EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
And also, our tireless interpreters in the House.
Member’s Statement 249 – 2(2): Inuit Clothing
I was not going to make a comment, but I feel that I have to make a statement.
As one of my colleagues stated, I felt very much and one thing that I heard very much was whether or not we should wear furs.
When I go down south, I tell a story to make a little awareness.
Yes, we are from a cold climate and it’s not going to change anytime soon.
We wear parkas with fur trim, and yes they do come from animals, but it’s important.
If you live in the north, I am sure your face would freeze right away if you are wearing a jacket without a fur trim or if you don’t wear any skins.
I was watching Peter Mansbridge who came up here, and he was wearing a parka.
I was very grateful that he was wearing a parka with a fur trim.
Fur is vital and important, and also the meat, I get sick if I don’t eat traditional foods.
Mr. Kattuk (interpretation): Mr. Speaker, I would like to go back to Members’ Statements.
Speaker (interpretation): The member would like to return to Item 3.
There are no nays, please proceed Mr. Kattuk.
Member’s Statement 250 – 2(2): Sealskins – An Inuit Tradition
Maybe you didn’t see me raise my hands while we were on Item 3, but I would like to thank my colleagues for going back to Item 3.
In regards to the issue of seals and sealing, I worked on this issue extremely hard and I would like to come back to it.
I would like those individuals to understand about how seals and by-products were used and are being used today.
In here, it states: (interpretation ends) animals being skinned alive. (interpretation) It’s something that’s not true.
We never skin seals or any other animals while they are still alive because if you do that, it’s going to come back to you.
Inuit would never skin any animal while it’s still alive.
In the Inuit tradition, it would mean that it would come back to the individual who does that to a seal or any animal.
It also states here that they’re used to keep you warm.
Sealskins were used as tents, clothing because that was the only available product or available material.
We didn’t have any linen or any cloth available.
They were used for clothing, for shelter and for food.
I eat seal meat, and I’ve eaten it all my life.
As a person from Sanikiluaq, seal meat is available year round and it’s one of the staples of an Inuk’s diet.
Mr. Kattuk (interpretation): We eat seal meat because I come from the north.
When I eat seal meat in the winter time, my skin thickens and my blood is better for my health.
We eat seal meat all our lives and there are people that say that if you don’t eat seal meat while you’re out hunting, you get cold.
But if I eat seal meat my body is more resistant, it is stronger.
Those are the types of things that the traditions of the people of Sanikiluaq and other communities in Nunavut.
The male seal usually has an odor.
Some people die when they haven’t tasted that male seal.
That’s just an example that I’m talking about.
There are some people that I know in this world, like Osama Bin Laden who has never tasted seal meat, as well as Saddam Hussein.
He was captured by the Americans before he had a chance to taste seal meat, which is unfortunate.
That’s what we talk about when we talk about seal meat because it’s very delicious and it’s good for Inuit and we have been consuming it for years.
I’m proud to say that I’m a seal hunter and I live off of seal meat.
Seal meat is my life.
It’s part of my life, it’s my diet.
When I get paid, I cash my cheque and the money is spent already.
The hunters feel a sense of satisfaction when they provide seal products and sell them and they spend all that money to good use for the family.
They are proud to be able to make a little bit of money out of that seal meat.
Going to the Co-op or the Northern Store and spending that hard earned cash almost as fast as they make it is part of their lives.
It is very good that the seals is used by the hunters in a positive way and to provide food for the family.
I am proud to say that I am a hunter and I receive seal meat from other hunters.
Member's Statement 251 – 2(2): Support Inuit Seal Hunting
I also stand to say that I am in support of seal hunting.
Today we hear the ajaajaa song and this was made by Aksaqattaq, who was an elder of mine.
When they went caribou hunting and they couldn’t find any animals, that is when he sang the ajaajaa song.
They had encountered problems with no food, no animals and so he made the ajaajaa song; and it goes something like this; “Qiujavit, qiujavit, qiujavaksinnarivit, alainaittuqaqpuq inuunialiqtunga ulluq suli taava:.
It means, it was in the springtime and that individual was very happy to know that there is going to be wildlife again.
The day is good and the stars are bright at night.
It is going to be springtime.
That is the song that he sang and he was my great grandfather.
My adoptive parents were also very good hunters.
For that reason I would like to recognize the people who are working very hard to be able to provide food for themselves with seal meat and the women that sew sealskins to make beautiful clothing for us.
I had my headset off.
I would like to recognize one of the individuals that work on the Hansard at Innirvik, Anne-Marlene Kilabuk.
I would like to recognize her and welcome her to the gallery.
Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery. Going to the orders of the day. Item 6.
Question 315 – 2(2): Plans to Change the Capital Planning Process
My question is for the Minister of Finance in her capacity as chair of the Financial Management Board.
When you take a look at the five-year capital plan that was tabled last fall in this House, we’ll see that the planned totals for the coming years decline each year. We know that’s because while part of the overall capital budget is set, another part of it is left open for departments to propose new projects and to allow for flexibility in there.
My first question to the minister is: is the department considering making changes to the Government of Nunavut’s capital planning process?
And if so, what specific changes are being contemplated?
Every year we finalize the capital plans for the Government of Nunavut, and those were tabled in the House in the fall.
The proposed changes that we are working with, we’re looking at this in the summer.
We are looking at consulting with the agencies involved in planning capital plans, particularly the municipalities.
We are working with Community and Government Services over this summer to develop a five-year plan with more consultation with the hamlets.
That will be worked into the long-term five-year plan, but every year, each year, as we set the budgets, those targets are identified based on needs as well.
It’s good to hear that the government is looking at getting some input from the communities on this.
Mr. Speaker, it’s my understanding that departments have a supplementary list.
I know we have heard raised numerous times in the House, here, over the last few weeks, by different ministers and senior officials here in the witness stands, that they have a list of projects.
They have got a supplemental list that they would like to see included in the overall capital plan and that is something that the department would like to see in there.
Mr. Speaker, my question is: are these lists secret or are they available for members to have a look at?
Every year in the planning process, internally, there’s a capital planning process committee that works through each department to talk about the priorities of every department.
I think we all know that there’s a high demand for projects across Nunavut, and it’s often difficult to meet every single project based on needs. Our needs are greater than what we are able to fund each year.
The information that we work with, the departments continued plans, are all working documents, and the only concern that I would have ensuring that is that if they are working documents, and they are not final… . I have a concern about presenting a plan to this House that is not final and that is in draft stages on a regular basis.
So, each year when we have a better idea of our funding position, we are able to allocate funding for capital projects. But as it is right now, internally, it’s a working document; it’s not a secret to internal staff. But, presently, I would have concerns about tabling that in the House in the draft stages.
I know over questioning in the House here, over the last few weeks, different ministers have indicated that is something that is in our supplemental capital plans and members ask questions. We don’t know that it’s there.
I can appreciate that it is a working document, but I am wondering, if it’s something like departmental priorities for capital projects that are not listed on the allocated five-year capital plan, if it would be something that could be put forward to members of this House so that we can be reaffirmed that the minister is not just saying that it’s on there.
We recognize that it is not something that is there, it would be a priority for the departments to try and put into their capital plan, but I think members would love to see that there is a list somewhere, with the projects that are not on there, that affect their communities, in front of them and in black and white.
So, would the minister look at providing something like that?
As I said earlier, there is an interdepartmental capital planning committee that sits with every department to develop the capital plans on an annual basis.
This summer we’re looking at further defining that with municipalities, so the plan changes on a regular basis.
The target dollars that we have available basically dictate what we’re able to afford to deliver each year.
Again, I’m reluctant to share draft documents in the House that are not final.
I know through standing committee meetings, every minister shares with the standing committee members the plan for the upcoming year and there’s an opportunity for regular members to provide input into that process.
At the same time, I also committed to this House that we would be consulting with the members in developing the five-year capital planning process this coming summer.
It seems odd to me, we recognize that it’s not a capital plan that we want, but just simply a list of priority projects that the departments have and recognize that could change from year to year. But, a lot of times it’s said that’s in the supplemental plan, a priority of the department, that the government doesn’t want to let the members of this House know what their capital priorities are individually.
Mr. Speaker, I know that the minister indicated that we do have limited dollars and that does dictate what the actual plans end up being.
How does the Financial Management Board make its final decision on deciding which projects or priorities will get onto the plan for the allocated amounts that are there?
As I mentioned earlier, there is a working committee, internally, that reviews the Government of Nunavut’s capital priorities, if you want to call it that. But, at the end of the day, the projects that are approved are based on needs and different issues.
It all depends on what the project is.
Just to give an example, we had a plan two years ago that we had to adjust to accommodate the school here burning down.
That’s the kind of change that we have to be flexible to deal with in the capital planning process, and the concern I have in sharing a draft document in the House is it will raise unnecessary expectations in the general public, to share a needs list, by every department, in this House.
What I do want to say is that I’m seeking the members’ input; the members do have input into that process at the standing committee level, on capital planning processes that we’ll be introducing this fall.
So, again, I want to say that it’s not a set plan.
It changes on a regular basis, but to table it in the House would be raising unnecessary expectations in the House as well as the general public.
Question 316 – 2(2): FOL Site Use as a Trades School
Not too long ago, he told me about the FOL site in Rankin Inlet.
The Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs is in town, and some of us won’t be able to meet with him.
For that reason, I would like to ask the minister: you have said that you had written a letter that the FOL site could be used as a trades school and that the community wants to use it as such.
I wonder if the minister can indicate to us if he ever got a response.
I did have opportunity this morning to speak briefly with Minister Scott, at breakfast.
The issue of the FOL site did not come up at that time.
The member is correct: we are still pursuing options around opportunities with that type of infrastructure on the ground in Nunavut, in particular the FOL site.
We will follow that up with the federal minister.
I did have a response from the minister that they were looking into it, but they were very non-committal.
That is why the hope is, over the next couple of weeks, after the House is finished, to arrange some of those ongoing meetings with our federal counterparts.
It should be said that there is an urgency for the discussion of this.
I wonder why you felt that this was not an emergency matter? I would like to ask the minister if, while this federal minister is here, he can discuss this with them.
Maybe that is the only way that the defense department will start doing something, because you have more of an idea of where he is.
Mr. Scott has arrived; he has been in town for less than 24 hours.
He will have meetings all day today with different stakeholders and groups.
I believe this morning he was in senior-level meetings with the Premier and other officials of the Government of Nunavut.
My understanding of the file is that the responsibility, as the member has pointed out, lies with the Department of National Defense and that minister.
What Minister Scott would be able to do for us, if he acquiesced, would be to be an advocate for the issue and indeed a supporter, hopefully, around that federal cabinet table.
These discussions are at a very preliminary stage, and again, I would hope to be in the position to follow them up in a couple of weeks in a face-to-face meeting with the federal minister of defense.
Question 317 – 2(2): Dog Team Slaughter
As I stated before about the dog team slaughter, I would like to ask the Premier: (interpretation ends) will the Premier support this inquiry and talk to the DIAND minister about it?
We have advised the standing committee, and we are happy that they were able to discuss it because this has affected us and it has to be looked at closely.
The committee is behind us regarding this slaughter.
They have advised us to pursue this inquiry.
Question 318 – 2(2): Nunavut’s Economy
It is concerning the simulator project that was announced as being rejected in the Nunatsiaq News this morning by the federal government.
I know quite a bit about this simulator project because I started working on it in 2001.
We applied all over the place: Aboriginal Business Canada and other places and most recently to the Nunavut Economic Forum.
It’s quite surprising that it got rejected because it was recommended as one of the top 20 projects by the Nunavut Economic Forum in 2004; in fact it was in the top 10.
So, my question for the minister: will the minister tell the House if he will be meeting with the minister of DIAND today, while he is Iqaluit, to discuss moving the decision-making for our share of the $90 million Northern Economic Development Strategy funds to Nunavut?
Yes, that’s an ongoing discussion that I am having with the Ministers that are here now, the Minister of INAC and also the Minister of Northern Development, Ms. Ethel Blondin-Andrew.
So, that’s an ongoing discussion that we are having on that file.
I am glad to hear you are having ongoing discussions, but we have been having ongoing discussions for years, since we first got elected and since this program was announced last year.
I am wondering, concerned, Mr. Speaker, about the message we are sending to Nunavut’s private sector when they learn that our funding program for Nunavut is going to be administered in Ottawa and not by decision-makers in Nunavut such as the Nunavut Economic Forum.
So, can the minister tell me and tell the House if he’s worried that investors in Nunavut will lose faith that the Government of Nunavut is in charge of developing Nunavut’s economy, as stated as one of our priorities?
No, I don’t see it like that.
We have an ongoing discussion with the businesses in Nunavut, and they seem to be happy, and they are doing work within Nunavut.
So, I feel quite confident that it will go ahead.
I thank that minister for that.
I am very pleased to hear the minister sound so optimistic, because when you are dealing with the federal government you have ongoing discussions.
Ongoing discussions could mean years, Mr. Speaker, but we don’t have years available to us.
I am wondering if the minister could commit today to work with the Nunavut Economic Forum and the federal government to meaningfully review the criteria as used to apply for funding, and work on streamlining the application process so that the priority projects for Nunavut receive the funds when they’re in need of it, in the year they apply.
That’s actually a part of the discussions that the officials of the two levels of government are having; that’s one of the items that they are discussing and trying to find ways, like he says, to streamline the process.
It’s also something that we are doing within the department itself, the Department of Economic Development and Transportation itself.
So, yes, we are working on that at the two levels.
Can the minister tell me what his department will do to help the Kitikmeot and Nunavut acquire the simulator so that we can begin to train people for jobs in mining, DEW Line cleanup projects, for work for the municipalities and construction companies?
Hon. David Simailak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I still have not seen the application, so I don’t even know what it looks like. But once I see the contents, then we will try to assist the Kitikmeot with their request.
Question 319 – 2(2): Separating Couples
I would like to address the Minister of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth.
We all know that the elders that were present here yesterday are trying to implement Inuit traditions.
I would like to ask the minister if in Inuit culture the man should be separated from his wife or spouse and his children?
Speaker (interpretation): Minister of CLEY, Minister Tapardjuk.
I am not too sure if it’s the Inuit culture.
It would be advisable to ask that question to the elders. What they tell me, after working with them, they say that if there are problems, instead of separating they would deal with the problem.
I don’t think it’s Inuit culture.
Once the minister hears from the elders, with the help of the Minister of Justice and with another minister, will they work together on this issue?
The first Legislative Assembly had already established the Elders’ Council on Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, and it’s obvious that they are operating well.
That’s why the elders came here for a conference, to meet about Inuit knowledge.
The Elders’ Council is set to review the government’s Pinasuaqtavut planning. It states that the Government of Nunavut will work hard to incorporate Inuit traditional values and societal values.
The public should be friendly and know the Government of Nunavut and own the government.
The elders’ traditional knowledge council is working on this issue, and also, they have asked my colleagues and my colleagues have accepted to do a pilot project in the two communities so we can incorporate Inuit societal values and so that the elders can be involved in resolving some of the problems that occur at the community level.
I know the Department of Justice’s deputy minister and also my department’s deputy minister are working very hard to deal with this issue and we will also work with the Department of Health and Social Services.
It will be mainly for social issues.
After the conference, I aim to provide information to the cabinet about if we are going to look at how the system is going to operate.
I believe that the three departments, CLEY, Department of Justice, and the Department of Health and Social Services will have to work together.
As ministers, we have also agreed to that.
Question 320 – 2(2): Judicial Decision on the Allocation of Shrimp Quota
My question is for the Minister of Justice and our Premier.
The recent decision in federal court dealing with Northern shrimp quotas was just come to, and the federal government had decided to throw out the decision made, throw the case out of court, and the decision that the Nunavut government is appealing was to try and get more of the shrimp quotas that were allocated.
Again, if you go back to my statement yesterday, I indicated Nunavutmiut feel we are there, we are ready, we need more than crumbs.
We need the whole cake or the whole cookie or in this case a whole lot more shrimp. …
Mr. Speaker, the judge decided that the distribution of the Northern shrimp quotas off Baffin Island, in 2003, was fair.
It went on to say that it has gone up significantly compared to other groups in the area.
I guess before we had none, so any amount would be significant from that.
I wonder if that’s what they looked at.
He went on to say that he was sympathetic to our claim, that it was not enough, however. It wasn’t enough reason, he felt, to throw out the quota decision.
He ruled that the quota does try to respect the interests of Nunavut.
My question to the Premier is, what kind of reaction is coming from our government on this decision?
We’ve been in discussions with Nunavut Tunngavik Inc.
We’re not the only parties to this, so, we’re disappointed and we do not agree with the decision that was arrived at, but we have to review our options at this point.
I had a good discussion with the DIAND minister.
I believe the fisheries minister is coming here in the near future.
I do hope that we can make movement, but at this point, we’re reviewing the judgment and looking our options.
It’s not helpful, but everybody knows that we are treated in a different manner than what you would see elsewhere in the country.
We need the resource more than anybody, because we have the highest unemployment rates in the country, and we could sure use those jobs in the fisheries sector.
So, we’ll continue to do what we can and we keep raising it, but at the same time, we’re looking at our other options, whether we have to back to court or not.
We remain open to the best avenue to pursue.
It might be a good opportunity to net the federal fisheries minister when he is here and pull on his ear a little bit when he is here to try and make him realize that.
Mr. Speaker, the Premier had indicated that they’re in discussions with NTI on this and I understand that this is a recent decision, but is one of the options, that both parties are looking at, going back into the courts and appealing that decision?
Well, we remain open.
We have a window of opportunity to possibly appeal, if we want to, or pursue a different action.
So, those are our options at this point.
At the same time, we’ll continue our discussions.
I had a good discussion with the minister of Indian affairs on this very subject this morning.
The minister of fisheries is coming next month to discuss this further.
What we would like to see is a fair allocation, not in the mind of the judge, but in the minds of Canadians.
If you look at anywhere in the country, any allocation made to a jurisdiction is around 85-90 percent, and the shrimp allocation that we get is around 21 percent.
That’s not even close.
So, that’s something that is totally unacceptable and we’ll continue to pursue this matter.
I couldn’t agree with the Premier more on this, and I have one suggestion: when the fisheries minister does come, that they get some wonderful shrimp from the Panniqtuuq fish plant and serve them and make sure that everyone around the table gets ten shrimp and that the minister only gets two.
Maybe it will hit home to him how unfair it is.
Mr. Speaker, the minister had indicated that they are looking at other options other than pursuing legal action.