EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
People have on occasion taken an extra day or two to shop. We all understand the high cost of living in the Arctic and any time we can take advantage of cheaper priced goods, I know whenever I travel I try to do a little bit of shopping myself. I’m not going to begrudge somebody that opportunity, but it’s not going to cost the Department of Health or the Government of Nunavut any additional funds.
Thank you to the minister for the explanations.
Mr. Speaker, the federal government recently announced that all pregnant women who must leave their communities to give birth would be entitled to an escort.
Can the minister confirm whether this announcement has required any changes to be made to the Government of Nunavut’s medical travel policies and, if so, what kinds of impact will these changes have?
When the federal government made the announcement that they would provide escorts for maternal travel, the guidelines and parameters of that program still aren’t fully known to us as a government and to my colleagues across the country.
That being said, we are one jurisdiction that did implement it immediately for the betterment of our residents in anticipation of getting all the data.
There are some limitations to it.
We have been negotiating the amount of time that the escort can be there. It isn’t for the full term.
There is a fixed period of time that we’re still finalizing with Health Canada and NIHB to make sure escorts are available for as long as possible.
As a father, I was present for both of my children’s births.
There are too many spouses and parents that haven’t had that option.
I think this is a great step that the federal government has announced that they will provide additional resources to NIHB clients to make sure that those families can start their bonding from the time of birth.
I think it’s a fantastic opportunity that Nunavut and my department initiated right away in anticipation of getting the further details from the federal government.
I look forward to providing more details when that is lined out.
As far as any direct changes to our Medical Travel Policy, there are no direct implications at this moment, but as Mr. Shooyook mentioned yesterday, it is already creating an additional burden on our boarding homes because there are increased people travelling.
It is something that we are very aware of and we’re analyzing continuously.
Nunavut’s medical travel policies restrict the ability of medical clients or their escorts to travel with infants.
If an individual is breastfeeding, this can lead to a difficult situation for the mother, the child, and the family.
We are all aware of how important breastfeeding is for the health and well-being of a child.
Will the minister commit to reviewing medical travel policies for clients and escorts to make it easier for women to travel with their infants?
I very much appreciate the member allowing me the opportunity to highlight how important breastfeeding is to young infants.
The Department of Health and the Government of Nunavut do not put any barriers in place for that.
In fact I encourage mothers who are travelling for medical reasons to take their breastfeeding infant with them to make it better on the dietary and health of the baby.
That being said, it does depend on occasion on the severity of the medical appointment or the purpose of the travel.
Like I said, I encourage mothers to bring their breastfeeding infants with them, but it can’t interfere with the medical process or the procedure that is going on.
Unfortunately, again, just due to continual challenges in our delivery of health care, we don’t approve a babysitter as an escort to go with the mother.
The mother would have to be able to care for that infant on their own. If there is a medical need for that person to have an escort, then they would obviously be allowed with our current Medical Travel Policy.
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters: Bills 27, 45, and 46 with Mr. Enook in the Chair.
>>House recessed at 15:25 and Committee resumed at 15:50
Before we begin, I would like to welcome our fellow Nunavummiut who are watching the televised proceedings and listening to the radio broadcast. Welcome to your committee.
We will proceed to the Committee of the Whole.
In Committee of the Whole we have the following items to deal with: Bills 27, 45, and 46.
Mr. Mikkungwak (interpretation): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) We wish to deal with Bill 45 and Bill 46. (interpretation) Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Does the committee agree that we first deal with Bill 45?
Bill 45 – Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 2, 2017-2018 –Consideration in Committee
As we proceed, Minister Peterson, do you have officials that you would like to join you at the witness table?
Yes, I have two officials that I would like to join me at the witness table.
Does the committee agree to have Minister Peterson’s officials at the witness table?
To my right is Jeff Chown, Deputy Minister of Finance, and to my left is Camilius Egeni, Director of Expenditure Management, Department of Finance.
Welcome, Mr. Chown and Mr. Egeni.
I just heard a phone ring. I would like to remind you to please put your cellphones on silent mode.
We will now proceed with the review of Bill 45.
Minister Peterson, if you have any opening comments, you now have the floor.
I appear before you today to present Bill 45, Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 2, 2017-2018.
Bill 45 is a supplementary appropriation for 2017-18 capital totalling $139,590,000.
This is comprised of $106,171,000 for capital carryover projects from the 2016-17 fiscal year to the 2017-18 fiscal year and $33,419,000 for four other capital projects.
There are two types of capital carryovers in Bill 45.
We have been calling these projects “FAM compliant.” Mr. Chairman, approval of these carryovers is technical in nature.
These projects are ongoing and Bill 45 ensures their continuation.
There are a total of 132 projects in the carryover request. This is 11 projects more than last year. The total capital carryovers are broken down as follows:
$449,000 for the Office of the Legislative Assembly for improvements;
$11,399,000 in 13 projects for the Department of Finance in support of Nunavut Arctic College operations and includes the Kitikmeot Mining Training Centre – Student Residence phase, three community learning centres in Iqaluit, Whale Cove, and Grise Fiord, a new student records system, the Rankin Inlet trade school, ongoing lifecycle, and three other minor projects;
$3,161,000 for the Department of Family Services for its case management system and renovations to the Rankin Inlet Adult Group Home;
$2,763,000 in two projects for the Department of Justice covering the Qikiqtani Correctional Healing Centre and renovations to the Nunavut Court of Justice;
$11,419,000 in 37 projects for the Department of Education and includes Cape Dorset classroom portables and Peter Pitseolak site cleanup, as well as repairs and renovations to several schools;
An additional $6,474,000 to the Department of Education for cash flow adjustments for the Cape Dorset new school;
$9,118,000 in 11 projects for the Department of Health, which includes the repair, renovation, or replacement of several health facilities, including the Baffin Regional Hospital, as well as medical diagnostic equipment;
$1,364,000 in two projects for the Department of Environment covering wildlife office renovations in Resolute Bay and Kugluktuk laboratory renovations;
$36,677,000 in 49 projects for the Department of Community and Government Services covering a wide range of municipal and community infrastructure projects;
An additional $24,945,000 to the Department of Community and Government Services for the Kivalliq Energy Management Project and Baker Lake Tank Farm Storage Facility;
$29,824,000 in 14 projects for the Department of Economic Development and Transportation covering a number of airport improvement projects, replacement of the Motor Vehicle Information System, the Kivalliq Regional Visitor Centre, and Iqaluit marine infrastructure; and
An additional $2 million to the Department of Economic Development and Transportation for environmental and engineering activities for the Grays Bay Road and Port Project.
If there are any general comments on the opening comments, I now open the floor.
If there are no comments, we will begin with the page-by-page review of Bill 45.
Please note that if you have questions while we go through the pages, raise your hand so that I can give you the opportunity to ask them.
I believe you have a copy of the bill in front of you.
Let’s proceed starting on page 4. I’ll read the Inuktitut copy.
Capital. Not Previously Authorized. Total Assembly Operations. $449,000.
Total Department. Not Previously Authorized. $449,000.
I guess the first question I would like to ask is: how many capital projects have been on the GN-wide capital plan for five years or more but remain uncompleted and how many have not been started?
I’m sorry, Mr. Chairman, we don’t have that information with us today.
Can the minister provide that to us before the ending of this sitting?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Minister Peterson, is that possible?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. We will be expecting that.
On page 5 of this document I see that carryovers, one of the projects is the Iqaluit Community Learning Centre of a little over $4 million. Can you provide us with an explanation of what the delay is here?
Sorry, technology down here is kind of wonky some days.
Our substantiation sheet says that it’s more of a status update. It doesn’t indicate what the delay is.
It looks like everything is being completed. It’s a multi-year project and it’s proceeding.
The anticipated completion date is 2018-19.
Ms. Angnakak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for that response from the minister.
There is also an amount of $127,000 from the Nunavut trade school. Can you tell us what that’s about?
Again, there’s technical stuff down here.
The project is on schedule. Most of the work is completed.
The substantiation sheet indicates that the work to be completed in the spring/summer of 2017 is, what they say, outstanding seasonal work.
I don’t know what that exactly means, but possibly clean up around the area and things like that.
Yes, I wonder myself: what does that mean?
On Item 2 on the same page it says the Iqaluit Campus Relocation, $66,000.
Can you tell us what that means? How will that $66,000 be spent?
I am trying to get to these substantiation sheets before the light comes on.
It’s proving to be a big challenge.
It appears that the college, because of the damage to the other facility, is looking for additional office space to relocate the Student Services Division into the residence area.
The RFP closed on April 20 and they are currently working with CGS to look at the different options available.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Peterson. (interpretation ends) I don’t mind being methodical because we want to give the proper information out.
Can I ask the minister to say that all over again? I didn’t get a really good understanding of what that was all about.
What relocation to what and who’s relocating?
I believe they’re looking for office space to relocate the student services. From what we understand on the substantiation sheet, they had an RFP out for space which closed just recently on April 20.
They are currently working with CGS to look at the available options.
I just wanted clarification on page 5.
In your opening remarks on page 2, bullet No. 2, you mentioned $11,339,000 in 13 projects in support of Nunavut Arctic College operations, which includes the Kitikmeot Mine Training Centre – student residence phase.
I see that you have $904,000 allocated for that particular item.
I’m just curious. This is regarded as a carryover from some previous years.
Can I get clarification as to when this project was first established?
We don’t have the year here, but I seem to recall it going back possibly as far as the Third Assembly. We will get the year and update the member.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) We look forward to the information.
In that case, I wonder why this particular item has been revived at this particular time if it was something that we as this Assembly had not approved.
Maybe you can clarify that for me.
I’m not sure if I understand Mr. T. Sammurtok.
These are carryover funds that have been approved in previous years by this Assembly.
I understand that the purpose of this fund is to initiate the building of the student residence phase of the Kitikmeot mine training campus.
When I look at the substantiation sheets, I see that for future years, starting in 2018-19, you’ve got $2,730,000 for this project.
In 2019-2020 it goes up to $18,640,000 and in 2020-21 it goes up to $17 million, for a total of $39,274,000.
Are you assuming that this project has already been approved now or are you hoping that it will be approved by the next legislature?
As Mr. T. Sammurtok is aware from his time as Minister of CGS and on the FMB, multi-year projects are carried over from year to year.
I don’t have the exact year this project started, but there is a student residence phase and then there is a campus phase.
The student residence phase is almost complete and it was approved in previous years going back a number of years.
Part of the carryover funds for this $904,000 went to begin the design and facility planning process for the mine training school.
What I’m saying is this has already been approved in prior years, but as we all understand in government, when we go through a capital planning process, each department is required to do their capital planning, then they work through the FMB process, then we work through the standing committee, and then we come into Committee of the Whole.
Usually in a non-election year we would typically deal with the capital estimates in the October sitting. In this case, because it’s an election year, this is a carryover we’re dealing with.
If they’re doing the capital estimates to continue this project, they would likely be brought forward in… . I’ll just say that October 2018 would be the first opportunity for the new government to deal with the capital estimates.
At that time the new MLAs and the new cabinet would debate it in this House, and then they would approve or not approve any capital projects that come forward.
My concern with this particular item is that this government is looking to build a mine training centre in the Kitikmeot.
We have a perfectly good mine training centre which was built to provide services to all Nunavummiut.
I’m just curious as to why there is duplication of another mine training centre when we have a mine training centre already operating.
As Mr. T. Sammurtok knows as well, the existing Kitikmeot Campus has, I think, maybe three or four buildings.
The three buildings are all between 35 and 45 years old. Arctic College is mandated to offer a wide range of programs for Nunavummiut and the existing campus does not allow that to occur.
I have explained this a few times. I’m not sure why they say the Kitikmeot Campus/mine training centre. Part of the campus would of course include mine training programs, but there are other programs that they would focus on as well; language, culture, education, and health career type of programs such as nursing, social work, office administration, and maybe even law programs down the road.
Now that they’ve got the Canadian High Arctic Research Station in Cambridge Bay, there are opportunities for Nunavummiut to come and learn, and work through the college and learn other careers, such as scientific research type of careers that would assist them to get opportunities in the scientific field; climate change, conservation, and those types of programs.
The bottom line is there is an old campus there that is limiting the opportunities for Nunavummiut to take programs closer to home.
That’s not to say that only students from the Kitikmeot go there because I often meet students from right across Nunavut coming to my office to get swag and such and tell me about their homes. They tell me how much they appreciate the opportunities to go to college in Cambridge Bay.
I just want the minister to understand that I don’t begrudge the fact there’s a need for a college campus in the Kitikmeot.
However, my concern here is that there is a duplication of services because I don’t believe that… .
We have a campus here in Iqaluit, we have a campus in Rankin Inlet, and we have a campus in Cambridge Bay.
However, I don’t see courses such as, for example, nursing being provided in all three campuses at the same time, or NTEP.
I guess I’m just curious as to why there’s a need for a duplicate mine training centre when we have a perfectly good operating mine training centre for Nunavut.
In your substantiation sheet on page 3 of 4 under the title “Benefits,” it’s talking about the mine training centre in particular.
It reads, “Arctic College is expanding program offerings across Nunavut, including the Cambridge Bay campus.”
That’s fine. I don’t have a problem with that. However, I do have a question on the statement that says, “The new Campus will focus on mine training…” I would like a clarification on that.
Again, these projects have been approved in previous years. These are carryovers.
The bulk of the funding that we’re carrying over or seeking approval for carrying over is going towards looking at design and planning for a campus, and then to look at development and the options and all that.
It does say it will focus on mine training, but we also know it will accommodate many other Nunavut Arctic College programs, as I have already said. I know that the Minister of Education is over there and I’ll ask him to speak to it in a minute. Again, it is an old facility.
Nunavut Arctic College has a board of directors and officials who work on these on a regular basis. They know what Nunavut Arctic College requires and what kind of programs they require. They work with industry.
They work with the communities. They work with many people to identify the type of training that Nunavummiut need.
We have made education a priority in this government.
We’re continuing with a focus to provide education and training to Nunavummiut and hoping to keep this project on track.
With that, Mr. Chairman, I’ll ask the Minister of Education if he would like to offer some additional comments.
Minister Quassa, if you want to comment on this, I give you the opportunity as the Minister responsible for Arctic College.
Hon. Paul Quassa (interpretation): Thank you, Chairman.
Yes, I wanted to provide further clarification to my colleague, Mr. Sammurtok, on his question and comment.
The campus in the Kitikmeot is in Cambridge Bay and yes, there is (interpretation ends) mine training (interpretation) that is a targeted program.
With respect to the one in Rankin Inlet, let’s be clear that this is a (interpretation ends) trade school (interpretation) and it falls more into the category of employment training. That’s why its name is Sanatuliqsarvik trade school.
However, my colleague, Minister Peterson, stated correctly that we don’t offer just one program in the larger centres. (interpretation ends) The campuses, (interpretation) as they are called, have offered NTEP courses in Rankin Inlet, Cambridge Bay, and here at the main campus. There are various courses offered in the regional campuses, not just mine-related programming such as the one being offered in Cambridge Bay.
These are (interpretation ends) campuses (interpretation) that can provide various courses.
With respect to the programs being offered in Cambridge Bay, we have been clear in our announcements, such as stating that mine training can be taken not only in Cambridge Bay.
For example, you may have heard information in the past where we have contemplated offering this program in Pond Inlet or other communities adjacent to mines. This program can be offered anywhere, such as in Rankin Inlet or anywhere a mine is adjacent to a community such as Baker Lake. These are the various ideas in play.
With respect to the program being offered in Cambridge Bay, it is geared towards mining where the one in Rankin Inlet is for (interpretation ends) trades, (interpretation) as that is the focus.
That’s the difference between those two areas and I think we should clearly understand that.
I’ll stop there for now. I just wanted to clarify that.
Mr. Tom Sammurtok: Thank you, Chairman.
I thank the minister for his explanation on that.
However, my understanding is that mining is not a trade. Considering that the campus in Rankin Inlet is a trade school, it begs the question: why do we have a mine training capability and facility in that particular trade school?
Anyway, be that as it may, I’ll just end it here for now. I’ll allow other members to ask questions.
I don’t think there was a question.
It was a general comment and I don’t think you’re expecting an answer.
We are on page 5. It reads, Finance. Capital.
Not Previously Authorized. Total Centrally Administered Funds. $11,399,000.
Total Department. Not Previously Authorized. $11,399,000.
Turn the page. Page 6. It reads, Family Services.
Not Previously Authorized. Total Corporate Management. $3,161,000. Total Department.
Not Previously Authorized. $3,161,000.
Turn to page 7. Justice. Capital.
Not Previously Authorized. Total Directorate. $2,713,000.
Ms. Angnakak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Minor Capital under page 7, Item 2, it says, “Justice Information Technology Projects.”
Can I just get a clarification of what that is?
That’s where, in the Public Trustee Office, they’re going to update and have their own database systems and also in the Legal Division.
They’re just updating their databases.
I don’t have many more details than that.
Ms. Angnakak: Just one other question on this page. Under Item 3 it says, “Nunavut Court of Justice Renovations.” It’s just $50,000.
Can you tell us what that’s for?
The renovation project was completed in December of 2016 and they have some outstanding issues with the outdoor security gate. They call it a “sally port” where the trucks and vans back in. They have some problems with the gate, but they can only make those repairs in the summer of 2017.
Total Directorate. $2,713,000.
Total Registries and Court Services. $50,000.
Total Department. Not Previously Authorized. $2,763,000.
Turn the page. Page 8. It reads, Education.
Turn to page 9. It continues to that page. Education.
Capital. Not Previously Authorized. Total Corporate Services. $17,890,000.
(interpretation ends) I just want to touch a bit on the first item there on page 8. It says, “To provide funding of $6,474,000 required to adjust the cash flow for the Cape Dorset New School.”
It says, “…estimated that the new school will cost approximately $34 million.”
Is this not to say it’s going to cost more to build the new school in Cape Dorset, just to be clear?
The replacement high school project is not costing more. It’s just that we’re able to build it faster.
Mr. Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the response.
Yes, I’ve gotten a little bit of an update from the minister. They’re a little ahead of schedule on this project. Can the minister state how far along they… ?
I know they have done some blasting of the site for the foundation. Given that, how far along in advance are they with this project and when is the expected completion date?
Yes, it’s a good news story.
We thought this would take a little bit longer. The contract was awarded in September of 2016 and was scheduled to be completed in August 2019, but they were able to get the materials and equipment into Cape Dorset in October 2016, which allowed them to begin construction of the foundation in the spring of this year and potentially have the facility closed in before the winter of 2017 to allow them to expedite the construction of the building and the interior work.
As to when there is an estimated completion date, I would have to defer that answer to the Minister of Education, if he has that information.
Minister Quassa, can you comment on that?