EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Are you or is that part of what is considered a small craft harbour?
No, that is separate. A floating dock is not considered a small craft harbour.
Thank you for that clarification because I know that there have been some concerns.
Our dock has sat on the shore because there is not enough room on the breakwater. There were concerns in Grise Fiord and Resolute Bay as well with the ocean. There is no break and they’re afraid it’s going to get broken.
There is no way of stopping it with the waves.
In terms of small craft harbours, I know the Arctic Fisheries Alliance has been working really hard. It combines all three communities of Arctic Bay, Resolute Bay, and Grise Fiord. It actually is looking at the development of a small craft harbour in Qikiqtarjuaq, which I know they have already completed a feasibility study.
I think they are actively seeking funding to be able to complete a socio-economic impact study, which goes to what Mr. Arvaluk was saying in terms of providing economic opportunities for our communities. It’s nice to always support those.
Is that part of what the minister is talking about in terms of supporting small craft harbours?
I believe I heard about three questions there.
There was a study conducted already by the group that you mentioned at Qikiqtarjuaq. We just received that and we will be going through that. That is a real good initiative coming from these communities.
I’m going to change gears.
You mentioned and talked about the airports. I know in one of your comments… . I don’t really take exception to it, but you had mentioned that there aren’t very few flights missed due to weather.
I don’t know, but you must not have flown into Nanisivik very much because we have quite a few flights that get missed due to weather.
In regard to Iqaluit, I know Mr. Okalik was raising questions about this.
Since most of the North Baffin and different communities… . We go through Iqaluit when we fly down and it is a big interest for my constituents to make sure that the airport... .
If you’re there on Monday, Wednesday, or Friday, it’s very hard to find room when you’re coming up from Ottawa or going down.
I know that there’s nothing in the budget this year for it, but in travelling across the south, there are some airports that have different airport development fees. When you’re travelling through, you actually have to pay when you go through their airport to help build new facilities. Has the government thought about doing something like that?
I know that in one of his Ministers’ Statements, the minister mentioned something about the Iqaluit airport being the 20th busiest airport, if I remember correctly, across Canada. Has the government thought about doing that as a way of generating revenue?
I believe that discussions have been around for a bit, in previous governments also. Down south, they call it the airport improvement fee. We don’t want to impose that to your constituency, it’s already a high cost, but in Iqaluit, the discussions are still ongoing.
I do have questions about the Arctic Bay Airport, but I was going to save that for when we go through the page-by-page [review].
I am just wondering if the minister could give an update as to what’s actually going to happen to the Nanisivik Airport once the Arctic Bay Airport is finally opened.
At this point in time, once the new Arctic Bay Airport is up and running to full capacity, the Nanisivik Airport is going to be closed.
Has the government had discussions with the Department of National Defence in terms of possible use with the Nanisivik Naval Facility?
I think that what DND and the naval facility are mostly interested in is just a dock.
In terms of the infrastructure that’s already up there and reclamation of the area, what’s in the plans for that? Is everything just going to be left there and mothballed? There are three generators that were put up there to create electricity.
There is infrastructure which, I believe, would belong to First Air and then there are government buildings there as well.
I’m just wondering what’s been done in terms of planning for that.
It’s not in capital planning for the future, but I’m sure that’s been thought about.
I will have my ADM respond to that question.
Mr. Kunuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I believe, at the time of the turnover of, I think, A and B airports to the GNWT, in the reclamation, clean-up of contamination and everything like that was built in.
We haven’t really talked to the federal government yet, but once that airport is no longer used, we probably will be talking to the federal government for them to start reclaiming that airport.
So it’s not the Government of Nunavut’s responsibility for reclamation of that area, it’s actually Transport Canada and the Government of Canada.
Mr. Kunuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) The answer is yes. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In his opening comments, when the minister was talking about small craft harbours, and some of the other comments that he made working towards… . He was saying that there was a lot of collaboration with the federal government.
With global warming and the idea of the Northwest Passage opening up, I can see why ports and harbours are going to be important. Has the Government of Nunavut thought about talking to other countries about whether they are interested in helping support types of ports like this and joint projects?
No, we haven’t spoken to the Americans or the Russians about small craft harbours and we don’t intend to.
I agree with the comments that the member from Tununiq made there. Yes, we do have to start initiating some of these infrastructure projects.
I will be answering some of those questions and I am looking forward to some of those questions when we come to the line-by-line items.
I am sort of closely starting to watch the time.
Yes, I was looking and checking to see. I only have 3 minutes and 50 seconds left to continue.
I guess I wanted to conclude by thanking the minister, actually, for his commitment to the High Arctic and the High Arctic Transportation Strategy that he’s put through.
In all of the issues that we talk about, whether it is air transportation or road transportation between the communities, or even travel by the sea, in the High Arctic, the costs are just extremely high.
So his commitment with the study that’s been done and travelling to the communities… . I know Grise Fiord and Resolute Bay have got issues with their airports and we’ve got issues with our airlines.
So I want to thank him and his department for his commitment to what they’re doing in terms of coming up with that strategy and looking at ways of helping our communities in the High Arctic.
I know it’s definitely appreciated by Grise Fiord, only being serviced by twin otter and with the runway being so small and not capable to have any other services. They actually have two airlines that they have to go through to be able to get anywhere like down to Iqaluit for medical or whatnot.
So it’s definitely appreciated in the comments that I have received from my constituents in having him come up and do that. I wanted to pass that along to him while he was here.
I will thank the hon. member from Quttiktuq for those comments.
I’ll try to keep it brief here; we have been here a long time today.
It’s nice to see the money is being spent in Pangnirtung for trying to relocate the airstrip there.
But over the next five years, there’s no money that I see allotted to spend to look at an alternate runway site for Kimmirut. So I’m lobbying for Kimmirut to see if they could get extra money.
I know you’re spending money to rehabilitate the runway, but you’re still going to have a short runway and it still won’t be able to land twin otters in there.
So I would just like to encourage him to try to get some spending money in there over the next little while so that they can look at an alternative site.
The airfare from Kimmirut to Iqaluit is about the same as it is from Iqaluit to Cape Dorset and it’s only a third of the distance, so I would encourage him to do that.
It’s basically a statement.
If you want to comment on that, Minister Taptuna.
Of course, there are a lot of priorities and with a small budget, it’s pretty restrictive. We try and maintain the safety factor that’s given to Nunavut airports under the regulatory system.
There are a lot of regulatory compliances that we have to abide by.
As I mentioned in my opening statement, there’s a lot to do but very little capital resources to do that within the government.
I would like to thank my colleague for High Arctic for posing very good questions.
I had asked the minister about a week ago on the status of our airport here and I still haven’t received a response, but he stated that he would respond to me next week and the week is coming to an end.
I was wondering what they’re going to do with our airport here in town. Looking at the substantiation sheet, I cannot see anything pertaining to the Iqaluit airport.
I did indicate at last week’s sitting that I was hoping to get all of that information.
There is a preliminary design of the new Iqaluit terminal and that has yet to be looked at by the cabinet, and I intend to do a presentation to the cabinet tomorrow.
My intention was to get this out before the sitting was done for the session, but as soon as I know anything new, I will let the member know.
The Iqaluit International Airport is used to greet international visitors, such as the Paris delegation visit with the cold weather testing.
We need to have it planned properly so that we take advantage of these opportunities. So therefore, with the cabinet listening, I want to urge the minister about the fact that this is an urgent case.
I just wanted to ask that question.
To a certain degree, it is fairly urgent.
This government is responsible for safety of its people.
At times, the capacity of the existing terminal is just over-maxed. Of course, I understand that there are dignitaries who come to Iqaluit to a full terminal building.
We’re acting on it as fast as we can.
Even with Air Canada announcing that they’re going to be coming here, we’re on pace.
Although I was hoping to get this information out before the sitting, we consider this as a safety issue and every time it pertains to safety issues, it becomes urgent.
Observing the final minutes of the hour, I move to report progress.
Minister Taptuna, I would like to ask if you wish to have closing comments.
The page-by-page [review] will likely be carried on for tomorrow, my mistake.
(interpretation) Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the minister’s officials out.
Speaker (interpretation): Going back to our orders of the day.
A reminder of meetings for tomorrow, a meeting of the Full Caucus at nine o’clock in the morning in the Nanuq Boardroom.
Orders of the Day for December 3:
This House stands adjourned until Thursday, December 3, at 1:30 p.m.
>>House adjourned at 18:00 Appendix – December 2, 2009
Report on the Review of the
Annual Report of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Nunavut
Third Legislative Assembly
December 2009
Committee Members
James Arvaluk, Chair
Fred Schell, Co-Chair
Moses Aupaluktuk
Committee Staff
Committee Clerk: Stephen Innuksuk
Research and Policy Analysts: Alex Baldwin and Tutalik Boychuck
Standing Committee on Oversight of Government Operations and Public Accounts
Report on the Review of the Annual Report of the
The Information and Privacy Commissioner is an independent officer of the Legislative Assembly who is required under section 68 of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act (ATIPP Act) to prepare and submit an annual report on her activities to the Legislative Assembly.
The ATIPP Act provides for the Commissioner of Nunavut to appoint, on the recommendation of the Legislative Assembly, the Information and Privacy Commissioner for a five-year term of office.
The appointment of Nunavut’s first Information and Privacy Commissioner, Elaine Keenan Bengts, was recommended by way of motion in the Legislative Assembly on November 2, 1999.
On November 25, 2004, her reappointment was recommended by way of motion to a second five-year term of office.
The Legislative Assembly of the Northwest Territories enacted the ATIPP Act in 1996.
“The Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act was created to promote, uphold and protect access to the information that government creates and receives and to protect the privacy rights of individuals.”
The ATIPP Act and regulations were inherited from the NWT on April 1, 1999.
While the Act has been amended seven times since the creation of the new territory, there have been no fundamental changes to it over the last 10 years.
The minor changes that have been made to the Act consist of amendments to address conflicts between the ATIPP Act and other territorial Acts.
In 2007, there were consequential amendments to 15 other Acts to prevent the ATIPP Act from prevailing over these Statutes.
For example, the Young Offenders Act was amended by adding the following text:
“Confidentiality
No person shall use, disclose or transfer a record kept pursuant to section 63, or any personal information obtained under this Act or in the course of his or her employment, contrary to
this Act;
the policies of the Government of Nunavut; or
the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act
Paramountcy
The provisions of this Act respecting the privacy, confidentiality, collection, use, disclosure, transfer and destruction of records and other personal information prevail despite any conflict or inconsistency with the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.”
As another example, the Insurance Act was amended by adding “Despite the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act,” so that section 21.1(3) now reads:
“Despite the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, the Superintendent may make information about an insured or about any party to an application referred to in subparagraph (a)(ii) that is collected under subsection (1) available, either directly or through an agency designated by the Superintendent and on terms and conditions satisfactory to the Superintendent, to
an insurer that
undertakes or agrees or offers to undertake contracts of automobile insurance, and
has a written application signed by the insured;
auditors of the statistical agency referred to in subsection (1); or
the insured.”
The thirteen other Acts that were amended are: Statistics Act, Archives Act, Disease Registries Act, Education Act, Evidence Act, Financial Administration Act, Human Rights Act, Labour Standards Act, Medical Care Act, Payroll Tax Act, Qulliq Energy Corporation Act, Vital Statistics Act, and the Wildlife Act.
The changes that have been made to the regulations have been house-keeping in nature.
The list of “Public Bodies” has been amended to reflect the creation of new public bodies of Nunavut.
As the Information and Privacy Commissioner has noted, her position is mandated to:
“…conduct reviews of decisions of public bodies and to make recommendations to the Minister involved (…) the Commissioner has the obligation to promote the principles of the Act through public education.
She is also mandated to provide the government with comments and suggestions with respect to legislative and other government initiatives which affect access to information or the distribution of private personal information in the possession of a government agency.”
Standing Committee hearings on such annual reports as those presented by the Information and Privacy Commissioner, the Languages Commissioner and the Auditor General provide an opportunity for the issues raised in each report to be discussed in a transparent manner.
Government accountability is fostered through the requirement in the Rules of the Legislative Assembly that the government table a comprehensive response to the Standing Committee’s report and recommendations within 120 days of its presentation to the House.
The Information and Privacy Commissioner of Nunavut also serves as the Information and Privacy Commissioner of the Northwest Territories.
The Information and Privacy Commissioner’s most recent annual reports to the NWT and Nunavut legislatures raise similar themes and recommendations.
Reports and Hearings
The last Standing Committee report on the review of an annual report of the Information and Privacy Commissioner was presented in June 2003 in relation to the Information and Privacy Commissioner’s 2001-2002 annual report.
Since 2005, the Government has been tabling its own annual reports on the administration of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
The latest report on the administration of the Act was tabled in the Legislative Assembly on June 11, 2009.
On September 15, 2008, the Information and Privacy Commissioner’s 2007-2008 annual report was tabled in the Legislative Assembly and the government tabled its response to her report on January 26, 2009.
The Information and Privacy Commissioner’s 2008-2009 annual report was tabled in the Legislative Assembly on June 8, 2009.
The Information and Privacy Commissioner appeared before the Standing Committee on Oversight of Government Operations and Public Accounts to present her two most recent annual reports on October 1, 2009.
Transcripts from the appearance have been posted on the Legislative Assembly’s website.
Prior to this appearance, the most recent committee hearing on an annual report of the Information and Privacy Commissioner took place in October 2006.
That hearing covered her 2004-2005 annual report.
Members of the Standing Committee on Oversight of Government Operations and Public Accounts would like to thank Ms. Elaine Keenan Bengts for appearing before the Committee to present and discuss her most recent annual reports.
The Standing Committee was pleased to have had the opportunity to engage in a productive dialogue with the Information and Privacy Commissioner.
General Observations
Corporate Culture
As in her previous years’ annual reports, the Information and Privacy Commissioner emphasized the importance of establishing a corporate culture in government which encourages both access to government information and protection of personal information.
During her opening comments to the Standing Committee, she stated,
“It is my pleasant observation that public bodies in Nunavut do appear to have a positive corporate culture.”
The issue of transparency in relation to the government’s contracting practices has been raised by committees of the Legislative Assembly for a number of years.
During the Information and Privacy Commissioner’s October 1, 2009, appearance before the Standing Committee, the issue of disclosure of information concerning government contracts was raised.
The Information and Privacy Commissioner stated that the release of information about government contracts is an ongoing issue across Canada.
She stated that “most southern jurisdictions publicly post the contracts they reach with outside agencies.”
She also stated that “some jurisdictions have taken to posting much of what is in a contract and protecting only certain parts of it.”
She acknowledged the difficulty of achieving a “balance between the right of the public to know and the rights of businesses to carry on business.”
The Information and Privacy Commissioner also affirmed that the process by which contracts are awarded should be made public.
The Standing Committee notes that the government has, in recent years, commenced the practice of tabling annual reports on its contracting, procurement and leasing activities.
The Standing Committee recommends that this practice be extended to the government’s Crown corporations and agencies, including the:
Nunavut Housing Corporation;
Qulliq Energy Corporation; and
Nunavut Arctic College.
Endorsement of the Act by Members of the Legislative Assembly
In her 2007-2008 annual report, the Information and Privacy Commissioner stated that she would “encourage all Members of the new Assembly to publicly and clearly endorse the purposes of the Act and to provide continued leadership in ensuring open government.”
During her appearance before the Standing Committee, the Information and Privacy Commissioner was asked for further clarification on this statement.
She encouraged Members to use the Act by making their own requests for access to information.
She also stated that, “Openness in this jurisdiction is one of the main concepts upon which this jurisdiction was established.
That’s why, in this jurisdiction, this Act is even more important than anywhere else.”
She also noted that if MLAs were to make significant use of the Act, they would be “making the public bodies and the departments sit up and take notice, follow through, and do what they’re supposed to do under the Act.”
Members’ Use of Social Networking Sites
The extent to which social networking sites such as Facebook are in compliance with federal privacy law has attracted national attention in recent months.
In July of 2009, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada issued the results of “an investigation into the popular social networking site’s privacy policies and practices.”
The Standing Committee recognizes that these sites are becoming increasingly popular in the North.
This issue was also raised during the Standing Committee’s hearings.
The Information and Privacy Commissioner offered a number of cautionary comments with respect to this issue and stressed the importance of ensuring that any site established by a Member of the Legislative Assembly avoid including personal information of constituents.
Open and Closed Adoptions
During the Information and Privacy Commissioner’s appearance, the issue of adoption was raised.
The Information and Privacy Commissioner commented that:
“In the last year or so, the Ontario legislature has struggled with this very issue over whether or not adoption information should be open.
They passed legislation which opened up all records past and for the future, and there was quite a backlash from the public over that.
In the end, they took a step back and they passed their legislation for open adoptions going forward, but wouldn’t open the ones that had already been completed.
The reasoning for that is that parents who put their children up for adoption on the understanding that they wouldn’t be contacted in the future were really upset about the fact that now their names and all of the information would be open.”
The Standing Committee has noted that on November 20, 2009, the Yukon Government announced that:
“The new Child and Family Services Act will come into effect on April 30, 2010 and will include significant changes in how the Department of Health and Social Services deals with adoption disclosures … The new legislation allows for more openness around adoption-related records, making it easier for birth parents and people who were adopted to find each other.
However, in situations where they wish not be contacted, birth parents and children involved in previous adoptions can maintain confidentiality by filing a no-contact declaration … People wishing to file a disclosure veto or no-contact declaration have until April 29, 2010 to do so.
After that, adopted people aged 19 or over and birth parents will be able to access their individual information.”
On October 26, 2009, the Full Caucus of the Legislative Assembly announced that a new Child and Family Services Act will be introduced during the 3rd Legislative Assembly of Nunavut.
The Standing Committee is of the view that this issue merits consideration during this review to ensure that Nunavut’s practices in this area reflect and respect Inuit societal values.
The Information and Privacy Commissioner’s most recent annual reports to the Legislative Assembly have provided a number of formal recommendations.
As noted earlier, the Government of Nunavut has, in recent years, presented formal responses to the Information and Privacy Commissioner’s recommendations.
These are summarized at the end of this report.
The Standing Committee is pleased to take this opportunity to present its own recommendations to the government concerning the issues raised by the Information and Privacy Commissioner.