EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Mr. Speaker prior to my conclusion I would like to take this opportunity to thank the members of the standing committee and also members of the staff.
It has been a lot of work in arranging and putting this together and it is appreciated very much and I would like to thank them.
At this time Mr. Speaker this concludes our interim report and I move that the interim report be received by the legislative assembly.
Speaker: Thank you Mr. Tootoo and members of your committee.
Speaker: Do members agree that the interim report of the standing committee be received by the House.
Are there any nays, there are no nays and the report is received by the house.
Item 12: Reports of Committees on the Review of Bills.
I wish to report that Bill 12 - An Act to Amend the Divisional Education Council Dissolution Act has been reviewed by the Standing Committee of Culture, Education and Health and that the Bill is ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole as amended and reprinted.
Mr. Speaker I seek unanimous consent to waive rule 68(5) and have Bill 12 moved into the committee of the whole for today.
Speaker: There is a request to waive rule 68(5) of the standing committee report on Bill 12 can be referred to the committee of the whole.
Bill 12 is referred to the Committee of the Whole.
Tabling of Documents, Mr. Ng.
Tabled Document 95 - 1(3): Finance and Administration Business Plan
Tabled Document 96 - 1(3): Human Resources Business Plan
Tabled Document 97 - 1(3): Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs Business Plan
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Thank you Mr. Speaker. I am pleased to table the business plan for the Departments of Finance and Administration, Human Resources and Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
Speaker: Thank you Mr. Ng. In accordance with Motion 14-1(3), the business plan for Finance Administration and Human Resources is referred to committee of the whole.
Also in accordance with Motion 14-1(3), the business plan for Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs is also referred to the committee of the whole.
Tabling of Documents, Mr. Clerk.
Tabled Document 98 - 1(3): Response to Petition 10-1(3)
Mr. Clerk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I wish to inform members that a response to petition 10-1(3) Gjoa Haven new water lake and community hall has been filed with the Clerk's office by the Honourable Jack Anawak.
I realize that members are interested to get to lunch but bear with me, we just have a few more items and then we will get to the Committee of the Whole and then break for lunch in the next 5 minutes or so.
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters - Bill 12, Bill 13, Tabled Documents 41 -1(3), 95-1(3), 96-1(3), 97-1(3), 61-1(3) 87-1(3) and 93-1(3).
Accordingly, by the authority vested in me by Motion 3-1(3) the Committee of the Whole will stay in the session until it reports itself out with Mr. David Iqaqrialu as chair person.
Prior to the commencement of the committee of the whole we will break for lunch and I ask members to report back to the House by 1:15 p.m. Sergeant at arms.
>>House recessed at 12:15 and resumed at 1:23 p.m.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you for coming.
We do have a quorum now.
Today we will be considering Bill 13, Tabled Document 41 – 1(3), 61 – 1(3), 87 – 1(3), 93 – 1(3).
Yesterday we were dealing with the Department of Sustainable Development under general comments.
I would like to deal with Bill 12 on Education and once we are completed Bill 12 we will deal with Sustainable Development.
I did not hear you. Could you repeat please.
I would like to deal with Bill 12 with the Minister of Education and once we are finished with Bill 12 we can go back to the Department of Sustainable Development.
Mr. Akesuk has moved that we deal with Bill 12.
Opening comments by the Minister.
Minister Arvaluk you can do your opening comments now.
Bill 12 – An Act to Amend the Divisional Education Councils Dissolution Act
Bill 12 is in front of you.
This is an Act to Amend the Divisional Education Council's Dissolution Act, which was approved last year.
Once we reach July 1, 2000 the Divisional Education Councils will be dissolved and they will be amalgamated with the Department of Education.
This Bill is needed to clarify how the final wrap up of the Divisional Councils will occur.
Who is responsible for the various activities such as final audits and how those activities will occur.
One of the goals that we have consistently wanted to achieve is to give the District Education Authorities operating at the community level closer links with the department and better access to the minister.
This Bill will help the community District Education Authorities become more responsible and accountable for education within their community.
Those communities that are ready will be able to take on more responsibility through an agreement with the minister.
Some communities are ready to do far more and this Bill will help them achieve their goals.
Mr. Chairman, this Bill does not replace the current Education Act.
But it does clarify how the Divisional Education Councils will finalize their affairs.
The Bill provides for community District Education Authorities the opportunity to assume more responsibility should they choose to do so.
The Chairman of the Standing Committee opening comments.
I thank you for the opportunity to speak on Bill 12, An Act to Amend the Divisional Education Councils' Dissolution Act.
As the Chair for the Standing Committee on Culture, Education and Health, I would like to thank the minister for his participation in the Standing Committee review process on this Bill.
The Standing Committee held a number of briefing sessions and meeting with the minister on Bill 12 over the past few months.
I would like to note for the benefit of all the members of the House that although this Bill has been amended, the changes were requested by the minister and the Standing Committee supported the amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I will ask Mr. Havioyak to read part of the Bill 12 report.
The dissolution of the Divisional Education Council and bringing the functions of the regional education boards into the Department of Education would help ensure that there was more accountability and transparency in government services and would provide more Nunavut wide programs and services.
It was also hoped that there would be cost savings realized.
The Standing Committee supports there objectives however, the Standing Committee has stressed the importance of also continuing to develop local capacity in education matters and is very pleased that the minister and his department shared this vision of a local District Education Authority playing a strong role in education issues.
We believe that the involvement of local communities, local school officials and other local educational and children's organizations will be essential if we are to deal with many of Nunavut's educational needs.
It is the DEAs that bring these groups together at the community level.
The Bill provides that the minister shall enter into agreements with DEAs who wish to take more responsibilities and the minister has stated his commitment to work with DEAs in establishing these agreements.
The Standing Committee commends this and looks forward to hearing more about these agreements in the coming year.
The Standing Committee was advised that the amendment proposed by the minister was to provide more certainty as to who would be the employer of the many casual employees at the local level after July 1st, 2000, when the DECs will cease to exist.
While all teachers and a number of full time DEC employees will be members of the Nunavut Government staff, virtually all of the other employees will now be employed by District Education Authorities.
This includes janitors, casual workers, cultural instructors, substitute teachers, classroom assistants and others.
The Standing Committee was advised that while the DEAs in the Kitikmeot and the Kivalliq have many years of experience in this regard, it was apparently done a bit differently in the Baffin.
All of these people have been paid to date by the Baffin Divisional Educational Council.
While the amendment was revised at the Standing Committee request to focus on the 13 DEA office managers who will actually still be employed on July 1st, 2000, the Standing Committee is nevertheless concerned that the Baffin DEAs will now formally have the responsibility of about 1 thousand employees when these people start being re-hired in August 2000.
All of these people are formally laid off at the end of the school year and they will not be employees on July 1st, 2000 and therefore the legislation does not need to formally deal with them but there may be some issues in the coming school year.
Accordingly, the Standing Committee has asked for some assurance that the DEAs receive some support and training to undertake these new responsibilities.
The minister committed that the Department of Education would continue to provide the payroll and support functions that the DEC played in the past for any DEAs who wish this service.
As well, the minister committed that the department will investigate insurance needs and any liability issues to ensure that DEAs will be protected.
The minister has also committed that the three Community Development Officers who assisted in training and support for the DEAs will continue in the Department as well as the new Co-ordinator and that training will be given to DEAs on their roles and responsibilities as employers.
The Standing Committee will be particularly interested in seeing that this training happens as quickly as possible.
Hopefully by this fall as members are aware that most people on DEAs are community volunteers and they may need support, particularly in some of the Baffin communities where the responsibility of being a legal employer may be quite new to some people.
There will be other matters to be worked out such as supervisions and a reporting relationship with these people and principals and the DEAs.
The Standing Committee is confident that the Department will ensure that this will be worked out before the fall.
I will ask Mr. Nutarak to conclude the report.
There were a few other matters reviewed by the Standing Committee on this Bill during the Standing Committee review of the follow up plans for after the dissolution of the DECs.
The committee reviewed the proposed organizational chart for the regional staff.
Members of the Standing Committee expressed some concerns that the proposed chart seems to repeat the existing structure with only a few changes to position titles. Members wondered how this would impact on the estimated cost savings as well as the ability to achieve Nunavut wide educational programs and services.
However, the minister noted that this staff structure will evolve and that this is a transition step to ensure stability for the coming school year.
As well this Bill requests an exemption from the Statutory Instruments Act for any outstanding appeals after July 1st, 2000 that would have ordinarily been dealt with by the DECs.
The Bill also proposes that anything done by the minister in the exercise of a power or the performance of a duty of the Divisional Educational Council be exempt from the Statutory Instruments Act.
The Standing Committee was advised that the Statutory Instruments Act requires that the government publishes certain instruments in the Gazette, including regulations, appointments and certain directives and that this has the result of promoting openness and transparency of government decisions.
The Standing Committee would like to note for the members that the whole Education Act is under review at this time and the committee has been advised that the draft legislation will be brought before the House in the coming year.
At that time it will come before the Standing Committee again.
If the new legislation continues to exempt the minister from the Statutory Instrument Act for education duties and responsibilities that used to belong to the Divisional Educational Councils, the Standing Committee will question this at that time as we don't wish to compromise the spirit of openness and transparency which is so important to all of us.
While the District Education Councils were exempt from the application of the Statutory Instruments Act, minister are usually required to publish appointments, directives and regulations in the Gazette and there doesn't seem to be any reason why the minister should not also do so now that these responsibilities have been brought within the government.
The Standing Committee would request that the principles of openness be honoured as much as possible and the minister would consider how his appointments and any directives he gives regarding the appeals process can in fact be made available for review by the public at some point.
Perhaps in a statement to the House.
Mr. Chairman, it is evident by what has happened in the House over the past few weeks that in addition to dealing with employees, the DEAs are going to have to play a more assertive role in assessing their community's education needs in making their pleas for education capital and resources and in developing plans and even fundraising for the things they feel are important.
The sooner we ensure that all the DEAs have adequate support to carry out their very important roles and responsibilities, the sooner they will be able to take these initiatives with confidence and determination in all the communities.
The Standing Committee encourages the minister and the department in their work with the DEAs once the DECs are dissolved.
We look forward to hearing more about it in the future.
Those are my comments, Mr. Chairman.
Before I go to the minister, I would like to recognize Joannasie Kooniloosie from my community.
Welcome to the legislature and I believe the other one is from Kimmirut.
I wanted to recognize Pitseolak Padluq, he is originally from Kimmirut but is now from Cape Dorset.
The Minister of Education and his officials can go down to the witness table.
Thank you very much Minister Arvaluk.
If you would introduce your officials please.
On my left is Mark Spakowski, from the Department of Justice and on my right is Ian Rose from the Department of Education.
Bill 12, An Act to Amend the Divisional Education Councils' Dissolution Act.
General comments. Any comments.
Just a couple of comments or questions.
I know the idea behind the dissolution of the Divisional Education Councils is to devolve that responsibility down to the DEAs and I know that all the staff that aren't teaching staff are going to become employees of the DEAs.
Just for clarity I am wondering why those employees aren't part of the Department of Education staff as well, along with the teachers.
Just wondering why that is, if I could get an answer to that.
Minster of Education, Mr. Arvaluk.
The staff of the District Education Authorities in the communities, there are around 13 on contract under the DEAs, and what we are saying here is in fact that we are not going to make changes to things that presently exist in the communities. These are the employees of the District Education Authority.
In here it talked about providing training to the DEA staff to be able to handle these additional responsibilities.
Now I would ascertain from that, that in the past that service wasn't being done by the DEAs it was being done by the DECs.
So I guess that is the context of what I am asking.
On paper they may have been employees of the DEAs, but in every other aspect of it, their payroll and everything else it was being done through the DECs.
Just looking for some clarity here.
Only in Baffin.
The other employees of DEAs in the Kitikmeot and the Kivalliq, their payrolls are done locally.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Minister Arvaluk.
Mr. Tootoo, did you have another question.
I know and I can use here for an example, the one that I am aware of.
They only have I believe a part time staff person working for them at the DEA.
Along with the training I guess to take on these additional responsibilities you need to be able to have someone there to do it as well.
I just wonder if additional resources such as PY's are going to be provided to the DEAs to handle these responsibilities.
Hon. James Arvaluk: Yes, there will be more responsibilities given to the DEAs in time through direct negotiations with the Department and that additional resources can be added as needed.
I am not on the Education Standing Committee so I hope that I am not repeating questions that were asked there earlier.
How is it going to be determined, what are going to be the criteria or the formula to determine the level of support of whether a DEA is qualified for one, two or three or however many support staff in doing that.
I know as an example, here the DEA deals with five schools and in other communities you only have one or two.
So I am just wondering if there is a fair way that will be used to determine the resources that the DEA gets.
Yes, these have been asked by the Standing Committee members and we said that we would have direct negotiations with the individual DEAs and these will be carried out on the basis of what they desire to handle and what we can offer as a department.
So there will be no set criteria for it but direct discussions will take place and an agreement will be reached through the department.
I guess if it is going to be done through direct negotiations, if at the time and I guess at any time as members know our roles and responsibilities.
If in the course of the initial negotiations the DEA agrees to a settlement or comes to an agreement with the department, if after that responsibility is given to them and they realize that they didn't totally understand the scope.
They did not ask for adequate resources.
Will there be an opportunity for them to come back to the department to try to accommodate that.
Hon. James Arvaluk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Yes, we want to be open as much as possible.
Do not forget that some communities are able to do more workload than the other communities.
So we will base our discussions on those abilities and there will be a process to take place in order to give them proper resources to carry out the agreement.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Arvaluk.
Mr. Tootoo any additional comments.
I have a couple more questions on the Statutory Instruments Act.
Maybe I will wait and let some other members ask general questions before I continue with those.
Any additional comments.
If there are no additional comments.
In the Standing Committee comments it mentioned that this Act would be exempt from the Statutory Instruments Act and it also states the reason the DECs were exempt from that Act.
I am just wondering why the DECs were not required to as it fell under the Department of Education.
The department would eventually have to have that responsibility, it would fall under the department even with the DECs in place so it would have to eventually be publicly put out.
The ultimate responsibility for it even in the current system falls back into the department indirectly and now it is going to directly.
I am just wondering if that was the case before.
I would like to have Mr. Spakowski answer that part especially to the Statutory Instruments Act.
Mr. Spakowski.
Mr. Spakowski: The Statutory Instruments Act provides for an exemption for things the District Education Council does.
If the Education Act provides for a direction to be made by a DEC then that direction does not have to be published in the Nunavut Gazette.
The policy behind this Bill after the DECs are dissolved is to put the minister in the position of exercising the DECs' power subject to arrangements with DEAs to have them exercise them.
The purpose of this provision is to ensure that when the minister is doing what the DEC did before that the same legal requirements apply.
Chairperson (interpretation): Mr. Spakowski please make your statement.
Mr. Spakowski: Currently the Statutory Instruments Act provides for an exemption for the District Education Council.
So currently when a District Education Council does something under the Education Act, if it makes a direction that direction will not be required to be published in the Nunavut Gazette.
The policy behind the Bill is when the DECs are dissolved that the minister will exercise the powers of the District Education Council under the Education Act.
The intent behind this particular exemption from the Statutory Instruments Act is to ensure that the same legal requirements apply to those things which the minister does which the District Education Councils did before their dissolution.
So when the minister does those things that the District Education Council used to do they will as before not be subject to the Statutory Instruments Act.
It is simply to preserve legal requirements as applied to those things when the DEC did them.
The same requirements will apply now that the minister does them.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Spakowski.
Mr. Chairman, I am not a legal expert.
I am wondering as to what the reason was behind having that exemption for the DECs.
What was the objective of having that.
Mr. Spakowski: To try and explain why it is that way now, because I was not around when those arrangements were put into place, but I believe that the District Education Councils are exempted the same way as local Municipal Councils are.
I think the reasoning was that things that are done under the Education Act by those bodies are not the sort of things that require publication in the Nunavut Gazette.
The Nunavut Gazette is there for a permanent public record and things like Municipal Council By-laws for example were not published in the Nunavut Gazette.
I am speculating somewhat why that regime was originally put in place.
In the Standing Committee there is an opening remarks that says the minister is required to publish appointments, directives and regulations in the Gazette.
I believe these are the types of things that would for the department or anything under the Education Act could now be not required if it goes through like that.
I am wondering is it necessary.
I realise that it was there for the DECs but as we all know these DECs are no longer going to be there.
It is going to be the department.
So I just wonder why they would still require something like that instead of the simple fact of leaving the same legal requirements that were there.
If the picture is changing then the legal requirements should change as well.
Could I get a comment on that Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Minister Arvaluk.
The exemptions are only applicable to the minister if he is acting as a DEC. But as a minister you are not exempted.
But to act as a DEC you do.
Do you want to add anything to that.
Chairperson (interpretation): We are hearing two different languages on one channel.
Problem for a bit.
I guess I wonder is the DECs, where the minister is going to act as the DEC after the Bill comes into place, there is no such thing as a DEC. So I am wondering why that still needs to…I question why that is there.
Why there are responsibilities for DECs that are no longer going to exist.
You will have the department and the DEAs.
I still wonder why that requirement would not be there for that.
We still have the old Act.
We are still operating under the old Act.
The old Act lists the DEC's responsibilities and that is why the minister has to act as a DEC after July 1.
I guess in light of my comments, I was wondering if the minister would they look at not including that exemption to be carried forward in the new Act and even in this temporary one for now.
Because again I fail to see the need for it.
I am not sure why the minister is to be exempted if he is acting as a DEC. Maybe I could ask Mr. Spakowski to elaborate on that.
Mr. Spakowski: The Department of Education is currently circulating a new Education Act.
The proposed Education Act.
That Act is drafted in such a way that it does not mention DECs at all.
So the need for this provision will not arise in the new Education Act.
Maybe just to get an idea of what kinds of things would not have to be reported as a result of this being in place.
Different appointments, directives and regulations.