EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Regarding polar bears…I raised this before at the beginning of November, end of October, I would like to raise my question regarding the research.
The Department of Sustainable Development seemed to do the research on land and do not seem to go to the shoreline or the ocean where polar bear mainly are.
Is there a provision in the Act, through DFO or any regulations with DFO regarding the research of polar bears on the ocean?
I am asking that because there only seems to be research on land.
For instance in the summertime there are ships.
I was told that there is still some ice in the summertime.
In Pond Inlet a woman told me her husband went boating to Pond Inlet and said there always are polar bears out in the ocean.
With that in mind I am asking the question.
I hope he understands what I am trying to say.
Are there regulations or provisions in the Act regarding the research of polar bears and its locations, or is it open to any?
Polar bear surveys are done while there is ice and we do know that during the winter there is more research done on the sea ice, although it is varies; they are camouflaged on the sea ice and when they are on the sea ice in the winter, that is when most of the research happens.
They also use helicopters in the summertime to help in their survey.
In 2000 or 2001, in Gjoa Haven, the Hunters and Trappers Organization was able to assist us through their Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit in the survey of polar bears in that area.
So, I hope I have responded to his question.
I am not sure whether he asked whether it was during the summer or winter when there is sea ice where the research is done.
Chairman (interpretation): I think that he wants to make a Supplementary response. Mr. Tigullagaq.
Mr. Tigullagaq (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Just to supplement the Minister’s comment, when there is an estimation of the population of polar bears, we do not just count them 1, 2, 3.
So, we tag them on the ear by putting them to sleep, we attach radio collars and we anaesthetize them.
We do not go to the shorelines because of the danger of drowning for the bears if they were too close to the shorelines.
So, we try to avoid doing that research and putting polar bears to sleep too close to the shorelines because of the danger that the polar bear may drown.
So, we do not just count the number of polar bears, we tag polar bears just to get an idea on estimate of the populations.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): Just to make a Supplementary.
Do you have any regulations, for example that they are only allowed to research a hundred miles and I know that in the wintertime they start doing research on polar bears in wintertime.
And at times, were they able to do research a hundred miles outside of the community?
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Akesuk.
Yes, there are no regulations or policies in regards to the distance of where the research is going to be done in order to have a proper survey done; that is how we do it.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, I have another different question, if I could get your permission in regards to the Hunters and Trappers Organization if that is okay with you.
Chairman (interpretation): Yes, we are on question period.
We are now on the questioning part of this.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): I ask you now, Mr. Chairman, you stated that you wanted everyone to go through the Chair in the beginning of this Committee of the Whole meeting.
Bill 35, which is before us, if it is passed, the Hunters and Trappers Organizations will have more involvement within the community themselves and I know that they are below Nunavut Wildlife Management Board and they go through Nunavut Wildlife Management Board.
Bill 35, if we pass it, are you going to increase the funding for the HTO’s?
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Akesuk.  Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In response to his question, usually after ten years, NWMB reviews their funding from the federal government; they review their contract.
At this time they are not in the negotiation stage, but once the new agreement between the NWMB and the federal government is final, yes we will look at ways how we can provide more assistance to the communities.
I’m sure that the next Assembly or the second legislature will look into that after the ten year implementation contract is signed.
We are now on questions. Mr. Iqaqrialu.
I am getting envious of Members talking about polar bears.
I think I will just make a few comments before I move onto my question, Mr. Chairman, with your permission.
Chairman (interpretation): We are now on questions.
We finished with general comments.
You have nine minutes for questions. Mr. Iqaqrialu.
Well then I’ll move onto my question.
I have a question in regards to Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit.
In regards to the polar bears, it was traditional knowledge not to harass polar bears, even the dogs were not allowed to go after the polar bear by themselves, otherwise the polar bear might not come back.
Today we can put the polar bears to sleep and we can now take samples from a live polar bear today and this is really different from our traditional ways of doing things and the polar bears today are very skinny.
So, have you done any study to see if it’s safe to do studies on polar bears like that?
Just to state that we are now on the Bill.
Perhaps we can focus more on the issue of Bill and I’m sure that we can deal with polar bear issues any old time.
Mr. Tigullagaq will provide response to the question.
Mr. Tigullagaq please clarify.
Mr. Tigullagaq (interpretation): Yes, we are now starting a study on polar bears to see what kind of effects tranquilizers have on polar bears.
To date we have no knowledge whether the polar bears that have been tranquillized are healthier than the non tranquillized polar bears.
We have seen polar bears that are healthy whether they have been tranquillized or not and we have no knowledge what kind of effect tranquillizers have on the polar bears, but we are now looking at it.
Mr. Iqaqrialu (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman I will not dwell on this too long.
I want you to know Mr. Chairman, today we shoot at the polar bears and try to scare them away and we invent these things to scare polar bears away.
I was wondering have you ever considered if these kinds of deterrents are good for polar bears.
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Mr. Akesuk.
First of all, to answer his question that Inuit in the communities, children, elders and the public, we think of the safety of the community residents first when scaring away the polar bears.
We look at how to deter polar bears and when we don’t have any other deterrents we have to use what we have.
If there is a polar bear that came into a community or to a camp how can they scare the polar bear away?
Perhaps if the Member has any other suggestions on better deterrents for polar bears, he’s welcome to give us his suggestion because we have to use rifles and make noises to scare them away to protect the safety of the public in the community.
Even though I am getting tired dealing with polar bears more questions keep popping up.
In my constituency we have a high population of polar bears and they were quite concerned in my community when the Hunters and Trappers Organization held their Annual General Meeting.  They were quite concerned about the polar bears being scared away or the things that we use to scare them away.
Perhaps we are disturbing the polar bears.
Perhaps this could be considered some time in the future because there is a high population of polar bears in my communities and the majority of the polar bears are very skinny and it’s becoming a rare occurrence that we harvest a nice healthy, fat, polar bear.
Perhaps the Minister can consider this or commit to getting funding to see if they could look into this.
Yes, once this Bill is passed, yes, we can look into these things during the life of this legislative assembly.
And yes, this Bill will give more opportunity to look at improving or rectifying some of the problems we are facing because the Bill we currently use now does not really recognize some of those concerns and I’m sure that once this Bill is passed they could be looked into.
I have one or two questions from page five from the committee’s speaking opening comments.
On page 5, if the Minister could look at it, the committee recommended that there are many regulation making powers by the department that are included in this legislation and they find it important that the hunters and trappers organization be provided the opportunity to contribute meaningfully to the drafting of this regulation.
In addition, the committee urges the Minister to set up a committee made up of stakeholders to review the draft regulations and their translations.
Committee members would also like those regulations to be tabled during the second assembly for review and comments made by all the Members of the Legislative Assembly.
Can the Minister commit to doing this and to make sure that HTOs and other stakeholders and the Members of the Legislative Assembly have an opportunity to make sure that they have input and at least have seen it before the regulations are made.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, her question and her concern are quite clear.
The Bill will specifically state that we will always work in collaboration with the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board when we start drafting up the regulations.
And when we go through clause by clause, you will be able to see the regulations and to make sure that they are involved.
If there was any urgent or emergency amendments to be made it would not just be made by the Government of Nunavut, it would also come from NWMB and NTI because we have to work together and we pull together in this process.
I understand the Minister that they will consult with NWMB and once we start going clause by clause I want the Minister to state yes, there will be collaboration.
We tend to agreed to some of the clauses even though we don’t understand because them.
I am not a member of the Standing Committee that’s responsible for this although I looked at and read the Bill; perhaps the Minister can identify which clauses that will be included in the regulations, if he can specify as to which clause is going to be included in the regulation because the Standing Committee of Community Empowerment and Sustainable Development worked very hard to make the recommendations when they were reviewing the Bill.
Do I understand the Minister that they have to make regulations that will work with the stakeholders; is that my understanding?
Mr. Minister. Minister Akesuk.
That was an agreement when we met in Apex with the chairmen of the HTOs.
We’re not under general comments; we are under questions.
The question that I have, Mr. Chairman, is looking at the present and the future, not just for the study of polar bears.
They usually put collars on polar bears to do a study on them.
My question is, I’m not exactly sure how they do it but there are various ways of tagging them. They also do studies on caribou by using nets.
Under Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit we’re not suppose to be bothering the wildlife that way.
It doesn’t matter what kind of wildlife they are.
Is there going to be a better system of doing studies on the wildlife rather than using the present ones?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Akesuk.
Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit will be incorporated into the legislation.
As I said in 1978 that legislation did not consider the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, but in the present legislation, Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit will be considered and used in the act.
I would like to assure Mr. Alakannuark that if we’re going to use Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit in the legislation, there is also written in the legislation, under clause 8 about Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit being incorporated or being utilized under the act.
What is going to happen is that we will be using the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit with this legislation.
We will be wanting the assistance of the public out there, the Inuit, when we’re dealing with the Wildlife Act.
Mr. Alakannuark (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman for clarifying that for me from the Minister.
My other question is, if we pass this legislation and Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit is incorporated into this Act, what about the radio collars, will they be using it less than before?
Some of the wildlife die off by using radio collars.
Is that going to be the case?
The Minister stated already that when the legislation is passed, some of the questions that are being posed by the Members will be answered.
Yes, what you’re saying is true and to thank you for the Members to be able to stick to the topic of the legislation.
All the things that the Members are asking will be considered once the legislation is passed in regards to the study of wildlife or the techniques that we use right now in the north in studying wildlife.
We will be utilizing the knowledge of the Inuit more so than before.
We are going to be using the most appropriate way so as not to disturb the animal as much as possible when we’re doing a study and to use the knowledge of the Inuit because they know the migration routes and the ways of the wildlife in the north.
That’s the way that we’re going to deal with the studies of wildlife.
After the legislation has been passed, I would like to see that the present techniques being used such as radio collaring, and others should be used less when you are doing a study on the wildlife.
That is the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit way.
I will be asking another question.
After how many years do they survey the population of the wildlife?
Chairman (interpretation): As the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole I would like the Members to stick to the general questions on the Act, itself.
Thank you. Minister Akesuk.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): Yes, Mr. Chairman, during general Question Period it would be very good to ask those questions, such as the question that Mr. Alakannuark is posing.
So after the legislation has been passed perhaps those questions would be solved or considered.
We have to work together in order to make the Act better for the people of Nunavut and Inuit people as well as the general public.
I have a question in one of the Clauses.
How will the other aboriginal people such as the Northern Quebec Inuit be recognized under the Act because we had a problem. I think it was last year, whereby an individual came to Nunavut even though he was originally from here, but has a land claim in the other Northern Quebec area.
He is an Inuk, but he was given a partial right to the wildlife in Nunavut.
He or she had to be a resident of Nunavut for a certain number of years before his rights were recognized as a whole.
How many years does an individual have to reside in Nunavut before they have their rights recognized?
It is under residency requirements, so we will probably find that out when we do Clause by Clause.
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Orr.
This is dealt with in Clause 12 of the Bill where Inuit of Northern Quebec have the right to exercise their rights under the land claim, but there is no residency requirement.
They can do that at any time, and the same thing with the Northwest Territories, Dene of Saskatchewan, and Manitoba.
These groups under Article 40 of the Land Claim have no time residency requirement on them.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Orr.
I have Mr. Anawak.
Mr. Anawak: I think that I am the last person.
It states that an Inuk person can hunt without a license and without paying a fee as long as he has proper identification.
It does not make much sense to me, for instance if an Inuk goes out hunting, I know the new wildlife officers who are not from Nunavut usually work here in Nunavut and they might want to have other individual provide an identification, like Mr. Iqaqrialu will not take his bank book when he goes out hunting but if a wildlife officer was to ask the individual who just caught a caribou or shot a caribou and the wildlife officer could say can you provide me with identification.
But as Inuit we can recognize each other so we don’t have to ask for identification.
I think this clause 10(2) Additional Right, should be clarified to make it clearer because we don’t always bring our identification.
As Inuit we are not used to having legislation and we are not going to try and make sure that we carry our identification on our person all the time.
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Tigullagaq.
Mr. Tigullagaq (interpretation): If I could make a few comments on that Mr. Chairman.
The reason why we have put this in the clause 10(2), for instance we have to put it in because the wildlife officer are not always too sure about people who look like Inuit but they are not really Inuit.
As an example, Iqaluit has a large population, people who go hunting may look like Inuit but they are not really Inuit, and they have all the rights of the Inuit and that’s why we have to put that clause in there for that purpose.
If a person cannot provide identification they are given 48 hours to provide it anyways to the wildlife officer if they don’t have it on hand.
That is why I have a problem with that clause 10(2) Additional Right.
Like I mentioned it already, I’ll use Mr. Iqaqrialu as an example, everybody knows him in Clyde River and the people who live in the community know each other but here in Iqaluit everybody might now know each other but I’m more concerned about the capital here where not everybody knows you.
For example if an elder was asked for proper identification it would seem trivial to him because he is not used to providing identification.
He may be so used to go out hunting without carrying identification and he might not have a driver’s licence or other pieces of identification.
I’m not really against this part of the clause 10 but it seems like we are trying to have too many things that people have to follow under part 2 again. I would like clarification under 11(4) No Limiting Rights.
I just wanted to get some clarification on exactly what it means to an Inuk in the term of an employment contract that attempts to limit an Inuk’s right of access to wildlife or harvesting wildlife during the Inuk’s leisure hours should be null and void.
I like that part, but some people are, you know, even if a hunter wants to go hunting on a nice day, they might be refused by their superiors.
They should be able to grant them the right to go hunting when it’s a nice day.
Perhaps can you clarify that and make it better only, he can go harvesting during his leisure hours, but it should be at any time when he wants to take some time off and it’s a nice day.
Maybe I’m mistaken, but it seems there should be in that legislation clause 4 that it should be not in his leisure hour but during the working hours as well when the day is good.
That clause is intended, for instance for people who are working in the oil or gas industry or mining industry who have limited rights during working hours and even the mining companies, for instance, would allow their employee to harvest out of working hours.
And so this is intended to protect those people, especially Nunavut beneficiaries who are working in those sectors under 5.2.3, they have the right, so this is intended to protect the rights of Inuit to be allowed to hunt outside of working hours in those sectors and part of that question I don’t really want to respond to, that other part because it might not be our jurisdiction regarding HR.
Chairman (interpretation): Are you done. Mr. Anawak.
Mr. Anawak (interpretation): Yes, it’s not in his authority regarding my question on Human Resources and their rights as employees.
So I’d just like to ask again then, yes I understand where they are coming from, but is it limited to those people working in different sectors.
For instance, there’s an employee in Uqusiqalik who is from Naujaat, we went into that camp where he was dying for country food.
He had caught a seal, but he had to do it behind the backs of his supervisors because tourists might see him.
So I guess this is the case where this clause might apply.
He was unable to hunt any caribou, fish, so would that apply to that sector, or are there limits where this clause applies too, but I could see it working in Uqusiqalik in Wager Bay, this family was really longing for country food when there’s caribou and fish all over; this was in a tourist sector. Would this apply in this sector as well?
This right applies throughout Nunavut and to every industry, every contract of employment in Nunavut and is also in the nature of a constitutional right.
Mr. Anawak (interpretation): I did not understand this one area regarding Article 5 in the Land Claims Agreement that they are allowed to harvest wildlife, fur bearers, it states that any person who had a right prior to October 27, 1981, what do you mean in there?
Is it people that were licensed prior to that date?
I do not understand it and would like further clarification.
Chairman (interpretation): Who is going to respond to that?
This is just another provision that is straight out of the land claim.
It applies only to the licenses, of course licenses to harvest fur bearers.
Inuit have a right without a license, so this section does not apply to them.
If it is a license holder, then a person who had a GHL, on October 27, 1981 would be able to harvest a fur bearer.
This is an exception to the fact that generally speaking only Inuit can harvest fur bearers.
And (b), of course, is the person who is approved and recommended by an HTO.
Mr. Anawak (interpretation): Thank you for clearing that up.
In section 42(2) it states carrying identification.
An Inuk and any other person exercising his or her right to harvest wildlife under section 12, 13, or 14, shall carry his or her proper ID while harvesting that wildlife.
I do not really understand that.
That is very contradictory because I would not bring my wallet out on the land, so can you make an exception there?
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): Some of those clauses are already being dealt with even before we have gone through Clause by Clause.
In Clause 42 it applies to an earlier question that any Inuk will not always bring his or her ID out on the land, so they still have that grace period of forty-eight hours to produce the ID.
The NTI beneficiary card can be considered proper identification.
It does not state that in there.
Where does it state NTI, or that forty-eight hour grace period will be applied because we need that allowance to give people time.
Where does it state in the Bill that they will be given forty-eight hours to produce proper identification?
If you turn the page in Clause 43.
It is under Clause 43.
Chairman (interpretation): Just a reminder.
We will get to those clauses.
Once we go through clause by clause then you can ask all you want under each particular clause.
Is that fine with you?
This Bill, once enacted, who will be administering this Act?
The Government of Nunavut will administer this Act, but in there it states that the local HTO’s and the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board and Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated will be consulted, although this a government Bill.
Thank you for his clear response.
He stated that the local HTO’s will be consulted in administering this act and with that response in mind, keep in mind also that the local HTO’s have very limited budgets.
I’m wondering if the budgets for the HTO’s will be increased due to the increase in their responsibilities.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): I stated earlier, perhaps I wasn’t clear enough that once an agreement is in place after the ten year implementation contract, then Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated will be providing further funding for the added responsibilities and we as a government as well will follow suit in possibly increasing their budgets.
The Nunavut Wildlife Management Board is a funding agency for the HTO’s and we also give a portion of their budgets.
Once that agreement has been completed, we too as a government will follow suit in the increase in the budgets.
Mr. Iqaqrialu (interpretation): Thank you. This bill, once enacted, is he saying that there will be an increase in the budget to the HTO’s.