EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Even at this time, there are instructions in Inuktitut that we are providing Arctic College or other departments because what we hope to do is that the departments will have to be run with the Inuktitut language.
So that is what we are aiming for and I believe the First Assembly approved this.
I wonder if the minister can say that the year that we’re aiming for, 2020...can he update us as to exactly what they are doing to prepare for, so we will be aiming for 2020.
Do you think we’ll be there on time, or be late, or are we too far ahead?
So, does the minister think that 2020 is adequate to use the Inuktitut language?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Even this spring, we are in the process of producing Inuktitut policies. The first Nunavut policies will be English, French, and Inuktitut.
And the other one; regulations to protect the Inuktitut language where the private sector, restaurant owners, government agencies, or departments, those will deal with the public; we’ll have to use Inuktitut because a lot of times they are just in English where they should be in Inuktitut.
So what we’re saying is that we’ll be promoting the Inuktitut language in our everyday life.
So we are hopeful that once this act comes about that we will be able to use it to give us more strength, not just within government, but for the whole Nunavut, because the majority of the population in Nunavut is Inuktitut speaking.
So do I understand that the Protection of Inuit Language Act, what he said, that the stores, the restaurants, businesses, that they will have to use Inuktitut language? So in Quebec, we see only French language.
So do I understand that everything will be in Inuktitut by that year?
As I stated, the Language Act will be in English, French and Inuktitut. And of course, Inuinnaqtun falls under Inuktitut.
After the Act, so we are expecting that those three languages will be quite strong, and not just verbally, but also written.
What we will be asking those communities in the springtime is what the public feels about the act because they will be consulted. All the communities will be consulted so we can get ideas as to what the Act will entail.
By that time we will have a better idea if it’s positive or not. So, we will get an idea as to what the content of the act will be.
Can the minister say that all the communities will be consulted?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): At this time, I cannot say that all the communities will be consulted because we have consultants who will be working on the Act.
Yes, we will definitely have to go to some communities to hold public hearings, and how strong it will be.
But we have asked the different hamlet councils and businesses, the elders, and youth as to what should be in that Act.
It would be kind of difficult, so I will check into those, but now we will be asking the general public as to what the contents of the proposed act would be.
So at this time I cannot answer that all the communities will be visited.
Question 277 – 2(3): Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit (Kilabuk)
As my colleague was raising questions, I understood the responses in regards to the remarks that I made yesterday, that Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit is not being utilized enough in the House.
But I want to state that I am very hopeful, and I have no doubt that the minister and our other Members of the Legislative Assembly want to defend our fellow Inuit.
We’re all protective of them, but we have to have a general understanding of how a word can assist others.
It will not take just one; we will have to offer how we can assist our fellow Inuit. It’s very reassuring that by year 2020 where our language will be.
I wonder when Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, when will those come into effect? Or is there a plan that entails where we will conduct with Inuit culture and values?
Speaker (interpretation): Minister responsible for Culture, Language, Elders and Youth, Mr. Tapardjuk.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): We are presently working on the Inuit societal values, I believe I mentioned that last fall in the House.
We will be conducting a study of how in Cambridge Bay and Clyde River, as to how we can minimize the problems that we encounter today if we were to use Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit.
If we find that if there were improvements, and if it comes out positive, then we can do the same thing with the other communities.
At this time, we have funding approved that we have to set up an Inuit folk school.
So in April I want to have all the communities, and if they agree what we’re trying to do, that the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Committee are currently working on how the government should operate, and the government offices.
There are different committees who are employees, and how can they operate more on Inuit values.
Also, the Anti-harassment Policy, we wanted to apply more to the Inuit values because if the content is too foreign for the Inuit, we want it to be reviewed by the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Committee and we are aiming for 85 percent because we have to pay more attention to those things.
So we have a heavy task ahead of us.
We are presently doing some work, but I can’t say exactly when we will bring it about. It would be more ideal if we can bring those about before the year 2020.
Mr. Kilabuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It is clear now and it’s open that, Mr. Speaker, we know a lot of things that have been studied or tried by the government.
We can’t say what the foundations were and we should be able to say, as I have tried to say yesterday, that as government, we knew that we had to prepare, we have to make a complete plan as a government.
We want to serve everybody with everything because we want Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit to be even stronger. I am still looking for how else we can make a plan where there has been pilot stuff.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): The first government, there was an IQ Task Force and this task force was doing studies on how the government should work and what tools they will use.
The names are there and they were tabled in this House as IQ Task Force, and using that, the government started planning that now we incorporate Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit.
I am in full agreement with my colleague that we are not doing enough, but we are trying to do something. Maybe we should be more sensitive to those because the Inuit should have their own government and to be able to run it the way they want, but we will finally obtain that goal once we start using our language.
Mr. Kilabuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker...(no interpretation)... some of them might be able to appreciate the...I’m trying to state today, Mr. Speaker, maybe there’s no business plan to include the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit. Where are the plans that have been tried and have not been successful to date? Can he give me today the business plans where the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Task Force has recommended and that the Inuit have been holding on to?
Where can the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit be included within the GN-wide plan?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): The Department of Culture and Communications and Employment have been working to try and work as a department. We have a division within our department to implement the task force recommendations.
They are just beginning to work on this project.
How could we do more to make this Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit practice more forceful? The Inuit land claims organizations; we should be able to work with them. So we should be the government of all of the Inuit organizations as well so that we can work with them a lot more.
As a government we are working all by ourselves solely. So, we have to work more with Inuit organizations and use their knowledge to include Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit recommendations in the government.
Mr. Kilabuk (interpretation): The questions that I have stood, I truly believe in them.
I can talk about some recommendations that can be implemented.
How could we possibly be included within the government? Since I stood yesterday, and said, “I want to know how we are at this time of government. Where are we now?”
If we don’t have any plans to go ahead we won’t know where we stand. Perhaps the things that are blocking our way, and we cannot move ahead as a working group, maybe we can work on these blocks that block our way. I’m just stating this because I think this is our last day to meet today so that we can make our workers understand what we’re trying to do.
Speaker (interpretation): I did not hear a question there.
Member of the Legislative Assembly for Iqaluit Centre, Mr. Tootoo.
Question 278 – 2(3): Health Services for Students Outside of Nunavut (Tootoo)
Before I direct my question to the Minister of Health and Social Services, I would like to acknowledge the presence of our other page here that wasn’t recognized earlier, and that is; Celina Angujaq. I would just like to recognize the efforts and the hard work that all the pages are doing for us here during our long sitting days. I think we all appreciate the work that they do.
Mr. Speaker, my question for the Minister responsible for Health and Social Services deals with how, for health purposes, the department determines residency. I know, for example, in Education, if a student leaves a territory to pursue post-secondary education, they are still considered a Nunavut resident.
In cases where individuals have to leave the territory to obtain medical services, how does the department look at residency in cases like that?
If a person is from Nunavut and is seen by physicians here and requires care outside of the territory, then we would make those arrangements for that individual for care.
Maybe to clarify my question, I wasn’t looking at how the department would prepare and make arrangements for services, but my question was more; how do they determine if an individual like in the case of education, that goes out for school, and sometimes they could be out for four to five years depending on the type of program that they’re enrolled in.
For that entire time they are considered Nunavut residents.
For individuals that leave the territory for medical purposes because of services that are not offered in Nunavut, and they require those services, how does the department determine the residency of individuals in cases like that?
That’s what I was looking for.
In cases where a person requires care out of territory, during our debate in Committee of the Whole we had discussed that process.
If a person is from Nunavut and cannot receive the care in a 24/7 facility, the Department of Health makes those arrangements to find a place in a facility down south where the person can be cared for.
The total budget within the department is approximately $15 million for those types of services.
We need to look at those situations on a case-by-case basis. The individual once sent to receive that kind of care is considered a resident of the north, and the department would makes the arrangements for that service.
If a person leaves the territory to go to school, then that student in any province would then access the provincial medical health care services in that province.
I don’t know how I can ask to make it clearer, but strictly just for medical purposes, how does the Department of Health determine if someone is a resident of Nunavut?
Do they have to have a family member, someone that maintains a residence in Nunavut?
Do they have to have a Nunavut health care card?
How do they determine exactly whether or not an individual is, for health purposes, a resident of Nunavut or a resident of another jurisdiction?
If a person moved up here from Ottawa and says I’m a resident of Nunavut, then the person has self-declared that they are a resident of Nunavut.
The way the system works within the health care card coverage is; in each jurisdiction there is a three-month grace period where a person who moved to the territory has three months to apply for that particular province or territory’s healthcare plan.
So if I move to Ontario, I have three months to apply, at which time the Ontario system would kick in.
If a person came up from Ontario to Nunavut and said I’m moving here, I’m going to be a resident here; then the person would apply for that coverage. They will have three months to apply, at which time the person will continue to be covered as the application process is in place.
That process is across Canada. It allows a person to change coverage from province to province or territory to territory, and still be covered as the paper work goes through.
Mr. Speaker, I am aware of the three month rule that is for people that make a permanent move to a different jurisdiction, but where an individual moves for temporary purposes, whether it be for education, whether it be for health reasons. Are those individuals not still considered, for health purposes, a resident of Nunavut?
Their family maintains the residence here, they still have a Nunavut Health Care card, for whatever reasons that they cannot access services here, they move outside the territory, hopefully for a temporary period of time to get their needs addressed, or get their education achieved, those people are not for education, they are still considered Nunavut residents.
Is the minister saying that that is not the case for health, it is regardless of why you leave, whether it is temporary or permanent that you have three months to declare and get the paying health care coverage from the other jurisdiction, whether or not you plan on coming back after four months, six months, or whatever; that they will cease, no matter what, they are no longer Nunavut residents for health care purposes after three months.
If a person moved for whatever reason, that person in that province should apply for that particular province or territory’s health care coverage.
The person moved and as a student, then that student should make arrangements to transfer that plan. A person moves to Nunavut, we have a three-month grace period to allow people to apply so that they can be covered as a new resident of that province or Ontario.
So if a person makes a decision on their own for whatever reason, then they have to then go through the process of applying for that coverage.
If we make the arrangement of any person, which we do in health under the budget of $15 million for home care, community care, we make the arrangement for that facility, and we use a number of facilities throughout Canada where we cannot care for a person who requires a 24/7 service.
We make those arrangements, but if an individual again moves on their own to another jurisdiction, then that jurisdiction’s coverage would kick in after three months, if they applied for their coverage.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. The Question Period is over.
Written Question 016 – 2(3): Individual Education Plans (Peterson)
My Written Question is for the Minister of Education concerning individual education plans.
From August 1, 1999 to July 1, 2005, broken down by year and by school, how many enrolled students have participated in individual education plans?
From August 1, 1999 to July 1, 2005, broken down by year and by type of attendance, full-time, part-time, semi-frequently, how many enrolled students have participated in individual education plans.
From August 1, 1999 to July 1, 2005, broken down by year, how many of the enrolled students on individual education plan
a) had disabilities
b) were gifted students?
Return to Written Question 012 – 2(3): Nursing Recruitment (Aglukkaq)
This is a Return to Written Question, 012 – 2(3). The member, David Alagalak asked on February 23, 2006.
Tabled Document 105 – 2(3): Accreditation Survey Report for the Department of Social Services Baffin Region, September 25 to 29, 2005 (Aglukkaq)
Per the commitment I made last week, I wish to table the item: Accreditation Survey Report for the Department of Health and Social Services Baffin Region, September 25 to 29, 2005.
I am tabling the reports and I have also provided CD copies of the report.
Speaker (interpretation): Please bring the tabled documents forward to the Clerks’ desk.
Tabled Document 106 – 2(3): Treatment Facilities Inadequate in the Kitikmeot (Peterson)
I would like to table a document entitled: “Treatment Facilities in the Kitikmeot are Inadequate.” It is dated March 3, 2006.
Tabled Document 107 – 2(3): Sealing Poster: Save the Baby Veal – Avoid Cultural Prejudice (Akesuk)
Tabled Document 108 – 2(3): F/P/T Ministerial Report – Canadian Council of Fisheries and Aquaculture Ministers Meeting (CCFAM) – October 2005 (Akesuk)
Tabled Document 109 – 2(3): F/P/T Ministerial Report – Canadian Endangered Species Conservation Council (CESCC) – October 2005 (Akesuk)
Tabled Document 110 – 2(3): Nunavut Business Credit Corporation Annual Report for the Year Ending March 31, 2005 (Akesuk)
I wish to table the following documents: Sealing Poster: Save the Baby Veal - Avoid Cultural Prejudice.
Also, F/P/T Ministerial Report - Canadian Council of Fisheries and Aquaculture Ministers Meeting (CCFAM) - October 2005.
As well, the F/P/T Ministerial Report - Canadian Endangered Species Conservation Council (CESCC) - October 2005, and the final one is the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation Annual Report for the Year Ending March 31, 2005.
Tabled Document 111 – 2(3): Equipment Losses (Kilabuk)
As I made a commitment earlier, I stated that I would table a document in regards to compensation for equipment lost. I have a list of the individuals who have lost goods due to the severe winds and the negative impact it has had on the turbot fishermen.
Tabled Document 112 – 2(3): Government Leased Property Update (Brown)
I wish to table the following document that was requested during my appearance in Committee of the Whole: Government Leased Property Updates.
Motion 014 – 2(3): Extended Time to Review Bill 07 – An Act to Amend the Liquor Act – Notice (Tootoo)
I give notice that on Wednesday, March 15, 2006, I will move the following motion: I move, seconded by the Honourable Nember for Arviat, that notwithstanding Rule 68(1), the Report of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Accountability on the review of Bill 7, An Act to Amend the Liquor Act, be extended for further 120 days.
Mr. Speaker, at the appropriate time, I will be requesting and ask consent to deal with my motion today.
Speaker (interpretation): Notices of Motions. Mr. Peterson
Motion 015 – 2(3): Extended Time to Review Bill 11 – An Act to Amend the Fire Prevention Act – Notice (Peterson)
I give notice that on Wednesday March 15, 2006, I will move the following motion: I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Hudson Bay, that notwithstanding Rule 68(1), the Report of the Standing Committee on Infrastructure on Housing and Economic Development on the review of Bill 11, An Act to Amend the Fire Prevention Act, be extended for a further 120 days.
Mr. Speaker, at the appropriate time, I will be requesting unanimous consent to deal with my motion here today.
Motion 016 – 2(3): Extended Time to Review Bill 08 – Statistics Act – Notice (Tootoo)
I give notice that on Wednesday March 15, 2006, I will move the following motion: I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Arviat, that notwithstanding Rule 68(1), the Report of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Accountability on the review of Bill 8, Statistics Act, be extended for a further 120 days.
Mr. Speaker, at the appropriate time, I will be requesting and ask for consent to deal with my motion today.
If this is the appropriate time, I would like to ask consent to deal with the last motion.
Motion 014 – 2(3): Extended Time to Review Bill 07 – An Act to Amend the Liquor Act (Tootoo)
I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Arviat, that notwithstanding Rule 68(1), the Report of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Accountability on the review of Bill 7, An Act to Amend the Liquor Act be extended for a further 120 days.
I request consent to deal with my motion today.
There are no nays. Mr. Peterson.
Motion 015 – 2(3): Extended Time to Review Bill 11 – An Act to Amend the Fire Prevention Act (Peterson)
I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Hudson Bay, that notwithstanding Rule 68(1), the Report of the Standing Committee on Infrastructure, Housing and Economic Development on the review of Bill 11, An Act to Amend the Fire Prevention Act, be extended for a further 120 days.
Again, at the appropriate time, I would like to seek unanimous consent to deal with my other motion today.
Motion 016 – 2(3): Extended Time to Review Bill 08 – Statistics Act (Tootoo)
And thank you colleagues and a special thanks to our Premier for his support for our extensions I know he agrees whole-heartedly with them.
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Honourable Member from Arviat, that notwithstanding Rule 68(1), the Report of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Accountability on the review of Bill 8, the Statistics Act, be extended for a further 120 days.
>>House recessed at 15:34 and resumed at 16:05
We will continue on with what we started off with yesterday.
I would like to ask Mr. Simailak if he is going to bring in his officials to the witness table.
I’m sorry, Minister Simailak.
Before we go on to Committee of the Whole, we have Bill 5, Bill 6, Bill 9, Bill 12, Bill 13, and Bill 14 to deal with.
We would like to proceed with Bill 12 and the review of the Department of Finance followed by the Department of Justice, and the Legislative Assembly. We then will do Bill 13, Bill 14, Bill 5, Bill 6, and Bill 9.
Do we agree that we will deal with Bill 12 first?
Minister Simailak, would you like to bring in your officials down to the witness table?
Does the committee agree that the officials could be taken to the witness table?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Please assist the officials and the minister to the witness table.
(interpretation ends) Thank you Minister.
For the record, please introduce your witnesses. Minister Simailak.
On my right is Bob Vardy, Deputy Minister of Finance, and on my left is Victor Tootoo, Assistant Deputy Minister of Finance.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Simailak. Yesterday, we had one member who did a general comment.
So are there any general comments; none?
We are on (interpretation ends) Finance.
Total Operations and Maintenance. $1,798,000. (interpretation) Are there any questions?
I’m sorry; does anybody have his or her hand up?
Thank you. (interpretation ends) Finance.
Total Operations and Maintenance. $1,798,000. (interpretation) Do you agree?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Finance.
Branch Summary. Policy and Planning.
Total Operations and Maintenance. $3,914,000.
I was hoping I wouldn’t ask many questions because of a sore throat, so I will jump in here.
I welcome the minister and his officials back.
On page C-6, a question on the Crown Agency Council. The Crown Agency Council is responsible for developing Letters of Expectation to the Government of Nunavut’s Crown agencies. I think they were tabled in May 2005 and to date only the QEC’s response was tabled in the House.
When will the other responses to the Government of Nunavut’s Letters of Expectation to Crown corporations be tabled in the House?
We can certainly help you if you want to save your voice; you just pass this.
Yes, we have responses from four other Crowns. We are still waiting for one more and that’s the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation that we are waiting for.
Can the minister commit to, I guess, the backdoor tabling process so that we don’t have to sit and wait until June to get them?
Hon. David Simailak (interpretation): Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman: Thank you, very much. Mr. Peterson.
Do all the Crown agencies follow the Government of Nunavut’s Financial Management and Human Resources’ policies?
I am told not exactly, but we are working towards that and we will continue working towards that goal.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Mr. Peterson.
Can the minister tell us if the Qulliq Energy Corporation follows the Government of Nunavut’s new Staff Housing Policy?
Hon. David Simailak: Mr. Tootoo, please.