EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I am pleased to table today the Minister’s Annual Report on Poverty Reduction 2014-16.
Tabled Document 289 – 4(3): FPT Ministerial Report on the Canadian Council of Ministers of Environment, October 3, 2016 (Savikataaq)
Tabled Document 290 – 4(3): FPT Report on the Ministers Responsible for Infrastructure, September 6 to 7, 2016 (Savikataaq)
Tabled Document 291 – 4(3): Contract Activity Report 2015-2016 (Savikataaq)
Tabled Document 292 – 4(3): Procurement Activity Report 2015-2016 (Savikataaq)
Tabled Document 293 – 4(3): Leasing Activity Report 2015-2016 (Savikataaq)
Tabled Document 294 – 4(3): Community Based Search and Rescue Policy (Savikataaq)
Today I have six tabling documents.
Mr. Speaker, I am tabling an FPT Ministerial Report on the Canadian Council of Ministers of Environment, October 3, 2016.
Second one, I am pleased to table today the FPT Report on the Meeting of the Ministers Responsible for Infrastructure, September 6 to 7, 2016 in Edmonton, Alberta.
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to table the following reports:
Contract Activity Report 2015-16,
Procurement Activity Report 2015-16, and
Leasing Activity Report.
Lastly, Mr. Speaker, the member from Sanikiluaq will like this one.
Today I am tabling the Department of Community and Government Services’ Community Based Search and Rescue Contribution Policy.
Hon. Minister of Justice, Mr. Keith Peterson.
Bill 39 – Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2017 – Notice
Hon. Keith Peterson: Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on Tuesday, March 14, 2017, that Bill 39, Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, be read for the first time.
Bills 19, 26, 27, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 38, 41, 42, and 43 with Mr. Enook in the Chair.
Before proceeding to the Committee of the Whole, we will break for lunch and report back at 1:30 p.m.
>>House recessed at 11:41 and Committee resumed at 13:29
Chairman (Mr. Enook)(interpretation): Good afternoon, Nunavummiut watching the televised proceedings and listening to the radio broadcast. Welcome to your committee.
Before we proceed with our committee meeting, (interpretation ends) Premier Taptuna (interpretation) and all members, I would like you join me in recognizing and welcoming some Iqaluit elders and the president of the seniors society.
As members, let us recognize Okpik Pitseolak, who is here, Simon Nattaq, Martha Tikivik, Lazarus Arreak, who is the current chair of the seniors society, Cameron McGregor, who is a board member, and Jerry Ell, who is also a board member.
In Committee of the Whole we have the following items to deal with: Bills 19, 26, 27, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 36, 38, 41, 42, and 43.
Good afternoon, members. Good afternoon to the elders here today.
Mr. Chairman, we wish to commence with the clause-by-clause review of the following bills with the Minister of Finance in this order: Bill 32, Bill 33, Bill 35, Bill 36, and Bill 42; then with the Minister of Justice: Bill 19 and Bill 31; next, if time permits, we will proceed to Bills 26, 28, 30, 38, 41, and 43.
Are we in agreement that we first deal with Bill 32?
Bill 32 – Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 5, 2015-2016 – Consideration in Committee
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. We will first deal with Bill 32.
I would first like to ask if you would like to have officials with you at the witness table.
Yes, I have two witnesses that I would like to bring in to the witness table.
To my right is Jeff Chown from the Department of Finance and to my right is Greg Babstock from the Department of Health.
Minister Peterson, if you have opening comments on the bill, I now give you the opportunity to make them.
I appear before today to present Bill 32, Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 5, 2015-16.
Through this bill, the government is seeking an additional $3,869,000 in 2015-16 to properly account for the Iqaluit Energy Services Contract, which the Department of Community and Government Services manages.
The funding is to account for the building modifications and upgrades made to Government of Nunavut buildings over the term of the contract.
Once these modifications and upgrades were in place, they became our property.
We must include these additions on our balance sheet as “owned assets,” as if the government had gone out and bought them directly.
The government did not record these additions previously.
We must now record the adjustment of $3,869,000, which includes about $5 million for the cost of the additions minus about $1.1 million for amortization costs.
My colleagues, please refer to Bill 32, supplementary appropriation.
As I don’t have the Inuktitut copy and I don’t want to make a mistake, I’ll just follow the English copy.
On page 4 it reads, (interpretation ends) Government of Nunavut. Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) 2015-16, No. 5.
Community Services. $3,869,000. (interpretation) Do you agree?
It reads, (interpretation ends) Government of Nunavut. Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) 2015-16, No. 5.
Schedule 1. Capital. Capital Appropriation. $3,869,000. (interpretation) Do you agree?
Members, in your legislation binder, let’s refer to Bill 32.
I think you have it in front of you. I don’t have an Inuktitut copy, so I’ll just follow the English.
It reads, (interpretation ends) Bill 32, Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 5, 2015-2016. (interpretation) Clause 1.
Chairman (interpretation): We will go to page 2. Supplementary Appropriation.
Total Supplementary Appropriation. $3,869,000. (interpretation) Do you agree?
Chairman (interpretation): Let’s go back to the bill. Clause 4.
Chairman (interpretation): Members, do you agree to Bill 32 as a whole?
Do members agree, pursuant to Rule 62(2), that Bill 32 can immediately be placed on the orders of the day for third reading?
I now give you the opportunity to make your closing remarks, Minister Peterson.
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I again thank yourself and the committee for their excellent scrutiny of this bill in the standing committee and here today. I appreciate your support.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. We will now deal with Bill 33.
Minister Peterson, if you have any opening comments for this bill, I now give you the opportunity to make them. Minister Peterson.
Bill 33 – Supplementary Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, No. 3, 2016-2017 – Consideration in Committee
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am here today to present Bill 33, Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) Act, No. 3, 2016-2017.
Through this bill, the government is seeking $37,964,000 in additional operations and maintenance funding for 2016-17.
$2,064,000 for the Nunavut Housing Corporation to increase funding to local housing organizations, consistent with our practice of funding local housing organizations in line with the Government of Nunavut’s own collective agreement increases;
$6.9 million for the Department of Justice to address the following projected budget shortfalls:
$1.1 million for the Law Enforcement Branch;
$1.3 million for the Registries and Court Services Branch; and
$4.5 million for the Corrections Branch.
$29 million for the Department of Health to address the following projected budget shortfalls within its Health Care Service Delivery Branch:
$9.2 million for medical travel;
$8.7 million for contract nurse services;
$8.8 million for mental health and treatment contracts; and
$2.3 million for physician services contracts.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my opening comments. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
We will be dealing with Bill 33. We will start on page 4. As I have the English copy, I’ll read it in English. (interpretation ends) Government of Nunavut.
Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) 2016-17, No. 3.
Total Law Enforcement. $1,100,000. Total Registries and Courts Services. $1,300,000.
Total Corrections. $4,500,000.
Total Department. $6,900,000. (interpretation) Do you agree?
Turn the page. Page 5. (interpretation ends) Ms. Angnakak, for page 5. (interpretation) Go ahead, Ms. Angnakak.
On page 5 we’re dealing with a $29 million budget shortfall for Health. I would like to just ask the Department of Finance: how are they helping the Department of Health deal with this reoccurring situation that we have every single year where the Department of Health is coming for appropriations?
The department works on a monthly basis with the Department of Health through various reporting. We help them analyze their numbers to present us with more accurate, detailed numbers. Also, through our Financial Management Board, when the Department of Finance and all cabinet approve the supp requests, we also put conditions in that they must return to the FMB with recommended solutions.
Mr. Chairman, a lot of these costs are very difficult to control. For example, when people get sick, there are medical evacuations. Pharmaceutical costs are constantly rising.
It’s more sophisticated when you send people out for out-of-territory hospitals. Those costs are sometimes hard to forecast because you don’t know how long people will have to stay in a hospital and you don’t know what kind of specialized tests would be required.
We work with the Department of Health to assist and understand that. The finance department, of course, is in the business of numbers whereas the health department is primarily concerned with providing a very good health system for our citizens.
Just one further comment about this issue, I think it has happened, perhaps, since this government was formed.
Basically there are appropriations every single year. Why don’t you look at the history and get a better sense of what you’re going to need in the upcoming fiscal year?
Every year you come back for appropriations. Obviously this is a very important department and like you say, the shortfall is a very complicated issue.
There are no easy answers, I understand that, but when a department comes to you with their draft budget, are they cut down by Finance or do you guys usually accept what the department is coming to you with?
Ms. Angnakak is absolutely correct. It’s a recurring annual exercise with the Department of Health going back at least to my day as an MLA.
We had similar discussions in the Legislative Assembly.
Again, all departments must approach the Financial Management Board with their business cases. The Financial Management Board, of course, will set parameters for all departments what are priorities and what are not priorities. Of course we have to keep in mind our annual fiscal constraints.
We’re limited by funding we get annually from our territorial financing formula.
We’re also limited by our own source revenues, which are primarily taxes. We’re constrained and we have to prioritize across all government departments and public agencies with the funding.
When the Department of Health comes, we don’t approve all of their requests.
We do have to ask them to prioritize what they’re requesting.
In some cases you might get anywhere between 8 and 15 requests and you can’t fund them all, otherwise there wouldn’t be funding for all of them.
We do know that Health has been working very hard over the years to find more efficiencies or effectiveness in their system. I recall in the past where they didn’t have a CT scan at the hospital. Through the patient wait times funding we got from the federal government, they were able to get that.
There’s also the radiology. There is new specialized equipment where people are trained on and that means you wouldn’t necessarily have to send people to the south anymore. If we get more investments in our facilities and more training for the people that work for us, then perhaps some of those costs can go down.
Again, we’re living in a very remote part of Canada, the north, and it’s very costly to transport people on medical travel, escort travel, and medevacs. There are a lot of times you just can’t predict those costs.
Of course, again, we’re sending people to the southern provinces and of course the Northwest Territories have their costs that they charge us through reciprocal agreements for bed nights depending on what kind of room.
It could be a very expensive room depending on the seriousness of the illness.
The hospital charges for sophisticated tests.
These are things we can’t forecast, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to provide two further comments on this area.
One, really, like the minister said, you can’t fund everything that the Department of Health wants, but at the end of the day when it comes to treatment, it’s very hard to say no to that and we end up paying for it anyways through appropriations.
My second comment would be I would like to remind the minister and his cabinet once again, perhaps, to think about the merits of having the board of management for the hospital because that board could actually raise funds to address things like these kinds of appropriations. That’s all.
Minister, if you would like to comment on that, I give you the opportunity.
I again thank Ms. Angnakak for her comments and concerns.
We will take those under consideration.
Going back to the review.
We’re on page 5 of Bill 33.
I have the English copy. (interpretation ends) Government of Nunavut.
Total Health Care Service Delivery. $29 million.
Total Department. Not Previously Authorized. $29 million. (interpretation) Do you agree?
It reads, (interpretation ends) Government of Nunavut.
I would like further information.
There are local housing authorities and local housing organizations under the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
My question is if this is for both the LHOs and LHAs.
The funding is for the LHOs, local housing organizations.
For the ones that are under the Baker Lake Housing Authority under the NHC, will they also be receiving the compensation and benefits under this particular line?
I’m not familiar with every community’s structure, but I believe the intent is for every community, whether it’s an LHO or, say, an LHA, they get funding.
We’re on (interpretation ends) Government of Nunavut.
Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) 2016-17, No. 3. Nunavut Housing Corporation. Operations and Maintenance.
Not Previously Authorized. Total Nunavut Housing Corporation. $2,064,000. Total Department.
Not Previously Authorized. $2,064,000. (interpretation) Do you agree?
Go back to page 2. It reads, (interpretation ends) Government of Nunavut. Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) 2016-17, No. 3.
Operations and Maintenance. Operations and Maintenance Appropriation. $37,964,000. (interpretation) Do you agree?
Go to your legislation binder and refer to Bill 33. We will be dealing with that bill.
I believe you all have the bill in front of you. I only have the English version, so I’ll be reading it in English. (interpretation ends) Bill 33, Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) Act, No. 3, 2016-2017. (interpretation) Clause 1.
Chairman (interpretation): Let’s refer to page 2.
Total Appropriation. $37,964,000. (interpretation) Do you agree?
Chairman (interpretation): Go back to the bill. Clause 4.
Chairman (interpretation): Members, do you agree to the bill as a whole?
Committee members, pursuant to Rule 62(2), do you agree that Bill 33 can immediately be placed on the orders of the day for third reading?
Minister Peterson, we have concluded this bill. If you have any closing comments, the floor is yours. Minister Peterson.
I would just like to thank you and your committee again for your questions and comments in support of this bill to help the Government of Nunavut to continue to deliver our valuable programs and services across our territory and all the communities.
We will now go ahead with Bill 35.
It’s with the same minister. Minister Peterson, if you have any opening comments on Bill 35, I now give you the opportunity to make them.
Bill 35 – Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 1, 2017-2018 – Consideration in Committee
I appear before you today to present Bill 35, Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 1, 2017-2018.
Through this bill, the government is seeking an additional $71,807,000 in 2017-18.
This supplementary capital appropriation will provide the Department of Community and Government Services with $71,807,000 to recognize the accounting treatment relating to acquiring through a lease-to-own arrangement several buildings the Government of Nunavut currently leases.
This appropriation is somewhat unique in that the government is not asking to spend this amount in cash this year.
Instead we are seeking spending authority to enter a long-term lease-to-own deal that will cost the government this much over the length of the arrangement.
This appropriation represents the net present value of the future stream of capital lease payments.
We consider all the lease payments the government will make as part of this arrangement over the next 10 years and calculated what those payments are worth to the government in today’s terms.
The government is seeking to enter into lease-to-own contracts for:
the Legislative Assembly building at a cost of $15,973,000; and
nine office buildings located in decentralized communities at a cost of $55,834,000.
This supplementary appropriation also includes:
a $200,000 reduction to the Department of Family Services’ capital budget related to the transfer of the elders facilities to the Department of Health; and
a $200,000 increase to the Department of Health’s capital budget related to the transfer of the elders facilities from the Department of Family Services.
Mr. Chairman, the government is also seeking $10 million to allow the Department of Education to move forward with plans following the fire that destroyed Kugaaruk’s only school on March 1.
Our priority is to support the students and others impacted by this event.
Government of Nunavut officials are working closely with the community to find temporary space so that students can get back to class and complete the school year.
Looking ahead, we plan to purchase and install modular classrooms this summer to provide students with dedicated class space in September.
We expect this will cost an additional $6 million.
We must also begin planning a new school and are seeking $4 million to initiate the design and build of the project, which we estimate could cost $40 million in total.
Mr. Chairman, it is still quite early in the planning process. We will return with further details at the spring sitting.
However, having approved supplementary appropriations starting April 1 will allow us to move forward in time to meet crucial sealift deadlines.
Mr. Chairman, because the fire occurred after I first tabled this bill in this Assembly, I intend to make a motion at the appropriate time to seek the committee’s support to amend this bill to include $10 million to the Department of Education.
I believe you have Bill 35 in front of you. We will start on page 4.
We’re on page 4. (interpretation ends) Government of Nunavut. Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) 2017-18, No. 1.
I would just like clarification for the $200,000. Once it’s transferred to Health, how would that money be used?
We didn’t bring those details with us, but the transfer being that they’re capital monies, they would be in accordance with our capital planning process.
We’re on (interpretation ends) Family Services. Capital. Not Previously Authorized.
Total Corporate Management. -$200,000.
Total Department. -$200,000. (interpretation) Do you agree?
Turn the page. (interpretation ends) Health.
Total Directorate. $200,000.
Total Department. $200,000. (interpretation) Do you agree?
Page 7 in English. (interpretation ends) Community and Government Services.
Total Community Services. $71,807,000.
I just have a question about this. When you’re entering into new lease agreements or at the end of ten years when you actually take over the buildings, what kind of due diligence is done to ensure that... ? For example, for the Legislative Assembly, the ground that it sits on is actually sinking a bit because of the sandy foundation.
What kind of thorough investigations do you do before you enter into big amounts, negotiated lease amounts that are of this size?
Before the minister responds, although I know we all wish to speak, but let us remember that we have interpreters and we need to make sure they keep up so that we can all have the same understanding.
Mr. Chairman, if you will allow me, I would like to bring a new witness into the witness table.
Members, do you agree to allow the witness into the witness table?
Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the minister’s current witnesses out and the other witness in.  Thank you, Sergeant-at-Arms.
Minister Peterson, please introduce your witness for the record.
My new witness is Eiryn Devereaux from the Department of Community and Government Services.
Mr. Devereaux, welcome to the House.
Ms. Angnakak, please ask your question again so that Mr. Devereaux can hear it properly.
I’ll try to speak a little slower as well.
My question is when we’re approving these amounts of money of over $71 million that pertain to future capital lease payments and that pertains to eventually owning this Legislative Assembly and other government buildings that are currently occupied by other government departments.
What kind of due diligence are you doing to ensure that we’re actually getting buildings that are worth that amount of money?
We have heard, I don’t know if it’s rumours or if it’s true or if even CGS has done any work on making sure, for example, if the leg. is secure on its foundation.
There’s talk of some parts of the foundation shifting and sinking because of the type of material it’s built on, for example.
So if I can get clarification on that.
I’ll ask Mr. Devereaux to explain the process.
Chairman: Mr. Devereaux.
Mr. Devereaux: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Initially during the last few years as we started negotiating with this particular landlord, we undertook some site investigations.
Relative to this particular agreement coming into full force, there is a due diligence period.
That due diligence period right now is proposed to be the end of this calendar year, in which case, if we do go ahead and sign the agreement, we will spend the next six months to do more detailed engineering studies before the agreement would be finalized. We will have an exit point if we’re not satisfied with those investigations by December of 2017.
If you or your department is not satisfied with the investigations or you find new information even that really hinders the signing off of the agreement, what happens then?
What is the next step? What happens to these monies that we would approve?
What happens to that and what are the next steps if it should get to that point?
Hon. Keith Peterson: Mr. Chairman, thank you. I thank Ms. Angnakak for the question.
Mr. Chairman, if we didn’t move forward on this initiative, then the appropriations would lapse and we would have to look at other options.
My other question was: what happens if we don’t go forward with this?
Well, we would have to look at other options.
The current leases are expiring in 2019-2020.
One of the options we did consider was purchasing the buildings and the landlord was unwilling to sell them to us.
That’s why we came back and this is why we have this option, but again, if we don’t move forward, then we will just have to look at other options.
When you look at all of the buildings for the lease-to-own deal, we would have leased them for 20 years now. How much have we paid in total for the Legislative Assembly and the other nine office buildings?
It has been 20 years. How much money have we spent on the Legislative Assembly and the other buildings on leases and if we’re going to buy them?
Roughly the annual payments since the Government of Nunavut entered the leases for this building and the other nine buildings, roughly... .
Sorry, Mr. Chairman. We’ve got all kinds of numbers here.
Mr. Chairman, the annual amount for the Legislative Assembly would have been $3.2 million.
Mr Okalik, do you have another question?
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): My apologies, Mr. Chairman.
We have paid $60 million in total in the past 20 years and on top of that, there is another $16 million, so we have paid $76 million if we’re going to purchase the Legislative Assembly.