EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Faxed copies of applications for leases coming in. Is there a provision or something that allows for timing of when that is received because they also indicated the timing is very important, if you have fax that is sent, like in the middle of the night or through the night, and there’s someone waiting at the door, first thing in the morning, to do that lease, both for the same one, and how do you decide, what would happen, who would be considered to be the first in line, in a situation like that.
Hon. Paul Okalik: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes the provisions permit for facsimile copies, once they are received by the Registrar by way of fax, or by other means, that are legally possible, they will be stamped, and once they are stamped, they’ll be deemed to have been received on that day, and at that time.
So it’s possible by way of fax to register documents.
Mr. Tootoo: Thank you Mr. Chairman. I understand that faxed documents can be accepted with it.
For example if they faxed an application for a lease to go at midnight and my good friend Mr. McLean, also wants that lease and he’s in there at the door waiting for them to open up, probably even before they even get there.
When the door opens up, we have someone walking in saying I want to apply for that lease, and in the mean time you have a fax, that came in through the night saying I want that lease. What would determine, who is first in that case, that has potential of happening.
I wonder how it would be taken care of, would it be if the person that goes to work that is there, goes to the fax machine first, or goes to the door first, would that determine who gets the lease.
Hon. Paul Okalik: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, the practice is that you don’t open the doors, at exactly 8 o’clock probably, the office doors open up at maybe 8:30 or 9 o’clock.
The fax copy would be the first one to get the attention of the Registrar in those instances. So it would be stamped and then it would have priority over later leases that may arrive, that given day.
So that would be the practice, and what we are doing now is trying to make it possible to pass regulations, to permit those to occur, so I can’t exactly answer right now, how it’ll operate because the legislation has not been passed yet.
So once it’s passed then we can work on those details, on the exact operation of the office and the practices that will be adopted by the Registrar.
I would like to thank the Premier for explaining that, I would just hope that whatever practices that they come up with there that people are made aware of them.
I could just see someone waiting in line in the morning thinking they are the first one there and finding out that someone faxed something overnight and could get upset if they are not made aware of that.
Another area that I just want to ask about is on the surrender of leases.
My understanding and again I am not a lawyer so bear with me.
Currently only the person now that is leasing the property can submit a surrender of the lease. Under the amendments, it allows for both the person leasing and the person that owns to be able to submit for surrender.
In the current conditions the person submitting that surrender has to have written permission from the owner. Under the amendment it allows, or it states that both can submit a surrender but the owner doesn't have to have any permission or anything in writing from the lessor where the lessor still has to get permission from the owner.
I am just wondering if there is a reason why that is like that or is there a need for that to be looked after.
On the first question about the issue of providing notice on practices where documents are required by law by this legislation.
When we are putting those into practice they have to be by regulation so the public has to be aware of those practices.
On the more technical issue, I would ask Mr. Crow to respond.
Mr. Crow.
Actually the provision was changed so that now the surrender of lease may be submitted by either the lessee or the lessor.
The lessor being the landowner.
But that only applies to who can submit the document to our office.
A surrender of lease is a prescribed form under the regulations and under that form, the consent of the lessee is required as well as the lessor and consent of any mortgagees that are on the title.
So the full consents of all parties effected by the surrender are still required.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Crow.
That concludes my questions, I just wanted to make sure that everyone was still kept in the loop and there aren't any surprises and we find out that all of a sudden they have a new owner or they have to move or something like that.
So if there is still a mechanism in place to ensure that permission is there from all parties, then I don't have any problem with that.
I am glad that is still in there.
That was a comment and not a question.
The form that you have just mentioned, for example if I was leasing land and I owned the land, if I wanted to surrender, I would have to fill out the form.
Where would I be able to access the forms, is it from your department or from the government.
Both at this time.
The landlords usually have all their certificates and the office now in Iqaluit do have to keep a copy of the forms.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): If there are going to be forms that I have to fill out, who should I give it to first, if I’m going to fill out the forms.
Yes, you need the community's approval and once they approve it, then that can be given to the office in Iqaluit. That usually happens, lastly you deal with the office in Iqaluit once everything is processed and then it could be given to us.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to get further clarification about the Land Titles Act.
I was wondering how you view the smaller communities, especially for example Iqaluit is a tax based community since it has town status.
There are other smaller communities such as Gjoa Haven that are non-tax based communities.
Are you going to also consider these smaller communities as larger centres like Iqaluit, because it is a tax based community.
Will they be treated the same. So I would like further clarification as to how you will be dealing with that, first of all. Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Yes, thank you Mr. Chairman. This Act does not reflect that, it does not involve that.
If there were tax arrears according to this Bill, the taxes would be for land taxes, so this bill does not deal with town status or municipal status, but there is another Act that deals with that.
Mr. Puqiqnak (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Chairman. I’m concerned about the application forms that are written in Inuktitut.
There are other dialects, in Nunavut, since this will become an Act, will the Act be written in all the official languages of Nunavut.
These are not translated due to the fact that it is only lawyers who even see these documents.
These Acts rarely get viewed by the public and because only the lawyers get a chance to view these Acts, they are not translated, but if a translation is requested then we can have the Acts translated so they will be available for public viewing.
We as Inuit don't have the education that lawyers have in terms of the law.
What I want to know is, we want to know what our laws are pertaining to because when we as beneficiaries are into land ownership then it would be very helpful if we could understand the laws that are written in terms of land titles.
I would like to see these Acts written in all of the official languages of Nunavut.
So Mr. Chairman, it states here that some of these laws are already in place and some are still proposed bills.
What I would like to know is if those who are over the age of 19, is that a recognized age in law.
What does the law enable this person who becomes 19 to be able to do according to the Act.
What is his empowerment and privileges.
I think this Act has been translated, as for the age requirement of 19, it states that anybody who has not attained the age of 19 years is not entitled to be contracted.
Those who are contracted are required to be grownups.
So 19 has been recognized as the age at which you are an adult.
If a person was not 19 then a consent form would have to be done.
If I were to purchase land would I have to pay a land lease every year.
We cannot buy any land.
We can only lease land as it stands now.
Once we are able to purchase land we wouldn't need to pay any land leases.
We may have to pay taxes if we are land owners, but that's it.
If I decided to stop paying my land lease and if I refuse to pay land lease on the land where I have my house.
What would happen to me.
These thing vary.
If you have arrears to the bank or to the community, if you owe on a land lease then this will be reflected in the community.
If you were to try and buy anything on credit then arrears would definitely be in your way.
It states now if anybody has outstanding arrears anywhere then you would have to pay your arrears first before you can purchase anything else.
The policies vary.
So I can not really answer the question posed.
Mr. Alakannuark (interpretation): That is it for me.
I want to ask Uriash to take my place as the Chairperson so I can sit down and ask some questions.
All the questions pertaining to Bill 4.
If you could keep your question based on this Bill 4 without getting side-tracked.
It would really help our progress if we could keep our questions pertaining to the Bill.
That is something that I wanted to say.
I will not be asking too many questions.
I just want to make some comments regarding this bill.
What I will say is strictly information and probably something to work on in the future.
Lack of housing has had a huge impact on the Inuit and not being able to purchase houses has been a major discouragement for a lot of our people.
Those of us that live in communities there are some better or more well off and there are some that are not as well off as others.
Homeownership and having land is very important to us as we have tried to implement Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit.
The way it used to be we never had to pay taxes or leases or anything like that and then we had to learn how to start paying for our homes and our land.
Years ago we used to live free of rent, we had houses that were free of rent.
Now after having lived in places free of rent for so long it turned around when we started getting houses that we had to pay rent for.
Now a lot of people have been effected by this change.
Although we felt that the land has been ours since the beginning of time, all of a sudden we have to start paying for it.
This has been something that has been really hard to understand.
Some of the land leases are higher and they have to be paid every year.
How can we change this so it accommodates everyone.
I think there needs to be consultation regarding this matter.
This Land Titles Act, is there any provision in this bill where if a homeowner dies, who would that person's home be passed on to.
These land leases that you are talking about are administered by the Hamlet Councils.
The reason why these land leases are administered by the Hamlets is because they are the ones providing the municipal services.
The land leases have to be paid so people can still get municipal services provided by the hamlets.
I cannot really give you the information that you are seeking there but I do want to say the hamlets are consulted and when someone wants to buy land everything is recorded and wills are recorded.
So if a homeowner dies then that estate is passed on to the offspring or the person named in the will.
Estates are distributed according to a will.
Thank you for your response there.
I want to ask about the land officers in the communities.
Who do they work for, do they work for the Government, Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, the Hamlet.
I just wanted to ask that.
I just want to remind you that you should ask questions pertaining only to the bill in front of us.
You are asking questions about something that is not really relevant to this bill.
I am not reprimanding you, I am just reminding you not to go outside of this bill.
The lands officers work for the Hamlets.
I have no more questions because I think you have all my papers at the chairman’s table. If I have a question I will have to do it off the top of my head.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Iqaqrialu. I do not hear a question there.
Mr. Chairman I was just thinking, it was mentioned earlier there was talk about being able to submit the facsimiles instead of the originals.
I think he stated that only facsimiles need to be accepted, there isn't a necessity to have the originals follow up.
I am just wondering about two things.
One, why were originals required in the first place, and two, has the concern surrounding fax copies been taken care of.
That system was a bit archaic and it was a bit behind the times and we are trying to update that right now by introducing this legislation and allowing for facsimiles to be filed.
We are trying to introduce it to the new era.
I know had occasion on a couple of times to argue with someone on why can you not just settle for a fax copy in the past.
One of the excuses that was given as to why an original has to be there, is because some of the faxes use some kind of paper where the image fades away over time.
So I am just wondering if issues like that have been taken care of.
Or will all faxes be received in a way that they do not dissipate over time.
Those nitty-gritty issues will be prescribed in regulation and they will determine what is acceptable and what is not.
So it will be made public before they are put into effect.
Maybe if I just ask, when this bill becomes an Act, I am sure that there will be other required amendments.
If there were amendments required would you be making amendments in the future.
Yes if there is an amendment required to this Act or an amendment to the clauses of this Act then they will be done as we are going through them.
Of course there will be consultations first before they are any amendments made to see how best we can amend these clauses.
Provisions in the clauses.
Mr. Chairman, Mr. Iqaqrialu if you do not have any more questions I would like you to return to your seat as Chairman.
No further questions or comments.
If we have no more questions or comments we will review the bill.
Bill 4.
Clause by clause. Clause one.
Page number one, bill 4.
I apologize Mr. Nutarak.
We are going back to clause 2.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): I would like to get further clarification on why section 18 is repealed.
I just want further clarification on what is being repealed and why.
Mr Premier.
The reason why section 18 is repealed is because if any of the employees cannot be at the office everything will have to be closed.
There will be no papers coming in or going out.
So we repealed this for that reason so that it does not hold anything back and I believe it is for the better.
Any further comments or questions.
There are no further questions.
Clause 2.
Again I have a question on clause 4.
Could the premier give us an explanation of why this is repealed and why the substitution is put in here.
Chairperson (interpretation): This is exactly what we should be doing.
We are sticking to the subject.
Any documents written or electronic, will have to go the lands title office.
We would like to be open so our Registrar may keep a record in both written or electronic form.
Clause 4.
Clause 5.
With this clause could you give us further clarification on the meaning.
It is the amendment of certificate of titles 41.1.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): I think the Deputy Minister can respond to this better than I can.
Ms. Saunders.
Ms. Saunders: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This section is intended to give more flexibility for the format of the title documents so that the Land Titles Office will be able to simplify the process of forms or simplify certain things about the forms without always having to return to the Statute or be guided by overly strict provisions there.
There is no particular change contemplated now but it is all part of this overall plan to make it a simpler and more straightforward process.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Ms. Saunders.
Clause 8.
Chairperson (interpretation): Page 4.
You don't have any eyes on this side so you didn't see me.
Clause 9, an owner may provide a duplicate certificate of title to a Registrar and may request that it be cancelled, what are we talking about here.
What kind of title are we talking about and how much power have we given to this person.
It is a duplicate certificate of title and in a lot of cases it was a hindrance, so what we have decided is to make an amendment to this particular clause so that if there are going to be transactions by a homeowner, they would not have to go through all this to accomplish whatever they are doing.
I believe we are on clause 9.
Under clause 12, subsection 112(1), is repealed and the following substituted.
Could you give us clarification on the substitution.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Mr. Crow can answer that question.
I am just reviewing my notes for a moment.
The replaced section was designed to deal with a procedural anomaly in our office where procedurally if a document was registered by a lease and then that lease was transferred to somebody else, then that person who owns the lease today if they registered a surrender of lease with our office, that person's interest as well as the original lease itself would be cancelled off of the title and the municipality would have a free and clear title again upon the surrender of that lease.
However, often because of the unique nature, the system whereby the Commissioner's Land has been brought into the Land Titles system, it often results in a lease being registered with what is called a Minister's Caveat.
That's a caveat that is on title to give notice of an interest registered under section 59 of the Act. Section 59.2.
The procedural anomaly is that when a surrender of lease is registered with our office, if the lease was on title by way of a caveat then the land titles procedures do not call for that caveat to come off the title and municipalities, their ownership would show that caveat.
So this section was revised to say that the Minister’s Caveat would be treated like a lease in that when the surrender is filed it would be removed from title as well.
So it was really to deal with this procedural way of getting the municipalities title free of these prior interests.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Crow.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): Again under Clause 12 (2).
The following is added after section 12(2).
Could you give us an explanation.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Mr. Crow will respond to that question.
For a surrender of lease section 112 of the Act requires that a mortgagee consent to a surrender of lease.
If a bank holds a mortgage and the leasehold title they have to consent before that leasehold title is cancelled.
The amendment to subsection 2 again relates to this situation where the prior lease is registered by way of caveat.
What it is doing is saying that where there is a prior interest registered by way of caveat, there is no policy reason for having the consent of that person having had a prior interest.
That comes out of the wording.
Essentially it deals with the situation where I have transferred my interest to somebody else.
There is no need now for my consent.
So it again it deals with this anomaly where my prior interest was registered by caveat instead of an actual lease.
We are on Clause 12.
Chairperson (interpretation): Clause 13.
Chairperson (interpretation): Clause 14.
Chairperson (interpretation): Clause 15.
Chairperson (interpretation): Clause 16.
Chairperson (interpretation): Clause 17.
Chairperson (interpretation): Clause 18.
Chairperson (interpretation): Clause 19.
Chairperson (interpretation): Clause 20.
Chairperson (interpretation): Clause 21.
Chairperson (interpretation): Bill 4.
Chairperson (interpretation): Bill 4 is now ready for third reading.
I would like to suggest that we report that those two bills are dealt with and that we report progress at this time.
I would like to thank the Premier Mr. Paul Okalik.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you very much for dealing with these two bills and I would also like to thank my officials for being here with me.
Chairperson (interpretation): Do not stand up yet. I have to say thank you first.
Thank you very much. I am sure you are welcome.
Thank you Mr. Premier Okalik.
I would like to thank our legal counsel for being here with us.
I am very sorry to say that I have a hard time pronouncing your name but I do thank you for being here.
Thank you, we will see you tomorrow.
Mr. Chairman. Mr. Iqaqrialu.
Your committee has been considering Bill 3 and Bill 4.
I would like to report that Bill 3 and Bill 4 are concluded and I move Mr. Speaker that the report of the committee of the whole be concurred with.
Do we have a seconder.
Bill 3 – An Act to Amend the Statutes Revision Act, Third Reading
I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Pangnirtung that Bill 3 – An Act to Amend the Statutes Revision Act, be read for the third time.
Bill 3 has had third reading.
Bill 4 – An Act to Amend the Land Titles Act, Third Reading
I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Hudson Bay, that Bill 4 – An Act to Amend the Land Titles Act, be read for the third time.
Merci Messieur President.
Bill 7 – The Legislative Assembly Members Removal and Disqualification Act, Third Reading
I move seconded by the Honourable Member for Baker Lake that Bill 7 – The Legislative Assembly Members Removal and Disqualification Act, be read for the third time.
Item 21. Third reading of bills. Item 22.
A meeting of the striking committee at 5.15.
Meeting of the Government Operations & Services Standing Committee at half past 5 in the Nanuq Boardroom.
Orders of the Day for Friday November 3;
Motion 10 – 1(4)
Minister's Statement 6 – 1(4)
Minister's Statement 8 – 1(4)
This House stands adjourned until Friday November 3, at 10 a.m.
>>House adjourned at 5.08 p.m.
Friday November 3, 2000
Pages 411 - 492
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk
Opening Prayer 411
Ministers' Statements 411
Members' Statements 414
Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery 420
Oral Questions 422
Written Questions 437
Reports of Committees on the Review of Bills 442
Tabling of Documents 444
Notices of Motions 444
Motions 445
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters 447
Report of Committee of the Whole 489
Third Reading of Bills 489
Revert to Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery 490
Assent to Bills 491
Orders of the Day 492
Friday November 3, 2000 411
035 – 1(4): Kakivak Association Update (Okalik) 411
036 – 1(4): Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit September Report (Kattuk) 412
037 – 1(4): Decentralization Update (Okalik) 412
076 – 1(4): Suicide Prevention (Iqaqrialu) 414
077 - 1(4): Natillik Constituency Concerns (Puqiqnak) 414
078 - 1(4): November 11th Remembrance Day (McLean) 415
079 - 1(4): Gravel Needs (Arvaluk) 416
080 - 1(4): Passing on of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (Alakannuark) 416
081 - 1(4): Iqaluit East Constituency Meeting (Picco) 417
082 – 1(4): Rankin Inlet Craft Show (Thompson) 417
083 - 1(4): Compensation for Jurors (Nutarak) 418
084 - 1(4): Pangnirtung Constituency (Kilabuk) 419
085 - 1(4): Arctic Winter Games Iqaluit Host Society (Tootoo) 419
083 – 1(4): Impacts of Fuel Price Increase on Government (Tootoo) 422
084 - 1(4): Status of Committee Motion on Petroleum Products (Iqaqrialu) 423
085 - 1(4): Compensation for Jurors (Nutarak) 423
086– 1(4): Use of Hotel Accommodations (Puqiqnak) 424
087 - 1(4): Transfer of Social Services to Hamlet (Nutarak) 425
088 – 1(4): Tourism Plans (Iqaqrialu) 427
089 – 1(4): Chesterfield Inlet Gravel Shortage (Arvaluk) 427
090 - 1(4): Nunavut Housing Corporation RFPs (Tootoo) 429
091– 1(4): Support for Small Businesses (Puqiqnak) 431
092 – 1(4): Deadlines for CLEY Funding Applications (Havioyak) 432
093– 1(4): PPD / Nunavut Power Corporation Amalgamation (McLean) 434
094 – 1(4): Use of Smoking Cessation Funding (Iqaqrialu) 434
095 - 1(4): Response to Question on Funding (Nutarak) 435
096 - 1(4): Support for AWG Host Society (Tootoo) 435
007 - 1(4): Housing Strategy Committee Information (Tootoo) 437