for 2014-15 state that they will be working on what is being requested in the communities with respect to airports.
Has this started or has this review been started?
I will get Mr. Suvega to respond to that question about what has been happening to date.
Yes. The review of the capital needs assessment has started.
Who is doing the capital needs assessment? Your employees or contractors?
This is a contract assessment that is being done.
When will this be completed?
We expect that it will be completed at the end of this month.
Why don’t I pretend to be a minister.
While they are doing the needs assessment, it states that here that they will be prioritizing by using this capital needs assessment but I’d like to ask a question.
What is going to be the basis of the assessment? Whether it be the length of the airport or how the community is laid out or the safety aspect of a community? What is the reason for doing assessment?
Mr. Chairman, the needs assessment will be different.
I will get Mr. Suvega to respond to that question.
The airports and the terminals have to get repaired and then we have to do an assessment on the operations of the airport and the airstrips.
They do that according to their operating licenses.
Nunavut airports, do they all have licenses?
I would like Mr. Suvega to continue to respond to these questions.
Mr. Suvega (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes.
All Nunavut airports have a license as well as the mining companies have licenses too at their airports.
Going on to a different topic under Motor Vehicles Information System. Have the equipment already been purchased?
I thank the member for his question with respect to MVIS and getting new equipment, we are replacing the older models for newer ones.
I just want to know if the older equipment will be replaced by sooner while they are purchasing new equipment.
With your permission, Mr. Chairman, I would like Mr. Suvega to respond to that question.
We’re trying to replace the older computers.
All the older equipment will be replaced by newer ones, but not all at once.
We are working with the GLO offices and the hamlets in each community.
Mr. Joanasie (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank Mr. Suvega for answer the question.
In 2014-17, under the business plan of the department, it says that they will be working with the GLOs in regard to the operations of motor vehicles.
(interpretation ends) What specific improvements do you plan to achieve?
We have been saying this more than once. Our department is working with the GLOs and will continue to do so in regard to MVIS, or issuing licences.
Our department uses the GLOs more often than the other department, especially with the MVIF and issuing drivers licenses and we work with the GLOs in each community.
With those items, would they be given training with respect to issuing licenses and other things. It would be beneficial to each community, if our department works with the GLOs.
And again it says that in 2014 the department will be amending the Motor Vehicles Act and Regulations.
What kind of changes will you be making in the legislation?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Minister Kuksuk.
His question is what kind of changes will be made to the Motor Vehicles Act.
I don’t have the answer myself but if I can get Mr. Suvega to respond to that question.
There are a number of proposed amendments to the Motor Vehicle Act that are required in order to modernize the legislation.
These include but are not limited to: distracted driver legislation, graduated licensing for new drivers, tougher measures to address impaired driving, legal basis for an end-of-life vehicle program and fees and other issues, including definition of residency, new by-law making powers for communities, community safety zones, disabled parking, regulation of construction of vehicles on roads and penalties for driving without insurance.
I thank the official for his response.
In the department priority it also states that they will be working with a contractor to look at the Motor Vehicles Act. How did you use the work of those contractors?
I do not have the information for the single contractor but if Mr. Suvega knows the answer then I would like him to answer that question.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Mr. Suvega.
This was started in 2007-08. Some of them have already been looked at.
We also have to develop new legislation. This is an ongoing process. I cannot address one single topic but I would be happy to address the specifics once the review has been completed.
Chairman: We are at Economic Development and Transportation.
Branch Summary. K-6. (interpretation) Next on my list, Mr. Rumbolt.
I have one further question to what Mr. Joanasie was questioning about the 20-year capital needs assessment for Nunavut airports. The minister responded that it was going to be completed by the end of June.
I’m just wondering if the minister will commit to tabling the completed capital needs assessment in the Legislative Assembly in the fall sitting.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Minister Kuksuk.
Yes. We will have those available by the fall sitting.
On page 180 of your business plan it states that you will conduct planning work for the remediation and removal of decommissioned airport buildings in Qikiqtarjuaq, Coral Harbour, Nanisivik, Sanikiluaq, and Resolute Bay.
As of today, at what stage are we at with the planning for the removal of these buildings?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. Minister Kuksuk.
Some of them are older buildings that need to be removed. What they needed to check on first would be any contamination or any danger that they may pose in terms of demolishing them.
Then they need to do… the environmental assessment has been completed and now the actual contract work is something which we are now working on.
The minister just mentioned that they were going to start planning the deconstruction of these buildings. When can we anticipate there will be actual work being done in our communities where these buildings will actually start being removed?
I can use an example in his own community the building… money will begin to be allocated and it will not be until about 2015-16 fiscal year that the actual demolition can take place.
Following my list we are on (interpretation ends) Economic Development and Transportation. Branch Summary. Transportation.
K-6. Mr. Enook.
Thanks for providing me with another opportunity after my time expired.
Mr. Chairman, I have a question for the minister in relation to my previous questions about the airport.
People who communicate with airplanes and the question that I have, let me try and read it in English.
(interpretation ends) Can the minister or his officials clarify what authority the department will have over such matters as safety under the proposed terms of its new contracts for the provision of CARS services at Nunavut’s airports?
Mr. Chairman, I would like to have Ms. Winmill expand on her answers that were related to the previous questions.
I thank the member for that question. It’s a really good question.
The GN retains the accountable authority for all airports across Nunavut and ensures that our safety management system is implemented and followed so that we will still retain control of the safety of the airports across Nunavut.
I would like to go back to an issue for clarification.
I think Mr. Mikkungwak asked part of the question on the things that you began to do.
You stated that in Nunavut, the airport people will be working with NAV Canada and the Arctic Airports Division to determine which communities could benefit from the installation of instrument landing systems.
I would like to ask if it’s going to be possible for some community to have those kinds of things.
We were going to identify these issues and which airports in which communities are busier.
There are many factors that need to be looked at.
This is way we could answer.
I was going to ask a question and part of the answer was already supplied.
What basis will you be using to determine which airports would meet those kinds of criteria in terms of getting instrument landing systems so that airplanes can line up correctly with the airstrip in any kind of weather?
Would we say that Grise Fiord and Resolute Bay would never get any because they only get maybe two flights a week and they’re way at the bottom of the list?
What kind of determinations will you be looking at? What kinds of factors will you base your decisions on?
In terms of the determination, I would like Ms. Winmill to answer this properly, if it’s okay with you.
That’s actually a really good question again by the member.
I don’t know all of the factors that will be taken into consideration, but one factor which we were discussing while we were down meeting with NAV Canada was exactly Grise Fiord and that it’s very difficult to get someone to man the CARS station there.
A criterion is how many observations had been missed and for whatever reason throughout the year and whether putting in the system would alleviate that.
I would like to remind you that all my questions are excellent. Thank you. You don’t need to say they’re excellent questions anymore.
The GPS system that you will be installing, which community will be first. Have you already made a determination on which communities will be getting them, and on what basis?
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. These will be determined. There is no final decision based on this or that.
We do not have one reason identified that we can make public yet. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
When can we know the basis for how you will determine which communities will be made priorities? Maybe I’ll say it in English, (interpretation ends) terms of reference.
I think that’s clear.
Maybe Ms. Winmill can respond to that question.
Chairman: Thank you. Ms. Winmill.
The determination will be made by the third party, NAV Canada.
Being that NAV Canada will be determining that, does this mean that you are out of the picture?
Ms. Winmill may have an answer.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. Winmill.
It is based on their criteria.
On page 178 and 179 on priorities in regard to the transportation and planning policy, I will read a brief statement. In the 2014-15 business plan it states that one of your priorities will be to work with communities on port proponents, docks, and all kinds of things, because it could mean all kinds of things.
Will you work with communities on these kinds of things to develop plans for communities where port infrastructure has the potential to achieve financial sustainability?
Let me read it in English, because I don’t if the interpreters have interpreted this properly. (interpretation ends) “Work with communities and port proponents to develop plans for marine infrastructure in communities where port infrastructure has the potential to achieve financial sustainability and multi-model linkages.”
(interpretation) Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask if this is one of your principles too. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, this is an excellent thing in which to base decisions upon, multi-motor links and economic potential.
Please correct me if I am wrong, Hon. Minister.
I think it already states that potential to achieve financial sustainability, do I understand correctly, in your plans, if there is no financial sustainability, even though the other communities want to take in this but they will not be considered because the plan is written in such a way?
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, we would also look into this and also include that and others, Mr. Chairman.
If we are going to be requesting for funding for capital items, such as marine infrastructure and port proponents that we cannot provide funding for ourselves. We would have to request funding from the federal government. This would be included and it there may be other items, as well.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, the business plan for your department and they only make their plans for main estimates, what about if there is a safety issue?
How come the safety issue is not included in this sentence?
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): First of all, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In regards to the member’s question, the wording in regard to port proponents and in which community it will go, I would like Mr. Suvega to respond to why it was written in this way.
Mr. Suvega (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The way the business plan is written, although it is geared towards marine infrastructure and port proponents, there are other items although they are not included in there.
For example, the Ingirrasiliqta Strategy, we use our strategy within the department and the ministers usually make reports no matter what kind of meeting we attend within Canada and internal meetings and we usually report to all the meetings wherever we go that we don’t have any port infrastructure and we envy all the other provinces that do have the facilities for marine infrastructure and in Nunavut, we don’t have marine infrastructure for the safety of the boats and we negotiate and lobby for this anytime we have the opportunity.
I am not concerned about others. I am not even thinking or considering them.
Mr. Chairman, I am basing my question on that.
That is what I am concerned about because the Hon. Minister, it is written in you plan and it is written there. Only if they have infrastructure that has potential to achieve financial sustainability.
I’m asking you whether the Government of Nunavut is basing their decisions on this plan. If there’s not going to be any financial sustainability then you will not consider it?
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m sorry that’s how it written so therefore I’d like to have Mr. Suvega respond.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) As my colleague Ms. Angnakak says I think I’m having another Joe Enook episode where I can’t seem to get the answer I’m looking for.
(interpretation) I’m asking a question the way this plan is written.
Are you using this as your foundation? Yes or no?
Then I’ll have a clearer understanding of this complicated subject.
Yes, we are using that as our foundation and others.
We have business plans and we can also include items if they’re not included in the plan.
Since you are basing your decisions on that. Thank you for clarifying that. The communities that don’t have economic development opportunities or fisheries economic opportunities so we are quite disappointed for those of that that don’t have community economic development.