EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
The strategy will include research on caribou and prioritizing research on caribou throughout all of Nunavut. It will comprise of working together with communities on research and involving all communities.
We understand it’s a very important issue and it is across the territory, and we are going to work together with communities to address those concerns and find out as much as we can about the health of our caribou herds across the territory.
I am very pleased that there is going to be some research done on the caribou species.
It seems to be very important, especially today, because I was brought up when there was numerous caribou around here.
It’s a little bit shocking to be out in this time today. That is one of the major changes we see today. Today, we are using binoculars and having no luck in seeing any.
This is very different today.
I have heard, and I am not trying to be against mining close to our community, they use helicopters and planes which create noise.
This is thought to be one of the reasons.
People walking on the land looking for caribou find people looking for minerals instead.
I think we have to deal with this issue and put some kind of strategy in place. That was the reason for my question to the minister.
That’s exactly what we intend to do through this caribou strategy and involving all user groups and communities in the strategy.
The strategy hopefully will be developed and completed by next spring, at that time, which I will share with all of my colleagues and members.
I agree with the member that caribou are very important but so is economic development and sustainability in all communities, and there is a balance to be had in between.
Our traditional foods are very important to us and we would like to preserve them.
The minister has indicated that they’ve got a caribou strategy. Are you going to be including the people of Nunavut when you are putting this strategy together?
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. Minister Shewchuk.
Yes, we will. They have been included already.
We have had consultations in the Kitikmeot, the Kivalliq, and the Baffin region and representations from all communities.
All HTOs were involved, the chairmen of all the HTOs, and there will be ongoing consultation with them.
I would be pleased to say at this time too that all Nunavutmiut can contribute to this caribou strategy online on the Department of Environment website.
I thank the minister. I had asked when you are going to complete this strategy.
Our target to complete the strategy is the end of March 2011.
Question 441 – 3(2): Review of the Nunavut Housing Trust (Ningeongan)
I am going to try and lift a few more rocks today and see what I can find underneath them.
My first question for the minister is this: how much did the GN or the Nunavut Housing Corporation pay the accounting firm of Deloitte and Touche for the report that it submitted on the Nunavut Housing Trust?
I apologize. This is one thing that we didn’t find under the rock.
I will have to look at the information and get into the details to see how much was paid to the accounting firm.
I agree with the price we pay for it because they found a lot of things.
I can’t give you the exact dollar figure that was paid to Deloitte and Touche, but I will when I do have the information.
When I was reading the report, I noted that the firm interviewed a number of the corporation’s current employees. However, it would seem to me that if you’re trying to get to the bottom of things that happened in the past, you need to talk to the people who made the decisions in question.
Did the accounting firm interview the former president of the Nunavut Housing Corporation and other former senior executives and, if not, why not?
Following the terms of reference and the mandate, I am sure that all was covered.
I think there were three main issues that they covered: the capacity issue when they were looking at the management; the accounting system at the headquarters and at the regional level, what the accounting process was in between those two; and also the database that was being used at that time.
Those were the three categories that they focused on.
The report is quite long and they call focus on those three categories.
I can’t really answer if they did talk to the former executives because it wasn’t an inquiry.
We were looking into why we went over on the budget, but Deloitte and Touche, I’m sure, were following their mandate and their terms of reference.
Yesterday, the minister indicated to the House that the accounting firm conducted its work over the telephone rather than taking the time to actually go to the Nunavut Housing Corporation’s offices in person.
As we all know, when the Auditor General does her work on behalf of the Legislative Assembly, her staff examine files and talk face to face with the people who are working in the department that is being audited.
Can the minister clearly explain why this was not done in this case?
As I stated in my response, Deloitte and Touche was given a mandate and their terms of reference were to look at why they were expended.
The finance audit was done by the same firm and it indicated that they complied with accounting standards.
However, there was another tasked project on the side and this was for 275 to 285 units set aside for the Affordable Housing Initiative. When this was included in the review, they started to research the reasons for the overage in the costs of construction. They delved into the records to see what the reason was for the budget overruns.
I spoke to some of the reasons.
It was partially the fault of the regional offices and headquarters not communicating. The positions that are responsible for the estimates are separated between the regions and headquarters. The finance department is situated in Arviat since that is the headquarters of the department.
The headquarters personnel are situated in Arviat, along with the finance department, but the main headquarter positions are located here in Iqaluit. That formed part of the web of miscommunication and exacerbated the problems faced by staff working out of various communities.
What I want to find out is why there were no consultation trips between the staff from these offices.
I will have to conduct some more research into this issue and once I have found the reasons for this misappropriation, I will return to the House to report on the matter.
Mr. Ningeongan: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation) Thank you, Minister Curley, for your response. (interpretation ends) Before I was elected to the Legislative Assembly, I closely followed these proceedings back in Coral Harbour.
I remember that when the minister was on the regular members’ side of the House, he had raised the idea on more than one occasion on holding a public inquiry into issues of concern.
Given the magnitude of this issue and the fact that the Housing Corporation finds itself needing a further $50 million on top of the $60 million that was discovered earlier this year, will the minister consider holding a public inquiry into this whole mess?
With respect to this, firstly, as part of our initial meetings with the Nunavut Housing Corporation, we explored the units currently under construction and these total 285 units.
These units are in demand already by residents and in Rankin Inlet, the residents want these units completed as a priority.
Ever since 2006, which was the start of this Nunavut housing initiative to construct 725 new units, this process has continued and construction has been completed on quite a number of units. We have units under construction and near completion. Last year, the federal government allocated additional funds for more units under the federal Affordable Housing Initiative which totalled 285 units.
These units are already in high demand.
Many residents want more units constructed. The units that have been completed have been allocated to the residents who are most in need. With respect to this matter, we have undertaken this initiative and we have no choice but to complete their construction.
All of our constituents have stated that housing is a priority and they want to start allocating these units as soon as possible. Further, we also know that we still have a huge portion of our population requiring housing.
We will make it a priority to complete the construction of the remaining units.
With respect to why we ought to try and determine the reasons for the overage in the budget allocated for this project and the initiative in this process, personally, myself and the staff tasked to research this matter continue to look for the reasons why we ought to conduct a more thorough investigation or if we even need to go that route.
We are still contemplating all of our options.
We are also looking to see if there were any instances of financial mismanagement or even criminal acts. To date, we continue to reflect on these options.
In my opinion, I do not think members of the cabinet are in support of that. However, I do know that the other side is in support of this initiative and I believe it is in your purview if you wish to conduct a more thorough investigation to get answers for our fellow Nunavutmiut.
Question 442 – 3(2): Review of the Nunavut Housing Trust (Schell)
I’m just going to continue with Minister of Housing here.
Mr. Speaker, I was advised yesterday by the Minister responsible for the Nunavut Housing Corporation to forget about the issues facing the corporation, but I can think of the 110 million reasons why we need to remember.
Mr. Speaker, Deloitte and Touche’s review of the Nunavut Housing Trust included 19 formal recommendations for improvements at the corporation.
Can the minister tell us if he would be able to table an action plan during this sitting to respond to these recommendations or is this something else that’s going to be forgotten?
I would like to thank my colleague for asking the question. I thank him for reminding me because we almost forgot it.
We’re going to be very pleased to table the information on the action plan and we will be able to respond to each of your questions. I am sure that my colleagues over here would like to know what we were doing about it.
I can tell you that we’re working on everything.
Also, let’s not forget the units that have to be constructed or are being constructed in your communities.
One of the issues that I have been raising in the House is concerning the corporation’s use of structural insulated panels.
I note that the review report indicated that the accounting firm did examine some drawings of the housing units. I remember a year and a half ago when we were in Calgary, the former Minister of Housing had mentioned that were going to be sending a SIP unit and a stick built unit to Arviat. They were going to build them side by side and determine what the difference is in constructing them.
My question to the minister is: what were the results of this test?
That is an excellent question and further, it is true that Nunavutmiut need to know which is preferable.
Once I have checked into this matter further, I will inform the member of my findings.
However, I want the members to know that we also have more issues to deal with which pertain to the mandate of the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
In reference to the matter the member brought up, as an example, pre-constructed units or SIP panels, and that is how I would say it in Inuktitut, the standards for the SIP panels are still being developed.
I believe that we constructed some units that were not up to code this past winter.
I have tasked staff to look into this matter further, at least as an internal investigation of the NHC, to see whether we followed code or not with these SIP panels. When standards are available, it is always more prudent to comply with standards.
We are still looking into the matter as to whether the first units constructed followed standards or not. I will be pleased when the results are presented to me once the investigation has been completed on these initial units and I will ensure that I report on the findings.
My next question is: are these two units included in the 285 units that were sent or were these over and above that?
Hon. Tagak Curley (interpretation): I don’t have the details in front of me.
I will look into it so that I can provide the information to the member.
Speaker: Your final supplementary, Mr. Schell.
One of the issues identified in the review report is theft of materials. Has the NHC been able to determine the exact extent of the losses over the past two years as a consequence of theft?
We did indeed look into the issue that was mentioned. We have continued to monitor the matter once concerns were submitted.
We have also consulted with the public and quite a few presenters made this out to be a huge issue.
When we actually conducted our investigation, we found it to be a minor issue.
If it had been a major issue regarding theft of construction materials, more communities would have voiced their concerns as most of the communities are small enough that people would know about a resident who, all of a sudden, had a surplus of construction materials.
Where and when we have found instances of theft, we have been notified by the RCMP about these cases. Some of the instances were so minor that the RCMP had no recourse but to abandon the case.
That is the reason why we have difficulty understanding the public perception that a major theft had occurred resulting in this massive over-expenditure. The incidents we have found are not numerous nor were there many communities that experienced this problem.
What I can state is that if we totalled the equivalent costs to replace these materials, it is definitely not even in the millions.
I was briefed that we have had one or two cases where a couple of two-by-fours were taken over the course of the winter and many of these materials were in the open where they could have been stolen.
I do not think that the theft factor resulted in the huge increase we are debating today.
Member for Nattilik, Ms. Ugyuk
Question 443 – 3(2): Mine Training and Drug Testing (Ugyuk)
I would like to direct my question to Minister Taptuna in regard to mining.
KIA held a meeting in Cambridge Bay just recently and one of the issues revolved around mine training.
There were going to be 22 students signed up for the mine training and these positions were in great demand.
There were four students who passed this course and they were able to continue to BC for further training. Only 4 out of 22 students passed this course, even though many Inuit want to work in a mine.
Most of us are aware that a lot of Inuit face food shortages at home due to not having employment.
They are living in poverty and experience hunger due to their inability to afford the groceries at the stores. When Inuit turn 18, the social assistance they are provided with is never enough to purchase groceries for the month and that is how expensive groceries are. That is how prevalent poverty is in Nunavut.
Many of these people applied for the training, but they were rejected and a result was that they are asking questions as to the reasons for their rejection.
I would like to know if the mining companies have the authority to conduct blood testing on potential workers to check for drugs.
This was one of the most asked questions. They want to know if this is a legal requirement.
Are they able to do that without the proper consent and conduct drug testing through their blood?
If these people do indeed have drug issues, then how can we provide support so that they are able to obtain employment and become more self-sufficient so that they can leave the social assistance program?
I believe that Inuit are given an opportunity to improve their future by having employment. When Inuit are barred from employment opportunities, they are stuck in a life of poverty with no chance of improvement.
It is very difficult when you speak about young people getting tested before they go take the training courses and actually working in a mine. It’s rather mandatory, most companies do that nowadays, and I understand that at the KIA AGM, there was a lot of that happening.
There are a lot of young people who do get trained up but rejected for work because of these tests.
Now, other parts of your question there was that… . Within this department, we do support the mine training round table and it’s to bring in organizations so that we could actually kind of coordinate the type of mine training that the regions and communities need.
For that matter, we do support the initiatives in mine training.
Although, there is another factor there when you indicated that there are groceries that are involved in there, but maybe I’ll come to that when you pose your question a little more clearly.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Yes, I’ll try and make myself clearer.
The people who were rejected, do they have any place to go or any goals that they can go to, like if they want to further their education or if they want to stop taking drugs?
We understand that when we need help with our personal issues, we can be provided with support. Is there some kind of support mechanism for these people who were rejected to take the training course?
At this time, I don’t have any indication or information that there are other alternate ways of dealing with some of these trainees who are rejected because of the tests that these companies do have.
I believe that’s more or less a personal choice.
For the most part, these tests are being conducted before these trainees actually get to the sites.
For the most part, they are right at home within their communities, but alternate assistance being provided to them, I’ll have to check into that and get back to the member on that, Mr. Speaker.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Minister. Thank you, Ms. Ugyuk.
Question 444 – 3(2): Nunavut Caribou Strategy (Komoartok)
I would like to continue in the same vein of questioning that was pursued by my colleague from Iqaluit West, Mr. Okalik, posed to the Hon. Daniel Shewchuk, the Minister of Environment.
As I understood it, in March 2011, you will have completed the caribou strategy that will outline the plans and research to go into the caribou population study.
However, as per my colleague’s earlier remarks where he identified the areas around Iqaluit and Pangnirtung as having had no caribou for the past three years, many hunters have had to go extreme distances and they are not always successful in their hunts.
We have not experienced this in the past, but only in the last few years have we started experiencing this hardship.
Due to this reason, I would like to ask the minister: with respect to this community consultation tour you alluded to in your Minister’s Statement as occurring in March 2011, if this process is shorter than that time period and it is finalized in this calendar year, will he commit to a population study? I want to know if this will result in a new caribou population study or if there would be other research initiatives that would occur, especially here in the Baffin region where it seems that our caribou have left their usual haunts.
Will you be conducting a caribou population study this upcoming fiscal year?
I thank the member for that question in regard to the caribou strategy, an important document we’re all looking forward to seeing. When this strategy is complete, it will be produced to everybody. It will pertain to the management of caribou across Nunavut.
As I stated before, all user groups are involved in the creation of this strategy, including all communities on Baffin Island.
We do understand that the Baffin Island caribou is a very important issue and a high priority issue.
So once the strategy is completed, research will be prioritized on that with involvement of all communities across Nunavut to where we need to see where research needs to be done on caribou.
I totally understand his statement that the research has to continue.
With regard to the importance of caribou and caribou meat to our people, it used to compose the majority of the food consumed by our community members, as well as those from Iqaluit and perhaps in all of Baffin Island. However, the caribou are no longer in areas that are in close proximity to the communities.
We no longer have herbivore meat available close by the communities and we do not have too many other species we can trade for caribou, at least with respect to terrestrial species.
More residents are consuming seal meat to supplement their diets, including char and other species, such as bearded seal, as caribou meat is a rarity nowadays in many communities.
That is why I want to ask the minister this question: when communities are experiencing hardships in obtaining country food, can the government provide assistance to the communities, either as a subsidy or freight subsidy, to allow our residents to order caribou meat from other communities, such as in Rankin Inlet or Coral Harbour?
In particular, we have been assisted by other communities I mentioned, especially when we celebrated Canada Day, whereupon caribou meat was ordered from Rankin Inlet and we are very grateful for that.
It seems that we will have to look for these types of assistance, at least in our community. I want to ensure that my fellow residents are able to consume country food, especially meat that we crave.
Can the minister identify today whether or not his department can offer these types of assistance programs to residents in the Baffin region or if there are no discretionary funds available? I would like to know if this is a future matter we may have to deliberate on. Can he offer any assistance to these people?
At present, there are no programs in place to subsidize the inter-trade of country food, although we feel it’s a very good idea: the communities that do have an abundant of one species trade with another community that doesn’t have that species.
We think it’s very important that we do that and we involve airlines to do that to provide cheaper freight rates for this to happen.
As I said, at present, there are no programs within government, or that I know of with NTI or Inuit organizations that provide that type of service.
Actually, I think we do have a small amount of funding that is targeted for Baffin communities that provide very little support to that effect.
As far as the strategy is concerned, we have done some work on North Baffin caribou. There have been collars spread out and collars in 2008-09.
The collar information tells us where these caribou move, where they migrate, where they are at certain times of year, and where their calving grounds may be, so it is very useful information.
Our plan into the future will be to do that with caribou on the South Baffin Island to see what kind of movement there is.
As we all know, caribou move vast distances and at certain times, they are very hard to find.
Mr. Komoartok (interpretation): I wish to thank the minister for that informative response.
Further, I, too, would like to see this type of program set up for inter-community trade in the Baffin region.
It seems that our caribou are not just off wandering around but have migrated to different areas.
When the caribou have settled into an area, our hunters generally are able to find them. In the past, caribou herds would wander into close proximity of the communities and sometimes they were even a nuisance.
However, in these last three years, the evidence is quite overwhelming that there are no caribou in the immediate vicinity of any community.
Last winter, hunters from Pangnirtung were forced to hunt on the south side of the peninsula, which is the northern extent of the Iqaluit hunters. Some hunters go back and forth between the communities and these hunters saw no caribou anywhere between the two communities.
This summer, a resident had to charter a plane to go caribou hunting near Iqaluit from Pangnirtung.
However, even with all of their searching, they were unable to find any caribou in those areas.
The lands closer to Pangnirtung have no caribou even though hunters continue to search for them close by. There are hardly any caribou in the northern parts of our hunting areas.
When they are found, they usually are able to catch only a few. This has transpired all year, in the winter, spring, and summer, and to date.