EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Why do we have to provide the funding to do the renovations on it then?
The office buildings that are provided to us are not, like it would be just a one room building and no partitions in it at all.
We have to make it comfortable for the employees because we use them.
That’s why we are altering it, to provide the room for the ten employees.
The government doesn’t own the building and he will be getting $73 thousand dollars worth of renovations.
He’s very fortunate.
He’s going to be assisted by the government.
Can we do that in other communities that are privately owned and if they’re going to be occupied by the government, we can do renovations on them.
Is there a rule on that?
We have always had that in Nunavut.
If we have to do renovations on the buildings, then what we do is we do renovations in all the Nunavut communities.
What about the individual that owns the building?
Is there no way that the individual who owns the building can do the renovations instead?
When we’re looking for a building that we want to lease, and if we make an agreement then we take it as is without it being renovated.
So, what we do is we try to make it as comfortable as possible and renovate it to make it better for the employees.
Chairman (interpretation): Is that okay, Mr. Iqaqrialu?
Mr. Iqaqrialu (interpretation): I don’t feel that it’s right of the Government of Nunavut to do that.
As people of Nunavut, if that’s the way the Government of Nunavut is going to run, then we should be able to get some assistance that way too.
It does not matter who owns the building, we are going to have to be able to help them out, and do renovations to their buildings. The Minister said that there is an agreement in place, and if that is the way it is, then we should have the option, in our communities, to renovate buildings that belong to somebody else.
This is not my responsibility.
The responsibility falls on the Minister of Public Works.
I am the Minister of Human Resources.
According to that, I think what we should do is not agree to this part, to spend the $73,000 until we get a clarification.
Chairman (interpretation): I have no more names on my list.
We will go to 4-6.
Questions. Comments?
Branch Summary, Human Resources, Detail of Capital Directorate, $73 thousand.
Chairman (interpretation): Opposed?
Total Tangible Assets, $73 thousand.
Going back to page 4-4.
Detail of Expenditures, $73 thousand.
Chairman (interpretation): Does the Committee agree that the Department of Human Resources is completed?
Do you have any final comments, Ms. Thompson?
The question that Mr. Iqaqrialu posed earlier on, he could ask them again to the Minister of Public Works.
Mr. Havioyak (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends): I would like to begin with the review of the Capital for the Department of Sustainable Development.
Chairman (interpretation): Does the Committee agree that we proceed with Sustainable Development?
In 2004-2005, the draft Capital Plan for Sustainable Development.
In 2004-2005 my department has proposed a $1.88 million dollar Capital Plan.
(interpretation ends) The Department of Sustainable Development’s Capital Plan has always had a primary interest in communities and community operations.
The year 2004-2005 Plan, 95% of the department’s total capital commitment will be identified as relating to investment in specific communities.
The remaining 6% of that Capital Plan relates to planned spending on various areas throughout Nunavut.
Attraction projects serve as a way of developing tourism potential within communities they are also important as a way of protecting and enhancing sites of community importance.
Attraction development projects also allow the Department to focus some of its annual funding to help non-decentralized communities meet their goals.
My Department is continuing with a long-term capital plan that over time will see new wildlife offices in every community in Nunavut.
Planning to replace is done based on the conditions of the existing buildings and the estimate remaining such as, mobile equipment purchases and upgrades supports the Department’s enforcement and conservation activities and include items like snowmobiles, all-terrain vehicles and boats.
Capital assets within territorial parks, enhancing and encourage local usage and support increased tourist usage, thus, providing substantial economic benefits to the adjacent communities.
Headquarters region, capital investment in parks will include funding legal surveys for proposed territorial parks.
(interpretation) The Visitors’ Centers play an important role not only as places where tourists learn first hand about a community, but also as places that actively support community activities and events.
Funding has been allotted in 2004 and 2005 Capital Budget for equipment purchases and displays for Nunavut Visitors’ Centers.
In 2004 and 2005, investment in the art for Nunavut programs will continue. Investment will focus on the accusation of artwork by Nunavut artists to catalogue and preserve their work for future generations.
(interpretation ends) Capital investment in 2004-2005, we will include investing in capital items that will facilitate decentralization, as well as further investment within the community.
As you can see, Mr. Speaker, this Capital Plan is well balanced, again.
The Plan makes excellent use for its limited resources to fund projects that are cleverly focussed upon supporting the needs and priorities of the communities.
Our Plan ensures that all of our Capital Projects provide real benefit to all Nunavummiut.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Akesuk, Minister of Sustainable Development.
Does the Chairperson of the Committee of the Community Empowerment and Sustainable Development have any opening comments?
As Chairman of the Standing Committee on Community Empowerment and Sustainable Development, I am pleased to be able to provide Opening Comments as we begin the review of the 2004-2005 Capital Estimates for the Department of Sustainable Development.
Mr. Chairman, earlier this month, the Standing Committee had the opportunity to meet with the Minister of Sustainable Development to review the draft 2004-2005 Capital Estimates.
Mr. Chairman, the Standing Committee has always been strongly in favour of measures to support our harvesters, artists and craft-people.
In fact, one of our Members is a renowned artist, Mr. Puqiqnak.
Committee Members are concerned that an adequate supply of soapstone in Gjoa Haven, Baker Lake, Kugluktuk, and many other communities is not readily available to all of the artists.
Members would like to see capital projects that would improve existing quarries to make it safer and easier for artists to access high-quality, Nunavut soapstone.
Mr. Chairman, Committee Members recognize that the Minister is required to perform miracles with less than $2 million dollars and I commend them for that.
The standing committee was pleased to note that the Nunavut Economic Development Strategy, “Building a Foundation for the Future” has been released to the public.
Committee members noted that the strategy states in part, and I quote, “fishing processing facilities need to be expanded along the Davis Straight to help ensure that Nunavummiut benefit fully from the sustainable use of this resource.”
Further goals of the strategy are to have at least two fish processing plants fully operational by 2013.
Mr. Chairman, the standing committee is concerned that there is no funding in the capital plans for the construction of the new fish processing facilities.
Committee members remained supportive of the Minister’s efforts to secure additional funding for community based economic development, including the construction of new fish and meat processing plants.
Committee members believe that the key to Nunavut’s economic development is community based economic development.
Mr. Chairman, the standing committee has consistently supported economic development opportunities in non-decentralized communities like Clyde River.
When the second Legislative Assembly convenes next year, I envision refocusing of priorities to encourage economic development in the non-decentralized communities.
Mr. Chairman, the standing committee remains concerned about the number of outstanding IIBA’s.
Committee members urge the Minister to do everything in his power to ensure that these IIBA’s are completed in a timely fashion so that Government of Nunavut projects are not negatively impacted like what has happened in the last four years.
Mr. Chairman, the standing committee is pleased that the Minister continues to invest in attraction developments in the communities, however, committee members are concerned that hamlets are not being given enough input in deciding what sites for archaeological and traditionally significant sites will benefit from the attraction development funding.
I would like you to go up to the witness table?
As the Chairperson, I have to note what’s happening here.
In the opening comments of the Chairperson, there was nothing in there that says Clyde River, that’s following the Inuktitut version of the standing committee’s opening comments.
At this time I’ll give the Members an opportunity for 10 minutes of general comments.
The Minister of Sustainable Development, please introduce your witnesses.
The Assistant Deputy Minister, Ms. Rosemary Keenainak and on my left, our Director of Finance, Mr. Speaker.
Terryl Allen.
Chairman (interpretation): The floor is now open for general comments and we will also have a 10 minute question period.
Those were very interesting opening comments by the Minister in regards to what’s going to be happening at the smaller communities.
In the last three years, I think that we have been focussing more on the non-decentralized communities, and how they should benefit from the Government.
We all know that in Coral Harbour, that if the meat processing plant is built there, it would be economically beneficial to the people of Coral Harbour.
I am sad to say, well, I am grateful, but on the other hand, that the non-decentralized communities are included in consideration of capital projects and so on.
Today my colleague was talking about Coral Harbour and the possibility of setting up a meat processing plant in order to boost the economy, because they have an abundance of caribou and char.
There are also some communities that are getting dogs and I am sure that that will be beneficial to the people.
For those types of projects and their O and M dollars that are required, we are not seeing any infrastructure, or any support systems being built in the communities.
We had it better in the Government of the Northwest Territories’ days.
In Hall Beach there was a feasibility study done in the fishing industry, and we were able to do commercial fishing at one point, and now we cannot do that anymore.
The only fish that we can catch are for consumption only, and we are all aware that there is a large abundance of fish in the Hall Beach area.
Building up another meat processing plant in Nunavut has to build into the capital plan.
Pangnirtung has a fish plant and it is very viable, and it creates a number of employment positions.
Even though it is vibrant in the community, it did have controversial effects in Hall Beach, and the other places where we had quota fishing.
We gave it up so that Pangnirtung can get a boost.
That is the way it happens.
If a fish plant in another community, there will be a number of harvesters, possibly twenty plus, that could get revenue, and we have to seriously consider all those issues, and also consider building a fish plant in the High Arctic.
Or, as an alternative, what we can also do is to put seasonal projects in those communities that are non-decentralized.
Mr. Chairman, I wanted to make those comments because there is a need for such projects.
For the past five years, we have not been able to receive what is mostly needed at the community level. I am talking about being able to process meat and fish in order to generate more revenue at the community level.
Just a comment on the opening comments made by the Chairperson of the standing committee.
I just wanted to support him on this issue.
The artists and carvers at times lack resources such as carving material.
I’ve mentioned this a number of times last year.
If I’m off track, Mr. Chairman, you can correct me.
It must be in the Operations and Maintenance section Mr. Chairman, if it’s here.
To date, we wanted to move it to the capital items in reference to the Chairperson’s comments.
If it’s put in the capital estimates following the responsibilities of the communities, are the artists there because there’s qulliqs made and this could be beneficial to the community carvers?
They would like to go to the quarry sites and maybe get material to make qulliqs but it’s dangerous.
If a person fell, one might get hurt in a quarry area if they’ve gone into a quarry area.
I mentioned that Mr. Chairman, maybe they should be moved into the capital under carving material availability for carvers.
I have a very brief comment to make and I would like to thank the Minister of Sustainable Development in regards to furs and skins.
I would like to thank the Minister for setting up a program where we were able to get rebates for the sale of furs and skins.
That has increased the income of Inuit but then again, there are some of the communities, mostly all the communities in Nunavut have many fish.
In Pelly Bay or Kugaaruk, we are known for the taste of our fish.
If we had a fish plant, it would be very beneficial to the community.
The meat processing plant in Cambridge Bay is quite large, but we have to consider the other communities to provide them with economic opportunities.
In regards to soap stone quarrying and carving, those are the areas that the government should consider.
In regards to economic development, when you have been a member of boards or entities in a particular region, it is hard at times.
Mr. Chairman, in Nunavut, we have natural resources out there lying idle.
We have our animals that we’re not harvesting commercially, and I agree with all the Members around here when I say that we’re not doing anything about the natural resources out there.
We have the meat processing plants.
We have an abundance of muskox in the Kitikmeot area.
I always remember that moratorium that was set over there a few years ago, ordering the closing down of the meat processing plant there.
Is there anything to boost their economy?
They are trying to start up small businesses and other projects.
There are always barriers erected at the start up stage.
People have their dreams and they would like to get started and create opportunities according to their abilities.
But there is so much red tape that we have to go through, it is so hard to get off the ground or get something started.
Mr. Chairman, economic development is something I’m very, very interested in.
That is when something gets started at the community level, but with the previous Government and this Government, there is so much red tape that nothing is happening at the community level.
We’re not able to realize our dreams.
If that is the case, Mr. Chairman, the Department of Sustainable Development has helped our communities by way of employing our staff.
We have to support this Department because they can help our communities.
Would any others like to make comments?
We are on General Comments.
When we were in the Opening Comments of the Standing Committee, Clyde River was not included in the Opening Comments.
Again, they don’t have the same opportunities as we do.
I could also include Clyde River as one of the potential communities that we could build a processing plant at because we are in the hub and we are more accessible to a larger number of communities than Pangnirtung.
But I would like to say that the Department of Sustainable Development, in their Capital Plans, were going to do a test fishery in order to find about more economic opportunities.
I think that is a very excellent idea, but in the Capital Estimates, some part of that idea is gone out of the picture.
As the people of Nunavut, for some reason or other, there are too many challenges, too many obstacles in the development of these types of plans.
I think it is up to us, as Members of the Legislative Assembly, to remove those barriers so that it will be easier to create these economic development projects and to look at the possibility of commercially harvesting the animals and see what we could do to improve the system.
In the communities, for example, a fish or meat processing plant, we all know that transportation, transporting these products is very expensive, so we have to look at alternative methods that are more cost effective.
If it is possible, I would like the Sustainable Department Minister to look at options, look at cost-saving measures, and look at alternative methods that could be used in Nunavut.
It is a must that we have to do.
I wanted to make those General Comments in the Capital Estimates.
I have no more names on the list for Capital Estimates General Comments and each Member is allowed 10-minutes to ask questions.
I have no names for questions on my list.
Page 11-5 and 11-6, any comments?
Page 11-5 or we are on 11-6.
Program Development and Delivery.
Total Headquarters Region. $175 thousand.
Chairman (interpretation): Total Tangible Assets. $175 thousand.
Chairman (interpretation): I alluded to page 11-7, 11-8, 11-9, and 11-10.
Yes, you can speak to any one of those pages.
Mr. Havioyak (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, a question.
Last year, as to the work in 2003-2004 the amount in Kugluktuk is mentioned, $193 thousand was used the previous year.
And they show $75 thousand used next year.
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Minister.
Yes, I will able to give you more clarification, as to how much has been expended.
It does not state how much has been expended, but we wanted to improve the Qurluq Park.
Mr. Havioyak (interpretation): I did not hear the reply.
There was $193 thousand used to improve the Park.
Is that your response?
I have been to that area this summer.
There does not seem to be any work done there.
I was not very happy.
Yes, there was money put aside and to show $75 thousand would be put aside and may not be used.
If we say yes to $75 thousand there and for the year 2004-2005 there is no work, I would like clarification as to what this money was used for.
It is written there.
It is to review the land, how it can be made attractive, and to maintain the roads because the hamlet council had made a trail to the Qurluq Park.
We want to work on the trail again.
We used the funding to review how this Heritage River Trail could be set.
This $193 thousand was put in there and an additional $75 thousand is to complete the Qurluq Park.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Akesuk.
Mr. Havioyak (interpretation): I get your response here. Yes, you are building the trail?
Yes. I thought that these funds would only be used to go towards the Park, but I see the trails and roads are covered under this.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): Yes, they’re included in there.
For Pond Inlet, and I’m glad that Qilalukat Park, and I’m glad that they put that back in the line item, what will this $85 thousand dollars be used for?
Is that for improvements on the park?
What will that be used for?
Yes, it will be used to relocate and also to put up picnic tables and what not.
I would like to get clarification on the Inuktitut translation.
I could not understand it for Kugaaruk, attraction development.
What does upaguminaqstaugiarniga sunna upagunarksititargiarqu mean?
Just that Inuktitut version.
I don’t understand that dialect.
That is for you my colleague. Mr. Akesuk.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): In our communities, like in all of our communities, our communities have attraction sites.
This is to improve the tourist attraction sites.
Usually the tourists are elders so that it could be more accessible to the tourists.
The way I understood it, I’ll ask another question anyways.
The tourists would like to go see old heritage sites and usually the tourists would like to see old sites and they enjoy visiting attraction sites or old fishing weirs during the summer time.
Is that what we’re talking about, or, is this line item geared towards something else?
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): Thank you, I almost called you Mr. Speaker, Mr. Chairman.
Yes, we will be developing the attraction sites.
That’s exactly what we’re talking about.
We want to make the old heritage site more attractive for the tourists and we would also like to work with the communities themselves to make sure we develop the attraction sites because the communities know better than we would, they have a better idea where the attraction sites would be.
For the Chesterfield Inlet, Wildlife Office Garage, $50 thousand dollars.
But as you go down and reach down to Whale Cove, it’s the same wildlife office garage for the Whale Cove, and it’s almost half a million dollars more. That’s why I’m not too happy.
Why is there a large difference between the two, between Chesterfield Inlet and Whale Cove when they have no wildlife office garage and those two seem to be the same?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Netser. Minister Akesuk.
This $50 thousand will be utilized within our current year to renovate the wildlife office garage, which is where the ski-doo workshop is.
So, Whale Cove is at its initial stage and Chesterfield Inlet has been ongoing.
For Chesterfield Inlet for 2009 Capital Plan and also, if you look at Whale Cove, 2005 and 2009 Capital Plan, they are the same, just for your information, but the year value differs from each other.
Mr. Puqiqnak (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, correct me if I am wrong.
Mr. Chairman, maybe I am a little bit disappointed with or perhaps I just overlooked it, our meat processing plant in Kitikmeot for example, Cambridge Bay, seems like there are no plans for Cambridge Bay, usually that is our headquarters in Kitikmeot Region and for Gjoa Haven, although there is a fish processing plant there and meat processing plant still there; I do not see any funding geared towards those two items.
Sustainable Development Department, can your Department not sell our country food now?
I wonder why there is no funding made available for 2004-2005.
My question is why is that so?
Do not forget, we have interpreters, Thank you.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. $1 million, 998 thousand will not be able to cover all those needs.
With limited resources we have to stretch our dollars and in the future they will require additional dollars.
And within our Department, we have done our review that we will, if we can come up with $20 million dollars, at least we will be able to cover some of the requests, but with $1 million, 900 thousand, with those limited resources, we are unable to stretch them far and I know that we will work on that again in the future.
And with the Nunavut Economic Development Strategy, I know that our strategy is going to, we are going to benefit from the strategy if we want to bring out those Capital Plans.
Although those are very important to us and we will have to look at stretching our dollars to the maximum.
At this time, as a Government priority is the education and housing and once that is over with, as a Minister for this Department of Sustainable Development, I will let my counterparts know, at the Federal level, that we require more capital funding and this $1 million, 900 thousand dollars had to be allocated to the Nunavut communities.
That’s why it is like that.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Akesuk.
Our wildlife in Nunavut, we have all this opportunity for economic development with our natural resources and they’ve been sitting idle since the creation of Government of Nunavut.
That’s according to my knowledge in the Kitikmeot area.
I don’t know how our previous government funded these.
The Government of the Northwest Territories provided funding for all the Northwest Territories communities.
When we became Nunavut, they sat idle.
We asked questions and no answers came and the only thing we hear is that we can’t do it.
Not just in those areas, but my colleague from Kugluktuk spoke about soap stone quarries.