EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Our department has not looked into these avenues that the member is speaking about, about emissions.
However, we do have encouraged people to emit fewer emissions into the air.
People, I think, are wise, we don’t give them credit for it sometimes, but they do buy vehicles with smaller engines now and they are looking into all kinds of alternative sources of energy just for cost saving too.
Looking at the west, they have their private plan. I was wondering if you can start planning on other uses of alternative energy so that we will not depend on fuel.
They provide support in the Northwest Territories. Looking at the Northwest Territories likewise, are you going to start looking at those things?
Yes, of course, we are interested and we will be working with other departments, such as CG&S and Nunavut Housing, in looking at and developing plans where we can be more energy efficient as a government and as a territory.
I’m done for now, so I will allow the other members to ask questions.
Mr. Ningark (interpretation): I’ll go back briefly to the $80,000.
For those who have shacks to store their equipment, it seems that polar bears are now damaging all of the cabins and their shacks at the communities.
Would they be able to make claims from that $80,000?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank Mr. Ningark.
A situation like the member describes would not be eligible. There is an onus on people that they have to lessen their risk as much as they can.
This program is established for something that happens as a natural disaster where a person is not in control of the situation.
But where a person is in control of storing their equipment or whatnot and there is a risk there that can take place, they have to take all responsibility of that risk.
So as the program is setup right now, they would not be eligible but as we said, we would review this program in cooperation with other interested groups and come up with other criteria too.
But as he states it right, no, it wouldn’t be.
So we will proceed with the page-by-page review of the departmental estimates starting with page I-4. Branch Summary.
Total Operations and Maintenance. $3,992,000. Agreed?
I don’t want to lose my opportunity, I’m sorry.
I had asked the Minister of Finance if there are any plans to get rid of the shopping bags.
I was wondering if the Department of Environment has any plans in the future to stop the use of plastic bags because they’re destroying our beautiful environment.
I know that they have given out reusable shopping bags, but can they take another look at how to stop the use of plastic bags in Nunavut altogether?
I would thank the member. I think this is an important issue and it’s of interest to me too.
I do live in a smaller community… well, not that small anymore, it’s the second largest community.
But we have a similar problem in Arviat where shopping bags are very much of a hindrance not only to the landfill but to the land and the viewing of the land.
So we would be interested in consulting with different departments, Community and Government Services and hamlets, on their view of shopping bags and having something alternative to plastic shopping bags.
We would be very much interested in this.
We are already aware that the other places are starting to utilize biodegradable bags.
But these plastics that we use are not biodegradable, so maybe we can start using biodegradable bags.
I was wondering if you could look into that because these used plastic bags or shopping bags are accumulating in our environment.
So I urge the department to start looking at plans for the future.
Hon. Daniel Shewchuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the member. Again, he brings up a very good point.
And yes, we are very interested in looking at that avenue of using biodegradable bags and speaking with all of the stores and businesses that supply plastic bags to maybe revert to these.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister Shewchuk. (interpretation) Mr. Okalik, are you finished?
(interpretation ends) Branch Summary.
Total Operations and Maintenance. $3,992,000.
Chairman: Go to page I-5.
Total Operations and Maintenance. $16,006,000.
Baker Lake residents are not just mainland people; we have five distinct groups in Baker Lake.
We have genealogical ties to other areas of Kivalliq and even further north, Gjoa Haven and Nattilingmiut. Baker Lake has strong ties with Chesterfield Inlet, Rankin Inlet, Whale Cove, and Arviat and these communities come to Baker Lake to hunt as well.
In Baker Lake, we not only fish but we also hunt for caribou and we also hunt for marine mammals with our ties with the rest of the region.
Specifically, the inlet between Baker Lake and Chesterfield Inlet, in our community, that section is also known as the north and south channels leading into the inlet.
Our mothers, aunts, and relatives can also work with sea mammal products, although we historically depend on caribou over a large land mass.
In Baker Lake, with the rich history of the Back River and the major contributions from the people of the Back River known as the Ukkuhikhalingmiut are major contributions to Canadian identity with world-renowned artists and cultural strength for cultural programs.
Back River people have ties to the areas of Chantry Inlet, Gjoa Haven, Taloyoak, and Kugaaruk by relations by way of the Back River.
Would the minister and his department consider making Back River a Heritage River?
I thank the member for his question and his point of interest there. Yes, we would be interested.
Of course, we would have to do a quite in-depth consultation with the community of Baker Lake and all interested user groups that use that area. But if that was an interest of the community of Baker Lake, we would be interested in looking at something like that.
I also thank the minister for that reply because it’s a positive note.
As I mentioned earlier, two of three rivers are recognized as heritage, being the Kazan and Thelon.
The Back River has some historic importance to the sovereignty of Canada because the majority of the Back River people were brought down to Baker Lake and some of them were also brought up to Gjoa Haven in terms of the sovereignty program in which to get communities created. That’s how a lot of the Back River people ended up in Baker Lake as well.
I just want to make a statement, Mr. Chairman, if I may, as I touched on the fact that we have world-renowned artists, such as the late Jessie Oonark.
A lot of her work is well recognized throughout the world, a lot of it has been sitting in the Vatican, the Buckingham Palace, the National Gallery of Canada, and the Canadian Museum of Civilization.
It’s recognized throughout the world as well as the other descendants of the Oonark family.
I am very proud to say that I’m a relation of that.
But the one thing that we were always taught in Baker Lake is the importance of the history of where the people came.
In today’s society, the people of the Back River are also really consulted with for cultural programs and also historic importance for terminology, history, and even as you may know, in the last two years, the stories and legends of Kiviuq have gotten a lot of recognition. A lot of the Back River people were consulted with that.
So this is exactly where I was resorting to in terms of seeing whether or not Back River could be recognized as a Heritage River. I just wanted to make that comment.
I’ll take that as a comment.
Minister Shewchuk, you wanted to comment on that too?
Hon. Daniel Shewchuk: Yes.
Again, I thank the member for very interesting information. I would ask him at this point in time if he can provide us with the information that he is giving us.
In conjunction with the member, we would be pleased to take his request forward and nominate that river to the Community Heritage River Board that exists at the present to consider further process in this river getting the protection it needs.
I would like to move on to sealing. The European Union had banned sealskin products. What are your plans for the upcoming year to support seal harvesters in Nunavut?
I thank the member again for that important question.
The plans for the upcoming year in regard to our sealing program are to deliver the sealing program the same as it has been in the past.
Where will we market the sealskins since we can no longer trade with European countries? Did you find any new markets outside of Europe?
First of all, yes, we are looking at other markets. We are looking at China, Russia, and Asia.
I would just like to say too, as the member is well aware, that we have our repatriation process that we have in place right now with our sealing program where Nunavutmiut are allowed to buy tanned sealskins back from the auction house directly.
We are assessing where that is right now and how that’s going to work into the future. Hopefully it works very well so we can get our own sealskins back and produce clothing and crafts, and distribute them to southern Canada and the rest of the world.
So the program is going to stay the same at the present. We’re looking at other markets and we’re looking at other avenues to use our sealskins produced in Nunavut.
Since they utilize a lot of sealskins, have you thought about the people of Greenland? Have you any plans for Greenland to market our sealskins there?
I’m advised that we have been in communication with Greenland and they are not too interested in our sealskins.
In spite of that, by negotiating with them, we have changed their minds on other issues since they talk to countries outside of Canada.
Because we are both Inuit, they started supporting us after we had close discussions with them although they were not originally interested.
I urge you to continue to speak to the people of Greenland since we both use and understand the importance of utilizing sealskins.
I assure the member that I will keep in communication with Greenland and we will keep up the negotiations and ongoing communications.
However, we have been, as I said, in communications and they are not interested in our sealskins right now. The main reason being is the quality of our sealskins.
From the time the hunter harvests them and gets them, we buy them at all of our individual community conservation officers, the quality is deteriorated somewhat. So it’s the quality that’s the factor here too.
I remember that they were very happy and pleased with our sealskins in regard to the quality. I wonder where the quality went poor with our sealskins.
So I urge the minister and his officials to look into this issue because these sealskins are available and can be prepared at good quality.
I’m just urging the minister to make sure that he communicates with Greenland.
Hon. Daniel Shewchuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, very much.
I assure the member that I will be in communication with Greenland and we will discuss options in sealskins.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister Shewchuk. (interpretation) Going back to (interpretation ends) Branch Summary.
Chairman: Go back to page I-3.
Total Operations and Maintenance. $19,998,000.
Chairman: Is the committee agreed that the Department of Environment is concluded?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) I would like to thank the minister and his officials for being able to be before the Committee of the Whole. I would like ask Minister Shewchuk if he has any closing comments.
I would just like to thank my witnesses beside me and I would like to thank my witness over in the Gallery, Earl Baddaloo, Assistant Deputy Minister.
And I would like to thank the Committee of the Whole and the members for the very good questions that were asked here today.
Again, I encourage all of you that if you have any concerns with our department to voice them. We’re open to you at all times and to make Nunavut work better as a whole.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister Shewchuk. (interpretation) Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the witnesses out.
(interpretation ends) Do members agree that we proceed with the next department?
Bill 01 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2009-2010 – Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs – Consideration in Committee
Chairman: I would now like to ask Premier Aariak of the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs to make her opening remarks.
I am pleased to have this opportunity to present to the Members of the Legislative Assembly the 2009-2010 Main Estimates and Business Plan for the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
The role of the department includes providing support to cabinet and overall coordination of the work of the public service, including the implementation of the priorities we set under Tamapta/ᑕᒪᑦᑕ: Building our future together.
In addition, the department coordinates intergovernmental and circumpolar relations, and, in support of the Minister responsible for Aboriginal Affairs, addresses aboriginal issues for the GN. The department ensures that our responsibilities under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement are implemented.
The department’s main estimates total for the fiscal year 2009-2010 is just under $13.9 million.
This amount is comprised of approximately $9.7 million for salaries and benefits and $4.2 million for other operations and maintenance costs.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Legislative Assembly, please allow me to outline several of the key budgetary priorities for the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs for this fiscal year.
One of our priorities under Tamapta/ᑕᒪᑦᑕ is to establish a social advocacy office.
This budget will establish that important office by moving two positions from Health and Social Services and adding one new position to an already existing position in the EIA Directorate.
This office will continue working on suicide intervention and gender issues.
In addition, over the coming year, the social advocacy office will begin focused study, research, and consultation.
It is our hope that we will be able to recommend appropriate systems to act as strong intermediaries on behalf of our constituents, with a special focus on children’s advocacy, physical disabilities, and advocacy on behalf of those disadvantaged due to their gender.
I have been pleased to hear strong support from many members for this work.
Ultimately, it is crucial that any office advocating for individual constituents have some level of independence from government.
However, it is important that options be developed quickly and I am confident that the social advocacy office working within this department will be able to make significant progress over the coming year by working together with various stakeholders and with other departments.
Two new positions will be created in this budget for the Energy Secretariat to provide ongoing guidance in relation to energy issues, including implementation of Ikummatiit, the GN’s Energy Strategy.
In addition, this secretariat will undertake initiatives to raise public awareness around energy conservation.
Starting with the business plans that you are currently considering, the Department of Executive will coordinate all business planning functions for the Government of Nunavut.
With the transfer of two positions from the Department of Finance to the Policy and Planning Division of Executive, we will turn the policy directions that we set under Tamapta/ᑕᒪᑦᑕ into concrete action plans and business plans for 2009 to 2013.
Other significant changes to EIA’s budget for this year include the addition of one position to the Nunavut Bureau of Statistics, an increase for the longer travel distances for cabinet ministers, and a one-time increase to our communications budget to help assist with the costs of celebrating the 10-year anniversary of our wonderful territory.
That concludes my opening remarks. I welcome your comments and look forward to answering your questions on the EIA main estimates for 2009-2010.
Chairman: Qujannamiik, Madam Premier.
Chairman: Qujannamiik, Premier Aariak.
Chairman (interpretation): Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort her witnesses in.
(interpretation ends) For the record, Premier Aariak, please introduce your witnesses.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On my right is Markus Weber, Deputy Minister of EIA, and on my left is Scott Marriot from Corporate Affairs.
Does the Co-Chair of the Standing Committee on Oversight of Government Operations and Public Accounts have comments?
I am pleased to provide opening comments on behalf of the Standing Committee on Oversight of Government Operations and Public Accounts on its review of the 2009-2010 Main Estimates and Business Plan of the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
The standing committee notes that the department’s proposed 2009-2010 operations and maintenance budget of $13,856,000 has increased by approximately 48 percent since the introduction of the department’s 2004-05 main estimates.
The number of positions in the department has increased from 71.5 PYs in 2004-05 to 86.5 PYs in 2009-2010.
The Commissioner’s Address of April 1, 2009, announced the creation of a new social advocacy office, which has been established as a division in the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
The department’s business plan indicates that the social advocacy office will “continue and expand the work of the Women’s Secretariat, continue work on a Nunavut suicide-prevention strategy, and undertake comprehensive analysis of children’s advocacy and the potential for ombudsman-like services.”
During the minister’s appearance before the standing committee, members engaged in a broad dialogue with respect to the structure, role, and priorities of the social advocacy office.
As the work of the office evolves, members look forward to further discussions concerning such issues as the establishment of separate and independent ombudsman and children’s advocate positions.
The Commissioner’s Address stated that the social advocacy office will “recommend policies, programs, and services which would better represent the interests of groups of people who find themselves vulnerable, at a disadvantage, or in need of a strong voice.”
Members also look forward to discussions concerning the identification of the needs of vulnerable groups in Nunavut society. Members also stressed the importance of the office being involved in the government’s planned review of the Child and Family Services Act and noted the importance of ensuring that the needs of both children and youth are taken into account in the office’s mandate.
The department provides a $250,000 annual contribution to the Qulliit Nunavut Status of Women Council.
Members note that the council has been led by an acting president since July of last year.
Members also note that a public call for nominations to the council has recently been issued.
Mr. Chairman, there is no formal system in place for the registration of lobbyists in Nunavut.
A recent annual report of the Integrity Commissioner suggested that “the value of lobbyist [regulation], introduced by other jurisdictions, might be considered.”
Further work in this area could complement the government’s plans to introduce a new Public Service Act and a Code of Values and Ethics.
Mr. Chairman, the 2006 Report of the Auditor General to the Legislative Assembly recommended that the GN review aspects of its decentralized financial structure.
The department’s 2009-2010 business plan indicates that “There has been a persistently high vacancy rate for decentralized positions in many communities. Of the 459 decentralized positions in the GN, the numbers of vacancies have fluctuated between 105-125 positions over the past few years.
However, Inuit employment rates for departments for those filled positions have been quite steadily averaging around 56% and positions filled by local residents at around 65%.
The more successful decentralization initiatives appear to be those where job opportunities closely matched the local skill base.
The Report Card exercise, which will be conducted by external reviewers by the fall of 2009, will provide the GN with valuable information to help reassess decentralization initiatives in government.”
The standing committee looks forward to reviewing the results and recommendations from this exercise.
The department’s 2009-2010 business plan indicates that the budget for the Energy Secretariat has been increased to $648,000 for 2009-2010.
Its 2008-09 budget was $424,000.
One of the department’s priorities for 2009-2010 is to implement the energy strategy “through a coordinated approach with affected departments and agencies.”
The Government of Nunavut’s Energy Strategy, which was tabled in the Legislative Assembly on October 30, 2007, indicates that this fund is to be managed by the Department of Finance.
However, none of the GN’s 2009-2010 business plans make any reference to the Affordable Energy Fund.
The standing committee also recommends that the government’s report card exercise examine the balance and distribution of energy related portfolios between different departments.
For example, while the Department of Finance is responsible for the administration of the Nunavut Electricity Subsidy Program and the Harvesters Fuel Tax Rebate Program, the Department of Education is responsible for the administration of the Senior Fuel Subsidy Program.
The department’s 2009-2010 business plan indicates that one of its priorities is to “Continue implementation work on the Northern Vision dialogue… with a report to Northern Premiers at their July 2009 meeting.”
Members encourage the minister in her efforts to effectively represent Nunavut’s priorities in such areas as arctic sovereignty and pan-territorial initiatives.
Mr. Schell: On February 20, 2009, the Council of the Federation issued a statement in “Support for the negotiation of a new and comprehensive economic agreement with the European Union.”
The statement noted that only the province of Newfoundland and Labrador issued a separate communiqué.
That province’s government stated that it was “unable to support this at this time” as a consequence of concerns related to such issues as the proposed EU ban on seal products.
On May 13, 2009, the Council of the Federation announced that it “held a conference call on May 11, 2009 to discuss the proposed trade ban on seal products by the European Union (EU).
The discussion took place at the request of Newfoundland & Labrador Premier Danny Williams and Nunavut Premier Eva Aariak.
The Council expressed a strong objection to the EU’s proposed ban which is not based on fact or on scientific information.
The Council indicated its support of the federal government’s public commitment to take action at the World Trade Organization should the EU proceed with the proposed ban.
The Council also agreed to work with the federal government to reverse the position of the EU.”
The standing committee strongly urges the Government of Nunavut to vigorously pursue this issue.
Mr. Chairman, the Clyde River Protocol between the Government of Nunavut and Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated was signed in 1999.
A new agreement was signed between the parties in early 2004.
The department’s 2009-2010 business plan indicates that one of its priorities is to work “on a renewed protocol” with NTI.
The standing committee supports a positive working relationship between the GN and NTI while urging the government to be candid with MLAs and the general public concerning the rationale for its own position in areas where the two parties may have disagreements on specific issues.
The department’s 2009-2010 business plan indicates that one of its priorities is to “Complete the negotiations process of the Implementation Contract for the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement.” It states that there have been no official discussions or negotiations while the NTI lawsuit for breach of contract “against the federal government is before the courts.”
In early June of this year, the Nunavut Court of Appeal issued a judgement concerning the Government of Canada’s appeal of a decision by the Nunavut Court of Justice to not include the GN as a defendant in this case.
The federal appeal was dismissed.
On July 17, 2008, the federal Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs released The Road to Improvement, the report from Neil McCrank, Special Representative for the Northern Regulatory Improvement Initiative.