EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
As Minister of Environment, I have invited them to work closely with us.
I also met with the mining officials at the Kitikmeot trade show last week and with four or five of the major companies there.
They expressed some concerns over the mixed messages that the government is sending to the industry in their dealings with the Nunavut Planning Commission.
They voiced their concerns that the land use planning process appears to be rampant with red tape bureaucracy, and this is mining companies telling me this.
I think they thought that I was with the government or something.
To correct them, I told them that I am with the Assembly.
My question for the minister: will the minister commit his department officials to work cooperatively with the planning commissioner to complete the West Kitikmeot Land Use Plan in 2005?
The purpose of inviting the Nunavut Planning Commission over to Iqaluit to meet with me is to make sure that I have a close working relationship in the future with them.
Also the Government of Nunavut is prepared to make sure that we recognize and make sure that we work together in the West Kitikmeot Resource and Land Use Plan.
So, the purpose of me inviting the Nunavut Planning Commission is to have a better working relationship in the future.
I thank the minister for his response that he is inviting the Nunavut Planning Commission over to meet with them.
I would like to hear a commitment from the minister that he is going to establish clear protocols that his department can work with the Nunavut Planning Commission so that they can finalize the West Kitikmeot Land Use Plan in 2005; a clear commitment for him today.
I commit to working closely with the Nunavut Planning Commission.
I will make sure that my colleagues also know about it.
There are still three people on my list: Mr. Netser, Mr. Barnabas, and Mr. Tootoo.
The Member for Nanulik, Mr. Netser.
Question 149 – 2(2): Language of Instruction in the Schools
I was very pleased that the Minister for Education had a chance to meet with my constituency and to discuss, among other important issues, the language-of-instruction option that has been brought forward by his department.
In my community of Coral Harbour four options were discussed; actually three, but we made it four.
Four options were discussed and it has been decided to hold a form of plebiscite on this issue in mid-March.
I strongly support this decision to allow the community of Coral Harbour to democratically express its views on how children should be educated. Thank you for the opportunity to hold this plebiscite.
Can the minister tell this House how this plebiscite will be organized and how the outcome will be used by the department?
We tabled the bilingual education strategy, which is inclusive of the language-of-instruction, in November 2004.
And the member is correct; when I was in the member’s constituency’s communities of Coral Harbour and Chesterfield Inlet, there were concerns raised that the three languages of instruction that we had proposed may not actually fit with the community needs, in particular in Coral Harbour.
Therefore and thus we looked at the opportunity to bring forward a hybrid model which would combine one of the options of the language-of-instruction.
In our discussions with the local DEA, our proposition to the DEA was that an opportunity would exist where we would have an opportunity to pull in community members in the community to see what exactly what model they were looking at or leaning toward.
And I also would like to thank the minister.
In Chesterfield Inlet the DEA was asking in regard to the bilingual curriculum.
Will the community of Chesterfield Inlet be given an opportunity to vote on the plebiscite too?
I don’t know if plebiscite is the proper word because that has a different connotation.
What we were proposing is to have the two communities look at what option to bring forward.
Any community in Nunavut and every community in Nunavut has an opportunity through the local education authority, to examine the models that have been brought forward by the language-of-instruction and then choose the option that they would like to bring forward.
I think the beauty of the language-of-instruction model is that it gives the communities an opportunity to program the resources as well as the subjects to be covered in their own school at the local level.
Speaker (interpretation): Your second supplementary, Mr. Netser.
Perhaps the education authority has three options to choose from.
The three options were given to the local education authority by the department, and the local DEA wanted to come up with a fourth option, which was not in the options given to them.
The Chesterfield Inlet District Education Authority would like to get the same options.
They were given three options to choose from, and they also want to be part of Nunavut.
Coral Harbor and Chesterfield Inlet want to be part of Nunavut and they would like to see the fourth option amongst the options that were given to the community of Chesterfield Inlet.
Can the community of Chesterfield Inlet and the other community be included with the fourth option?
Hon. Ed Picco. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Part of the role of the Minister of Education is the opportunity to be able to go out into communities and hear what communities have to say.
I have been trying to meet with as many DEAs as possible, and indeed I have met with almost every chair of the DEAs throughout Nunavut in the past ten months.
Part of the program being brought forward by the Chesterfield Inlet DEA and Coral Harbor’s DEA, I thought, were good suggestions.
They were talking about a hybrid model of the language-of-instruction, of the three options that were presented.
I believe that there is some opportunity there, so what I will do, with the member’s concurrence, in the House today is ask our (inaudible) regional director to finally be able to facilitate with the Chesterfield Inlet DEA as well as the Coral Harbor DEA and make sure that this has moved forward as per our discussion in both communities. Because Bobby was also there, as well as the Assistant Deputy Minister of Education, to make sure that the requests of the communities are followed through.
It may be an option for other communities to look at too, as the process for language of instruction evolved and become more known throughout Nunavut, Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Question 150 – 2(2): Planning Stages for Multi-use Facility
When the minister visited the community, residents of the older part of the community walked to the meeting, and the community hall was short of capacity right away, there were even other members of the community who wanted to attend the meeting.
Mr. Speaker, Arctic Bay residents have been very vocal in their need for the multi-use facility.
There are currently five different communities with community halls or arenas in the five-year capital plan.
When is Arctic Bay scheduled to begin the planning stages for a multi-use facility?
Speaker (interpretation): Minister of Community and Government Services, Mr. Kilabuk
In the upcoming six months, yes, we will be dealing with the community halls or multi-use facilities. I could point out to you that in the next six months we will be able to review that with the federal government.
Speaker (interpretation): Mr. Barnabas
What other new infrastructure is currently being considered for Arctic Bay?
I cannot elaborate, in detail, what is being considered for new infrastructure.
As I have announced before to Nunavumiut, we will be working with Nunavut Association of Municipalities, and this spring we will be reviewing the entire infrastructure that is needed in all the communities of Nunavut so that we can work along the lines of community needs.
Your second supplementary, Mr. Barnabus.
What steps are being taken to secure funding from your department for infrastructure projects in Arctic Bay?
I would like to inform my colleagues that at this time we are expecting some funding from the federal government to assist us.
It is the first time that we have had an opportunity to work on community halls, arenas, and swimming pools.
Currently, we want to consult with all the communities to find out what their requirements are and what their priorities are.
After consulting with the communities we will be making a five-year plan and a ten-year plan.
Question 151 – 2(2): How Funds from the Federal Government will be Incorporated
Again, my question is for the Minister of Finance and it deals with her budget address.
In the revenue section she talked about TFF, the territorial formula financing transfer agreement that we have with the federal government.
Also in there, she talks about the new formula arrangement that was made.
Also in there, she indicated that there is $40 million over the next four years that will be coming and not incorporated into our fiscal framework that she announced.
I would like to ask the minister if she can clarify how and when these funds will be incorporated into our framework?
The federal budget that was announced on Wednesday confirms the funding that will be channeled down to the territories under the new Northern Strategy.
That commitment was made in the fall.
The federal budget yesterday confirms that commitment to the territories; once the legislation has been passed by the federal government then the money will be channeled down to each jurisdiction.
At the same time, the territories will be working and consulting with Nunavutmiut on how to better allocate that funding which I outlined in my budget address.
The actual dollars have not been forecasted into this amount because at this point in time we need to wait for the legislation to pass at the federal level to allocate the funding.
I guess what I am looking for, and I am sure that all members are… . We could have lots of uses and ways to spend that money.
The minister has indicated that the money has to flow from federal government to our government.
Is that correct that it will built into, once it does flow and when the legislation does pass, it will flow into a general revenue pot of our territorial government where all members of this Assembly have a say on how it is done?
Any new funding that is approved or allocated by the federal government goes from one level of government to the next level of government.
Some of that funding is channeled through us through formula and some of it is channeled through contribution agreements and whatnot.
What I am saying here is that the $40 million has not been added into my budget address as an amount that is already included in our general revenues.
Once the legislation is passed, it will come down to us.
The federal government has made the commitment I identified in their budget speech on Wednesday, so we are expecting that.
Having said that, I also said in my budget address that we will be consulting Nunavutmiut on how that funding will be allocated, and members of this House are Nunavutmiut, so we will consult with the members as well.
I would like to thank the minister for her response.
Mr. Speaker, on dealing with the formula financing agreement that we have in place, the minister also stated that there is an expert panel that has been announced by the federal government.
I know that one thing we heard here, even just on Monday of last week, is the criticism of people saying that people from somewhere else are telling us what to do and what we need and how to do things.
As the Minister of Finance, the Department of Finance has played a lead role in negotiations in dealing with the formula.
Do they have any members that are on this panel?
The finance ministers of Canada met recently in Ottawa to talk about recommending names to the federal finance minister as to who will sit on this panel.
The three territories have collectively put some names forward, but that has not yet been finalized.
We are putting those names forward to the federal finance minister.
We will have a say in terms of what we discussed.
The expert panel is expected to review the concerns and challenges faced by any jurisdiction when it comes to getting funding from the federal government.
We are looking at trying to come with ways to have funding that is adequate, first of all, plus, at the same time, predictable from year to year and so on.
Whatever improvement that is necessary to the formula or the bill or equalization, that committee will be looking at gathering all that information and presenting a report to the federal government, as well as each jurisdiction’s finance minister.
I am very pleased to hear the minister indicate that the three northern territories jointly put forward some names on that.
That would mean that the three territorial finance ministers understand that our needs and circumstances are unique.
I would like to ask the minister if she could indicate whether territorial finance ministers, and maybe along with the three territorial premiers, can find a way to insist and ensure that there is Northern representation on this expert panel, because we always say that the circumstances and challenges that we face in Nunavut and the other two northern territories are unique from the rest of Canada, and it is something that usually these experts from somewhere else have no clue about.
So, we need to make sure that we have someone who knows what we are going through there.
The three territories recognized that our needs are very unique to the rest of Canada.
We work under our territorial formula financing arrangement, which is a need-based system.
It is very different from the equalization program.
So, the individuals that we recommend for the panel must have that understanding in terms of how the funding is allocated.
Not only that, but they also have to have a good understanding that we don’t have province-like powers in benefiting from the resource development in the North.
So, as for individuals that we are putting forward, definitely it is in our interest to put forward names that have that background and understanding of how the formula works and the challenges we face.
Yes, the Northern premiers and the Northern finance ministers have been aware of that from the get-go and have presented those to the Prime Minister as well as to Minister Ralph Goodale.
So, to respond, yes, we are putting forward names of individuals who have that knowledge.
Question 152 – 2(2): Liquor Warehouse for the Kitikmeot
My question is for the minister responsible for the Liquor Board, the Liquor Act.
In her news release last month, the Minister of Finance announced the opening of the Nunavut Liquor Management operations in Rankin Inlet that has the responsibility of purchasing, storing, and distributing liquor in Nunavut.
The announcement also said that liquor can be purchased in Rankin Inlet or Iqaluit without the use of import permits.
As the minister knows, the Kitikmeot does not have a liquor warehouse, and the freight and administrative costs act as a deterrent to ordering liquor from Rankin Inlet or Iqaluit.
My question for the minister: what specific plans does the government have to open a liquor warehouse in the Kitikmeot?
Speaker (interpretation): Minister responsible for the Liquor Licensing Board, Ms. Aglukkaq.
This issue, again, was raised during our meetings with the hamlet of Cambridge Bay just last week.
I recognized that the citizens and residents of Kitikmeot are still required to request a permit to purchase their liquor from Yellowknife, it being the closest point, with the option to purchase outside or within Nunavut; having said that, to date we have not considered opening a liquor warehouse in the Kitikmeot.
We have opened the one in Rankin Inlet and I announced that, but for our part, we have not considered it or looked into it or the cost associated with it at this point.
There’s considerable red tape, hoops, and hurdles, and administrative hassles that our Kitikmeot residents must go through to obtain an import permit.
In many cases, bootleggers profit because of people’s aversion to complicated paperwork.
This undermines the government’s plans to develop their corporate knowledge base, which the minister announced in her news release.
My question for the minister: what specific plans does the government have to streamline an import permit process for Kitikmeot residents, to put them on the same level footing as the residents in the Kivalliq and Baffin?
I understand that many of the residents in the Kitikmeot have to purchase their permits from outside the communities.
One of the things that we are looking at in the next little while is that there have been some contracts awarded to a number of agencies in the region to issue permits.
One example is citizens of Cambridge Bay or Taloyoak go to Kugluktuk to request their permits.
That process is being reviewed with our administration now being handled in Nunavut.
We are looking at trying to use agencies in the community that can issue permits on our behalf, by communities where there is no restriction.
Within the next few months, we will be looking into that and how we can address that.
One of the things that we have also done in the past around issuing permits, is we have contacted agencies or hamlets.
One example is the hamlet of Cambridge Bay, whether they would be interested in issuing permits on our behalf.
At that time, Cambridge Bay refused to take on that responsibility.
This time around when we are looking at improving that service, we looked also to outside, perhaps small business, to issue those permits in place of hamlets or any other agencies.
In the news release, the minister mentioned that there would be increased annual revenues to Nunavut from the repatriation of the liquor operations to Nunavut from the Northwest Territories.
I am wondering if the minister could tell me what the net revenues would be to Nunavut from the repatriation?
There are two areas.
First of all, the management of the Liquor Warehouse was managed through the Northwest Territories until we transferred that responsibility to Rankin Inlet a few weeks ago.
Revenues that is associated to O&M and salary dollars was spent in the Northwest Territories.
With the transfer and opening of the Rankin warehouse with that money will be spent in Nunavut and people will be in positions and the leasing will be with organizations.
In terms of the kind of revenues that are associated with sales, we’ve only started the operation in Rankin Inlet last few months, so at the end of this fiscal year we have to have better ideas on how much sales actually took place in Nunavut.
I don’t know what the exact numbers until one fiscal year has passed and we are able to review the sales this year.
I appreciate the Minister’s response.
In the same news release last month the Minister announced the Rankin Inlet operations.
The Minister of Health was directly quoted as saying, “In the past Nunavut has experienced negative social repercussions of alcohol without receiving the revenues to educate and make alcohol awareness a priority.
In future years that are generated by this transfer will address these issues.”
Mr. Speaker, this statement clearly implies the extra money generated from liquor sales will go directly to treatment programs.
However the Minister of Finance later back tracks these comments during an interview that I heard.
My question to the Minister is why did the Minister of Health suggest that the revenues go to treatment if the government had no intention in doing this?
First of all, the sales of liquor are in a revolving fund.
We purchase the items and we sell the items.
That affects zero.
Where there are dollars is in the issues in the permits.
The idea of taking funds from sales and putting it towards initiatives to me, the approach that I would like to take in the whole thing is that we have a better idea by having the responsibility of liquor in Nunavut, on how much is spent on the liquor compared to the branch and services that maybe offered by other agencies of government around education, around preventive issues.
There is a whole number of issues.
As a government any sales or any tax collected if you have tobacco income tax.
We don’t have that tobacco tax and put it towards tobacco education initiatives.
It goes basically to general revenue and as a government we set those priorities.
By having the responsibility within Nunavut we’ll have a better idea on how much money is spent on liquor as compared to what we do for health around alcohol treatment programs, around policing, around committees that is established in each committee to manage liquor, the liquor board.
So the overall is it will be under Nunavut.
It is important to keep in mind that we don’t collect revenues and gear it towards where we collect from.
It goes to a general revenue and then we allocate that funding accordingly.
Before we go to Item 8, we will take a lunch break for 40 minutes.
>>Committee recessed at 12:24 and resumed at 13:11
Item 12: Petitions
Petition 004 – 2(2): Co-op Refunds and Income Support
I like to table a petition from the constituency community of Pond Inlet.
It’s in regards to co-op refunds and income support.
(interpretation ends): Mr. Speaker, 161 residents of Pond Inlet are petitioning the Government of Nunavut to amend the Social Assistance regulations so that Social Assistance benefits are not reduced by the amount refunded to the co-operative members also on Income Support clients.
This issue is very important for people living in the remote communities of the High Arctic including my communities of Arctic Bay, Resolute Bay, and Grise Fiord where the cost of living is extremely high.
I was pleased to note from the budget speech that was issued, has been considered by the Government.
I know that the response to this petition will be favorable.
Hopefully that will go ahead.
Item. 13.
Item 13: Reports of Standing and Special Committees
Committee Report 003 – 2(2): Appointment of the Languages Commissioner of Nunavut
As co-Chair of the Standing Committee Ajauqtiit, I am pleased to report to the House on the appointment of the Languages Commissioner for Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, the Standing Committee Ajauqtiit has undertaken another selection process for this important position.
All five members of the Committee had conducted interviews and selection process for the Languages Commissioner.
Mr. Speaker, we conducted in-person interviews with five of the strongest candidates, including reviewing some written submissions from each candidate detailing the candidate’s vision for languages in the Territory and role of the office.
After careful consideration and assessment of the applicants, the Standing Committee Ajauqtiit, unanimously recommended the appointment of Mr. Johnny Pujjuut Kusugak of Rankin Inlet.
Mr. Speaker, the Languages Commissioner must be a strong, committed voice for the promotion and preservation of Nunavut’s official languages and dialects.
At the same time, he or she must have the diplomacy to mediate solution, have sensitivity to the aspiration of different language groups and possess the integrity and administrative competence to deal with matters in a fair and timely manner.
Above all, he or she must be a leader in the Inuit tradition able to hold the respect and confidence of all Inuit elders and youth, as well as French and English-speaking residents of Nunavut.
We believe, Mr. Speaker, that Mr. Kusugak does possess these qualities and is the most suitable candidate for the position.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Kusugak was born on August 13, 1959 in Repulse Bay, Northwest Territories.
He began a career in education in 1989 as the Head Supervisor at the Kivalliq Hall in Rankin Inlet.
He later attended the Eastern Arctic Teacher Education Program graduating with a teacher’s certificate from Nunavut Arctic College and McGill University in 1993.
In 1996, Mr. Kusugak was given his first opportunity to work as a senior manager.
He took on the position of Special Advisor at Indian and Northern Affairs Canada.
In 1998, he returned to the field of education as President of Nunavut Arctic College.
Mr. Kusugak then served as the Executive Director of the Kivalliq Inuit Association in Rankin Inlet.
Mr. Speaker, I move that the report of the Standing Committee be received and adopted by the House.
Later today I will move the appropriate motion to recommend his appointment.