EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) My questions are directed to the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation.
Mr. Speaker, on March 18 of this year, I asked the minister for an update on the status of the government’s negotiation of a development partnership agreement with Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation concerning the Mary River project, which is of great importance to the residents of Pond Inlet.
At that time, the minister told me that this process would begin once an Inuit Impact and Benefit Agreement had been signed.
Mr. Speaker, as I noted in my Member’s Statement yesterday, the IIBA between the Qikiqtani Inuit Association and Baffinland was signed last week.
Now that the IIBA has been signed, can the minister indicate when negotiations between the GN and Baffinland will begin for a development partnership agreement?
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate the Qikiqtaaluk Inuit Association and the proponent for coming up with an Inuit Impact and Benefit Agreement. It’s a milestone and the signing took place on Friday. So congratulations to both parties and the Inuit of the Qikiqtaaluk region.
Mr. Speaker, in January 2012, we updated our development partnership agreement. Within that agreement, we updated some tangible net objectives that we want to see in there as a government. Of course, those are: education, training, more infrastructure and other various benefits that may flow through this government and the proponent.
Again, both parties do have to agree. Through this development partnership agreement, it gives the proponent, the mining companies an avenue to qualify or be eligible for the fuel tax rebate, which is administered through the Department of Finance.
Mr. Speaker, we await a formal letter from the proponent to commence negotiations on a DPA.
Of course, it’s not mandatory, both for the proponent and the government. There’s got to be agreement and benefits to each party for an agreement to be signed.
As I have noted on a number of occasions, the Nunavut Impact Review Board’s final hearing report on the Mary River project indicated that a development partnership agreement could result in a number of benefits, including “organizational infrastructure, physical infrastructure and communications infrastructure.”
Can the minister indicate what the Government of Nunavut’s priorities will be when negotiating a new development partnership agreement with Baffinland?
Absolutely, we have to give certain clarity to the proponent. Within our new policy, there are objectives that we will have to try to meet and of course, it’s education and training, new infrastructure, and community capacity building.
Through these more open discussions on the net benefits that we do want to receive from the proponent, it has to benefit the communities through the Government of Nunavut and it also has to be beneficial for the proponent.
Mr. Speaker, if there’s no agreement that disqualifies or the proponent will not be eligible for the fuel tax rebate under the Petroleum Products Tax Act, they do have to enter into a development partnership agreement to qualify for the fuel tax rebate.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) As the minister will understand and appreciate, it is essential that the community of Pond Inlet be closely consulted on its priorities.
Will the minister commit to me today that the community and municipal leadership of Pond Inlet will be formally consulted and listened to as the Government of Nunavut prepares to negotiate a development partnership agreement?
We do have our regional sustainable economic monitoring committees through our regional offices in the three regions.
They inform my department of potential benefits that the community can receive from the mining companies.
Of course, we do consult communities when it comes to negotiating DPAs.
Question 721 – 3(3): Outstanding Debt to GNWT (Elliott)
Mr. Speaker, over the years, I have noted that our counterparts in the Northwest Territories regularly raise the issue of outstanding amounts owed to them by the Government of Nunavut.
I understand that the majority of this debt is due to health services that have been provided over the years to Nunavut residents at the Stanton Regional Hospital in Yellowknife.
Can the minister provide an update on exactly how much money the Government of Nunavut currently owes the Government of the Northwest Territories and what interest rate is being charged on that debt?
I thank Mr. Elliott for that question. I have to apologize, Mr. Speaker.
I just don’t have that kind of information in my briefing binder, precise amounts, but we appreciate the Northwest Territories Stanton hospital. We had a quick tour of the Stanton hospital with our colleagues, John Ningark and Jeannie Ugyuk, in late July.
We talked to the chief executive officers and we have an excellent working relationship with the Stanton hospital serving the Kitikmeot. We did discuss some financial issues.
I am aware that the hospital and the Government of Nunavut Department of Health are working through those issues.
I just can’t provide that level of detail at this time of the day.
As the chair of the Public Accounts Committee, public accounts and spending of the public money is very important.
Mr. Speaker, last week, my colleague from South Baffin asked a number of questions about the difficulties faced by our government officials in collecting fines across the territory.
It’s interesting that we, as a government, also find ourselves in the delinquent position of not paying our dues.
My understanding is that the amount is close to $10 million.
Can the minister describe what steps the Government of the Northwest Territories has made to collect on the funds owed to them?
Perhaps we can learn from their example.
Mr. Speaker, I don’t think it’s any secret in this House and certainly not in Canada that the Government of Nunavut has made great strides in their financial reporting. We have tabled our public accounts on time for the last two years in a row. It looks like we will be doing it again the third year, and that’s very good progress for our government.
The Auditor General of Canada is very pleased with us and Minister Flaherty, the Minister of Finance for Canada, is very pleased. We are making good progress.
I can assure Mr. Elliott that our government and the Government of Northwest Territories are in good conversation and good dialogue to discuss any accounts payable and accounts receivable between our respective governments.
Can the minister describe what steps the Government of Nunavut will take to ensure that we pay off our debt to the Government of the Northwest Territories in a timely manner?
I appreciate Mr. Elliott working valiantly on behalf of the Government of the Northwest Territories to have the Government of Nunavut pay their bills.
Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, the Government of Nunavut and the Government of Northwest Territories have a very good working relationship. We will address the issue. I can’t give the details, but I assure Mr. Elliott that the level of concern that we have is not as elevated as his concern is.
Members will note that the allotted time for question period is expired and as such, we will move on in our orders of the day.
Did you say five or six?
I think it was five.
The member is seeking unanimous consent to go back to Item 5 in the Orders of the Day. Are there any nays?
There being none. Item 5 in the Orders of the Day. Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery.
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I quickly checked the orders of the day. I thought perhaps that I got the numbers mixed up.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to welcome a lady from my riding to the Gallery today, Ms. Vicki Aitaok. She’s a long-term resident of Cambridge Bay and of course, she’s from the Kitikmeot.
Mr. Speaker, she’s one of the board members of the Nunavut Housing Corporation. She’s the owner of Arctic Closet gift shops in Cambridge Bay. She organizes all the tours, coordinates visits with the increasing [number of] cruise ships that come to our community every summer.
I welcome Vicki to the Gallery. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery. Welcome to the Gallery, Vicki.
Committee Report 040 – 3(3): Bill 64, An Act to Amend the Liquor Act (Ningeongan)
I wish to report that Bill 64, An Act to Amend the Liquor Act, has been reviewed by the Standing Committee on Legislation and that the bill is ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.
Bill 64 will be placed on the order paper for September 12.
Tabling of Documents. Mr. Aupaluktuq.
Tabled Document 395 – 3(3): Anconia Victory Lake Project (Aupaluktuq)
I wish to table today a collection of documents concerning the Anconia Victory Lake Project.
This collection includes items from the Baker Lake Hunters and Trappers Organization and the Beverly and Qamanirjuaq Caribou Management Board.
I encourage all members to review these with care.
Tabled Document 396 – 3(3): 2012-2013 Annual Report - Nunavut Business Credit Corporation (Taptuna)
I am pleased to table the 2012-13 Annual Report for the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation.
Tabled Document 397 – 3(3): Correspondence from a Concerned Parent (Elliott)
Tabled Document 398 – 3(3): CMAJ Article on Suicide (Elliott)
Mr. Speaker, I would like to table a letter from one of my constituents, a concerned parent, regarding the implementation of the Qulliq bilingual education model in the community of Arctic Bay.
This a good example of parental involvement and it is my hope that this kind of activism will lead to situations being addressed and dealt with in a timely and effective manner.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to table an article from the Journal of the Canadian Medical Association which appeared in its online issue today, on World Suicide Prevention Day.  Mr. Speaker, all too often we turn away from difficult truths.
We don’t mention them. We don’t address them. I feel it is important that we look our challenges in the eye and learn how to overcome them.
I encourage my colleagues to read this article. Even though it talks about the high number of suicides amongst young Inuit boys, there is a message of hope from a young man who explains why he decided not to commit suicide.
This is what we need to focus on.
Tabled Document 399 – 3(3): Director of Child and Family Services Annual Report 2012-2013 (Ell)
Tabled Document 400 – 3(3): Nunavut Status of Women Council Annual Report 2011-2012 (Ell)
Tabled Document 401 – 3(3): Nunavut Status of Women Council Annual Report 2012-2013 (Ell)
I have three tabling items.
I am pleased to table the Annual Report of the Director of Child and Family Services for 2012-13.
Mr. Speaker, I am also pleased to table the 2011-12 and the 2012-13 annual reports for the Qulliit Nunavut Status of Women Council.
Bills 32, 40, 68, and 69, and Ministers’ Statement 299 – 3(3) with Mr. Ningeongan in the Chair.
Chairman (Mr. Ningeongan) (interpretation): Good afternoon, members.
Good afternoon to Nunavummiut watching the proceedings of the Committee of the Whole.
I welcome them and I welcome my colleagues.
Mr. Aupaluktuq (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Today, we wish to continue with the review of Minister’s Statement 299 – 3(3) and, once concluded, we will proceed with the review of Bill 68, Bill 69, and Bill 32.
Does the committee agree to continue with our review of Minister’s Statement 299 – 3(3)?
To my right is Mr. Alain Barriault, President and CEO of the Nunavut Housing Corporation. On my left is Mr. Eugene Lysy, Chairman of the Board of the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Taptuna. I thank your witnesses for appearing before the committee.
Yesterday, we were on general comments, if you can recall. Prior to going to that issue, I would like to urge the members to stick to the subject at hand regarding the allocation of houses to the Nunavut communities.
We can proceed. On my list of names, I have Ms. Ugyuk.
We are dealing with Minister’s Statement 299 – 3(3).
I will be brief. (interpretation ends) How many houses do Nunavummiut need right now to meet our housing crisis?
Can Ms. Ugyuk repeat that question there, please.
Ms. Ugyuk, please repeat your question.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) How many houses do Nunavummiut need right now to meet our housing crisis?
The need right now is a little over 3,500 units.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) How much will all that cost?
Approximately $1.5 billion.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you for the responses, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) How many houses are required to meet the annual growth in Nunavut?
Anywhere from 90 to 100 units to meet the demand of the growing population.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) What has the Nunavut Housing Corporation, the Government of Nunavut, and NTI done to ask Ottawa for help?
On an ongoing basis, we do communicate our needs to the federal government and I’m sure NTI has done that also.
That was previously done for the Nunavut Housing Trust and Canada’s Economic Action Plan funding that we did get in the past.
The Nunavut Housing Corporation has come up with a strategy and collected data that we could bring forward to the federal government with reasonable facts, with facts that are related to what we are asking for, to try and meet our housing crisis in Nunavut.
Thank you very much for your responses.
In Rankin Inlet, the Prime Minister and Leona Aglukkaq, the Nunavut MP, was there. Even when they had a meeting with the Premier, if I could go through your department, was there a change in the housing issues to date?
When new houses spring up in the community, it seems like everybody is scrambling to get on the list to try to move into the house. What are the Nunavut government and the Premier doing to alleviate some of the housing shortages we have up here in Nunavut?
Minister Taptuna. I believe she wanted to go through your department to find out what the Prime Minister, our MP, and the Nunavut government are doing to alleviate the housing crisis.
I wasn’t a participant in that discussion with the Prime Minister.
The Premier would be in a better position to respond to that question.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Taptuna. (interpretation ends) Madam Premier.
On more than one occasion within a year, I’ve had meetings with the Prime Minister.
Housing is an ongoing issue that we bring up on any occasion, not only I, but the other cabinet members, including having discussions on the same issue with the Nunavut MP.
I am very pleased that the federal government has allotted some monies for Nunavut. We were given $100 million. Nunavut was the only one who was the recipient of that money.
Again, I have told the Prime Minister on more than one occasion that I appreciate getting some funds from the federal government, but I try to make sure that he is aware that at all times, we need additional houses.
As the minister responsible for the housing corporation indicated, we need approximately 3,500 housing units. Every year, we have to build 90 houses in order to meet the needs of the people of Nunavut. We are in a dire situation right now.
It is something that we will have to keep lobbying the federal government on at all times.
We are working together, going into partnership among the birthright organizations, the federal government, and the Nunavut government, because this is a very important issue.
I thank the Premier for her response.
We lack housing, but the federal government, as I understand it, has not given us funding for homelessness. I would like to hear more about this issue.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Ms. Ugyuk. (interpretation ends) Madam Premier, (interpretation) I believe that question was directed to you.
If you understood the question, it was in regard to no money being set aside for homelessness.
There are an increasing number of homeless people in Nunavut.
There is an annual increase and we are starting to integrate that into the planning system of the government. I have kept homelessness and the shortage of housing in the same topic. Homelessness is under the Department of Family Services.
Until now, we have not received funding specifically to target them separately from the federal government.
Chairman: Qujannamiik, Madam Premier. (interpretation) Mr. Oshutapik, I have you on my list. Go ahead.
I also thank the minister for being before us to review the housing issues.
My question is related to how housing units are allocated to which communities, especially with respect to the methodology that we hear about that was based on data and numbers. It is also listed in the statement as well that by using this methodology, they arrived at a decision to allocate housing, although they weren’t able to allocate housing to all the communities.
That is what I understood and which is why I would like clarification.
These numbers related to the housing shortages in all of our communities based on the waiting lists formed the basis for the allocations.
Will this be the future practice whereby housing units will be allocated using the waiting lists whenever we are fortunate enough to receive federal funding for our housing needs? The statistics have been stated as being the best method for this.
So my question is: will this new allocation methodology be the only one used in the future?
Mr. Chairman, we plan on using that methodology until a comparative equalization is across the board throughout Nunavut.
That’s the most transparent and fairest way possible. When we compare small communities to the major communities, then these small communities will not get a fair share of units allocated.
Mr. Chairman, in the past, Pangnirtung has received 55 units through the last construction season, the last round of funding, and through the Nunavut Housing Trust, they did receive 40 units.
Another funding program, Canada’s Economic Action Plan, through the Affordable Housing Initiative, they did receive 15, to bring the total up to 55 units in Pangnirtung.
We intend to use that methodology until we see equalization throughout our communities in Nunavut.
Mr. Oshutapik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also thank the minister for that response, although it raises another question.
Based on your response, previously if I understood the response, I wasn’t going to have any further questions.
However, the question I have is based on your response.
With respect to all communities here in Nunavut, when could we expect or can you estimate how many years it would take to have the communities become equitable in terms of housing? This is based on your previous response.
Mr. Chairman, there are numbers compared with the waiting list and percentages of housing units within that community.
If I can, Mr. Chairman, I’ll have Mr. Barriault elaborate and try and respond with detailed information for the question.
Currently, there are some large discrepancies, as we noted yesterday, between some of our communities in Nunavut.
Of the communities being allocated pubic housing through the $100 million, the average waitlist as a percentage of stock is 34 percent, which means those communities are short one house for every three houses they have.
In comparison to this, the communities that have not been chosen for allocation in this round of funding have an average need of 17 percent, which is less than one house for every five that they have.
There is quite a discrepancy in the needs between our communities. After the allocations of the $100 million, the average need of communities that have been allocated is reduced to 25 percent compared to 17 percent on the communities that have not been allocated housing.
As a result of this new construction, the needs of some communities in Nunavut will be more in line with the needs of other communities.
There are still a number of communities that have a much greater need than the rest, even after this construction allocation. Our intention is to continue allocating where the greatest need is until such time as the relative needs of our communities are about the same.
At that point, we can start to focus our funding efforts in a somewhat different strategic direction.
At this point, we want to address the discrepancy first, that communities that have 22 people living in one house will be addressed before other houses that have less overcrowding.
I thank the CEO for the response.
Yesterday, I stated that… . I wrote down what I heard and I am writing my questions as we go along because I want to find out and not forget about the questions that I would like to ask.
There was a statement that said that for more remote communities in Nunavut, it costs more to ship houses that are going to be built in those communities.
That will always be the case because shipping the equipment to remote communities will always cost more. I hope that this is not going to be delaying the remote communities from getting houses built.
I hope that this will not be an excuse for the remote communities that they cannot build houses because of how far they live.
I hope that’s not going to be the case when we’re going to be building houses in the communities of Nunavut because it’s more expensive to ship them to remote communities. I hope all communities are treated equally.
I hope that this is not going to be used as an excuse not to build houses in remote communities.
I thank the committee member for that question. Mr. Chairman, that’s not going to be the case. That’s the reality up north here for shipping construction material or any types of supplies.
It does cost more to ship to smaller communities. For housing allocations in the future, it’s going to be based on needs. The smaller communities will be comparatively equal to the bigger communities throughout Nunavut.
While I’m going into my questioning, I would like to state first of all that the lack of housing in Nunavut communities is very important. We have many problems in Nunavut, but the lack of housing is the most important issue that we have.
We all have to try and get some answers to the shortage of housing in the communities.
It’s not very good to have no place to stay.
When I first became a Member of the Legislative Assembly, I did not have a house and I had to be live in a shed. I understood at that time that it was very important for everyone to have a house.
It was not very good on my part when I had to live without a house. If you don’t have a house, then it’s really uncomfortable and it hurts your feelings.
To hear that the government does not have enough money to build houses, I know that they’re trying their best to rectify that.
I want to get some to answers to my questions.
First of all, in the Minister’s Statement on May 16, when I asked a question at that time on how the communities were allocated houses, one of the responses that he gave me was there are different reasons why they don’t get houses, for example, Cape Dorset, because they did not have enough power in their generator, and some others a little bit different.
I would like to find out the various reasons why the people of Pond Inlet did not get any houses built.
Minister Taptuna stated that some communities that are closer to economic development, such as mining, have employment, and they should be able to build their own houses because they’re in a wage economy. I just wanted to get a clear answer.
The people of Pond Inlet understood that because there is the Mary River mine, the government doesn’t have to help you as much. You’re in a wage economy and you should try and build your own house. It seems like that whenever a community gets a wage economy.
Is it the same as Baker Lake? Is that the way it is with Baker Lake too?
There is a mine close to Baker Lake. Is it okay for them not to be allotted a house because they will be able to build their own house?
I just want to understand what he meant by that.
Mr. Chairman, Pond Inlet is still ranked 18th on the list and that’s why they weren’t allocated any units at the time.
I also talked about our homeownership programs. We encourage anybody who is able to put in an application to afford their own homes.