EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Is the Minister of Justice going to be working hard to make sure that an institution is built up here to house the inmates that are currently housed outside of the territory?
Could the minister tell us when his department will make a decision on when that is going to happen or if it is under discussion at this point.
The federal government has the responsibility if they are going to be incarcerated for two years or more.
It would be a lot more beneficial if we had an institution up here in Nunavut; they would be closer to the communities.
We will be able to give them better services when they have to go to the halfway house or when they complete their sentence.
Question 344 – 2(2): Better Services for Elders
Following the comments that I made in my member’s statement, I will be directing my question to the Minister of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth, and it’s in regard to elders being provided better services.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): I would like the member to clarify what he means by a facility, in regard to the elders’ centres and the types of support services that are provided.
To clarify the point: for example, in your community there is an old nursing station that is used as an elders’ counselling centre for youth.
Usually, the elders have to buy their own heating fuel, and at one point we were told that the elders don’t have the clerical staff to help them with the paperwork.
In the smaller communities, they have absolutely no elders’ facilities and they are not provided with any type of support.
I would like to ask the minister what type of support services are provided for elders.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): For existing facilities, we don’t provide money for utilities, heating fuel, and so on.
But if there’s an organization in a community, there’s $2,000 that is provided by the government and it can be used at the discretion of those organizations.
We also have another pot of money that can be used for the renovation of the elders’ centres.
We only provide money for that, but for operations and maintenance, there are no monies identified.
In the response given by the minister, is your department making plans to set aside money for support services and for utilities?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): We have not gone to the planning stages on this issue, but what I can say is we are following Inuit traditions.
In regard to the cultural programs, especially for traditional counselling, we try and work with those organizations that provide those types of services and we also work with the Departments of Health and Social Services and Justice.
Once everything is coordinated, Mr. Speaker, I am assuming that once we come to an agreement on what kind of programs or services are going to be provided, if those three departments agree, then we then we can do something more about it.
But, at this point we don’t have anything available.
We are, however, starting to discuss this issue.
There is no information available at the smaller communities’ level on how they can get access to a facility and how they can get support services for clerical support or administration.
Can they table those documents?
Are we talking about counselling services?
Using Hall Beach as an example, they built a facility which was funded by the Department of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth, and I’m aware of Iglulik where they accessed some funds for renovating their building.
We’ve provided funds for facilities where elders can provide counselling services.
We can give money when they’re setting up those types of programs, but for facilities that will be used on a daily basis, it is more the responsibility of the Department of Health and Social Services.
We’re not responsible for the establishment of elders’ centres, we’re more into the renovations and counselling and so on.
Yes, I know that the housing corporation is responsible for the residential part of elders’ services, that they’re responsible for elders’ homes.
The minister has stated that he is willing to work with the Department of Health and Social Services and that he is willing to work with the Department of Justice in the initial stage, but in the smaller communities, there isn’t even a centre for elders to go to.
They don’t even have a secretary and they’re not even provided with funding.
So, how can the Department of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth provide support to the elders?
They don’t even have information as to how they can apply for funding.
Last fall there was a surplus of funds to improve and renovate old buildings, especially for elders’ centres where they can gather. It was funding just for renovating which was a surplus.
My colleagues and the member asking the questions also heard that we would be applying for funds that anyone who is willing to set up an elders’ centre could apply for.
There was $200,000 in funding available for that purpose, and we’ve informed the public out there and we’ve also informed the members of the legislature about that.
We’ve used other avenues to inform the public, especially because the funding has to be utilized better and properly.
If there is a facility already existing at the community level, there is funding available to renovate them by way of applying for those funds.
We work through the media such as Nunatsiaq News. Last fall, we informed Nunavutmiut through the media.
We can work harder.
We’ve also sent information by fax to the municipalities.
I don’t know of any other way of informing the public, but if you have any suggestions as to how we can inform the public more, it would be very well taken.
Question 345 – 2(2): Officials to Meet with Chesterfield Inlet HTO
Yesterday we were told that the Chesterfield Inlet fish plant was going to be dealt with and I thanked him for that.
Mr. Speaker, perhaps he could ask his officials to go to Chesterfield Inlet to meet with the hunters and trappers organization.
I will ask my officials to make sure that they deal with the fish plant.
We want not just to work with the Chesterfield Inlet, we are willing to work all across Nunavut to develop fish plants. I know it’s going to take a while to completely set it up, but my officials are willing to go visit any community with a fish plant.
The fish plant requires a lot of work.
Last year, our Premier and I toured the fish plant and saw that it is deteriorating due to age.
If we’re not going to get a new fish plant, we will definitely have to have it renovated.
When can the minister ask his officials to go take a look at the fish plant?
My officials will have to look into the member’s request and make sure that the fish plant is feasible. Our goal is a balanced and sustainable fisheries industry that provides maximum economic benefits to Nunavummiut.
Before we commit to opening a lot of fish plants, we’ll have to look at feasibility studies to make sure that there is enough funding and to make sure that they are feasible. I have asked my officials to look into this carefully and to make sure that there is a feasibility study done into all of the aspects.
We would like to support the sustainable development of fisheries in all communities and if the Chesterfield Inlet fisheries go ahead then we can look at expanding to the other communities.
I’m sure all of the communities with a quota for their fish would like fish plants, therefore we have to do a feasibility study and to make sure that the fish plants are operating without a deficit.
The minister of economic development appeared before the committee when he was at the witness table.
I asked him a question regarding the Chesterfield Inlet fish plant and would they do renovations.
When they start doing their work, will your department be willing to work with them at that time?
As the Department of Environment, we will look at the feasibility study and we can work with Economic Development and Transportation. They will look at the capital plan, and we’ll look at the fisheries aspect of it.
If NDC says that they will be working on the fish plant, will the minister commit to us that we will be allotted a certain amount of quota?
We would have to do our research and we would like to work with the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation.
They would have to do another survey in the lakes before the quota is allocated.
Yes, we are willing to work with the Nunavut Development Corporation and the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation.
Question 346 – 2(2): Expiry of Long-Term Leases
My question is again for the Minister of Community and Government Services, and it has nothing to do with gravel.
I raised some questions earlier on in this session in relation to leases and some of the leases that are identified in the document that the minister tabled.
Mr. Speaker, my question is: some of those leases are expiring; as you know, there are some long-term leases and some very expensive leases that were in there.
I am just wondering if the government is planning either just to renegotiate with these people that they have the leases with already, or are they looking at perhaps putting out another expression of interest or an RFP for new leases or other options to look at getting the best value for the dollar?
My colleague is correct.
The long-term leases are very expensive. Even though these are long-term leases, there’s a term, and for those leases that are drawing to the end, once we get close to the term date, or when the term date is up, we will consider and review whether we need to put it out in a tender or whether we need to renew the lease.
We are now responsible for contracting leases to make sure that the funds are used properly. We monitor them more closely than previously.
I am very pleased to hear that, as I know, and yourself and all of the members of this House, that’s something the Auditor General pointed out in one of her reports on the leases.
Mr. Speaker, my next question to the minister is: when they see that some of their long-term leases are expiring, how far ahead do they start planning, whether they are doing an analysis of what their requirements will be for whatever the location is and whether or not there would be an analysis done to determine whether it’s more beneficial for the government to actually build and own something than it is to continue with an expensive lease.
In response to my colleague, the leases are based on needs within the community for whichever department. But the leases being based on needs, and when terms are up, the department, in working with the other departments that may be involved, looks at, first, the needs, and then from there the decisions are made for renegotiating the contracts to either extend or weigh the options, if the government should be looking at building its own infrastructure to make the dollars stretch further for the benefit of this government.
I know every fall we are in here, and probably right after we are finished our sitting here, the departments will be putting together what capital plans or projections or projects they would like to see go forward for the next year, and I know that the planning for that takes some time in the case where a lease is coming up and the option of whether to either renew or to build or to do an analysis on to see which is more cost effective.
How much lead time, when there are five years left in the lease, or two years left in a lease, one year left in a lease, before that process starts? And that is actually looked at?
How much lead time, prior to a lease ending, does that start?
In looking at the capital planning process and needing to weigh the scale of economy before going to either build or extend or develop new leases, in most cases, unfortunately, the capital requirement reviews have often been in the latter year, after the leases have expired and negotiations have concluded.
So, in most cases the capital planning process tends to be after the leases have expired and options have been exhausted, when they look at if the lease will be extended or not.
One would think that you’d kind of want to go into negotiations; it might be a useful tool in your negotiations if you have those numbers ahead of time, say, “Look you want to charge us, whether it’s $1 million a year for an office building, and we can build for less than that.”
So, I am just wondering if, again, it has been identified by the Auditor General in the past, that the government or the department looks at, even though it is preliminary, to determine what potentially, based on current costs, would be the cost to construct a new facility that may replace something that is actually being leased, ahead of time, so that they have a little bit more back up and they are not being held for ransom.
When they are doing their negotiations on the leases, then they will know whether or not whoever they are leasing from is taking them to the cleaners or not.
Is that something that the minister would look at doing for upcoming expiries of major leases on some of our capital infrastructure?
Having had a few more seconds to look at my notes… .
I was looking for this earlier, but I couldn’t find the date: in 2003, for real property leases, a policy was put in place to ensure that the proper financial controls are in place. This goes back to my colleague’s comment about the Auditor General. So, to control for better measures, the policy has been approved at the cabinet level.
I will also note: for real property leases that meet or exceed that value of $1 million, then that requires FMB approval.
Question 347 – 2(2): Criteria for Program Funding
Last week I raised the issue concerning the rejection of the Kitikmeot Corporation’s simulator proposal under the Nunavut Economic Development Strategy funding.
The Nunavut Economic Forum ranked 20 projects and sent them to Ottawa. The simulator was number six.
My question for the minister: can the minister explain to me what criteria Ottawa used to evaluate and approve the Nunavut projects that were sent to Ottawa?
No, I don’t know what criteria Ottawa used when they went through those items.
I have a list of the 20 projects, and a huge number of them were quasi-government projects and a few private sector projects.
So, my question for the minister: can the minister clarify whether true private sector companies can qualify for the funds, or is the funding targeted at government and quasi-government priority projects?
No, private industry can also qualify for the funding.
I thank the minister for that statement.
It appears from my reading of the list that lower ranked priority projects were approved by Ottawa, including three that were in the bottom six.
So, my question for the minister: does the minister know why the lower ranked projects got approved and the higher ranked projects didn’t?
No, again, I don’t know what criteria was used to prioritize those applications.
It seems that there is a great deal of uncertainty and lack of clarity with respect to this northern economic development strategy funding and program, criteria, and evaluation process.
Can I ask the minister if he would commit to providing the House with the NEDS program criteria and approval process during our spring sitting beginning April 26?
I will see what I can do about that.
Question 348 – 2(2): Providing Soapstone
We usually ask any question we want in this House.
I would like to ask the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation a question with respect to Nunavut communities and soapstone.
Is there enough soapstone for the communities in Nunavut?
If not, would the department of economic development assist in acquiring soapstone for the communities in Nunavut?
In the spring and in summer, there will be a soapstone study done in each community.
For those communities that have soapstone close by, we’ll be doing a study to find out how far their location is from it and how much there is.
We will be able to find out, then, which communities would be given priority for assisting them in acquiring soapstone.
Written Question 030-2(2): Child Welfare Practices in Nunavut
My written question is for the Department of Health and Social Services and it concerns child welfare practices in Nunavut.
Which communities in Nunavut currently have child and family services committees?
Which communities in Nunavut have child protection workers?
Since 1999, how many Plan of Care committees have been established in Nunavut, and in what communities?
Since 1999, how many individual Plan of Care agreements within the meeting of its Section 19 of the Child and Family Services Act have been developed for children who need protection?
Since 1999, how many children have been apprehended within the means of Section 10, 11, and 33 of the Child and Family Services Act?
Broken down by community, how many children were apprehended under the authority of the Child and Family Services Act for the following years:
Broken down by community, how many foster homes have been approved in Nunavut within the meeting of Section 62 of the Child and Family Services Act as of March 22, 2005?
For the following years, how many children were placed with pre-foster homes in Nunavut:
For the following years, how many children were placed with foster homes outside of Nunavut:
How many childcare facilities such as group homes within the meeting of Section 62 of the Child and Family Services Act have been approved in Nunavut and in which communities are they located?
For the following years, how many children were placed in approved childcare facilities in Nunavut:
For the following years, how many children were placed in childcare facilities outside of Nunavut:
Tabled Document 111 – 2(2): Legal Services Board of Nunavut Annual Report for 2002/03 and 2003/04
I wish to table the following document: Legal Services of Nunavut Annual Report for 2002/03 and 2003/04.
Speaker (interpretation): Please forward the documents to the clerk.
Tabled Document 112 – 2(2): Government of Nunavut Responses to Standing Committee on Government Operations and Accountability Recommendations
I would like to table the follow document; Government of Nunavut’s Response to Recommendations by the  Standing committee of Government Operations and Accountability, dated November 24, 2004.
Tabled Document 113 – 2(2): Transcript from Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development
Mr. Speaker, I wish to table a transcript of March 10, 2005, Meeting of the House of Commons Standing Committee of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development.
This parliamentary committee has asked the Federal Government to form a judicial inquiry into the dog slaughter issue.
I would like all members to review this transcript with care.
Tabled Document 114 – 2(2): Letter from Clara Evalik from Nunavut Sivuniksavut Board
I would like to table the correspondence I got from Nunavut Sivuniksavut for the anniversary of the program and the names that are attending that program which will most likely be our leaders in the future.
Tabled Document 115 – 2(2): Response to Petition 5 – 2(2) Gasoline in Grise Fiord
I wish to table on behalf of the Minister of Community and Government Services a reply to Petition 5-2(2), Gasoline in Grise Fiord.
Motion 019 – 2(2): Support for Establishing a Judicial Inquiry into the Slaughter of Inuit Dogs – Notice
Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Tuesday April 26, 2005, I will move the following motion;
Now therefore I move, seconded by the Honorable Member for Hudson Bay that the Legislative Assembly call on the Government of Canada to agree to the standing committee’s request to establish a judicial inquiry into the dog slaughter issue.
Mr. Speaker, at the appropriate time, I will seek unanimous consent to deal with my motion today.
Motion 020 – 2(2): Recommendation for Re-allocation of $150,000 in Deleted Funding – Notice
Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Thursday, March 24, I will move the following motion;
Now therefore I move, seconded by the Honorable Member for Rankin Inlet North that the Legislative Assembly recommend the Government of Nunavut bring forward a supplementary appropriation act during the spring sitting of this house to reallocate the $150 thousand that was deleted from the 2005/06 main estimates of the Department of Environment and that the funding be used for the Disaster Compensation Grants to hunters and trappers to replace lost equipment as a result of natural disaster.
At the appropriate time, Mr. Speaker, I will be asking for unanimous consent to deal with that motion as well today.
Speaker (interpretation): The Member seeks unanimous consent to deal with his motion.
Mr. Netser: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and my colleagues.
Motion 019 – 2(2): Support for Establishing a Judicial Inquiry into the Slaughter of Inuit Sled Dogs
WHEREAS the slaughter of Inuit sled dogs scarred Nunavut communities and our culture;
AND WHEREAS in House of Commons Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development recently undertook a study on the slaughtering of Inuit sled dogs in the North between 1950 and 1970, and has requested that a judicial inquiry into the matter be held;
NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the Honourable Member for Hudson Bay, that the Legislative Assembly call in the Government of Canada to agree to the Standing Committee’s request to establish a judicial inquiry into the dog slaughter issue.
Abstained?
At this time I would like to seek unanimous consent to deal with my Motion 018-2(2) that deal with tabled documents being referred to Committee of the Whole.
Speaker (interpretation): The member is asking unanimous consent to deal with his motion today.
Motion 018 – 2(2): Tabled Document 100-2(2) GN Leased Properties Report ending March 31, 2004, Tabled Document 101-2(2) GN Procurement and Contracting Report 2003/04 and Tabled Document 102-2(2) GN Contract Data Report 2003/04 to Committee of the Whole
I move seconded by the Honourable member from Cambridge Bay that Tabled Document 100-2(2) GN Leased Properties Report ending March 31, 2004, Tabled Document 101-2(2) GN Procurement and Contracting Report 2003/04 and Tabled Document 102-2(2) GN Contract Data Report 2003/04 be moved into the Committee of the Whole for further discussion.
Qestion has been called.
I seek unanimous consent to deal with my other motion today.
Motion 020 – 2(2): Recommendation for Re-allocation of $150,000 in Deleted Funding
WHEREAS the Legislative Assembly has reduced the 2005-2006 main estimates of the Department of Environment by $150,000;
AND WHEREAS Members are of the view that this funding should be re-allocated to other areas of activity that benefit our communities and constituents;
AND WHEREAS the issue of disaster compensation grants for hunters and trappers is of concern;
NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the Honourable Member for Rankin Inlet North, that the Legislative Assembly recommend that the Government of Nunavut bring forward a Supplementary Appropriation Act during the spring sitting of the House to re-allocate the $150,000 that has been deleted from the 2005-2006 main estimates of the Department of Environment; and that the funding be used for disaster compensation grants to hunters and trappers to replace equipment lost as a result of natural disaster.
Item 19, Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters; Bill 8, Bill 9, Bill 10, Bill 11, Bill 12, Bill 13, Bill 14 and Tabled document 58-2(2), with Mr. Netser in the chair.
We’ll take a lunch break and we’ll come back at 1:30.
>>House recessed at 12:07 and resumed at 13:32
We will be dealing with the following; Bill 8, Bill 9, Bill 10, Bill 11, Bill 12, Bill 13, Bill 14 and Tabled Document 58-2(2)
We wish to deal with Bill 8 and the review of the main estimates for the Department of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth and then proceed with the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs followed by the Legislative Assembly.
After Bill 8, we will begin with the remaining bills and the order of review will be announced later.
Minister Responsible for the Department of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth, please proceed to the witness table with your witnesses.
Welcome, Mr. Minister.
For the record, please introduce your official.
On my left is David Akeeagok my Deputy Minister and shortly we will have another official coming to the witness table and I will introduce them when they arrive.