EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Essential positions won’t be fewer but it’s been decreased.
Mr. Chairman, also I note on here and taking a look at last year’s number; the initial amount that was budgeted for compensation and benefits is 250 thousand dollars and it was revised up to 266 thousand dollars and this year they’re asking for 250 thousand dollars.
I was wondering if there are less PYs there than last year and how come in almost every other instance there’s the same amount of PYs?
There have been increases due to changes in the collective agreement and that doesn’t seem to be the case in this area.
Under compensation and benefits, there was an increase in salaries of 60 thousand dollars in the adjustments to any new adjustments it’s referred to during that year.
Don’t those adjustments carry forward to this year?
I’ll get my deputy minister to respond.
She is more informed about this.
Some of the staff do not move with the position and we expect that there will be fewer positions that have to be moved. When the position is being moved, not all staff members in those positions agree to move.
Then the positions are filled in that community, in that decentralized community.
Mr. Chairman, I think I realize that but under the compensation and benefits for distribution, I would assume that those are for the compensation and benefits for the employees in a Human Resources position in that department.
I’m just wondering again why, if there hasn’t been a decrease in PYs working in that division, how come the increases that were put in last year of 16 thousand dollars are carried forward into this year’s main estimates or compensation and benefits.
Under decentralization, we’re in the last stages of planning.
This is just about completed and with that, I’d like to ask my deputy minister to elaborate.
The decentralized communities are just about completed and with that fewer positions are being moved so the money that would be set for that line would decrease.
Mr. Tootoo: Maybe I’d just like to ask the minister, under the compensation and benefits, the money that’s there, does that just cover the employees of the Department of Human Resources in that position?
This money would be used for decentralized positions, not just under Human Resources.
Mr. Tootoo: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I have a difficult time trying to understand that.
I think that the positions that are in the decentralized communities would show up under the departments that are being decentralized to as a PY under that particular department.
Here, we’re supposed to be looking at just the Department of Human Resources and the positions that it has working in the Department of Human Resources. So I just wondered how many PYs that covers within the Department of Human Resources?
The 250 thousand dollars under compensations and benefits is geared towards positions that are being decentralized.
For individuals that don’t want to leave their positions.
It wouldn’t come from there.
How many PYs does the department have working in this division of the department?
For decentralization, we don’t have officials working under decentralization but we support the secretariat in our O and M. Thank you.
So the minister’s saying they don’t have anyone in their department, any PYs in their department that this money under compensation and benefits for that division goes towards.
Does it actually go to PYs in other departments?
For compensation and benefits, it’s a benefit that is made available to the employees that don’t want to move to other communities.
So I guess what I’m getting and I still don’t know that I understand; because the benefit is given to employees that don’t want to move, is the money that is there, that 250 thousand dollars, it’s not directed to any PYs that the department has working in that division. It is actually money that is allocated to positions effected by decentralization in other departments?
How do they determine how much someone can get under something like that?
Because there’s just a pot there.
How do they determine, how do the come up with that number of 250 thousand dollars?
I will have my Deputy Minister respond to that question.
Ms. Levi: (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Decentralization for 10 communities, if there were some staff that did not want to move into one of the 10 communities that have decentralization then they’re given severance pay according to the amount of time they were employed.
So it is used for staff that are leaving and also for the staff that want to further their education, providing that individual wanted to get employment.
For employees that are quitting because they don’t want to move to another community; according to the length of their employment they’re given severance pay.
Mr. Chairman, so basically this 250 thousand dollars is education pay and severance pay.
Is that what the minister and the staff are indicating?
According to my deputy minister’s response to the question, how they set the payment, the majority of this fund is used for the staff that don’t want to move to another community and for staff that want to further their education, it is a lot less than what we use from here.
Mr. Chairman, given that explanation, I was just wondering if it wouldn’t be more accurate to actually show those numbers under the department in which they fall under.
If this isn’t really a compensation and benefits expense to the Department of Human Resources, and it’s actually related to PYs within other departments, I’d like to ask why it’s not reflected in the department that it belongs to.
Our department is the contact department for all the other departments.
We work on behalf of the other departments.
Mr. Chairman, I can understand that they are the coordinator but what I’m saying is under normal accounting practises you have to show an expense where it’s incurred.
And this is an expense as a result of a PY in a certain department.
I’m just wondering why it’s not being shown accurately so that we can see where that expense is actually coming from.
If we wanted to have accurate main estimates, and I’m not blaming the minister on this, maybe it’s something you could point out to the Finance Minister, if those expenses are being incurred by PYs from other departments, then that’s where the expense should lie.
It shouldn’t lie within the Department of Human Resources because it’s not an accurate reflection of where the money is spent and the expense is being generated from.
Mr. Chairman, this is certainly an area of interest that I can have discussions with the office of the Decentralization Secretariat and I will definitely let you know how those discussions go with them.
Mr. Chairman, I am just wondering if he is going to be checking that out with not only the Decentralization Secretariat but with the Minister of Finance.
Are these PYs and other numbers, if they are showing here are they also numbers that are shown in other departments as expenses or do they just show up once in the Human Resources?
In order to have the same level of understanding, under Compensation and Benefits there is nothing, because we are not paying for the other regional employees.
Each region operates its own regional offices.
There are employees that are relocating.
There are not many more staff that have to be relocated.
We take care of the Compensation and Benefits and severance pay that come from our department for all the other departments.
We pay the severance pay from our department for all the other departments.
That is why it is in this line item.
There is no money paid to the employee.
The clarification that I was seeking, although I understand the answers to the question that I had, but I do have a small question: last year it was 2 million 299 thousand in 2001/2002 and in the revised estimates 2 million 315 thousand.
There was a slight increase in the revised estimates and there was quite a decrease in the Main Estimates for this fiscal year. So I was wondering if you could clarify that.
I do have an idea according to the responses that I heard.
Yes although I mentioned earlier on, if you could look at from 2001/2002 the figures 2 million 299 thousand, there was a slight increase on the revised estimates by 16 thousand dollars.
They revised it with 16 thousand dollars because there was an increase to the salaries according to the collective agreement.
And for the Main Estimates 2002/2003, 1 million 799 thousand dollars there is a reduction by 500 thousand dollars.
We won’t have to photocopy any new agreement.
You were talking about some staff that don’t want to move or relocate to another community, they quit their job, and we have to pay their severance pay.
I was wondering for the communities that have decentralization, when the staff relocates to a community that is decentralized, when they quit, what would happen at that time?
I would like to say the reason for the 500 thousand dollars reduction this year is due to the reasons I gave earlier.
It’s the training that was provided to the employees who were going to be moving to the decentralized communities but for this year there is no training component for the people who were moving to those communities.
I don’t think we have any problems at this time with decentralization.
Chairperson (interpretation): 4-14, Human Resources. Branch Summary.
Going back to 4-5, Human Resources.
Total Operations and Maintenance 19 million 958 thousand dollars.
In regards to non-decentralized communities and in order to create employment for the summer students and in order for it to go smoothly, is your department going to be writing a letter to the health centres and to the government offices so that they’ll be aware that there’s funding available for student summer employment?
We have already sent the information out to the communities and it is in the communities already.
Chairperson (interpretation): Mr. Arvaluk, Anything else?
Thank you. Ms. Williams.
On page 4-5, I have a question regarding the increase from the previous year.
What new programs have you created with this increase?
To make it brief, there has been an increase in the number of employees and also in providing training for the staff.
There’s going to be a program review done in the department.
What new programs are going to be created because of this program review and what is going to be discontinued?
In regards to the program review, since we’re still reviewing I can’t tell the member at this time what is going to be discontinued or kept.
I would only be guessing at this point and I don’t want to be guessing, but I can say that they are working on that at the moment.
Ms. Williams (interpretation): Thank you. That’s understandable and my next question is how many consultants does the department currently have on contract and what is the amount?
There are current contracts that we have but I will have to get the information before I can give you a response.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you. Anything else Ms. Williams?
You had 2 million, 483 thousand dollars in the revised estimates for contract services and for this year you’re looking at 3 million, 147 thousand dollars.
How many consultants does that figure represent? You said there’s 718 thousand dollars for fees and payments.
How many consultants do you have on contract currently?
In regards to the contracts and the number of consultants and how many there are, I will have our DM respond.
I don’t think you heard me. I believe that the largest amount for contracts we have are for the instructors at the Arctic College. For the actual details, I’ll have my DM respond.
The Nunavut Arctic College has the majority of this amount.
But we do have contracts for other services and when we have to use professionals from universities, we contract them if we cannot find any sources up here in Nunavut.
I have Mr. Alakannuark.
My question is about the smaller communities, and correct me if my impression of a smaller community is wrong.
The majority of the decentralized communities have a high population level. So if we’re talking about a smaller community, what does the population level have to be in order to receive decentralization by government departments?
The government, for those essential services such as for example, the Department of Health and Social Services and the Wildlife Division and Policing, they don’t look at the population figures when they are looking at communities to decentralize those positions.
I do not think that there are any minimum population levels.
I don’t believe that we have a policy stating a specific number.
With the decentralized communities, for example if a department went up to Pond Inlet, what would be the total removal cost of one employee that has to be moved from point A to point B?
For the removal of an employee it would not only be the cost of the airfare, there would be the employee’s family, the removal of his personal effects and it might up to a maximum of 50 thousand dollars to move an employee from point A to point B. Thank you.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you. 4-5, Human Resources.
I would like to thank the Department of Human Resources Minister as we have been dealing with this department since yesterday.
I would like to thank the Honourable Peter Kilabuk, his officials and your Deputy Minister, Ms. Levi.
If you have any closing remarks, please go ahead.
I would like to thank my staff and our Deputy Minister, Carmen Levi and Marion Love and the employees who have been here.
They have worked extremely hard to prepare for this and please feel free to talk to our department even outside of the House if you have any concerns with our department.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you. At this time we will be dealing with Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs and the Premier is in charge of this department.
I am pleased to be here to present for review the 2002/2003 budget for the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
Approval of this budget will allow the department to begin new initiatives as we continue to work as a government towards fulfilling our objectives outlined in the Bathurst Mandate.
Briefly, the role of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs is to seek political direction, build consensus on policy issues within the government, to communicate that direction, to collect, analyze and provide information to government and to the public, and to provide coordination and leadership for the public service.
It is important to note that the Department has no capital expenditures.
The total budget for Operations and Maintenance for Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs in 2002/2003 is 11.90 million dollars.
This represents an increase of approximately 2.45 million dollars from the 2001/2002 budget.
This increase in funding is needed to implement many of the Department’s new initiatives as well as to fund a number of responsibilities given to this department over the past 3 years.
Program Review.
The Department has budgeted a one-time expenditure of 595 thousand for the review of all of the Government of Nunavut’s Programs.
Program Review will work towards program and service delivery reflecting the best use of resources as well as the broader goals and priorities of the Government of Nunavut.
It will also help to coordinate the delivery of services between departments, with the goal of eliminating redundancy.
This reflects the theme of Simplicity and Unity found in the Bathurst Mandate.
Mr. Chairman, it is important to note that this review is a joint project between EIA and the Department of Finance.
Communicating the direction of the government is vital to the ability of government to inform, listen to and respond to the public.
An additional 310 thousand dollars has been allotted to enhance our ability to communicate Government of Nunavut issues, in Inuktitut, with Nunavummiut.
This additional funding will allow the government to carry out new communication strategies, like providing regular radio broadcast information directly to communities.
In response to the Auditor General’s recommendation that “Internal audit and evaluation functions operate as fully as soon as possible,” the Evaluation and Statistics division has been allotted an additional 265 thousand dollars.
These new monies will allow the division to continue to deliver Government-wide evaluations similar to the recent Decentralization report.
(interpretation) The Department shows an increase of 832 thousand dollars for existing salaries.
This amount is reflective of the adjustments made to the pay grid, resulting from the new NEU contract negotiated and employees moving to higher steps.
This government continues to work to raise its profile within Canada.
The Department has allocated an additional 328 thousand dollars to support Intergovernmental Affairs.
Mr. Chairman, this new allotment will allow the department to continue establishing effective working relations with the federal, provincial, and territorial governments.
It will also allow the Department to prepare for the upcoming visit from Her Royal Highness Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip, scheduled for later this year; we well as a visit from the Prime Minister and Governor General and other dignitaries in future years.
This newly structured division within the Department is the government’s voice in the circumpolar world.
The division manages to the GN relationship with NTI and land claims bodies, provides funding to the Inuit Circumpolar Conference, represents the government on the Arctic Council and manages transportation-boundary dispute issues.
This division receives a total of 764 thousand dollars of which 130 thousand dollars is new money.
These are the highlights of the Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs budget for 2002/2003.
I would be pleased to answer any questions or address the comments of my fellow MLAs.
I recognise that the department is receiving significant new resources.
Since April of 1999, we have regularly asked this department to take on new or additional responsibilities; the Ikuma Report, the Law Review Commission, additional intergovernmental responsibilities and program review.
As surpluses of the earlier years are no longer available, the actual costs of some of these activities need to be addressed.
Thank you again for the opportunity to meet with you today and thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I’m now ready for questions.
We hardly ever speak English but I will be speaking English today. (interpretation ends) Thank you Mr. Premier.
You may go to the witness table. (interpretation) Sergeant-at-Arms, would you please help the witnesses go with the Premier.
Thank you. (interpretation ends) Premier Okalik, could you introduce your officials.
With me are, you must know the person on my left, my deputy minister, Ann Crawford. On my right Deputy Minister of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs, David Omilgoitok.
We’re going to be dealing with the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
Mr. Tootoo, do you have any opening comments?
Mr. Chairman, the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Services has reviewed the budget estimates for the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs for the 2002/2003 fiscal year.
I am pleased to provide you with the committee’s comments.
The committee notes that the department’s total budget of 11.09 million dollars has increased 2.4 million dollars, or 28 percent over the department’s 2001/2002 main estimates.
This is a substantial increase for a department that delivers few programs and services directly to the public.
Mr. Chairman, members recognise the role that the department plays as a central agency for the government.
Last year, members raised a number of concerns during the review of the department’s 2001/2002 estimates.
I would like to take a moment to make some comments regarding progress and performance in these areas.
The Standing Committee continues to urge that the department to impress upon all entities the need to fulfil their statutory tabling requirements.
As members are aware, there are a significant number of annual reports and other documents that are required by law to be tabled in the Legislative Assembly.
A considerable number of these requirements are not being fulfilled in a timely manner and Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs must fulfill its business plan goal in providing leadership and coordination in this area.
Mr. Chairman, the Standing Committee has previously made a number of recommendations in this House on the need for this government to begin producing annual performance reports that measure not only activities and expenditures, but also outcomes and results.
Members would note that this recommendation has recently been echoed in the decentralization evaluation that was tabled last week.
Members would also note that one of the department’s stated goals is measurable progress in all departments.
Mr. Chairman, the committee noted with interest in the budget address, the budget address commitment to increasing funding in the amount of 310 thousand dollars to improve communications in communities.
Members would again emphasise the need for more attention to be paid to using community radio as a means of communication.
Members stress the need for written communications in Inuktitut and Innuinaqtut to be as clear and intelligible as possible.
Members would also reinforce the need for communication flow in both directions between the government and the citizens.
Mr. Chairman, one of the most important challenges facing the government over the coming year is the coordination of the program review exercise.
Members reiterate their desire to see the knowledge and experience of long time front line staff to be drawn upon and caution the department not to fall prey to the over reliance on imported consultants.
Members are unclear to the extent to which the program review exercise will complement or delay the progress of the review initiatives that have already moved forward.
For example, the work on the Ikuma group and the Community Government and Transportation sponsored municipal financing review come to mind as areas where clarity in this matter is required.
Members have also noted during this budget session, that departments continue to tinker with their organisational structures and staffing levels.
It is unclear to members, to the extent to which the structure of the government itself will be fundamentally altered as a result of this process.
Members have noted that the funding for the law review commission has now ended and members look forward to the commission’s final report being tabled in this house.
Members would also like to see the government make clear which of the commission’s recommendations it accepts and which it does not.
On a similar theme, members are pleased to note that the department appears to be moving forward with evaluation projects and looks forward to the projects showing results.
Members also look forward to the release of results of the Nunavut Household Survey.
Earlier this year, the Standing Committee tabled its report and recommendations regarding the annual report of the Information and Privacy Commissioner.
Access to Information and Protection of Privacy issues fall under the jurisdiction of this department.
Members look forward to the government tabling its response to the committee’s report in a timely fashion.
Members applauded the Premier’s efforts at pushing Nunavut’s priorities on the national stage.
It is important however, that we lobby our federal partners in a concerted, coherent and coordinated fashion.
It is important that the government continue to make arguments at the national level in favour of funding arrangements that are based not on rigid per capita formulas but needs.
However, it is also important for our own credibility that we in turn deal with the needs of our communities in a way that is not solely based on population levels.
Mr. Chairman, a collegial relationship between the government of Nunavut and NTI is important to our success as a territory.
Members look forward to the tabling of the next annual report on the Status of the Clyde River Protocol.
Members have also noted with concern, recent statements by NTI with respect to the NNI issue.
The government could make its own position on issues of contention between itself and NTI more clear to the members of this house.