EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I have been informed that this is a program that’s going to be planned for Nunavut communities.
I will be pleased to inform the members and update the members on the progress of this program.
In terms of the social advocate’s office itself, could the Premier explain how the positions have been drawn from different departments and how they’re working together?
Are they all now EIA employees or is there still a health representative, or a justice representative, or two EIA representatives on that advocate’s office?
I would like to note that your time has come up.
The Deputy Minister, Markus Weber, will answer that question.
The office was created through last year’s main estimates and business plan.
One director level position from the Department of EIA has been turned into the director of the Social Advocacy Office.
That position is currently open for staffing with that competition closing on March 31 of this year.
That person will lead the office.
There are two current employees of the office. One is the manager of the Women’s Secretariat and that position was a transfer from the Department of Health and Social Services through the 2009-2010 main estimates.
There is another person working as a contract employee on the suicide prevention work that was being funded out of the vacancy in the director position.
So with the director being hired, that contract will be ending.
A new position was created as well for a social policy analyst and that position will be staffed by competition. It is currently vacant.
Lastly, the other position that was transferred from the Department of Health and Social Services is an administrative position for the Women’s Secretariat.
That position will take on further work. It is not just about women’s issues but the position will also do administrative work for the rest of the office and do some work on other gender equality issues.
So in total, there are four positions.
Two of those are currently staffed; one with the staff member, the other with a contractor.
I have Mr. Arvaluk.
I am a bit perplexed by some of Mr. Elliott’s comments.
I was trying to see where his line of questioning was leading to and while he was talking, I was trying to envision myself in different positions.
I would imagine myself as a mayor or as a councillor at the hamlet council when he was talking about the terms of reference currently in play for the MLO position in the communities, such as in Pond Inlet. I believe that is also the case for the other communities as that position will become redundant once the GLO position is created.
Will these municipalities be forced to pay the salary of the MLO if they wish to retain that position?
From my perspective, this position becomes unnecessary since all of their duties are superseded by the GLO position. The MLO is already a liaison officer.
The way it was set up was that the MLO, which is a hamlet position paid for via contract by the CGS department, served that role.
Now this other position will try and gather information related to hamlet operations, such as water trucks, garbage trucks, or the like, which require funding from the government.
Now the GLO will be funded through the executive, but will be simply fulfilling that same role as a liaison officer.
With respect to the MLO position, that role will no longer be necessary as it will become redundant.
If the hamlet wishes to retain the MLO position, how can we justify this when our finances are reviewed by the Auditor General? Will we not be reprimanded again for wayward spending?
We ought to be discussing this matter further before we cross that bridge and we also have to report to the Public Accounts Committee.
Can you provide some details as to how the hamlet could either retain the MLO position or how it will be resolved if they would like to transfer those funds to another position? A different PY will require funding from a different source so as not to see this funding.
Can the hamlets be provided funding by the CGS department if the hamlets wanted to create another role for their MLOs?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The municipalities will be able to keep those funds that they receive as block funding from this government. We will leave it at the discretion of the hamlets if they wish to return those funds.
With regard to communication, this government views the line of communication as a top priority.
Just by listening to the concerns expressed by the public, they wanted this position created and we agreed to this initiative, along with all of the Members of the Legislative Assembly.
Due to the importance we place on communication as the Nunavut government, we want the lines of communications between our governments, between the residents in the communities, as well as from Inuit in the communities to the government.
With respect to the roles envisioned, there are many roles for this position to undertake based on what we have researched in relation to the MLO position.
Currently, the MLO position has to work as a liaison for the hamlet, but on the side, they are also handling the government liaison related duties.
The one position tasked to provide these services currently is overburdened simply due to the existing workload. We envision the GLO and MLO splitting those tasks based on their job requirements as each position has different responsibilities.
Further, those funds currently used for the MLO positions can be retained by the hamlets.
Yes, I accept that. However, there’s a contract between the hamlets and CGS in which the hamlets agreed to carry out certain work to coordinate the government and the hamlets’ O&M.
So are you saying that you will be agreeing to changing the contract and the terms of reference with the hamlets so that they could keep their MLO and doing new jobs in the hamlet?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) As part of the municipal funding program, I don’t think the contract will be changing. What will be changing are the duties, as I illustrated earlier. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I’m relieved by that because that MLO position is everything in my community; anything that nobody wants to do, that’s what he or she does.
I’m glad that the contract is flexible to continue the funding for that position.
However, I’m still not in support of the creation of the GLO position, not because I don’t want the job in my community but because the money is a beautiful $4 million a year that I could use for something else that is a more tangible benefit to the community instead of just a liaison between the government and the community.
Tangible benefits can be made, but money is always tight.
In this case, we seem to be creating a position for the purpose of communication when, in fact, the communities have been doing pretty good communicating since the creation of Nunavut in 1999 with emails, television, local radios, writing letters, and emailing to the government directly from their homes.
There’s a lack of swimming pools in the communities. There’s a lack of youth initiative programs in our communities.
We seem to be only concentrating on adults all of the time maybe simply because they can vote. I don’t know.
But I’m still not in support of the creation of a position. I think that money could have been used better elsewhere within the government. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Did you want to comment on that?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) In the Qanukkanniq report, communication was one of the loudest complaints that we received from the people that we are serving.
They said that not only is the communication poor but it’s broken. We want to move things forward so that we fix this communication issue as much as we can.
Not only will the position be addressing communication issues but it will also be addressing services to the people in the communities and providing feedback to the government.
I have heard some complaints over the last week during question period or during the Committee of the Whole where individuals in the smaller communities or in any community are not being provided enough information, delays in receiving ID cards, job ads are not available, or the fact that summer student employment information is not readily available.
This position will be a major communication link in the communities. If the GLO will be in a position to immediately communicate to the government that things are not being received by the communities in such cases as, perhaps, information on summer employment, or job ads, or driver’s licences and ID cards are delayed, and other stuff that happen here.
(interpretation) In the past, the GLO positions were very important as the residents of the community depended on them.
We have been reminded time and again that ever since the GLO position was cut, most residents no longer had anyone to turn to, especially Inuit in the communities.
With the original positions having been so important to the residents, when the research team looked at what was handled by the Nunavut government or for that matter, by the federal government, they noted that many Inuit, especially the unilingual people, depended on the GLO. Specifically, when they received any type of government documentation, many elders would become confused as to which person or position was now responsible for the services that used to be provided by the GLO. With the re-establishment of the GLO position, these individuals would be able to turn to the GLO to provide guidance as to where they would have to go.
If the GLO is unable to provide the proper service, the GLO would continue to assist the person to try and contact the other positions that could provide that assistance as this position will serve in that capacity. The position will serve many roles to many people in the community, more or less to coin an English phrase, the glue that binds the community to the government since this role will provide that linkage between the two in all different capacities.
We were simply trying to follow the recommendations as outlined in the Qanukkanniq Report Card and that was when we instigated this initiative.
This government is listening to its constituents whom we represent here in Nunavut.
Chairman: Thank you, Madam Premier. (interpretation) Mr. Arvaluk, I think that you stated that you were done.
I think the Premier misunderstood me.
I’m not opposing the position in my community. I don’t think the position is crucial or critical. There are other critical programs that need to be funded in the communities.
That’s all I’m saying.
I just don’t feel that these positions should be a priority over other programs that have not yet been funded, that should be funded, rather than a lot of programs that are lacking in the capital items you will see in the fall when we’re reviewing the capital that is shrinking all of the time in terms of needs and requirements.
Very poor health centres elsewhere in three communities; municipal programs, water trucks and sewage, etcetera are in very poor condition.
I just felt that this position was not crucial or critical to be funded as quickly as possible. That’s all I was saying.
That’s just a comment. (interpretation) That’s it.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I agree there are a lot of crucial things that we have to work on as a government and we are addressing those crucial issues.
Each individual department has their priorities looking at those crucial issues and this is one of the crucial issues under EIA that we are trying to address, to accommodate the request by the public. (interpretation) Thank you.
I have a couple of names here that I have allowed for questioning earlier on.
I would like to ask the members to keep in mind that if your question is not related to what has already been dealt with I will invite you to ask the question.
I also thank you for the opportunity. I wanted to wait until my colleagues had asked their questions.
Mr. Chairman, if I may, just with your statement, I would like to follow up very quickly on a question that I had asked the Premier in regard to environmental assessment, regulatory processes, and the six principles, if I may, very briefly Mr. Chairman.
The GN’s submission to the Nunavut Impact Review Board on the Kiggavik project was signed by an official with the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs, dated February 17, 2009.
Mr. Chairman, the reason why I raise this is because I tabled this letter in the House earlier this month and this letter indicates the screening of the Kiggavik proposal and the six principles.
Mr. Chairman, my question, I believe, is legitimate. Earlier, the Premier told me that ED&T is developing the government’s uranium mining management policy.
My question, Mr. Chairman, is: can the Premier clarify what EIA’s role will be in approving the policy?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) ED&T has a mining policy, not a uranium policy.
ED&T’s mining policy encompasses all of the mining issues.
As a cabinet, we work together. As the Premier, I work with the cabinet. We come out with one voice from the cabinet, including the Premier.
I do not work alone, but I do work with my very competent colleagues, the ministers that I work with in the cabinet.
The reason why I asked that was because in the letter, it states that “As the project proposal involves the mining of uranium NIRB is reminded of the Uranium Management Plan Principles approved by the Government of Nunavut on June 4, 2007,” and it lists the six principles.
So this one is specific, Mr. Chairman, on uranium and my question was: what is EIA’s role in approving the policy, if I may ask?
We are currently working on the issue of the six principles that you mentioned. The six principles were established before this government and now this government is currently using them, but it is still under the mandate of Economic Development and Transportation.
Once it’s complete, it would have to be reviewed by the cabinet and then if it is approved, you will be informed.
I would not like the general public and the people of Baker Lake to be confused.
I don’t oppose development and employment opportunities.
In fact, I’m in full support of advancement and economic development.
I know personally some people who work in the field of being support staff in certain areas. I’m very glad to see them have employment. I just want to discuss the fact that the issue of constituents in regard to this is very sensitive and their main concern is the environmental assessment.
I just want to stress that perspective.
I just want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to raise this question again. I also thank Madam Premier for answering as well. Thank you very much.
Your point is taken.
I would like to ask you to possibly ask questions that you had not already asked.
I was going to ask if I’m allowed to in terms of the structure of the social advocate’s office. There are four positions.
Do they physically work together in one office to coordinate and work together on the social net? Is it all one physical office?
I did want to comment further with regard to my colleague’s comments, but perhaps I will have some time later on to speak to that issue.
With respect to the particular question asked by my colleague, Mr. Elliott, yes, it is true. They would work in the same office.
I haven’t actually asked any questions about the child and youth representative, which is part of that office as well and working with Health and Social Services.
To make my question short and hopefully get some answers so that I don’t have to ask more, what I’m getting at and what I would like to know is: over the last couple weeks, in June, and in November, I was asking questions about what is being done and what has been happening with the social advocate’s office and the child and youth representative.
I have been told, “Research, research, and more research.” So if you could outline what research had been done and what community consultations have been done, it would be greatly appreciated.
The research area that the member speaks to is something we deem important, especially whether it is properly incorporating Inuit customs and practices, as the member has heard the response a fair number of times with how comprehensively this matter is being looked at.
Also, (interpretation ends) the child and youth advocate position will be created. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Any more questions, Mr. Elliott? Mr. Elliott.
It has been a year and I was just wondering. Other than shifting four positions, two from your department and two from other departments, I don’t think I received an answer as to what research has been done or what has been done over the last year.
So if you could give me a broad explanation of what has been done, it would be greatly appreciated.
We’re not the only department that deals with social issues. We collaborate with different departments. In particular, we are working with the Department of Health and Social Services.
As the minister stated earlier, he met with Inuit to consult with them on traditional Inuit customs and practices to develop policies for youth and children and about child rearing and other issues during his December 2009 meeting.
The process to embed Inuit culture in there is not completed yet, but we are attempting to put it into the government policies. We still have to consult with the people to embed Inuit culture into our government policies.
I wanted to mention that and Mr. Weber will make a supplement if I left anything out.
The director of the Social Advocacy Office is being staffed. It has not been staffed, but the Social Advocacy Office has been very active over the last year.
The focus has been a continuation of the Women’s Secretariat work. It’s the same individual doing the same work, but doing new initiatives as well.
She has been very active in support of the Qulliit Nunavut Status of Women Council and all of the work that they do.
In addition, the primary focus of the Social Advocacy Office over the last year has been using the funding from the director position to fill the suicide prevention and intervention advisor position for a second year. That individual has been coordinating the inter-agency work with the Embrace Life Council, NTI, and the RCMP on the development of the Suicide Prevention Strategy, which we hope will be done soon.
We have also rolled out the ASIST training over the course of the last year, including the training of 24 Nunavummiut to be suicide intervention trainers.
All of that work has been going on through the Social Advocacy Office this year.
We have started to aggregate some of the research that have already been done on similar models in many jurisdictions that’s called the child advocate. We have aggregated some binders of research that have been conducted in other jurisdictions and the model that’s currently in place in other jurisdictions, including ombudsman models, but that’s just an aggregation of paper at this point.
We haven’t done any thorough study of those different models. On the surface, considerable work needs to be done to customize those to Nunavut.
That is the reason that the Premier has repeatedly indicated that the Department of Health and Social Services really is taking the lead on child protection at this point.
The ultimate outcome will be a review of the child protection program and the legislation, and that will happen over the course of the next two years.
The ultimate outcome of that will also be the creation of a child and youth representative, which also will happen before the end of this government’s mandate.
So there will be legislation for a child and youth representative, but it needs to be focused on Nunavut’s needs and the specific circumstances of Nunavut, including Inuit societal values.
So a lot of work has to be done on customizing those models.
There isn’t much sense when we don’t currently have the leader of that group nor do we have all of that input from Nunavummiut that would allow us to create a position of a child and youth representative.
That will happen once we have received all of that input from Nunavummiut.
Thank you for that explanation. That helps a lot.
From my side, I am sitting and wondering what’s happening.
We’ve got an office of four positions and one is not filled. It has been a full year and it hasn’t been filled; $186,000 was given last year and now you’re asking for more. In my role as being accountable and prudent, I just want to make sure that the dollars are being spent in the manner that they should.
Is some of that $186,000, obviously since that position wasn’t filled, did that go to Health and Social Services to cover the work that they were doing in December?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will refer that question to Deputy Minister Weber.
The Social Advocacy Office is currently staffed only by two individuals, but the expenditures of the office include the salary of those two individuals. They also include the $250,000 contribution towards the Qulliit Status of Women Council.
It includes $50,000 in women’s initiatives and grants.
In addition, they helped to fund many other activities with respect to the Suicide Prevention Strategy development over the course of the last year and with the ASIST training and some of the costs associated with that.
The bulk of the costs of that training were covered by the Department of Health and Social Services, which also received funding from other sources in order to make that possible, but that is where many of expenditures went this year.
I think this will be my final question. I’m sure the Premier is expecting this one, but with my questions earlier, what actually went to people with disabilities in terms of that Social Advocacy Office and them being represented?
It would be nice to create everything all at the same time for everybody, but it’s not possible.
We are working on it. We’re looking for people to work there and also putting a priority on setting up the job descriptions. It would be nice to have somebody there working with people with disabilities.
Madam Premier, (interpretation) I believe you wanted to make a comment before Mr. Aupaluktuq. You may go ahead.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank Mr. Aupaluktuq for asking a question about mining.
It’s very important for Nunavut.
To elaborate further, mining related issues are reviewed by ED&T. (interpretation ends) The mining issues are taken into consideration on a case-by-case basis.
I just wanted to reiterate that so that there is a good understanding by everyone. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman: Thank you, Madam Premier. B-4. Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
Directorate. Total Operations and Maintenance. $5,322,000. Agreed?
(interpretation ends) B-5. Branch Summary.
Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs. Statistical Services. Total Operations and Maintenance. $824,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) B-6. Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs. Branch Summary.
Policy and Communications. Total Operations and Maintenance. $2,916,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) B-7. Branch Summary.
Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs. Nunavut Cabinet. Total Operations and Maintenance. $4,624,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) B-8. Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
Branch Summary. Commissioner of Nunavut. Total Operations and Maintenance. $290,000.
Just a question. If the Premier could give us an update on whether she’s heard whether they have decided who the commissioner will be. I think her term is done on April 12 or 11.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have asked our elected members about the issue of the Commissioner of Nunavut.
The federal government is usually provided with a list of candidates for consideration.
Once I was provided with a list, I submitted that list of candidates to the federal government.
However, to date, I haven’t had a response back on whether they have made their decision and who they named yet.