EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
The Nunavut government contributes funds from the operations and maintenance budgets for archaeological activities. The funds were approved by this House for these purposes.
Last year, I believe I had responded that $25,000 was set aside for that and again, in this fiscal year, the total amount is approximately $25,000.
The funds come from the budget that was approved and the government hasn’t set aside any further funds other than those identified in the operations and maintenance budget.
Mr. Curley: Thank you. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The reason why I’m asking these questions is that the federal government sets aside a larger amount of money than the Nunavut government. In my preamble, I indicated that we should not always look at the federal government to look for money for expeditions, such as the Franklin Expedition. There are monies available from other sources.
The Nunavut government is the only place where you can get a licence for expeditions.
We should not be giving them licences. We should be giving them permits.
Is it possible to have that changed and that they be given permits if they’re going to be allowed to look for ships?
Based on the member’s first question regarding the MOU, I will check into whether I am able to table the MOU, but I would be able to provide some information to the member on the details related to this agreement.
With respect to looking for human remains, although that is part of the work, it isn’t the entire reason for the project, as it includes mapping the terrain and seabed, as well as what artefacts are found, which have provided a lot of information on what happened.
If we had used only our funds, we wouldn’t have found out about a lot of the circumstances and we have more details that have come to light. These details pertain to the areas that were used by the lost expedition.
We haven’t requested any further supplementary allocations and we haven’t heard from other agencies that want involvement. The funds used for this purpose under operations and maintenance haven’t experienced a shortfall and the budget was already approved previously as they are part of our operations and maintenance funds.
This project is more under the federal government. We have not requested additional funds.
With the other question that you asked, if there is another project requested, I will sign that licence or permit.
Question 705 – 3(3): GLO Position in Cape Dorset (Schell)
Mr. Schell: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is for the Hon. Madam Premier and my question is in regard to the GLO position in Cape Dorset.
When is that position going to be filled?
While I look through my briefing notes, the GLO positions in a variety of the communities are getting filled.
Again, it does indicate that they are at the interview stage at this point.
How many other communities are still waiting for GLOs?
First of all, I would like to thank him for asking that question.
There are 19 positions that are filled and there are 6 vacant positions.
Will all those positions be filled before the end of the mandate of this government?
The filling of these positions are at various stages. Some of them are at the interview stage and some of the individuals are still waiting to get an office.
Due to a variety of reasons, I cannot indicate whether we are going to be able to fill all of the positions prior to the end of this government.
There are a variety of reasons. There are some with no offices.
Question 706 – 3(3): Review of the Disaster Compensation Program (Enook)
As the minister is aware, two major disasters occurred recently in my constituency that resulted in the destruction of tens of thousands of dollars worth of hunters’ boats and equipment.
One of these incidents took place at the floe edge and the other occurred when a major storm hit Pond Inlet.
As I pointed out in my Member’s Statement on Friday, the current lack of adequate marine infrastructure in Pond Inlet has left my constituents extremely vulnerable to storms and other natural disasters.
Mr. Speaker, my first question is the following: will the minister assure me that the hunters who lost their equipment in these incidents through no fault of their own will be eligible for compensation under the government’s Disaster Compensation Program?
I would like to thank Mr. Enook for asking that question in regard to the Disaster Compensation Program. It is a very important program.
There are forms available and the conservation officers in the communities can help individuals who would like compensation under this program. Our office has the forms.
There are a set of criteria that has to be met before any compensation is paid out. Usually, the ceiling that can be collected through this program is $10,000.
Anybody can make a claim for compensation.
If they are not approved for compensation, they can make an appeal to the deputy minister.
There is room for appeal should they get turned down for compensation.
In 2005, the Government of Nunavut and Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated undertook a joint review of harvester support programs.
One of the recommendations in the final report from this review, and I’m sure you have a copy, was that the GN and NTI should work more closely together to develop and administer programs to assist hunters who suffer equipment losses.
Can the minister tell me what actions have been taken to implement this recommendation?
Usually, under Nunavut-wide programs, we work very closely with Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated.
In regard to the Disaster Compensation Program, it was originally set at $80,000, but since we didn’t receive many claims, we set it down to $40,000.
Again I would like to indicate that we have a close working relationship with Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated in regard to Nunavut-wide programs.
Maybe I didn’t make myself clear, but I was trying to ask you if Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated and the Nunavut government have taken any actions to implement the recommendations in this report.
My question is: what actions have been taken to implement these recommendations?
I don’t have the information in front of me and what recommendations have or haven’t been implemented. I will take the question and respond in written form at a later date.
Question 707 – 3(3): Relations with Inuit Heritage Trust (Tapardjuk)
While my colleagues were raising questions on this issue, a question popped up, so I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Culture and Heritage.
I am referring to the portfolio that my Annuraaqatik holds.
Mr. Speaker, this matter raised by my colleague regarding the lost Franklin Expedition ships and the response kind of confused me.
Can the minister clearly indicate whether the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement was referenced with respect to the Inuit Heritage Trust and their cooperation with the Nunavut government or is it unnecessary to request their approval prior to approving a permit for this project?
I would like it clarified, please, Mr. Speaker.
I thank my Annuraaqatik for asking me a question on this matter.
Yes, we work closely with the Inuit Heritage Trust on heritage issues and place names related to topography. When we are required to work together, we keep the Inuit Heritage Trust informed about artefacts, research, projects, and further information requests. That is part of their mandate.
We work with them on these matters and we keep them informed about projects, including any approvals that are required.
I wanted further clarification, which is why I asked about the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, as it forms part of Canadian law.
Mr. Speaker, just recently when my colleague was raising questions about permitting process, the question was asked, “Can you deny their request?” The answer I heard was that no, you could issue a permit to the applicant.
Mr. Speaker, is the minister saying that the Inuit Heritage Trust responsible for archaeological matters in Nunavut has no involvement in this approval process? They have no say in this matter? Is that what the minister was trying to state?
We work closely together with Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated or Inuit Heritage Trust.
Yes, we give the Inuit Heritage Trust every opportunity regarding the permits. I sign those permits when it comes to doing archaeological work or searches, as in the Franklin Expedition ships.
We negotiate with them and if there is a requirement for approval and so on, there is constant dialogue between our government and the Inuit Heritage Trust.
I am thankful that you work together with the Inuit Heritage Trust and other birthright corporations or organizations.
One of the questions that were posed by my colleague was whether you sign the permits or licences.
Do you negotiate with the Inuit Heritage Trust regarding the issuing of permits and if they tell you that they are concerned or that they think that looking for the Franklin Expedition ships is useless? Do you consult them prior to giving them a permit?
If there is a request, it would be given to me and I would sign it.
If it looks like it should not be approved, then it does not come to my desk and they would make an indication of the reason why the permit was declined.
Yes, I would sign a permit if it comes to my desk.
Question 708 – 3(3): Kivalliq Boarding Home Contract (Ningeongan)
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned earlier, the residents of the Kivalliq region who are required to travel for medical services out of the territory go to Winnipeg where, if they are lucky, they can stay at the Kivalliq Inuit Centre.
Can the minister provide an update on the current status of the medical boarding home contract in Winnipeg?
The medical boarding home contract was awarded on April 1, 2013 through an RFP process and it’s valid for three years.
Having a boarding home to stay in certainly makes the experience of travelling away from home for medical treatment much more comfortable.
Maybe, thinking now, I should have asked this question a lot sooner than today because my cousin back home is always so keen to remind me that the problem we have is we grow too fast and too late smart. I am almost convinced that I am a victim of that truth.
Can the minister describe what considerations have been given to changing the requirements of any boarding home contract to ensure that adequate accommodation is available and clients do not have to stay in hotels?
Of course, we’re always monitoring the usage of the boarding homes, wherever they are in the north and south, to address the occasional overcrowding.
It doesn’t happen very often, but we are aware of situations where it does and our officials work with the boarding homes to address those.
Unfortunately, it’s very complex and complicated to predict how many patients and clients will require a boarding home in a given week or even a given year, but we constantly monitor it.
Mr. Ningeongan: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, minister, for your response.
When some of my constituents have to stay at a hotel, again as I mentioned earlier, they feel that they do not receive the same level of support and service as clients who stay at the boarding home.
Will the minister commit to reviewing the boarding home contract to ensure that in the future, there will be adequate support and accommodation for medical clients from the Kivalliq region?
Although the clients and patients may stay at the local hotels, the boarding homes still work with the individuals.
They come to the boarding home for meals. They can avail themselves of the amenities there, whether it’s Internet, recreation, and other activities.
Again, as I had said earlier in question period, I will have my officials follow up with the boarding homes to see if there are any issues.
Question 709 – 3(3): Nunavut Suicide Prevention Strategy Action Plan (Elliott)
My questions are for the Minister of Health. Mr. Speaker, my questions are regarding the Nunavut Suicide Prevention Strategy Action Plan.
According to the action plan, the Department of Health plays the central role in mobilizing the GN regarding the implementation of the action plan.
An issue that has been raised by many members and is one of the anticipated results is “Sufficient and effective mental health and addictions facilities in Nunavut.”
Could the minister update the House on this priority?
Mr. Speaker, I think that earlier this year and last year, we talked about this as well.
We have moved away from the concept of an addictions facility.
We were working on a pilot project, a mobile addictions treatment facility, a pilot project that was held in Cambridge Bay. We’re still evaluating the results of that and following up with individuals.
We opened up the Akausisarvik facility here in Iqaluit in May. It is a larger facility. Thank you to the Legislative Assembly for those additional funds.
My officials are looking at a facility in Rankin Inlet and they are looking at a facility in Cambridge Bay.
When I say looking at a facility, it’s looking at existing buildings and seeing if we can reconfigure or repurpose them, as the government buzzword is, to use them from what they were previously used for and use them for mental health and addictions facilities.
With any action plan that requires an evaluation to show its success, has an evaluation of the current action plan been initiated?
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr Speaker.
Yes, the implementation committee is working to retain a person to evaluate the action plan.
March 2014 marks the end of the current action plan. Has the Government of Nunavut started working with NTI, the Embrace Life Council, and the RCMP to renew this action plan?
The Government of Nunavut and all of the partners have regular meetings. I met with them myself in May.
That topic didn’t come up, but I’m sure it will at some point and I will endeavour to inform the House of that update.
Question 710 – 3(3): Tamapta and Homeowners and Small Businesses (Ningark)
I would like to direct my question to the Premier regarding the Tamapta Action Plan and I want to ask about this plan as it speaks to poverty reduction.
Has any consideration been given to private homeowners as well as small business owners?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr Speaker.
The poverty reduction plan has many details as well as a plan to combat poverty and to lessen poverty.
It has various components that were heard during the community consultations and most of the categories were brought up during those consultations. These include the shortage of housing.
One of the biggest issues brought up was that when people are hired at a job, the increased rent is the biggest obstacle local residents complained about as it can lead to poverty. We heard the message from our residents. This issue was reviewed by the Nunavut Housing Corporation and measures have been implemented, specifically the larger household income amount, to lessen the impact on newly employed tenants.
This is based on this message as well as others. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Yes, the Premier as well as the cabinet prepared an action plan for poverty reduction.
My question is: now regarding the URCC utility rates, can this issue be dealt with by cabinet?
Some residents are seeing an increase in utility rates and it can impact our residents on the cusp of poverty within Nunavut.
Is this a matter that can be dealt with by cabinet or is this an issue that you, as the Premier, can resolve?
This is under the portfolio of the minister responsible for the poverty reduction plan.
I am unsure if this is included in this plan, but the minister responsible would know these details.
The reason why I directed my question to the Premier is that in her capacity as the leader of this government, I assumed that she had discussions with her colleague about reduction in costs for our residents or she doesn’t even discuss these types of issues with her colleague.
This impacts all the other costs that Nunavummiut endure and hopefully this spurs the Premier to start discussing them with her colleague about utility rates as we have to provide assistance to our residents. Perhaps we need to inform Nunavummiut that we are trying to combat poverty by lessening rates to provide assistance.
If you haven’t discussed it yet with the minister, will you be meeting with the minister to discuss this issue?
This is tied into the area of costs that are increasing the number of people on the cusp of poverty. This is something that is being looked at for implementing measures further down the line with The Makimaniq Plan and there are different measures being discussed for implementation.
This also ties into responsible management and to ensure that we don’t add to the costs our residents have to pay, especially utility costs.
It has many areas that are being reviewed, but most of the details are listed out in The Makimaniq Plan.
Let us move on to our orders of the day.
Reports of Standing Committees on Bills and Other Matters.
Tabled Document 394 – 3(3): Nattilingmiutut Curriculum Needs (Ugyuk)
I would like to table a letter that I have received from the Kinguvaakhaliuqtiit Language Society.
Mr. Speaker, the society is asking for support for their efforts to revitalize and strengthen the use of the Nattilik dialect.
At an appropriate time, I will be asking questions on the support that is available to language curriculum initiatives.
Motion 054 – 3(3): Appointment of the Integrity Commissioner of Nunavut – Notice (Oshutapik)
I give notice that on Wednesday, September 11, 2013, I will move the following motion:
NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the Hon. Member for Quttiktuq, that the Legislative Assembly recommends to the Commissioner of Nunavut that the Hon. J.E. (Ted) Richard be appointed as Integrity Commissioner of Nunavut, effective September 10, 2013.
Notices of Motions. No? No more notices of motions.
I must be seeing things. I thought I saw you with your hand up.
Motion 054 – 3(3): Appointment of the Integrity Commissioner of Nunavut (Oshutapik)
(interpretation ends) WHEREAS section 24 of the Integrity Act provides that the Integrity Commissioner is appointed by the Commissioner of Nunavut on the recommendation of the Legislative Assembly to hold office for a term of five years during good behaviour;
AND WHEREAS the appointment of the present incumbent expires today;
The motion is carried and as such, congratulations to Mr. Richard, who is sitting in the Gallery here.
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters. Bills 32, 40, 68, and 69, and Minister’s Statement 299 – 3(3) with Mr. Ningeongan in the Chair.
>>House recessed at 15:24 and Committee resumed at 15:40
Chairman (Mr. Ningeongan) (interpretation): Good afternoon, members and Nunavummiut who are watching the proceedings of the Committee of the Whole.
In Committee of the Whole, we have the following items to deal with: Bills 32, 40, 68, and 69, and Minister’s Statement 299 – 3(3).
We wish to proceed with the review of Minister’s Statement 299 – 3(3) and, if time permits, we will proceed with the review of Bills 68 and 69.
Does the committee agree to first deal with Minister’s Statement 299 – 3(3)?
Minister’s Statement 299 – 3(3): NHC Receives $100 Million in Federal Government Funding – Consideration in Committee
Does the committee agree to bring in the Minister responsible for the Nunavut Housing Corporation, Minister Taptuna, and his witnesses to the table?
Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort Minister Taptuna and his witnesses in.
Thank you, Sergeant-at-Arms. Thank you, Minister Taptuna and your witnesses.
On my immediate right is the President and CEO of the Nunavut Housing Corporation, Mr. Barriault, and on my left is the Chairman of the Nunavut Housing Corporation board, Eugene Lysy.
We welcome your witnesses to our meeting.
At this time, you may begin your opening comments, Minister Taptuna.
Thank you for the opportunity to meet with you to review my statement in the House this past May regarding the Nunavut Housing Corporation receiving $100 million in federal funding.
I believe, with the help of Mr. Lysy and Mr. Barriault, we can address some of the issues and concerns.
The allocation methodology described in my previous statement and explained in the backgrounder that I have distributed to the members is essentially the latest effort by the Nunavut Housing Corporation to get better value for their housing investment dollars.
As was stated in the House, our housing crisis affects every community in Nunavut, but not every community is affected equally.
Over the past ten years, the Nunavut Housing Corporation has tried a number of different approaches when allocating new units to address Nunavut’s ongoing housing crisis in the most effective way possible at its disposal.
In the early years of Nunavut, it tried a “some for all” approach to ensure it was being as fair as possible to every community. Although it was fair in that every community got a unit, it was unfair in that communities all have different needs, some greater than others.
The Nunavut Housing Corporation also tried, just before the Nunavut Housing Trust came on stream, to allocate units using an intensified allocation methodology, targeting 7 out of 25 communities, to ensure the 80 housing units delivered would have a noticeable impact. This, of course, was back in 2006.
All of these methods have depended ultimately on one thing: how far to stretch the investment. When the Nunavut Housing Trust came and Canada’s Economic Action Plan funding was announced, everybody got some, but some got more than others based mainly on community size and waitlists.
Now the Nunavut Housing Corporation is introducing a new approach based on all of this experience. A fundamental tenet of crisis management is to have a plan in place to coordinate resources to successfully stabilize a situation.
As demonstrated in the framework and Long-term Comprehensive Housing and Homelessness Strategy tabled last session, we must be more strategic with how we address our housing challenges. Giving some housing to every community means less housing overall for Nunavut.
By providing a transparent allocation system that recognizes the difference in the size of our communities, that determines need for public housing in an objective manner and allows flexibility for the realities of construction in the north, the Nunavut Housing Corporation is demonstrating that it is learning from its lessons.
I have great confidence that between the officials at the corporation who proposed a new needs-based way of selecting where to allocate new units and the board of directors who reviewed and approved the system before it was recommended to cabinet… .
Mr. Chairman, nothing is ever perfect. As they have done in the past, my officials at the Nunavut Housing Corporation will continue to find ways to improve on it. I am sure that some of you may already have suggestions on how to improve it immediately.
However, at this time, it is the best system we have on hand today.
Under different circumstances, for example, if we had a long-term funded housing construction program in place, a program that could guarantee that we were addressing our current ongoing housing needs in a progressive fashion, we could be discussing instead how a federal investment in housing should be shared among every community over time, but we do not have that luxury.
Mr. Chairman, we owe it to ourselves and our future generations to do the right thing and base our spending decisions on how best to overcome our very real, but not insurmountable, challenge of addressing the housing needs of Nunavummiut.
This is specific to the mover of the motion who asked that the Minister’s Statement be referred to the Committee of the Whole, specifically Minister’s Statement 299 – 3(3), so that it could be reviewed and debated by the committee.
I would like to ask the mover of the motion if he has any opening comments. Mr. Tapardjuk.
Mr. Tapardjuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wish to welcome the minister and his officials.
Further, I am quite ecstatic that you are able to be at the witness table.
I believe it was in May 16, 2013 during our spring session that you provided in your Minister’s Statement an announcement of $100 million specific to housing to be built in Nunavut. First of all, we should thank the Government of Canada for being able to allocate funding to Nunavut to put towards housing needs.