EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
It is being done right now. My latest update on that is it’s still in the process but should be completed in the very near future.
At that point in time, I would be more than willing to update the member and the House on the status.
I would like further clarification on the matter you stated in English and what you meant by the “very near future.” Exactly how far into the future?
Well, I can’t put a date on that.
I think that’s up to the RCMP and their timelines on completing their investigation, but I understand that it’s going very well. I’m not going to put a timeline on it, but I would expect it to be done in the next month, I would say.
Question 222 – 3(2): Accountability at the Department of Justice (Okalik)
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) My question is to the Minister of Justice.
As the minister will recall from our sitting in December, the Legislative Assembly clearly said no to his department’s request to build a $100 million prison in Iqaluit.
Mr. Speaker, it seems that while the minister respects the will of the House, his department does not.
According to recent news reports, departmental bureaucrats apparently commissioned an independent assessment of the prison in hopes of convincing our minds in this Assembly.
My question to the minister is simple: who is in charge of this government?
Is it the elected officials or bureaucrats?
Mr. Speaker, as I recall, the request for $300,000 in December was to undertake a study to look at three or four options to upgrade the Baffin Correctional Centre, to modernize it, and to possibly replace it.
That was simply what that money was for.
Of course, the vote was no with respect to that.
Mr. Speaker, the assessment that was completed recently was the assessment of the security features and that was required because the place is degraded, it’s falling apart.
So the work that was done was to assess the fire safety, ventilation, and security of the facility.
The next question was cost. It was $24,600, which is much less than what we were requesting in December.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I’m holding a news article from February 18, 2010, from CBC North.
Strater commissioned an independent assessment of this prison.
He hopes it will convince naysayers of the need to build a new one as soon as possible.
I think that is contrary to what the minister is saying.
Could I get an explanation, please?
I thank Mr. Okalik for pointing that out.
Mr. Speaker, as we know, quite often, the media reports things out of context.
I think what Mr. Strater is attempting to do is to provide an assessment of the facility.
We are required under Nunavut regulations to provide a safe facility and we have to identify what needs replaced and find money to replace those areas.
Security is a dangerous situation, particularly when the locks on doors don’t work for six days, leaving the area insecure.
So those are funds that we have to find within this Legislative Assembly and within the department to replace the security system in a crumbling, decrepit Baffin Correctional Centre, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I thank the minister for explaining what they are doing, but I want some clear answers.
The will of the House shall prevail on these types of situations and I was a bit disappointed in the report that they were commissioning a study that we had said no to already. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I thank Mr. Okalik again.
Mr. Speaker, I thought I was clear. We were looking for $300,000 in December for a study to look at upgrading and modernizing plans to replace.
This assessment was completely different. It was a look at areas in the building that need repairs.
Security is a concern, fire safety is a concern, and ventilation in the facility is a concern. It cost $24,600.
That’s significantly lower than the money that we’re requesting; it’s two different initiatives.
Question 223 – 3(2): Support for our Athletes (Elliott)
My question is directed towards the Minister of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth, the Hon. Louis Tapardjuk.
At the end of the Olympics, John Furlong, in the closing ceremonies, said that, “The games will have many wonderful legacies. I wish but for one, that every Canadian child, be they from Chicoutimi, Moncton, Grande Prairie, Squamish, or Niagara Falls, will have the chance to grow up to experience the pleasure of sport… no one left out.
And that we of the global Olympic family will not rest until the right of every child to play across this planet is secured.”
Going back to the travel issue and the costs, originally, Sport Nunavut, when people were participating, would pay a nominal $150 fee to allow them to travel to some type of a sporting event.
As it turns out now, the athletes actually have to incur 10 percent of the flight cost.
So with the increase in flights, you have communities like Grise Fiord where it costs $7,000 to fly out of the community.
That’s $700 on top of the $150 that the youth have to contribute.
Communities like Iqaluit and Rankin Inlet, where they have tournaments and lower flights and can participate and have active competition all the time, only have to incur the $150.
My question to the minister is: why has this changed?
In essence, what it is doing is it’s allowing our youth from the communities to, as Mr. Furlong said, be left out.
With respect to funding events, we provide funding support for the athletes by providing airline tickets, particularly to existing sports associations, such as soccer or hockey associations, or any other sport association based out of Nunavut.
This applies to those organizations that are recognized here in Nunavut as sports associations.
We provide them with funding for their travel arrangements or for regional competitions that determine the representative teams and these events occur throughout our territory.
What I would like to be completely understood is that we only provide assistance to recognized entities, whether they are soccer, hockey, or other sports associations.
We also fund other sports that are practiced by our athletes if they are going to be gathering to compete against one another.
That is how we provide funding support for our residents who are travelling to other communities to participate in sports.
What I would prefer is if the member would clarify what the issue is that they feel was not supported. I would like to find out who exactly was left out of this event and for which sport or event. I would like further clarification so I can work towards resolving it, Mr. Speaker.
Speaking hypothetically, in the future, if the costs of flights go up, what’s going to end up happening is our costs for our youth to travel is going to go up.
Most recently, our hockey team from Arctic Bay… the costs incurred to be able to come down for that type of event was too much.
Again, the fundraising is limited. We have different youth groups trying to do fundraising in the community and we have high unemployment, so the costs to actually bring the youth to come down… it was for a hockey tournament that was supposed to be happening in January. It was a Sports Nunavut activity.
That’s the most recent one.
I know in the past, we’ve had a soccer team that wanted to come down. It was a female youth soccer team that was unable to travel. When it was $150 and that was the flat rate, that was what every youth had to pay, that seemed to be fine.
Sometimes the hamlet would help out with fundraising and again, the generosity in our communities is amazing.
The amount of money that has to be put out for this, $150, is okay, but again, when you have the cost for us to travel from, let’s say, Arctic Bay, $18,000 for all of the team to come, 10 percent of that is $1,800 and then that’s divided by the team. So they have to come up with those dollars to cover that amount.
I’m just saying that in the past, it was $150. Now it’s $150 plus the cost of the flight. I’m wondering why that change was made.
I will have to look into when and where this has changed.
The support we provide for sports entities in Nunavut is usually for basketball, badminton, soccer, hockey, and wrestling.
It has a cap of $43,000 and it cannot go over $43,000 for one sports team.
In regard to his question as to when this had changed, I’ll have to look into that and get back to the member with a clearer response at that time, Mr. Speaker.
I believe, Mr. Elliott, your question has been taken as notice. I will move on to the next member.
Question 224 – 3(2): Polar Bear Management in Nunavut (Okalik)
Yesterday, I tabled a document in regard to polar bear management. I wrote a letter to Minister Prentice in regard to upgrading the polar bear status and we are against that.
I would like to ask the Premier since she’s the Minister of EIA what she had done to work with the federal government when they’re trying to take away our rights.
The management of wildlife is very important to us in Nunavut because we use them for sustenance.
We’re very sensitive to this. With the support of the Department of Environment, they can respond to the question as to whether Minister Shewchuk can respond to your question.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Premier. (interpretation ends) Your first supplementary, Mr. Okalik.
As a government, we have to protect our rights. So therefore, I would like to redirect my question to the Premier because she is supposed to protect the people of Nunavut, especially with respect to other governments.
I would like to ask her how this government undertook protective action and whether they are collaborating with the federal government on this polar bear issue.
Did you protect our hunters and did our government relay the disgust of Nunavummiut with respect to this matter as it has no basis? Did you relay all of this to the federal government?
Minister Shewchuk will respond to that question.
I would like to thank the member for pointing out the situation and his concern with Environment Canada.
We have always been working very closely with Environment Canada and representing Nunavut views on the polar bear issues.
I think, for clarity, Environment Canada has the jurisdiction of exporting polar bears outside the country of Canada.
Nunavut has the jurisdiction of exporting polar bears out of the territory of Nunavut. So the sole jurisdiction lies with Canada in regard to the export of polar bears out of this country.
Your second supplementary, Mr. Okalik
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): What I’m trying to convey is from the perspective of an animal rights activist.
They are fighting to stop the sealskin trade and now the polar bear is on their list.
The European Union has caved in to these activists and we no longer have any trade with them.
That is why I state that our own Government of Canada is allowing these fanatics to dictate free trade to Inuit and we are just accepting that.
I would like to ask the Premier: how and what are you doing to protect us? When outsiders again meddle in our affairs, how will you respond?
Will our Premier just turn the other cheek and accept their position?
How did this government attempt to protect their constituents and their sole means of income generation? The smaller communities are the ones that are most impacted. What did you do to protect the rights of Nunavummiut and those individuals who go out hunting, especially for smaller communities where they use polar bear hunting as their economic basis?
That question was directed to the Premier as the Minister of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Earlier, I stated that this is an issue we are committed to dealing with, especially since it impacts our wildlife, which is a cultural basis here in the north as animals make up our food, clothing, and income generation.
Whenever something this close to our hearts is impacted and the basis for that decision is unfounded, then this government attempts to resolve the wildlife management issues. When these issues arise, the federal government is informed about our position and of our concerns, especially with regard to impacts that affect our people.
The Minister of Environment works very hard on our behalf and we work together. We try to identify issues to the federal government in support of our fellow Inuit in cooperation with other departments. We try to work towards protecting our fellow Nunavummiut when the impacts revolve around wildlife and when we have concerns about these issues.
I didn’t hear a proper response to my question, especially as to what activities were undertaken to protect Inuit, particularly you, Mr. Speaker, your communities are severely impacted.
Many of these smaller communities don’t have any alternative employment options, especially in the High Arctic. Again, it seems that their one valuable income generation activity was pulled out from under their feet. The impact is that they have lost another source of income when there are hardly any opportunities open to them.
The government is allowing outsiders to impact these Inuit.
What kinds of activities did our government undertake to assist the Inuit hunters both as a government and as a representative of Nunavummiut to their federal government?
As an example, due to this loss of income, will the federal government compensate them?
Did the government ask of their federal counterparts for this type of assistance?
When our residents’ options are taken away, it seems to me that their rights have been abrogated.
Will this government take this lying down in the future when more obstacles are thrown at our feet?
Premier Aariak
We are not just turning the other cheek, so to speak.
It touches upon our culture, our subsistence, and our economic opportunities.
We will not sit back and watch it develop, and that is why we are still dealing with that matter.
Question 225 – 3(2): Whistle-blower Protection for Government of Nunavut Employees (Elliott)
I would like to thank the Minister of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth, the Hon. Louis Tapardjuk, for his answer.
I hope, in no way, people feel that Sport Nunavut is holding back because I know they bend over backwards to help have our youth travel, but in the smaller communities, sometimes it just doesn’t seem quite as fair and competition isn’t available like in the bigger communities.
I want to briefly revisit my question to the Minister of Human Resources, the Hon. Daniel Shewchuk.
I think that the minister may have misunderstood the point of one of my questions when he told the House that employees can report concerns about wrongdoing to their supervisors.
The concern that I have received from many of my constituents is that they don’t know where to turn when it is their supervisor who is committing wrongdoing. Can the minister clarify what employees in these kinds of situations can do?
Maybe I needed to clarify my answer to the member too. If it is the supervisor who is being complained about, I believe that there is a process in the Department of HR and headquarters that we could provide the names to you in the department that somebody could complain about their supervisor to.
As I said before in my previous answer, I will look into the information and get the exact information for the member as soon as I can.
I don’t believe I have any more direct questions about that, unless he could tell me when we would actually receive that information.
I commit to doing that during the sitting of this House.
Speaker: Your second supplementary… no?
Question 226 – 3(2): Compensation for Polar Bear Hunt Outfitters (Komoartok)
I would like to make a complementary question in regard to polar bear management issue as it was not answered.
There will be a reduction in the total allowable harvest for the Baffin Bay polar bear population and the impacts are immediate. If the communities can no longer sell their polar bear skins as per the previous question, will the Nunavut government or the federal government be providing compensation for those hunters as a result of losing out on economic opportunities?
Has the government discussed this matter with their federal counterparts?
My question is directed to our Premier, (interpretation ends) Hon. Eva Aariak. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I keep stating that the Department of Environment is responsible for this issue.
Today, based on the information provided to me regarding the matter of compensation for the affected hunters, we have not reached that plateau yet.
This is still under debate and dialogue, and that is all I can provide at this time, Mr. Speaker. Thank you.
I will now direct my question to the Minister of Environment and I’m sure that he can provide a response to my question regarding the same issue.
Did you convey the potential impacts on the hunters in these communities to the federal government that they will lose out on economic opportunities stemming from this ban? Will the hunters of these impacted communities be compensated for the loss of their polar bear total allowable harvest?
We have seen in many cases whereby the hunters have been severely impacted, such as with the loss of the sealskin trade, and yet, we don’t get any assistance provided to Nunavummiut from Ottawa even with the devastating plunge of sealskin prices.
We don’t want to experience another setback such as what happened with the sealskin trade ban while being ignored by our federal government. The meagre revenue from the sale of these skins usually goes towards the purchase of fuel, ammunition, tea, and groceries. This will impact these hunters as they will lose most of their disposable income and we don’t want to be in that same position again.
It’s quite obvious here in Nunavut that our residents will again be forced to bear the brunt of the impacts.
I wonder if they will get compensation and I would like to ask: has our government requested assistance or compensation from the federal government to reimburse these impacted hunters?
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Minister of Environment, Hon. Daniel Shewchuk.
The simple answer is no, the hunters will not be compensated. However, I will be announcing today the decision that we have made on the Baffin Bay polar bear situation and the allowable harvest and the recommendations that we received from the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board, and compensation is not part of that decision.
However, there are programs that we have put in place to assist communities in dealing with polar bears and damage that may occur because of polar bears, and I will announce that later today.
Speaker: Thank you, Minister. Thank you, Mr. Komoartok.
Question 227 – 3(2): Compensation for Polar Bear Hunt Outfitters (Okalik)
I don’t wish to keep returning to the selfsame issue, but I haven’t heard any response to my colleague’s question from any minister.
Did our government request the federal government to provide compensation if they are going to impose a ban on the legal trade of polar bear hides that will severely impact the sole means of seasonal income of these communities?
Will the federal government provide compensation?
Did the GN ask the federal government that question?
You didn’t tell me who you were directing your question to.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): The Minister of Environment seems to have become the mouthpiece for this government, so I’ll redirect my question to him as we seem to have no other minister capable of handling this question.
I’m not aware if that was part of our negotiations with Environment Canada.
However, let me explain this: the Baffin Bay situation, we had to take conservation action not only with Canada but the whole world. We needed to act on that population. Otherwise, it jeopardized the whole territory and all of our polar bears being non-exportable from this whole territory.
The decision I’m announcing today is showing management action towards that population that hopefully will uplift and remove the negative finding on that population and polar bears will be exportable again.
That is our strategy, that is our plan, and that is how we will proceed.
I have absolutely no issue with the way polar bear management is handled in Nunavut as that is part of our rights. However, it’s simply unacceptable whenever our rights are abrogated by the federal government.
These communities are being punished by our federal government simply for abiding by the management system of the government.
They lost their only viable option to incur some revenue when the federal government imposed the ban.
Will the federal government be providing support to these hunters? That is my question.
I am very pleased that our government is dealing with this issue as expeditiously as possible, but the federal government rescinded one of our only opportunities for economic development in Nunavut.
What is the strategy of our government regarding this issue? Will you be lobbying the federal government for compensation?
I will commit to the member that I will lobby the federal government for lost compensation with our polar bear TAH (total allowable harvest) being decreased in Baffin Bay.
However, I’m still advising the members about the decision that I’m going to release today that is very important towards our goal to have the negative finding lifted on that population so that those polar bears are exportable again and we can continue sport hunting those polar bears.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank the minister for his response.
In our first experience with this issue, we were just initiating our response to it. However, prior to any decisions being made, the federal government arbitrarily imposed the ban ahead of this government’s response.
The federal government wilfully derogated our rights and without any thought of the consequences of their actions, imposed the ban that has impacted our hunters.
So I’m urging the minister to lobby the federal government to compensate those impacted communities, especially the hunters.
I would like to acknowledge the member on his concern for the residents of Nunavut when it comes to sport hunting.
However, I must indicate to the member what’s very important is not only what he brings up but what’s coming up in Qatar. It’s a decision under CITES whether they are listed to Appendix I, which will deem them an endangered species.
Polar bear trade across the world will be stopped and this will affect all of our communities in Nunavut. We are fighting and struggling, and supporting our communities. We want to see sport hunting allowed and we will not stop this fight.
With respect to the matter of an export ban, I fully support the wish to keep that trade open. Nevertheless, when it is our own Canadian government that imposes the ban, I can’t support that initiative.
We are trying to manage the governance of our territory and yet, we are being undermined by our own federal government. To me, that is totalitarianism.
I want detailed information on how our Nunavut government plans to resolve this issue.
Will this government request funding assistance from the federal government to reimburse the hunters who have lost their sole means of income?
The federal government arbitrarily made this decision that has had a devastating result.
I would just like to advise the member too that it’s not only polar bears that would be compensated for when there is a decrease in populations and management action is needed.
It would be very expensive to our territory to start compensating for all wildlife losses and wildlife declines in populations.
I think it is incumbent on all of us as Nunavut residents that this, the wildlife, belongs to each and every one of us and that we all have to pitch in and manage our wildlife properly.
It’s very difficult to get into compensation of wildlife, polar bears, and not pass that on to other concerned populations of wildlife without having a great cost.
Written Question 010 – 3(2): Development Partnership Agreement between Government of Nunavut and the Meadowbank Mining Corporation (Aupaluktuq)
Keeping in light with yesterday’s proceedings, I apologize for my not being here due to illness, but I did watch the proceedings yesterday.