EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Once that decision has been made for investiture of authority, will members have an opportunity to express our concerns? When the authority is decided, will we have the opportunity to debate changes to the eligibility criteria for this referendum?
With respect to changes to this process, when decisions are deliberated upon, we will have to work with the Department of Justice to determine the eligibility criteria and the legal questions related to the vote.
As the minister stated, his department will consult with the Department of Justice.
What about the average citizen or homeowners who may harbour concerns? Who can we consult to share our wishes to change the voting eligibility requirements if we feel they are too simplistic?
It would be better if you would allow my deputy minister to respond to that question.
Based on the Plebiscites Act, right now, anybody who is over 18 years old and has one-year residency in the territory is able to vote under the lands referendum.
If we were to change the voting requirement, it is something that we would need to discuss with the Department of Justice. We certainly can take the member’s concern and bring this forward and get a legal opinion on this matter.
At this point in time, the Plebiscites Act clearly states, 18 years old and one-year resident.
The other thing you want to bear in mind is that you may be a tenant today, but you could very well be a homeowner tomorrow. There is some justification for people having a say in terms of how the land titles would change either through a yes or no vote.
That is exactly my point and reason for my being disconcerted about this issue. That is my point. I am tired of transient residents and people who just come to work in Nunavut determining our future, especially since they have no roots here in Nunavut.
People exactly like you public servants can vote in this referendum to determine my future.
I have my roots and will never leave my home, along with my children and grandchildren while temporary residents have long gone.
Many government officials, even teachers who have worked in Nunavut, will be long gone, yet they will determine the type of implications affecting me as a homeowner. Here again, we have outsiders controlling these significant events. Shouldn’t this be debated with extreme caution?
Should consideration be based on the impacts?
I seemed to hear the (interpretation ends) deputy minister (interpretation) state (interpretation ends) so what, (interpretation) it doesn’t matter since these residents may eventually purchase a home down the road.
The only answer I seem to not hear is this, “Your questions are pointless.”
You won’t take any of these impacts into consideration when commencing your discussions with the Department of Justice for the referendum question and the eligibility criteria.
Chairman: Thank you. Mr. Sammurtok.
Perhaps my response wasn’t clear enough.
I will try to respond clearly.
Yes, the concerns held by the public will be taken into consideration when discussions are underway.
When we initiate consultations with the Department of Justice, the concerns you have voiced are the type of concerns we will have to review and we have noted them.
We will be able to provide that information when determining the question, as those of us who will remain in Nunavut need to have our concerns heard and to address them.
I would like further clarification on my earlier question regarding consultations.
Yes, the officials and departmental heads will have that opportunity to discuss the concerns at that level, but what about the average resident of Nunavut?
What avenue will we have to share our concerns?
Here I am talking about people who aren’t involved in politics or representing others. What avenue will we have to voice our concerns?
Yes, the question the member raises, when the authority has been determined for this referendum, then the issue the member raised will most likely be determined for people to raise their concerns as well as to share their thoughts on the eligibility criteria. That may also change separate from what we just discussed.
This is a significant concern I hold; perhaps it isn’t even a concern for other people.
The reason for my concern is to protect my fellow Inuit who may not be provided the opportunity to share their thoughts on this vote that will have huge implications. The reason why Inuit fought for Nunavut and a government was to bring the government closer to the people and to ensure that Inuit are included in momentous decisions affecting them.
The response I heard was that it may be determined. Right away, I understand that also means it may never be determined as well.
That is how I take that response, as you only seem to be saying half of the answer. It may or may not be determined, but I take that to mean that it may not even be changed.
Am I correct in my understanding of this response and, if so, who will make that determination?
I believe we are all aware and understand fully that prior to the referendum, our department will be consulting the communities to hear their concerns and to understand the wishes of each local community as it relates to this question.
We will be going to disseminate the information and to hear their thoughts on the matter.
That is part of our plan prior to the referendum.
When we conduct our consultation tour, we will invite private homeowners as well as people in public housing to listen to their concerns and thoughts on the criteria. This will be part of our planned approach.
I certainly hope I am entirely understandable in what I am trying to state here. Let me use an example.
I won’t use other communities in this example, as I will use our local community to put my point across.
In Pond Inlet, we have nurses who spend an entire year in the community and they generally leave after this year in the health centre.
However, they will determine my future because they can vote. We have teachers in Pond Inlet who teach for the calendar year and after one year, they are termed as residents of Nunavut, but the majority tends to leave.
However, they are determining the question of whether I can own the land under my home; they are eligible based on the minimalist criteria.
This is extremely disconcerting to me on a personal level since most transients will leave Nunavut.
I am tired of transient residents continually determining the future of long-term residents.
How many communities will be included in your consultation tour, or is this an issue that still requires further debate?
As per my response earlier, when they start the consultation tour, they will be open to all the concerns or thoughts expressed by residents. For the particular concerns or matters of great interest to the residents, they will be included in the reports. We plan on going to every community in Nunavut to consult with them, as all communities have to be involved and to understand the reason for the referendum.
Please provide some direction if you can. If you have other names, I can leave my questions on this matter since I will have other questions on other matters.
I know that I do have some time left on my 10 minutes, although the time is still ticking down when I am not asking questions.
Mr. Chairman, if you can get back to me later on, I will leave this issue for now to allow other members an opportunity.
I apologize I wasn’t here when you first came up in Committee of the Whole, but I think it’s safe to say that this issue hasn’t been raised yet and that’s the water and sewage funding program.
Perhaps my first question is: how is this program administered?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Maybe for the minute details on this, if you will allow me, I’ll ask my deputy minister to elaborate.
The existing water and sewage subsidy program is administered through CGS’ Community Development Branch and it’s kind of a formula that has been pretty much established, I think, going back from the transition from the GNWT.
What the department is doing early in the new fiscal year is that we’re taking a comprehensive review of the existing water and sewage subsidy program to determine if the existing program is capturing all of the cost components associated with providing those services and to determine what is required to allow communities to be sustainable in the long term.
We are actually drafting the RFP now to develop the scope of work we need to get done for this particular program.
One of the issues I have raised in the past is about community support and development.
I read that much work has been done now to get the letter of direction rescinded by Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada of the five municipalities.
How many other municipalities are under such letters?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) There are no other communities under a letter of direction. Those were the only five. (interpretation) Thank you.
Can you state for the record which communities are the five municipalities?
The five communities that are referred to are Taloyoak, Gjoa Haven, Cape Dorset, Hall Beach, and Kimmirut.
Can the minister tell me what is going on in Iqaluit with their water licence?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok: Unfortunately, we don’t have any information on the status of the city’s water licence at this point. (interpretation) Thank you.
Can the minister tell me what role do you play with the city, then, when it comes to issues such as that?
Are they totally on their own or is this something that the department works with them with?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok: I don’t want to say that they are totally on their own. However, they are a tax-based municipality. However, as a department, we are there, if they ask, to provide them with support and advice so that they can meet the compliance requirements. (interpretation) Thank you.
Can the minister tell us how many times that that has happened in the recent past?
Up until the fall of this year, we were meeting every quarter with the City of Iqaluit officials, usually with the mayor and support staff.
We haven’t had a meeting since September, but I’ve had discussions with the city last week since the new mayor came on stream. It’s true that we need to get back to those quarterly discussions.
We are planning the meeting with the city officials in March of this month and we will certainly be going down through any issues that they’ve got and certainly work with them to see if there is any technical support, certainly, that the department can provide back to the city.
In your Minister’s Statement last Thursday, you stated that “There is still much work to do to bring municipalities into compliance with their water licences.”
Can you, as the minister, explain what you mean by “much work to”? What still needs to be done to bring all Nunavut communities that are not compliant [into compliance]?
At this time, some of the items we want to resolve can be corrected immediately while other issues would take longer. Some of them may require a longer time, but we are looking at the whole spectrum.
As it isn’t just for water services, it includes sewage-related needs like sewage lagoon repairs, and we want to have these dealt with by the municipalities.
We imagine this can be completed fairly quickly.
Furthermore, we can provide more training on waste management and the proper methods involved in the various areas.
These are the types of things we can work on in the interim, including the landfill (interpretation ends) fencing (interpretation) and other related waste management issues.
Just to go on in my questioning, I would like to ask a question in regard to the Community Development Fund. How is this fund administered?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, I would like to know what page she is referring to in her question.
Ms. Angnakak, if you can elaborate as to what page in the business plan.
I’m on page 160 of the business plan, $1.1 million.
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I understood her question, the (interpretation ends) Community Development Fund (interpretation) will be used for teaching courses at Arctic College related to financial management. (interpretation ends) SAO professional development, office administration, recreation leaders, works foreman, and by-law officer training (interpretation) are the different courses that will be offered through this initiative.
Ms. Angnakak: Thank you for that answer.
Can a hamlet use this program, perhaps, to have more support or training around finance management?
We have heard in the recent past some of the hamlets having serious financial difficulties and I’m wondering if this program can be used towards that as well.
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): First of all, yes.
As I stated earlier, it could be useful training for finance officers. It is part and parcel of the Community Development Fund.
I would like to go on to address the Senior Citizens and Disabled Persons budget here.
It goes from $75,000 to $193,000.
That is a pretty big jump. Can you tell us why?
I will read it in English. (interpretation ends) It provides a tax relief under the Senior Citizens and Disabled Persons Property Tax Relief Act. (interpretation) It only refers to Iqaluit.
The tax relief is basically for Iqaluit.
I don’t believe I got the whole answer I am looking for.
Why has the budget… ? It was set at $75,000 and now it is $193,000.
Can you explain why it’s such a big jump?
I apologize if I didn’t answer your question correctly.
There was an increase in the number of senior citizens and disabled persons.
There were 28 in 2009, but in 2014, there were 48.
Just to give us a good idea on who is using the program, can you give me a breakdown of seniors versus those with disabilities?
Who is accessing the program? Is it half and half or is one side of it more than the other?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I don’t have that level of detailed information; however, I would be happy to get that information for you. (interpretation) Thank you.
I want to ask a question about the mobile equipment block funding only because I really don’t know obviously very much about this.
How is this program administered?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) If I may, I would like to ask my deputy minister to elaborate.
The existing municipal block funding is administered by the Community Development Branch as well. Basically, each municipality is provided with a contribution of approximately $116,000 annually to cover municipal block funding, such as graders, backhoes, and dump trucks, those types of vehicles that the municipalities use.
That is pretty much what the fund is used for.
I see that the budget has not changed over the last year and the way that it is written, I don’t see any changes coming up. When you look at the demand from the community, is the budget meeting the demand?
With respect to that budget, it hasn’t changed, albeit for next fiscal year, that amount will change, as we are currently working on the budget.
Ms. Angnakak: I would like to ask a question regarding Community Infrastructure. This is on your business plan, 161, $1.3 million or a little more.
It says here, “Develops the departmental Five Year Capital Plan,” and it has an advisory committee.
Can you tell us who sits on the advisory committee?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) If I may, I’ll ask my deputy minister to provide that information.
I’ll allow Mr. Green to answer.
This program is in the Community Infrastructure Branch within Community and Government Services. It consists of nine staff that provide support to municipalities for the annual capital plan.
The committee is the Nunavut Community Infrastructure Advisory Committee. It consists of three senior GN employees and three municipal mayors.
Just for clarification, this advisory committee looks at proposals from all of the municipalities and then they decide what is going to be funded.
My other question would be: what are usually the funding requests? What do you approve? Everybody wants a new arena.
Everybody wants everything. How do you go about setting the priorities with the communities so that their requests can actually be met, that it actually makes sense? If you know what I mean.
Hon. Tom Sammurtok: Thank you, Iksivautaaq.
Just so that we get the proper response to this, if I may, I would like to defer that to my deputy minister.
Each municipality has their integrated sustainability plans that they update annually. Basically, each municipality takes their priorities from those plans and submits them to the CGS Community Infrastructure Branch.
All those requests are consolidated in a report.
Basically, the Nunavut Community Infrastructure Advisory Committee will rank and prioritize the projects that are brought forward based on the GN’s ranking and prioritization criteria. When we rank those, the highest ranking would be anything that relates to health and safety.
That would take priority over some situation where we would need an arena upgrade. Plus the fact that in situations where we have capacity problems within communities for their hamlet office or community hall, then that is also pretty high ranking.
There is a model that they use to rank and prioritize projects on behalf of the municipalities.
The three municipal mayors play an integral role in making sure that the process is transparent for all municipalities across the territory.
Just so I understand this correctly, let’s say, a lot of communities would like recreation facilities and they are into millions of dollars.
Members here, my fellow colleagues, have raised issues like long-term elder housing as a real priority. Would something like long-term elder housing or new health facilities be identified by the community or is that something that only comes from the government?
What is the community identifying specifically?
Is it only truly like water, sewage, and that kind of stuff?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I can respond to the question, but I will ask that my deputy minister respond to it.
The community sustainability plans capture the entire infrastructure within a community in terms of core infrastructure for programs and services. For the CGS branch, when we do the reconciliatory work, our focus is on municipal infrastructure, and then each department brings forward their requests for schools and education. Any projects that have been ranked and prioritized by the Nunavut infrastructure committee must also be ranked against those projects as well.
If a community put in a request for an arena, yet there has been strong support to put in a long-term elder facility, and there is only enough money to do one, based upon the process and procedures that you have in place, if the money was awarded, that would mean then that the long-term elder centre would be the one built.
Hon Minister, Mr. Sammurtok.
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Yes, you are correct.
I would like to go to Sport and Recreation. Is this fund proposal-based?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) It is fixed.
However, if I may, maybe just touch on some of the things that this money is used for; grants and contributions provided to sport organizations representing over 3,000 participants, sport organizations that include basketball, volleyball, and soccer, as an example, grants also provided to municipalities for facility improvements, and skills development and physical activity initiatives.
Those are some of the examples of where this money is spent. (interpretation) Thank you.
How do you go about ensuring that all communities can access this program? I’m thinking particularly of students or kids who want to play sports. They want to come to Iqaluit or they want to go down south or any other opportunities.
How do you make sure that everybody can access this? We have teams all over and some live quite far away, for example, from Iqaluit.
Look at the High Arctic. It’s very expensive to get there and from. How do you ensure that communities are all accessing this program and, if they do, how is it divided up?
Every year, the hamlets or the (interpretation ends) recreation leaders (interpretation) in the communities receive the written information outlining the various funding grants available to them.
Under your environmental work plan on page 162 of the business plan, it says that “Effluent quality standards for Nunavut” are being developed.
I’m wondering: does this mean that Nunavut has been operating without such standards?
Chairman (Mr. Enook): Thank you, Ms. Angnakak.
I believe my deputy minister can provide a detailed response to clarify the question, so if you could ask my deputy minister to respond.
Nunavut and other northern territories were given a five-year exemption under the CCME strategy for the effluent discharge levels.
CGS had hired Dalhousie University to do a review to gather baseline data on the existing sewage lagoons to see if they can meet the new proposed, recommended effluent levels.
Dalhousie has finished doing their collection of data. They are now in the process of finalizing their analysis of the collection of data.
We will probably know within the next four to six months, based on their sampling, if we would need to do any improvements to our existing wastewater management facilities to meet the guidelines.
From discussions with the officials from Dalhousie University, there are certainly strong indications that those systems are performing well.
We are on page J-5.
Continuing on, Mr. Mikkungwak.
Mr. Mikkungwak (interpretation): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I welcome the minister.
My first question I want to ask is related to some of the questions my colleague already asked about in the business plan on page 160.
My colleague was asking questions about elders and people with disabilities and assistance programs. One community is mentioned in the plan, and we have many communities in Nunavut.
What about the other communities in Nunavut? Are they included?
If I understood my colleague’s question, the funds slated for people with disabilities and elders are specific to Iqaluit. Iqaluit is the only community under our department’s budget.
All of the other communities receive funding from the Department of Finance.
That issue is now clearly understandable, so I will move to another issue.
It may have been obvious, but when I was first elected as an MLA, I was representing search and rescue groups in Baker Lake and throughout Nunavut.
I continue to support the search and rescue groups in Nunavut and Baker Lake.
However, on page 161, regarding the search and rescue groups, the funding has never increased.
If you look at the English version, (interpretation ends) “SARO Equipment and communication systems,” (interpretation) with that written information identifying the Department of Community and Government Services as being responsible for this part, will they be standardizing the communication equipment used by the search and rescue groups?
The local search and rescue groups or the municipal governments are able to make proposals to access funds from that program.
Mr. Mikkungwak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation) Regarding the communications equipment, if the SAR groups made a proposal to purchase appropriate communication systems, would they receive assistance or would their recommendations be paid attention to?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): I think we are all aware that when an emergency arises, having the proper equipment, including communication systems, is a must. If a proposal is submitted, it would be considered carefully.
Nonetheless, there are many SAR groups in Nunavut, obviously, and if they submit a proposal on communication equipment for their searchers, is there a funding limit to the amount they can request?
Through the emergency management program, we have provided devices like (interpretation ends) SPOT (interpretation) and two-way radios. However, if a search and rescue group wants to order other equipment, then they can do so in a written proposal.