EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Again I assure Mr. Aupaluktuq that staff will look into his concern. I would just like to reiterate his comments. Our frontline workers, not only in Baker Lake but in every community in Nunavut, are very much appreciated by our government and all of us here in the House and we should always take the opportunity to send them our thanks for their hard work every day.
I would like to welcome the minister and his officials here today. Earlier today in my Member’s Statement, I stated the fact that the population in Sanikiluaq has more than doubled in the time that the health centre was built and the need for a new health centre has not gone away.
Can the minister explain why the health centre replacement project no longer appears on the five-year capital plan?
Minister Peterson, tell him why.
I thank Mr. Rumbolt for his question.
Mr. Chairman, as a government, it’s no secret that we have all talked about it and debated it. It has been an issue for a long time.
It is difficult to fund all the projects we do need in Nunavut, especially health centres. In the case of Sanikiluaq, we had to push it back a couple of years. We plan to do some more preplanning.
It’s a function of cash flow and other projects. We couldn’t overwhelm the system. It is still a high priority for our department and our government.
Mr. Rumbolt: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the minister for the explanation.
One of the pressures on our health centre, again, from my Member’s Statement today, is the overcrowded situation at our health centre. I’m sure the minister is aware of the amount of staff that are having to use that facility and the “overcrowdedness” that they’re having. Can the minister explain what process his department goes through to obtain office space for its staff?
I’m going to ask my deputy minister to answer that question.
So I’m just going to go back to, I think, May of last year. I had the opportunity at that point to go to your community, Member Rumbolt, and at the time, the minister was Mr. Curley and I think Minister Shewchuk was there as well.
So the things that you have highlighted are important.
We had the opportunity to see the Sanikiluaq Health Centre firsthand. The leasing aspect of the government is actually with the Department of Community and Government Services, so our department has worked with CGS to move this process along.
I think that we did communicate to you at one point that we had identified some possible space.
The cost, I guess, is a bit prohibitive in terms of what we would get in terms of value.
I know there have been discussions here about getting value for money in terms of the government’s budgets and whatnot.
So we will re-engage with CGS to see if we can move this process forward. I know that you’re frustrated, as are your constituents, but I would also say that our staff is somewhat frustrated too. So it is a priority.
Unfortunately, we have just not moved as quickly as we would have liked.
Getting back to my Member’s Statement, in there, I had asked that if officials would be willing to engage with the community, maybe visit the community, and look for suggestions and ideas of what to do.
Will the minister commit to working with CGS and maybe arranging a meeting to go to Sanikiluaq, where they can talk to officials and come up with possible solutions?
I thank Mr. Rumbolt for the question and suggestion.
Mr. Chairman, if I can’t make it, I’ll have some of my officials get down there, but I really would like to get down to Sanikiluaq. I watched a film up in Fairbanks, in Alaska, at the circumpolar conference and it was about Sanikiluaq, so I would really like to get down there and visit the good folks.
In regard to the Taloyoak Health Centre, they built a health centre in Repulse Bay. Do you anticipate any delays or additional expenditures for this project in Taloyoak?
There may be some additional funding required to do preplanning and some site work, but we’re not 100 percent sure. We’re working CGS on that.
I understood that the Repulse Bay Health Centre Replacement Project… . Is that the same as what the Taloyoak is going to get?
Yes, it’s the same design.
Although it’s the same design, the location and the community is always the factor, so we had to do some site work to make sure that it fits properly on the site.
We tend to save costs when we use the same design.
The government endeavours to use the same design in multiple communities to save on architecture fees and design fees.
As I said earlier, the only real change would be the location in the community, which may be a factor.
Taloyoak residents are deeply appreciative of the proposed new health centre in our community as it took many years of prioritizing the health centre to realize it. Apparently the health centre design had already been printed, and we were informed of the type of health centre we would receive.
However, the design plans seem to have disappeared and we have now seen four different plans for the new health centre, and we are hopeful that we will get the new health centre next year and I am grateful for this facility, especially in light of my role as the Member of the Legislative Assembly for Taloyoak and on their behalf, I thank the government.
The other question I would like to ask, which I raised earlier as an issue relates to the Kitikmeot region, and whether the government has any plans for a mental health facility.
In the Baffin region, there is a mental health plan ready for implementation. Does the government have any capital plans for a mental health facility in the Kitikmeot?
I thank Ms. Ugyuk for her comments.
Mr. Chairman, the funding for capital projects for mental health in this community was discussed at the winter sitting. We want to roll that out and then we will expand it to the other regions with facilities.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Yes, I thank the minister for the understandable responses to my questions.
My secondary question relates to capital plans for a healing centre for addictions.
Can you provide an estimate of when we can expect a healing centre for Nunavummiut in our future?
I thank Ms. Ugyuk for her concerns.
Mr. Chairman, at this time, we’re working on the mobile addictions treatment pilot project in the Kitikmeot in Cambridge Bay, but we don’t have capital funds identified for addictions treatment facilities.
While we are reviewing minor projects, I have a question related to it. Can these minor project funds be reallocated towards a women’s shelter or facility? I refer here specifically to a women’s shelter.
Mr. Chairman, no, not in this budget.
We’re on page F-3.
Yes, a very simple question. I know the minister is welcome to the committee from my constituency. I know you work hard to bring up to date all the capital infrastructure requirements of Nunavutmiut, particularly with health.
I think, somewhat, we’re making headway in Nunavut and also those smaller communities to hear you make some statements earlier with respect to Qikiqtarjuaq.
That’s encouraging.
These smaller and older facilities are trailer kind of units that must eventually be replaced for our growing population.
I was curious with all the work that has been going on in updating and replacing facilities that have been on track for the last few years, five years or so, within the five-year plan. I was curious as to why the work plan or work schedules for construction in places like Arctic Bay sort of disappeared from the radar.
After all, they always have been on the five-year plan and the details were completed.
My question is simple: what took you, as the minister, to drastically change the work plan for Arctic Bay in favour of the one in the Kitikmeot region?
Mr. Chairman, the Taloyoak Health Centre was the one closer to the next on the schedule. We had to move the Arctic Bay back because of the fiscal framework and the other capital projects are very pressing capital projects that other departments deem necessary, for example, fuel tank farms in some of the communities. So it’s not that Arctic Bay isn’t important; we’re hoping to keep it on track and if things worked out, possibly even move it forward.
I think when the five-year plans are put in place, we tend to abide or stick to them in order to ensure that there’s no appearance of any political interference.
It was always ahead, considering the fact that there were a number of major renovations made to a number of units out there within the previous other administration.
So I’m a bit amazed that a decision could be made that way without any real justification, from my standpoint.
I know that there didn’t appear to be any compelling reasons prior to other years that the project had to be scaled back.
They were a lot more advanced in terms of the design phase, planning, and budget-wise.
So could the minister again ensure that he will continue to abide by the five-year planning process while he is the minister?
I thank Mr. Curley for his question. Mr. Chairman, I know Mr. Curley has been a strong supporter of health centres in Nunavut.
His comments earlier about Qikiqtarjuaq support that. He will recall from our time together on that side in the Second Assembly that we did push for the… . I think it was Pond Inlet that came and then Repulse Bay, Taloyoak, and Arctic Bay.
We did get Repulse Bay done and we’re going to get Taloyoak. It’s coming and subject to approval, and then Arctic Bay. So I will assure the [member] that we will stick to the five-year plan.
Let me remind everyone that we are on page F-3.
Total Capital Expenditures. $24,620,000.
Go back to page F-2. Department Summary.
Health and Social Services. Detail of Expenditures. Total Capital Expenditures. $24,620,000.
Does the committee agree that we have concluded with the capital estimates of the Department of Health and Social Services?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. At this time, while we’re concluding the department, I would like to ask Minister Peterson if he has any closing remarks. Minister Peterson.
Hon. Keith Peterson: Yes, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank yourself and the committee for your excellent questions and scrutiny of our capital budget for the Department of Health and Social Services, not only today but during standing committee meetings earlier this fall.
I would like to also thank my staff in the Department of Health and Social Services and the deputy minister today for their work in preparing this, and also to the cooperation and support of the departments of Finance and Community and Government Services as well.
I know it’s challenging at the best of times to deliver all of these projects on time and on budget, but we are striving to make progress in that area.
We will continue to lobby to get more infrastructure dollars so that we can put badly needed health infrastructure in our communities and in Nunavut to serve our residents. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister Peterson and Mr. Ma. (interpretation) Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the witness out.
At this time, my colleagues, we have time to proceed to the next department.
We will now be dealing with the capital estimates for the Department of Economic Development and Transportation.
I would now like to ask Minister Taptuna to go to the witness table and make his opening comments.
Welcome, Minister Taptuna. I will now give you an opportunity to make your opening comments. Minister Taptuna.
Bill 41 – Appropriation (Capital) Act, 2013-2014 – Economic Development and Transportation – Consideration in Committee
Hon. Peter Taptuna: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to be here today again to present my department’s 2013-14 capital plan to the Committee of the Whole. The Department of Economic Development and Transportation proposes a $20,075,000 capital plan for the 2013-14 fiscal year.
Mr. Chairman, the focus of this plan is improvements to airports and airside surfaces, as well as upgrades to airport equipment.
In addition, we have allocated $12,200,000 to advance the Iqaluit International Airport improvement project.
This funding will be used to develop comprehensive documentation and planning to successfully deliver this project under a private-public partnership model.
As I have said in the past, the infrastructure at Iqaluit International Airport is approaching the end of its useful life cycle. Improvements to the airport, which serves half of Nunavut’s communities, are our largest and most urgent infrastructure need.
The Cambridge Bay and Rankin Inlet airport improvement projects are driven by a need to enhance the safety of these facilities: in Rankin Inlet, by expanding the apron and in Cambridge Bay, by widening the runway.
Both projects will leverage Building Canada funds and will improve the long-term efficiency of all passenger and freight operations in the Kivalliq and Kitikmeot regions.
We are proposing to allocate $2.6 million for Rankin Inlet and $1,475,000 for Cambridge Bay.
Mr. Chairman, our Transportation Strategy addresses the need to rehabilitate and improve our community airports.
We have included $400,000 for a major surface overlay at the Kugluktuk Airport and $400,000 to initiate design for a new air terminal building at the Taloyoak Airport.
Mr. Chairman, these are the major airport projects we will be undertaking in the 2013-14 fiscal year.
There are also some other projects under $250,000 which are grouped together under the heading “Small Capital Projects.”
We have allocated a total of $800,000 to these projects, which will include new runway inspection vehicles for three communities – Arviat, Coral Harbour, and Clyde River – as well as maintenance equipment, such as compactors and blower attachments, for Qikiqtarjuaq, Iqaluit, Chesterfield Inlet, Cambridge Bay, and Arviat.
Several larger equipment purchases will be made under the “Minor Capital Project” heading. Under this heading, we have allocated $1.7 million to purchase loaders for Resolute Bay, Chesterfield Inlet, Pond Inlet, and Kugaaruk, as well as a grader for Rankin Inlet.
Mr. Chairman, we have included $500,000 in this capital plan to make minor improvements to community marine facilities.
The inclusion of these funds demonstrates our commitment to the development of marine infrastructure, which will encourage the Department of Fisheries and Oceans to continue and expand their own investments in small craft harbours in Nunavut.
We plan to make the majority of the funding under our Small Craft Harbours Program available to communities under contribution agreements so that they can carry out their own improvements to marine facilities.
Mr. Chairman, this capital plan was put together with much consideration given to prudent spending, which will help to achieve the government’s goal of bringing the overall budget back to balance.
In order to do this, like other departments, we had to defer some very worthwhile projects. Though this plan is financially prudent, we have ensured that it incorporates projects that focus on safety, which is our number one concern.
I believe that this plan is in line with the department’s mandate as we continue to strengthen the partnerships with the federal government, with industry, and with our communities to ensure that the investments we make in Nunavut have a lasting value for economic and social future of our territory.
I will be glad to answer any questions from my colleagues and committee members.
Mr. Rumbolt: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I do. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am pleased to provide opening comments on behalf of the Standing Committee on Community and Economic Development concerning its review of the proposed 2013-14 Capital Estimates of the Department of Economic Development and Transportation.
Members note that the department’s proposed capital budget for 2013-14 is $20,075,000.
The department’s capital budget was $14.4 million for the 2012-13 fiscal year and $3,925,000 for the 2011-12 fiscal year.
The department’s proposed 2013-14 capital budget is focused primarily on transportation-related infrastructure.
Mr. Chairman, members again engaged in a comprehensive dialogue with the minister concerning the issue of small craft harbours during his recent appearance before the standing committee.
As members will recall, the minister tabled the government’s updated Nunavut Transportation Strategy in the Legislative Assembly on June 5, 2009.
Some of the objectives of the strategy are to “implement the federal Small Craft Harbours Program in Nunavut,” “act on the Nunavut Small Craft Harbour Report,” and “extend the Small Craft Harbours program to other communities.”
The Department of Economic Development and Transportation’s proposed 2013-14 capital estimates include $500,000 in funding for the GN’s contribution towards the construction of small craft harbours in Nunavut communities.
This amount has been included in the department’s annual capital estimates since the 2009-2010 fiscal year. The department has indicated that this funding is to be used to “undertake studies, obtain permits, undertake design work, undertake minor marine improvements and partner with the [federal] Department of Fisheries [and Oceans] on funding major works if the opportunity arises.”
In June of 2009, the Senate Committee on Fisheries and Oceans released a report titled “Nunavut Marine Fisheries: Quotas and Harbours.”
The Senate Committee recommended that the Government of Canada “move forward to develop and implement, in collaboration with the Government of Nunavut, the harbour development plan recommended by the DFO-Nunavut Harbours Working Committee in its 2005 Nunavut Small Craft Harbours Report.”
The response indicated that “There are no immediate plans to construct additional commercial fishing harbours in Nunavut at this time.
Although members remain supportive of efforts to obtain federal support for investments in this area, it is recognized that construction costs for major marine facilities can be in the millions of dollars.
The standing committee again encourages the department to closely examine options for feasible and affordable improvements to existing community marine infrastructure that focus on the safety of boaters and protection of equipment, and which can be undertaken with available resources.
I would again note that the 2005 Nunavut Small Craft Harbours Report indicates that “Lack of Nunavut harbour infrastructure has resulted in at least two documented cases of loss of life in recent years.
In 2002, a Pond Inlet fisher drowned while paddling his dinghy from shore to his fishing vessel moored offshore.
Mr. Chairman, in June of this year, the Legislative Assembly approved an $871,000 capital carryover for the department’s small craft harbours project.
The standing committee continues to encourage the minister to table an annual report in the Legislative Assembly concerning the department’s actual expenditures in this area, including a detailed list of which communities have received and utilized funding under contribution agreements with the department.
Mr. Chairman, in June of 2009, the Legislative Assembly approved $925,000 in capital funding for the planning and design of the Iqaluit Regional Marine Facility to “meet the needs of marine re-supply as well as local boat owners and operators.”
In June of 2010, the Legislative Assembly approved a $532,000 capital carryover for this project.
It is the standing committee’s understanding that the cost to complete a deep water dock would be approximately $100 million. Members encourage the minister to provide regular updates to the Legislative Assembly concerning his department’s efforts to partner with the federal government and industry to identify ways to fund this project.
Mr. Chairman, some of the objectives of the government’s updated Nunavut Transportation Strategy are to “assure the integrity of the Nunavut transportation system by ensuring every community has infrastructure adequate for its needs within that system” and to “enhance the current airport systems.”
Other objectives are to “rationalize government use of the transportation system” and “revisit the government’s Air Services Study.”
Members note that the department’s proposed 2013-14 capital estimates include $17,075,000 in funding for a number of airport improvement projects, the most significant of which is the Iqaluit International Airport project, which is being undertaken as a public-private partnership.
Members will recall that on September 20, 2012, a federal-territorial news release announced that the P3 Canada Fund will contribute up to $77.3 million to this project.
Members encourage the department to be mindful of the potential impact of major economic development projects, such as the Mary River mine, on the development of new regional hub airports.
Members also encourage the minister to provide regular updates to the Legislative Assembly concerning his department’s work with such entities as NAV Canada and the Northern Air Transport Association concerning such matters as Community Aerodrome Radio Stations, navigational aids, and airport infrastructure.
Mr. Chairman, a major transportation infrastructure project with which the Government of Nunavut has been involved is the development of a Manitoba-Nunavut Road. On September 1, 2010, the Government of Nunavut and the Government of Manitoba jointly announced that the two jurisdictions would be undertaking “initial consultations on a cost-benefit study on a Manitoba-Nunavut all-weather road.”
Members encourage the minister to provide regular updates to the Legislative Assembly on this initiative and to table information concerning the business case for it.
The department’s 2010-11 capital estimates included $700,000 in funding for a new Kivalliq regional visitor centre.
In June of 2011, the Legislative Assembly approved a $697,000 capital carryover for this project.
The department has indicated that “the design of the visitor centre is anticipated to be complete in July 2012” and that “the project is expected to be built adjacent to or attached to the Rankin Inlet Air Terminal Building.”
Members note that although the department’s 2012-13 capital estimates included $100,000 in funding for renovations to existing visitor centres, the proposed 2013-14 capital estimates focus on transportation and safety-related projects.
During the minister’s recent appearance before the standing committee, members were advised that the minister anticipates tabling an updated tourism strategy in the Legislative Assembly prior to the end of the current fiscal year, and that this strategy will include consideration of tourism-related infrastructure issues. Members look forward to reviewing this new strategy.
The department’s proposed 2013-14 capital estimates include $2.5 million in funding for the acquisition of mobile equipment for Nunavut airports, including runway inspection vehicles, loaders, and vibratory compactors.
Members also encourage the department to work closely with municipal governments concerning the administration of agreements regarding municipal use of GN owned airport mobile equipment assets for the provision of essential services in clearly defined circumstances.
Mr. Chairman, in June of 2012, the Legislative Assembly approved approximately $12.0 million in capital carryovers for the department, including projects for new airport equipment shelters and airport improvements.
The department’s proposed 2013-14 capital estimates do not include any funding for projects such as new meat or fish processing plants.
While members recognize that federal investments may be essential for realizing a number of long-term capital projects, the department is encouraged to not lose sight of its economic development responsibilities. The standing committee also recognizes the role of the Nunavut Development Corporation in this area.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my opening comments on the proposed 2013-14 Capital Estimates of the Department of Economic Development and Transportation. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Rumbolt. Mr. Ningeongan.
Mr. Ningeongan: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. At this time, I would like to move a motion to report progress. Thank you.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Ningeongan. There is a motion on the floor and the motion is not debatable.
Item 20. Report of the Committee of the Whole. Mr. Enook.