EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
The number of positions in the department has increased from 120.5 PYs in 2012-13 to 135.0 PYs in 2013-14.
Mr. Chairman, the 2011 Budget Address stated that “A devolution agreement would bring us royalty payments on our natural resources, but it may be many years before we can bank that money.”
On May 18, 2012, the federal Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development announced the appointment of the chief federal negotiator for Nunavut devolution.
The proposed 2013-14 main estimates of the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs include funding of $1,887,000 for the Devolution Division.
The proposed number of PYs in the division is 9.0.
The department’s proposed 2013-16 business plan indicates that “the GN, NTI and Canada appointed respective Chief Negotiators and the three parties have been meeting to support Canada in the acquisition of a federal mandate to allow formal negotiations to commence.”
It also indicates that one of the government’s priorities for 2013-14 is to “Continue ongoing preparations to commence Devolution Agreement-in-Principle negotiations with the Government of Canada and Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated.”
The business plan also indicates that a devolution agreement-in-principle is not anticipated to be finalized until the 2015-16 fiscal year, following which negotiations would commence for a devolution final agreement.
Members also note that NTI’s ongoing lawsuit against the Government of Canada in relation to the implementation of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement may complicate progress towards concluding a devolution agreement.
Mr. Chairman, the 2006 Report of the Auditor General to the Legislative Assembly recommended that the Government of Nunavut review aspects of its decentralized financial structure.
The report that was produced from this review was tabled in the Legislative Assembly by the Premier on February 28, 2012.
The standing committee again emphasizes the importance of ensuring that the final reports and recommendations emerging from the work of consultants be tabled in the Legislative Assembly in a timely manner so that all members have the opportunity to review their work.
On June 5, 2012, the Minister of Human Resources tabled the Government of Nunavut’s Decentralization Action Plan in the Legislative Assembly.
The proposed 2013-16 business plan of the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs indicates that “The Department of Human Resources developed an action plan in response to the functional review.
Responsibility for decentralization will be transferred to EIA effective April 1, 2013.”
It also indicates that one of its priorities for 2013-14 is to “Proceed with the implementation of the Decentralization Action Plan.”
In June of 2012, the Legislative Assembly approved amendments to the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
These amendments provided the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Nunavut with the clear legal authority to investigate privacy complaints.
As of March 1, 2013, these amendments have not yet come into force.
The standing committee notes that two of the department’s priorities for 2013-14 are to “Work with the municipalities of Nunavut to create best practices for access to information and protection of privacy that are consistent with the ATIPP Act” and to “Review the administrative function of the ATIPP Act and assess the performance of public bodies in complying with the new privacy provisions included in the Act.”
During the minister’s recent appearance before the standing committee, it was suggested that the government work with such partners as the Municipal Training Organization to build capacity at the municipal level, which will help to achieve the ultimate goal of enabling the municipal level of government to be brought under the provisions of access to information and protection of privacy legislation, thereby ensuring that residents of the territory enjoy the same statutory rights with respect to information held by municipal governments as they do with respect to information held by the territorial government.
The standing committee also notes the importance of the government tabling an annual report in the Legislative Assembly on the administration of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
The 2011-12 report was tabled in the Legislative Assembly on November 2, 2012.
The standing committee also notes that the statutorily-required 2009-2010, 2010-11, and 2011-12 annual reports of the department’s Bureau of Statistics were tabled in the Legislative Assembly on October 30, 2012.
A recent annual report of the Integrity Commissioner suggested that “The value of lobbyist [regulation], introduced by other jurisdictions, might be considered.”
Further work in this area could complement the government’s plans to introduce a new Public Service Act.
In 2010-11, the department established its new Government Liaison Office.
Its proposed budget for the 2013-14 fiscal year is $3.6 million.
The department’s proposed 2013-16 business plan indicates that one of its priorities for 2014-15 is to “Conduct a detailed review of the GLO Program to identify its effectiveness and to outline new directions for improvement of service to Nunavut residents.”
The standing committee urges the department to communicate clearly and work closely with municipalities concerning the respective roles and responsibilities of government liaison officers and municipal liaison officers.
Members support the Premier in her efforts to effectively represent Nunavut’s priorities with respect to arctic sovereignty and pan-territorial initiatives, including such issues as enhancing search and rescue capacity and oil spill preparedness in the north.
Mr. Chairman, previous years’ business plans of the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs addressed such transboundary issues as the status of the Athabaska and Manitoba Denesuline land claims, which impact communities in the Kivalliq, as well as support for the Nunavut Hudson Bay Interagency Working Group, whose work on the Hudson Bay Inland Sea Initiative impacts the residents of Sanikiluaq.
However, the department’s proposed 2013-16 business plan does not address these important transboundary issues.
It is important that residents and community leaders in impacted areas be kept informed of the status of these issues and that the government be as transparent as possible with respect to its activities.
On April 20, 2011, a new cooperation protocol between the Government of Nunavut and Nunavut Tunngavik was signed.
The standing committee supports a positive working relationship between the Government of Nunavut and Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated.
It is also incumbent on the government to be clear and candid with MLAs and the general public concerning the rationale for its own position in areas where the two parties may have disagreements on specific issues.
‘The European Union’s proposed ban on seal products ignores the very real negative impact their discussions already have on the market for all Canadian seal pelts and on the people of Nunavut,’ said Premier Aariak. ‘The proposal to ban seal products is harmful to Inuit interests, demonstrates a lack of knowledge of its impacts on Arctic indigenous peoples, and is inconsistent with the type of partnership we need at the Arctic Council.
In light of Canada’s upcoming chairmanship of the Arctic Council, the standing committee calls on the Premier to make a formal statement in the House clarifying her government’s current position on this issue.
The standing committee notes the recent establishment of the government’s Interdepartmental Nutrition North Canada Subsidy Monitoring Committee.
I would also note that this initiative was referenced in a recent report released by the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, who commented that the Government of Nunavut is “designing a monitoring programme that should be operational in 2013...” The standing committee urges the Premier to formally update the Legislative Assembly on the status of its work.
Mr. Chairman, as I indicated at the beginning of my opening comments, the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs is assuming a number of functions and responsibilities that were previously exercised by the Department of Human Resources, which will be dissolved as of April 1, 2013.
Other functions are being transferred to the Department of Finance.
The standing committee stresses the importance of timely tabling in the Legislative Assembly of key departmental documents, including the government’s Public Service Annual Report and its quarterly Inuit employment reports. As of February 28, 2013, the most recent quarterly Inuit Employment Report to be available on the government’s website was for June 2012.
The proposed 2013-16 business plan of the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs indicates that one of its priorities for 2013-14 is to “Review departmental Inuit Employment Plans and assist departments in drafting a training and development strategy to implement their plans.”
The Department of Finance’s proposed 2013-16 business plan indicates that one of its priorities for 2013-14 is to “develop a government-wide Human Resources Strategy” in partnership with the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
Given the complementary nature of these initiatives, it is essential that the two central agencies work closely together.
It is important to acknowledge the progress that has been made in increasing Inuit employment in the Government of Nunavut.
Information contained in the government’s quarterly employment reports indicate that a total of 977 beneficiaries were employed by the GN in June of 2002.
By June of 2012, that number had increased to 1,607.
This constituted an increase of approximately 65 percent over the course of a decade.
On average, the government gained approximately 53 new Inuit employees each year.
It is important for the government to develop aggressive, realistic, and achievable timetables for achieving full representativeness across all occupational categories in the government, which is commonly understood to mean a public service that is composed of 85 percent beneficiary employees.
Information contained in the government’s June 2012 quarterly employment report, which is the most recent report to be available on the department’s website, indicates that there were a total of 4,160 positions across the government’s departments and Crown agencies. 3,205 of these positions were filled, of which 1,607 were filed by beneficiaries.
Assuming that the government could fill all of its positions, it would need to hire 1,928 new beneficiary employees to achieve full representativeness.
The standing committee notes that the government’s proposed 2013-16 business plan indicates that its current government-wide Inuit Employment Plan target is 52 percent Inuit employment by March 31, 2014.
In September of 2010, the Government of Nunavut filed a statement of defence in relation to the federal government’s attempt to have the Government of Nunavut named as a co-defendant in the matter of Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated’s lawsuit against the federal government.
In its statement of defence, which is a matter of public record, the GN indicated that the federal government “has refused to provide to the Government of Nunavut the necessary funding…to allow it to develop and implement the necessary training and other measures required to increase Inuit participation in government employment to a representative level.
In its response to this standing committee’s report on the 2010 Report of the Auditor General on Human Resource Capacity in the Government of Nunavut, the Government of Nunavut stated that it will “continue to lobby the federal government for funding in regards to obligations under Article 23.”
It is important that the government publicly clarify its current position concerning how much additional funding would be required from the federal government in order to meet its obligations and achieve its objectives.
Mr. Chairman, I would also like to take this opportunity to again draw attention to the ongoing gender gap within the public service.
The 2010-11 Public Service Annual Report indicates that approximately 40 percent of the public service is composed of beneficiary women.
Approximately 25 percent of the public service is composed of non-beneficiary females and an additional 25 percent is composed of non-beneficiary males.
However, beneficiary males compose approximately only 10 percent of the public service.
Mr. Chairman, the standing committee also notes that the government’s Priority Hiring Policy was revised in 2011 and will be in place until June 30, 2014.
The 2010-11 Public Service Annual Report indicates that 698 employees were receiving a bilingual bonus as at March 31, 2011.
The 2006-07 business plan of the Department of Human Resources indicated that a draft of a new “Language Incentive Program” had been completed.
Although the department’s 2010-11 business plan indicated that one of its priorities for the 2011-12 fiscal year would be to “Develop and implement a language incentive policy for the GN,” this priority was not discussed in subsequent business plans presented by the department.
The standing committee notes that the proposed 2013-16 business plan of the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs indicates that one of its priorities for 2013-14 is to “Develop the Language Incentive Program in partnership with Nunavut Arctic College.”
The standing committee encourages the minister to clarify the scope of this work.
The standing committee notes that section 17 of the Inuit Language Protection Act provides that the Inuit Language Authority “may develop, review, recommend or administer surveys or tests that evaluate Inuit Language proficiency...” Given the importance of complying with the Inuit Language Protection Act, the standing committee continues to encourage the department to develop objective tests for evaluating language proficiency within the public service.
Using my discretion as the Chair, I now recognize the clock and break for lunch.
We will resume at 1:30 p.m. Premier Aariak and her officials will be at the witness table.
We will resume at 1:30 p.m. Thank you.
>>Committee recessed at 11:51 and resumed at 13:29
Chairman (interpretation): Good afternoon, my fellow committee members.
At this time, we can return to our review. We were on general comments when we broke for lunch.
Prior to recommencing our discussions on this matter, even without my reminder about our rules, I believe all members recall which ones they are, Rules 77(1) and 77(2).
These are the rules we’re always told to abide by. They should be ingrained in our minds by now, so I will not read them.
At this point, do any of the members have any general comments before we move on to questions?
Let us now move to page B-4.
Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $7,115,000.
To begin with, I want to start on page 5 of the business plan. In the 2012-13 fiscal year, the last bullet for one of the priority is to “Develop a GLO handbook.”
One of the things that keep coming up, I think, is that people in the communities are always asking us to explain what the difference between a GLO and an MLO is. I figured maybe the Premier could give a description of that.
The MLOs are the employees of the local hamlets.
The GLOs or the government liaison officers are employees of the Nunavut government. I have continued to differentiate their job descriptions.
The GLOs are more communication oriented with the majority of their work dealing with government correspondence, as well as communication from Inuit to the government. (interpretation ends) The kind of services that the GLOs provide are delivering Government of Nunavut information and services at the community level and ensuring two-way communications with the public.
As the GLO will be the one central point of contact for each community, the GLOs will provide the utmost quality of professionalism and service through ensuring government services are easily accessed, reliable information is delivered, providing bilingual Inuktitut and English services, and ensuring reliable information is distributed.
Also, the feedback from the public on the Government of Nunavut is also very important in delivering some of the GN’s programs at the community level and coordinating collaboration between government agencies. The GLO plays a key role in implementing strategic direction for the GN, government liaison officers, and so on.
I think one of the concerns that came up last week on the first day of the sitting that I had asked questions about is the social insurance number.
There has been quite a bit of communication going on about that issue.
I think it was suggested at one time that possibly, the GLOs might take on that responsibility.
I know that the minister was going to look into it, but while we’re here in the House, I’m just curious to find out: have there been any updates or any further communication with the federal government on this issue and your office?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Elliott. (interpretation ends) Premier Aariak.
I have written the correspondence, as I had promised a week ago.
My deputy minister has also met with Service Canada and they are still in the process of resolving the situation.
With the oral questions that I asked yesterday regarding the GLOs, I kind of want to make it clear that I wasn’t suggesting that the GLOs weren’t doing their jobs or weren’t qualified to do their jobs.
I know that in all three communities of the High Arctic, there are three GLOs and I know that they’re trying to do their jobs as best they can.
I think I have raised some awareness around Grise Fiord and Resolute Bay with some of the issues they’ve had, which I’m sure the department is working towards rectifying some of those problems.
I know that the Premier had mentioned 16 communities and getting the materials out to the communities, but I wanted to specifically centre on the part with the suggestion of monitoring Nutrition North and food prices across the territory.
I was hoping that I was making myself clear in the sense that I know the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation was working towards getting ten individuals to volunteer to do the work.
My suggestion was to work together collaboratively and have the 16 GLOs compile the information with the volunteer assistance of maybe nine of the individuals in the communities that don’t have GLOs to be able to cover all 25 communities and get that statistical data.
I think one of the things that we need is to have that information to be able to properly report back and see what the prices are in the reality in the communities.
Is there any way that the minister would entertain that idea?
Thank you, Mr, Chairman.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Elliot. (interpretation ends) Premier Aariak.
I had answered that question, I believe, the day before yesterday when my colleague asked the question related to that issue in this House.
I will reiterate that the Department of Economic Development and Transportation is the lead department for the food security and anti-poverty committee. They are handling those responsibilities.
We can certainly consider how we can utilize the GLOs to include them in this process.
On page 6 of the business plan for 2013-14, one of the priorities for the department is to “Work with the municipalities of Nunavut to create best practices for access to information and protection of privacy that are consistent with the ATIPP Act.”
Could the minister explain how the department plans to do that and attain that goal?
The Government of Nunavut has agreed that the municipalities have to convey their openness to this idea. What we have heard from some of the hamlets is that they have limited numbers of staff and record management systems that can report on these issues. They will be kept in the communications loop.
(interpretation ends) Outside of the larger communities, capacity to perform functions beyond regular duties is extremely limited right now with municipalities.
Subjecting municipalities to the ATIPP Act at this time would limit their ability to provide the communities with the current level of service.
I would like to add that in her 2011-12 annual report, the Information and Privacy Commissioner changed her recommendations on including municipalities under the Act.
She now recommends that we work with municipalities to create rules and policies regarding access to privacy matters.
Chairman: Qujannamiik, Premier Aariak. (interpretation) Thank you for trying to promote me.
I agree. I think a lot of communities do struggle with the same issues that the Government of Nunavut has in terms of human capacity issues.
So I can appreciate that some of the hamlets are trying to work with the staff that they have.
As the minister did point out, the commissioner did mention about working towards rules and policies around privacy matters. Has the department worked towards accomplishing this goal?
I’m not saying, “Become ATIPP-compliant,” but as the minister suggested with her answer, “Follow up with different rules and policies to help work towards that.”
So is the government working towards creating rules and policies around privacy matters?
Yes, we want to work with their officials towards their moves to reach their goal.
When there were courses related to ATIPP given by the Nunavut government, we invited their officials during these three-day workshops.
There have been three to date, with the most recent being May 7 to 9, 2012. They were able to participate in these orientation courses and we foresee continuing that in the immediate future.
As I mentioned in the opening comments, there was the committee’s recommendation or suggestion that possibly, to help build up capacity within the communities, the ability to speak with the Municipal Training Organization to provide training that would allow hamlet staff to be up to the capacity to comply with the ATIPP Act. Has any communication between the department and the Municipal Training Organization happen?
When a replacement is hired to fill a position of manager of ATIPP who is on maternity leave right now, this individual would make contact with the Municipal Training Organization with the view of establishing a training partnership.
The issue of establishing a system of registering lobbyists has been raised in prior years by MLAs and in reports of the Integrity Commissioner.
Do you support the creation of a public registry of individuals who are paid by private interests to lobby the Government of Nunavut on different issues, yes or no?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the member for raising an issue which is a very good matter to deliberate upon.
This is, indeed, a matter we can take into consideration.
Next on my list is Mr. Schell.
On page 2 of your business plan, there is $1,228,000 budgeted for five staff for the Premier’s Office.
Can you indicate the titles of these five PYs?
Just give me time to find it.
We now have it.
Chairman (interpretation): Go ahead, Madam Premier.
According to this plan, I think you’re asking about the staff from my office.
I have a principal secretary.
I also have a press secretary. All the ministers have an executive assistant.
There is an executive secretary in our office and also the special advisor to the Premier who also assists us from Ottawa. They are not located here so that they can be close to the federal government.
These are the main staff that I work with.
In regard to the special advisor to the Premier, how long has that position been around?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Schell. (interpretation ends) Premier Aariak.
That position has been around since the fall of 2011.
Please remember that the Premier’s office needs some staff that are qualified. I had stated that I needed more assistance.
The federal government leaders have so many staff and we don’t have that many.
Is this individual a beneficiary?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): No.
Was there an advertisement for this competition through the normal competition process put forward?