EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
We are trying to come up with a solution that’s practical, feasible, and affordable to deal with the many issues of landfills. The landfills in all the communities are almost getting to capacity and this problem is not going away, so we are going to deal with it.
We just have to deal with it in a practical, sensible, and affordable way.
Question 304 – 4(3): Education Act Consultations (Akoak)
Mr. Speaker, last November, the Special Committee to Review the Education Act presented its report to the House. One of the recommendations in that report was that the government develop and table amendments to the legislation within the mandate of this government.
Since that time, the Department of Education has developed a timeline for bringing these amendments forward, including a series of stakeholder and community consultations scheduled to take place this June of 2016.
For the sake of the listening public, can the minister clarify why his department feels that June of 2016 is the best time to carry out these consultations?
I also thank the member for that question. Furthermore, I wish to welcome our colleagues.
Yes, that is a very pertinent question to ask.
If members are aware, at the beginning of the process here in the House, the special committee was mandated to review the Education Act and to present its report before the end of the term of this government.
That is the timeline we are following.
With respect to the drafting of legislation, we were informed that with respect to the new Education Act process, we had to implement the proposals in the fastest manner possible and we are trying to accommodate that. This is a speedy process compared to other legislation drafting.
With that, we have followed the direction we were given starting from May 2016 to July 1, which was identified for our tour. We will be doing our stakeholder and community consultations during that time.
We will also be bringing out our legislative proposal this coming fall in 2016.
The House was directed by the special committee to follow those timelines.
With that, we are now bringing the information out to the general public and today, we will indicate which communities we will be going to.
To add to that, members, with the week coming starting from June 6, we will be in the Kivalliq region and we will be doing consultation tours for two days. We will have a meeting with all the DEA chairpersons.
In the Kitikmeot, we will be there from June 8 and again, we will be there for two days meeting with the DEA chairpersons. We will be doing the same thing.
After that, from June 16, we will be touring the North Baffin area in Pond Inlet and the outlying communities will be invited.
For the last part of the tour, we will be here in Iqaluit in South Baffin and again, we will be inviting the outlying communities’ DEA chairpersons.
That’s the timeline we’re following to date in accordance with the direction that was given to us as the Special Committee to Review the Education Act.
The Gjoa Haven District Education Authority passed a motion on May 11, 2016 to ask the Department of Education to delay the Education Act consultations ‘til the fall.
Can the minister confirm whether he has received a copy of that motion and the corresponding May 25 letter from the Gjoa Haven DEA and, if so, what was his response?
I have seen the correspondence and I have received four letters asking for the delay.
Following the direction that was given to us, we will follow the original timelines that were set. As I said, there are four communities that have asked for a delay of the consultation tour. However, the special committee was directed to follow a timeline and also to see a new Education Act prior to the ending of this government’s term.
That will be my response to the DEAs in the Kitikmeot region.
Usually springtime is when most of the people are out of the community and that’s why we’re asking if there can be a delay.
Mr. Speaker, I am aware that entities such as the Coalition of Nunavut DEAs and NTI have expressed some concerns regarding the government’s proposed timeline for bringing forward amendments to Nunavut’s Education Act.
For the benefit of the listening public, can the minister describe his department’s plans for bringing forward amendments to the current Education Act and indicate whether he is considering changing the timelines for stakeholder and community consultations?
I also thank my colleague for making additional comments on his original question.
I can say that we make sure we have the information available through the Internet and explain what the proposed changes are. We haven’t said that we will change the Education Act.
These are just proposals provided by the Department of Education.
Directions have been given to us from the DEAs and we will be reviewing them very closely.
I am completely open to comments in every form possible and through any means on whether the recommended changes are acceptable or not. We will also be consulting with Nunavut Tunngavik and we’ve had close correspondence.
We have also been meeting with the coalition of DEAs and we have kept all other interested parties fully informed. We have also corresponded with hamlet mayors on community visits while we are dealing
*See Appendix for full text of Returns to Written Questions 7 – 4(3), 8 – 4(3), 9 – 4(3), 10 – 4(3), and 11 – 4(3).
with changes to the Education Act.
Making information fully available is very important and it has been an important tradition to keep the communities fully involved, along with NTI and other parties.
We will be taking all feedback to the Legislative Assembly. I know that members will have their own feedback to contribute on what needs to be changed. We will have a complete discussion on all this input.
We will continue to use this process.
As I said, we will be tabling all this information in the House after we have completed all our consultation from all stakeholders.
Members, please note that the time for question period has expired and we will move on with the orders of the day.
Return to Written Question 007 – 4(3): Government of Nunavut Responses to the Resolutions Adopted at the 2014 and 2015 Annual General Meetings of the Nunavut Association of Municipalities (Clerk)
Return to Written Question 008 – 4(3): Government of Nunavut Presentation to the Canada Transportation Act Review (Clerk)
Return to Written Question 009 – 4(3): Economic Activity, Tax Revenues, and Tax Rebates (Clerk)
Return to Written Question 010 – 4(3): Annual Fuel Purchases by the Government of Nunavut (Clerk)
Return to Written Question 011 – 4(3): Services and Benefits for Out-of-Territory Dialysis Patients (Clerk)
I am tabling the returns to written questions 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11, all of which were asked during the March 16, 2016 sitting of the House.
Tabled Document 130 – 4(3): Letter of Instruction to the Commissioner of Nunavut (Taptuna)
I am pleased to table the Letter of Instruction from the Minister of Indigenous and Northern Affairs to the Commissioner of Nunavut.
Tabled Document 131 – 4(3): Correspondence from NTI Vice-president James Eetoolook (Okalik)
During our recent winter sitting, I tabled a copy of correspondence that I had sent to the Vice-president of Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, Mr. James Eetoolook, concerning the issue of the Government of Nunavut’s obligations under Article 32 of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement.
At that time, I committed to tabling Mr. Eetoolook’s reply to me, which I am pleased to do today.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Tabled Document 132 – 4(3): Resolutions Adopted at the 2016 Annual General Meeting of the Northern Air Transport Association (Mikkungwak)
I am pleased to table copies of the resolutions adopted at the 2016 Annual General Meeting of the Northern Air Transport Association.
Mr. Speaker, these resolutions address a number of issues and themes that emerged during our recent televised meeting with northern airlines.
I encourage all members to review these with care, and I will have appropriate questions for the appropriate minister at the appropriate time concerning matters that fall under territorial jurisdiction.
There are no more. Moving on.
I’m sorry. I have documents to table.
Tabled Document 133 – 4(3): 2014-2015 Annual Report of the Representative for Children and Youth (Speaker)
Tabled Document 134 – 4(3): 2014-2015 Annual Report of the Languages Commissioner of Nunavut (Speaker)
Tabled Document 135 – 4(3): Languages Commissioner of Nunavut’s Systemic Investigation Report – Investigation into the Qikiqtani General Hospital’s Compliance with the Official Languages Act (Speaker)
Today, I will table three documents.
The first one is the 2014-15 Annual Report of the Representative for Children and Youth.
The second one is the 2014-15 Annual Report of the Languages Commissioner of Nunavut.
The third document that I am tabling is the Languages Commissioner of Nunavut’s Systemic Investigation Report – Investigation into the Qikiqtani General Hospital.
Again, I wish to take this opportunity to publicly thank the Languages Commissioner, Ms. Sandra Inutiq, for her service.
Ms. Inutiq has decided to leave her position as of Friday, June 3, 2016.
The Management and Services Board will be issuing an invitation for applications in the near future to fill this position.
I urge all members to join me in thanking Ms. Inutiq for her service.
Bill 17 – Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 2, 2016-2017 – Notice
Bill 18 – Supplementary Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, No. 1, 2016-2017 – Notice
I give notice that on Tuesday, May 31, 2016, that Bill 17, Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 2, 2016-2017, be read for the first time.
Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Tuesday, May 31, 2016, that Bill 18, Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) Act, No. 1, 2016-2017, be read for the first time.
Motion 025 – 4(3): Early Adjournment (Mikkungwak)
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. There is a motion on the floor and it is in order. The motion is not debatable.
Let’s proceed to Item 22 in the Orders of the Day.
Clerk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. A reminder that there’s a meeting of the Regular Members’ Caucus tomorrow morning at nine o’clock in the Nanuq Boardroom.
This House stands adjourned until Tuesday, May 31, at 1:30 p.m. Thank you.
>>House adjourned at 15:22  Appendix – May 30, 2016
Legislative Assembly of Nunavut  Assemblée législative du Nunavut
Question: Mr. Qirngnuq
Question to: Acting Minister of Culture and Heritage
Number: 255-4(3): Inuit Customary Laws
Date: March 10, 2016
There are ten members of the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Katimajiit and there are 25 communities in Nunavut.
The Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Katimajiit has members who represent all three regions of Nunavut.
Their role is to provide knowledge and advice to the Department of Culture and Heritage and the Government of Nunavut.
The Katimajiit will not be travelling to other communities as part of this project.
During the past three years in each of the meetings, the IQ Katimajiit has been providing information on Inuit customary laws which will be published by the Department.
Asked by: Pat Angnakak, MLA Iqaluit-Niaqunnguu
Asked of: Hon. Joe Savikataaq, MLA
Number: 7-4(3)
Date: March 16, 2016
Subject: Government of Nunavut Responses to the Resolutions Adopted at the 2014 and 2015 Annual General Meetings of the Nunavut Association of Municipalities
What were the Government of Nunavut’s responses to the resolutions adopted at the 2014 and 2015 Annual General Meetings of the Nunavut Association of Municipalities?
The relevant 2014 and 2015 resolutions of the Nunavut Association of Municipalities, along with the Government of Nunavut responses, are listed on the attached pages.
NAM 2014 Resolutions:
Traffic Fines and Court Rulings
WHEREAS:
The Municipalities have no way of collecting traffic fines or court adjudications.
AND WHEREAS:
There are many traffic fines and court rulings outstanding.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED:
That the GN take up its responsibilities for the enforcement of fines and court-ordered payments and creates to collect the fines and enforce the court rulings, and provide proceeds to the relevant municipalities.
GN RESPONSE:
The enforcement and collection of fines and court-ordered payments in Nunavut is a longstanding and complicated issue that involves all levels of government: municipal, territorial and federal.
The Department of Justice continues its policy review of the matter, which may also require legislative changes.
There is no timeline for any such changes at this time.
Derelict Vehicles
The Government of Nunavut registers and does not make a provision for ultimate disposal of vehicles and does not have a policy in place for derelict and abandoned vehicles.
Vehicles are also part of our lives in the Arctic.
That the Government of Nunavut, Department of Economic Development and Transportation creates a license, tax or policy for all vehicles entering the territory and uses this funding to provide for the ultimate removal of derelict vehicles.
The Department of Economic Development and Transportation is amending the Motor Vehicles Act, with introduction anticipated this year at the Spring or Fall sitting of the Legislative Assembly.
One of the changes under consideration is a regulation-making power allowing the GN to collect End-of-Life Vehicle management fees, which would be collected when vehicles are first registered in Nunavut.
These revenues could provide the financial basis for programs designed to ensure the proper management or removal of End-of-Life Vehicles, although it is important to emphasize that the development of such a program will include consultation with various stakeholders – including Nunavut’s municipal governments
WHEREAS: Mobile devices are becoming part of daily life.
AND WHEREAS: Vehicles are also part of our lives in the Arctic.
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That Nunavut amend the Motor Vehicles Act
to include a provision regarding distracted drivers.
The amendments to the Motor Vehicles Act will include provisions to address the problem of distracted driving, including the use of handheld electronic devices while driving.
NAM 2015 Resolutions:
Dust Suppressant
WHEREAS: The roads in Nunavut communities are very dusty.
AND WHEREAS: Dust in our communities is a nuisance and health hazard, and has been raised many times in the past.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: that Community Government and Services find ways to suppress dust and preferably pave the roads.
The Department of Community and Government Services already funds municipalities for dust control within the Municipal Funding Program and allows the municipalities to use any dust suppressant that they believe will be efficient and environmentally responsible.
Training for Calcium Chloride is available through the Municipal Training Organization (MTO) by requesting training on the training needs assessment.
CGS also has training materials that can be sent out.
Currently the Department has no plans to fund the municipalities for asphalt or other paving material because of the cost of delivering such a program.
Municipal Funding
WHEREAS: Municipal Funding is currently inadequate to meet the needs of Municipalities
AND WHEREAS: The Government of Nunavut is conducting a review of Municipal Finances
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Government of Nunavut find ways to increase the funding for Hamlets throughout Nunavut.
The results of the last Municipal Funding Formula review came into effect on April 1, 2013.
When the review was completed the intention was to have another review completed every 3 to 5 years.
We have started the review process and are on target to complete the review in the next fiscal year 2016/2017 with input from municipalities through the working group established.
Gravel Crushers and Compactors
WHEREAS: There is a need for gravel crushers and compactors in Nunavut Municipalities
AND WHEREAS: Several Nunavut Hamlets do not yet have gravel crushers and compactors
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED: That Community Government and Services identify and work with those communities without gravel crushers and compactors with the aim of seeing all communities having gravel crushers and compactors as soon as possible.
Community and Government Services understands that many communities do not have an adequate supply of granular material for regular road maintenance.
We are working towards a granular management program that is tailored to individual communities.
One successful model has been a Hamlet-run crushing program which has been implemented in three communities.
CGS provided capital contribution agreements for equipment and for training and the Hamlets have successfully operated and produced granular material.
The Hamlet sells the material and all money earned is put back into the program for operation and maintenance costs, making the programs sustainable.
Page of 2
Asked by: Simeon Mikkungwak, MLA
Asked of: Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk
Minister of Economic Development and Transportation
Number: 008 – 4(3)
Subject: Government of Nunavut Presentation to the Canada Transportation Act Review
The Assistant Deputy Minister of Transportation and the Director of Transportation Policy and Planning appeared before the representatives of the Canada Transportation Act Review Panel, on behalf of the Department of Economic Development and Transportation.
The presentation took place at the Roundtable meeting with representatives of the Canada Transportation Act Review Panel.
This was held at the Anglican Parish Hall in Iqaluit.
The presentation was comprised of 6 sections as follows:
Our Land & People
Our Air System
Our Marine System
Our Highway System
For the Panel’s Consideration
The presentation will be tabled at the next sitting of the Legislative Assembly, subject to completion of required translations.
Once the presentation has been tabled it will be posted to the Department’s website.
The specific URL can be determined at that time.
The Department did not make any additional presentations and/or submissions to the Canada Transportation Act Review.
There were no formal recommendations provided to the Canada Transportation Act Review Panel representatives.
Rather, the Department’s presentation contained responses and comments pertaining to a number of questions received in advance of the meeting.
These questions covered a range of air, marine and surface transportation issues.
Asked by: Paul Okalik, MLA, Iqaluit-Sinaa
Asked of: The Honourable Keith Peterson, Minister of Finance
Number: WQ9-4(3)
Subject: Economic Activity, Tax Revenues and Tax Rebates
Question1:
What was the Government of Nunavut’s methodology for calculating the value that is cited on Page III-4 of the “Environmental Scan” section of the Government of Nunavut’s 2016-2019 Business Plan concerning the Meadowbank Mine’s share of Nunavut’s Gross Domestic Product?
The “Environmental Scan” section of the Government of Nunavut’s 2016-2019 Business Plan was authored by the Department of Economic Development and Transportation (EDT).
EDT used Statistics Canada’s CANSIM table 379-0028 as their source for Nunavut’s GDP, broken down by sector.
For the last 3 years in Nunavut “Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction” has hovered around 20% (or one-fifth) of total GDP.
Because until 2015 the Meadowbank Mine was the only mine in Nunavut which was in production, EDT attributed the total GDP in “Mining, quarrying, and oil and gas extraction” to this project.
Question2:
For each of the following fiscal years, but without identifying specific companies, how much corporate income tax revenue was generated by the Government of Nunavut in relation to the operation of the Meadowbank Mine?
a. 2010-2011
b. 2011-2012
c. 2012-2013
d. 2013-2014
e. 2014-2015
Section 24 of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (ATIPP) prevents the disclosure of taxpayer information in a way that identifies specific taxpayers.
Personal information and business interests of a third party, including information about a third party obtained on a tax return or gathered for the purpose of determining tax liability or collecting a tax are protected.
As per Section 43(a) of the ATIPP Act, the Government of Nunavut may only use personal information for the purpose for which the information was collected or compiled, or for a use consistent with that purpose.
For each of the following fiscal years, but without identifying individual taxfilers, how much personal income tax revenue was generated by the Government of Nunavut in relation to the operation of the Meadowbank Mine?
For each of the following fiscal years, but without identifying individual taxfilers, how much payroll tax revenue was generated by the Government of Nunavut in relation to the operation of the Meadowbank Mine?
For each of the following fiscal years, but without identifying specific companies, how much fuel tax revenue was generated by the Government of Nunavut in relation to the operation of the Meadowbank Mine?
For each of the following fiscal years, but without identifying specific companies, what was the value of all rebates paid to companies by the Government of Nunavut under its Fuel Tax Rebate Program in relation to the operation of the Meadowbank Mine?
$ 1,646,945
$ 1,075,196
$ 1,959,839
$ 4,214,955
$ 3,830,959
*This amount has been paid to AEM, however the GN recently won a challenge in the Court of Appeal which will reduce the rebate in this year.
The exact amount is not yet known.
**This application has recently been completed and is under review.
This is the amount AEM has applied.
Asked by: Alex Sammurtok, MLA
Number: 10-4(3)
Expressing the data in the same format as that which the Government of Nunavut provided in the Return to Written Question 10-4(2), what quantities of fuel were purchased and delivered during the 2015 calendar year?
2,621,348
379,797
747,187
4,422,185
511,756
345,884
495,301
3,255,508
Clyde River - QEC
609,046
825,338
125,070
140,669
2,044,702
641,000
654,464
5,419,283
676,802
1,193,918
31,767,382
6,235,888
28,442,995
Iqaluit - QEC
5,364,953
972,636
200,644
2,312,138
595,012
804,213
3,249,378
831,078
568,171
5,172,292
727,300
1,085,122
2,089,391
475,563
147,727
3,389,369
221,690
1,237,561
69,650,395
12,116,901
39,232,465
3,414,329
1,155,808
Arviat - QEC
2,279,715
8,476,147
1,321,884
1,131,242
303,908
Chesterfield Inlet - QEC
2,842,232
499,075
522,940
12,357,107
2,101,850
5,358,547
Rankin Inlet - QEC
4,466,769
3,841,141
583,004
Repulse Bay - QEC
81,332
2,197,329
500,205
704,519
1,211,503
211,291
42,298,846
6,677,025
6,586,006
7,985,231
1,831,171
3,269,891
Cambridge Bay - QEC
3,019,291
4,127,817
689,727
1,022,025
3,378,533
609,520
525,207
Kugluktuk - QEC
1,089,707
3,277,665
420,777
597,938
22,878,244
3,551,195
5,415,061
134,827,485
22,345,121
51,233,532
6,869,231.6
2,100,000.0
Emergency Total  Volume
Emergency  Total Volume
11,832,000.0
2,227,000.0
3,818,000.0
Response: There were no fuel airlifts during the 2015 calendar year.
Asked by: Tom Sammurtok, MLA (Rankin North – Chesterfield Inlet)
Number: 11-4(3)
Subject: Services and Benefits for Out-of-Territory Dialysis Patients
How many Nunavut residents underwent dialysis treatment outside of the territory during the 2011-2012, 2012-2013, 2013-2014, 2014-2015 and 2015-2016 (to date) fiscal years?
Nunavut Residents
Broken down by fiscal year (2011-2012 to 2015-2016 (to date)) and health care facility, where did the residents undergo dialysis treatment?
Treatment Facility
Facility 1 – Ontario
Facility 2 – Manitoba
Facility 3 – Manitoba
Facility 4 – Ontario
Facility 5 – Ontario
Facility 6 – Alberta
Facility names have removed to protect client confidentiality.
Broken down by fiscal year (2011-2012 to 2015-2016 (to date)), what is the average length of stay outside of the territory for a resident undergoing dialysis treatment?
The Department of Health cannot provide an accurate average length of stay for a dialysis patient as each case is specific to the client.
There is no pre-determined treatment time.
Clients that are accessing this treatment may be ill and require temporary dialysis or require support while stabilizing for transition over to peritoneal dialysis which can be done in their own home in Nunavut.