EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
If you could direct your question to the minister’s statement.
I’d like to keep it in line.
You could rephrase your question.
Mr. Puqiqnak (interpretation): I think I’ll make another comment, later.
Mr. Chairman, at the September 24 meeting of the Chamber of Commerce in Baker Lake a motion was put forward that indicated, if I can read it:
“Whereas NTI and the Government of Nunavut are planning a review of the BIP and whereas the policy was created by the Keewatin Chamber of Commerce and enacted by the GNWT to level the playing field between northern and southern businesses; Be it resolved that KCC have representation on the review committee to protect business interests.”
Moved by Ray Mercer and Seconded by Al Lahare.
My question to the minister, I know she indicated that she’s not quite sure who’s going to be on the committee, but I would like a commitment from the minister that there’s at least a name from the KCC put forward for the selection process.
Hon. Manitok Thompson: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Our proposal as a department to cabinet is that we have four from NTI and four from GN, but there can certainly be a motion put forward if they want someone else on this body.
Mr. O'Brien: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.
With all due respect to NTI, why would it be necessary to have four representatives from NTI.
Can I have some rationale for that proposal.
Madame Minister, if you would like to respond please.
Hon. Manitok Thompson: Mr. Chair, that’s our proposal to cabinet and Article 24 is from NTI.
That’s the reason why we have equal numbers from each group.
I will be making a motion for the minister to consider putting a name forward from the Keewatin Chamber of Commerce for consideration on this review committee.
I think that’s only reasonable and fair.
Did you want to make a response, Madame Minister.
Hon. Manitok Thompson: In my statement, I said that this working group will seek input from and consult with all Members of the Legislative Assembly, representatives of the communities, the public, business leaders, and interested groups, so everybody will be consulted.
The group will be also consulting with the Keewatin Chamber of Commerce.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Would you like to make further comments.
Mr. O'Brien: Just for clarification purposes, the minister said that she cannot let us know right now who the individuals are that are going to be on this committee.
Is that because it has not been approved by your caucus, by cabinet.
Is that my understanding.
Madame Minister, or any one of the staff members.
As I said, I have a proposal to bring forward to cabinet and because we have been so busy we have not gotten to that yet.
That is my proposal at this time.
Mr. O'Brien: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Minister, I’m just trying to get it clear in my mind.
Are you saying that cabinet will make the decision on who is approved for this review committee, or are you making this decision as the minister for your department.
Who is making the decision as to who will serve on this committee?
At this time, I just know the numbers.
I don’t have specific names.
For my department, we have John Purdy who is here right now, Theresa Chandler, Terry Audla, and Barry Cornthwaite.
That’s from my department, and the proposal is for four other people from NTI.
That’s our proposal, thank you.
There’s other people who might want to ask questions.
Go ahead, please.
My last question, again to the minister.
Being that the Minister hasn’t finalized her proposal yet, I would ask her if she would consider putting a name forward from the Keewatin Chamber of Commerce, as one of the representatives, given the fact that this policy effects all businesspeople and what we have on it is bureaucrats, with all due respect, and elected representatives.
So I would ask the minister to reconsider and to put a name forward or accept a name from the Keewatin Chamber of Commerce in view of the fact that was their wish and they made it known through a resolution at the annual general meeting in September.
So I would ask the minister if she would reconsider her proposal and include one of these names or companies.
I believe that there has to be equal representation from all of Nunavut, and there has to be equal representation.
Please keep in mind that when you are going to be asking questions.
I will consider that, but there will be a lot of people in the working group, because there’s also the Kitikmeot Chamber of Commerce, Baffin Chamber of Commerce, Keewatin Chamber of Commerce, but I will consider the request, see how we can work around it with my colleagues.
Mr. McLean, I believe you have a question.
Mr. McLean: Thank you, David.
If I stray off the Minister’s Statement, somebody will bring me back to it.
Before I start, I want to give you a little history lesson.
The Business Incentive Policy that the Government of the Northwest Territories enacted was developed by the Keewatin Chamber of Commerce for the Northwest Territories.
They lobbied the government of the Northwest Territories to enact a Business Incentive Policy.
That’s why we have a Business Incentive Policy, because the private sector, who are the stakeholders in this, lobbied and drew it up and worked with the government as equal partners to develop the BIP, and I’m just echoing what Mr. O’Brien said in regards to it.
I have a problem, no offence to bureaucrats, they’re all hardworking and we need them, I see that.
But the Business Incentive Policy was formed to protect businesses, and I have to reiterate that there should be somebody, preferably from the Keewatin Chamber of Commerce, and the present President is Ray Mercer, who was one of the driving forces behind the Business Incentive Policy in 1983 and 1984.
I know the other chambers of commerce like the Kitikmeot and the Baffin and Iqaluit were sort of reaping the rewards of the Business Incentive Policy and I was reading the document again and it sort of says you’re going to consult with the business leaders and things like that, but what scares me is that they won’t be, and we’re going to have a Business Incentive Policy that won’t be reflective of the business community.
What worries me is that the Business Incentive Policy was a good document, but it was written in 1983 and 1984 and times have changed, where Article 24 has come along.
The Business Incentive Policy of today does not reflect Article 24 of the land claims agreement.
It should and I agree with it, because there is a large misunderstanding amongst the populace that Article 24 and the Business Incentive Policy are separate.
But how do you enact them in government contracts.
That is a tough question to ask, and it’s also going to be harder to answer.
I like the idea of community consultations.
We need it, because you’ll hear from people, and I’ve heard from people, being the past President of the Keewatin Chamber of Commerce, about Article 24 and the Business Incentive Policy and I’ve had to sit there and try to explain it to people and I couldn’t.
So if you take a tour of communities discussing the Business Incentive Policy you’re going to hear all kinds of different ideas on what Article 24 and the Business Incentive Policy are.
Just a short question, and Mr. Chairman, I want to ask some more questions.
Is the government going to integrate the Business Incentive Policy and Article 24 together in all contracting procedures, is that what the quest of this rewriting is.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. McLean.
Madame Minister if you would like to respond.
Hon. Manitok Thompson: Everybody is nodding on this side, so I’m nodding too.
Mr. McLean: Good.
That’s one of the questions that I’ve been wanting to ask for a long time.
The Business Incentive Policy, like I said, was established to give northern businesses an advantage over southern businesses because large firms down south would bid on work in the north and they would bid low, lower than the northern company, because the northern companies, as we all know, have to own warehouses and keep staff in the north all the time.
During the construction season they had to maintain staff and a lot of staff in the construction industry up here are Inuit staff, and when companies down south bid on it, they would fly their staff up and work on contracts and have no training components involved.
That’s why the Business Incentive Policy was enacted, to protect northern businesses and encourage them to grow.
So I’m kind of hoping that with this new Business Incentive Policy that cabinet is working on, and like it says here in the document, that some of the members are going to be encouraged to be on, will still protect northern businesses from southern businesses.
Is that the goal of the Business Incentive Policy that’s going to be rewritten.
That side is also nodding, so, yes.
We’re saying yes too many times, Glen, I mean Mr. McLean, but yes.
Chairperson (interpretation): Ms. Thompson is at the witness table and questions could be asked from any one of the members here.
Mr. McLean: Ma'na.
So, when this document is done and you got the working group of NTI, which I hope have some business experience, the government, which I know don't have any business experience, and the private sector, who I know have some business experience whether it's the Keewatin Chamber, the Baffin Chamber, or the Kitikmeot Chamber; can all of them work together and come out with a document that is truly reflective of today's Nunavut and which will benefit all businesses in Nunavut along with Inuit businesses.
We will have a chance to bring this document forward in our standing committee.
Chairperson (interpretation): Madam Minister if you would like to respond please.
Hon. Manitok Thompson: Thank you Mr. Chair.
I had already made a commitment in my statement that if any legislative standing committees would like the working group to appear before them, I have offered whatever they have with them to appear before the standing committees.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Madam Minister.
Mr. McLean: I don't know if the Minister understood what I said. What I asked is that will the standing committee responsible for the Business Incentive Policy have input and if there is something that is glaringly wrong have a chance to discuss and make recommendations before it turns into a policy or legislation and that we'll have ample time to deal with it, not ample time but a time to deal with it so that if there are glaring errors or if we find mistakes that we'll be able to recommend changes to it.
Are we going to get that opportunity.
Madam Minister or one of the staff members.
Yes, we will commit to that.
Mr. McLean: Ma'na Mr. Chairman.
The minister has answered all my questions and I'm happy with the responses I got from her and I’m sure this Business Incentive Policy is going to be one that reflects Nunavut.
I'll sleep a lot better tonight knowing that.
It's ok if the Minister's doesn’t make any comments.
If you don't have any comments to make or if you don't have any questions.
On Article 24, I had no kind of direction and we do have many questions to ask I just want to, I know that it states April 1, 2000.
I know that this policy will be implemented on that date, I was wondering if that will be announced at that time.
I'll let him answer this.
Chairperson (interpretation): The floor's open.
Mr. Bain: When the Business Incentive Policy was brought into force within the Nunavut Government it was only approved for 12 months and was set to expire April 1, 2000.
We're hoping to get a new policy in place so there's no confusion with contractors for the next contracting season.
So as early we can get that done with the co-operation of the standing committee and the public and what not the less confusion out there for the business community. Especially with a new policy coming in to place.
Nukarmiik.
Mr. Nutarak do you have any other questions.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): I wanted to make a comment that there was some discussion that was getting out of line, so I was going to point that out at that time.
Madam Minister do you want to make a response. Ok.
Any other comments.
All the names on my list are gone now.
Since I'm not sitting around the table at my seat there are hardly any questions.
If there are no other comments, or general comments, do you agree to the Minister's statement.
We were dealing with Bill 6 but we'll take a 20 minute break, or 5 minutes to deal with a technical issue.
Chairperson (interpretation): We can resume the Committee of the Whole.
Bill 6, we'll deal with Bill 6.
Mr. Minister could you make your presentation.
Your official will come in later.
Minister we can resume now.
I didn’t think we were complete with the Minister Manitok, I'd like to thank you for going onto the witness chair.
Right now our Premier is at the witness table.
So start now please.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Can I invite my official Kimberly Baine?
I will speak in English.
I would also like to thank the members of this committee for allowing me this opportunity to go into details about Bill 6, an act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
I'll first provide members with an overview of the effected legislation and then the rationale for the proposed amendment.
Members can then ask detailed questions of myself and my staff.
The GNWT passed the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act in 1994.
The act came into force on December 31, 1996.
This allowed the NWT Government two years to prepare for the requirements for compliance under the new legislation.
The act was then inherited by the Nunavut Government on April 1 of this year.
The act balances the peoples’ rights to privacy with the publics’ right to access information held by government.
The act restricts what types of personal information the government can collect about Nunavummiut, and once collected what the government can do with that information.
The act also provides mechanisms for Nunavummiut to request information held by government and clearly determines what information government must release and what information must be kept confidential.
Similar access and privacy regimes are legislated in every other jurisdiction in Canada.
The Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act inherited from the GNWT is now in place and the Nunavut Government is subject to all of it's rules and provisions in both the areas of protection of privacy and the right of access to information.
Under the act Nunavummiut can be assured that their privacy will be upheld by the Nunavut Government and that they can access information held by government as provided for in the legislation.
When the GNWT passed this act in 1994, they included a provision under section 4 which made privacy clauses in other acts prevail over the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act until December 31, 1999.
On December 31 of this year, section 4, clause 1 ends and section 4 clause 2 comes into effect.
Clause 2 states that the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act will prevail over all other acts unless specific amendments are made to state otherwise.
This allowed the GNWT legislature to consider all other privacy clauses in other legislation and determine if they are inconsistent with the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
And if they were inconsistent to decide which one should prevail.
The GNWT passed an act to amend the Access to Information and the Protection of Privacy Act this fall.
The act amended ten acts to reconcile the differences in the privacy and access rules between those acts and the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
The GNWT took three years to determine which acts required changes to the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
The Nunavut cabinet feels strongly that the assembly should not just automatically copy what was done in the GNWT but should carefully consider other ways in which Nunavut statutes should be amended before the Access to information and Protection of Privacy Act takes precedence over all the privacy clauses in the legislation.
We believe that the assembly and the Nunavut Access and Privacy Commissioner who will be appointed by the assembly should be involved in these decisions.
Unfortunately as the act is now written these decisions must be made and the amendment enacted before December 31, 1999.
This does not give the public the right of access and the privacy commissioner or members of this assembly time to consider the matter.
Mr. Chairman, it is for these reasons that our government is asking the assembly to pass Bill 6 an act to amend the Access to information and Protection of Privacy Act in this session.
Bill 6 extends the December 31 deadline by one year.
Mr. Chairman, one year is not a long time to undertake the legal and policy work needed to make the necessary amendments.
However, Mr. Chairman, with the assistance of the new commissioner and with the input of the assembly and with the standing committees we believe that we can meet the December 31, 2000 deadline.
Mr. Chairman, I want to assure the members of this assembly and all the Nunavummiut that by extending this deadline we are not in any way taking away any rights to access or rights of privacy away from the people of Nunavut.
What we are proposing is to leave all legislation as it is today for a maximum of one year.
Mr. Chairman, I feel strongly that any changes made to peoples’ rights to access government information or the right to privacy of personal information must be carefully and fully considered by this assembly before they are put into effect.
Given that the assembly and our government have only had a few months to consider this matter, I do not believe that asking people of Nunavut for a one-year extension for this legislation inherited by the GNWT is an unreasonable request.
With that I wish to thank the members for allowing me to say a few words on the act.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Premier of Nunavut.
At this time can you introduce your official.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Her name is Kimberly Baine, she's from my office.
She's able to respond to your questions.
Are there any comments to Bill 6.
There are no general comments.
I don't see any hands going up.
Mr. Akesuk .
Mr. Akesuk (interpretation): I suggest that we go clause by clause.
Bill 6 - An Act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
Bill as a whole, agreed?
Bill 6, are you agreed that we are completed with Bill 6.
Do you agree that Bill 6 is ready for third reading.
Thank you, Bill 6 is now ready for third reading.
I would like to thank Mr. Okalik, Premier of Nunavut for appearing before the Committee of the Whole and your official.
What's the wish of the committee.
Thank you for approving this, the Bill has gone through.
Mr. O'Brien: I would like to make a motion that we report progress.
And before we leave, Manitok I would like to thank you for appearing before the committee.
I had forgotten to mention my appreciation, thank you Manitok.
Mr. O'Brien has a motion on the floor to adjourn for today.
This is non-debatable. Do you agree?
All those in favour, please may I have a show of hands.
Maybe you weren't listening.
I apologize, for those in favour.
There are seven nays and eight yea's.
The majority of the members would like to adjourn for the day.
We will await the arrival of the Speaker.
You can go get the Speaker please.
We thank our law clerk for being here, and I will be going back to my old seat and thank you for the proceedings.
Speaker (interpretation): Okay item 20 Report of the committee of the whole.
Mr. Iqaqrialu (interpretation): Mr. Speaker I wish to report that your committee has been considering Bill 6 – An Act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act and it's ready for third reading and Mr. Speaker I move that the report of the Committee of the Whole be concurred with.
Mr. Iqaqrialu has a motion on the floor, who's the seconder Mr. Ng. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion is carried.
Item 21, third reading of bills, Mr. Ng.
Bill 1 - Loan Authorization Act 99/2000
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Mr. Speaker I move second by the Honourable member from Pangnirtung that Bill 1 Loan Authorization Act, 99/2000 be read for the third time.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Ng. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion is carried.
Third reading of bills, Mr. Anawak.
Hon. Jack Anawak : Qujannamiik, I move second for the Honourable member from Nanulik that Bill 4 An Act to Amend the Legal Services Act be read for the third time.
Your motion is carried.
Hon. Paul Okalik: I seek unanimous consent to be given for third reading of Bill 6, An Act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
Speaker: The Premier is asking for unanimous consent for the third reading of Bill # 6, the motion is in order.
Sorry. (interpretation) The Premier had asked for unanimous consent for the third reading of Bill 6.
(interpretation ends) There are no nays. Premier, you have unanimous consent.
Hon. Paul Okalik: I move, seconded by the honourable member for Kugluktuk, that Bill 6 - An Act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act be read for the third time.
Meeting of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Services at 5:30 p.m. in the Nanuq Board Room. Meeting of the Standing Committee on Culture, Education, Health and Social Services, 5:30 in the Tuktu Board Room.
Tomorrow morning 8:30, meeting of regular caucus in the Nanuq Board Room.
Orders of the day for Friday October 29. 10:00 a.m.
Bill 5 - Supplementary Appropriation Act No. 1, 1999/2000
The House stands adjourned until Friday October 29, 1999 at 10:00 A.M.
Sergeant- at-Arms.
>>House Adjourned at 5.12 p.m.
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 29. 1999
Pages 227 - 276
Opening Prayer 227
Ministers’ Statements 227
Members’ Statements 230
Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery 234
Oral Questions 236
Tabling of documents 255
Notices of Motions 255
Motions 255
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters 256
Report of the Committee of the Whole 274
Friday, October 29, 1999 227
34 - 1(3): Recruitment & Retention of Health Care Providers (Picco) 227
35 - 1(3): French Language School in Iqaluit (Arvaluk) 228
36 - 1(3): Appointments to NDC and NBCC Boards (Kilabuk) 229
53 - 1(3): NTI Bruisers Vs MLA Sharks (Picco) 230
54 - 1(3): Relaxation Tapes and Inuit (Arvaluk) 230
55 - 1(3): Importance of Education (Alakannuark) 231
56 - 1(3): MLA Sharks Goalie (Thompson) 231
57 - 1(3): NTI / MLA Hockey Game MVP (Iqaqrialu) 232
58 - 1(3): Joamie School Family Fun Night (Kilabuk) 232
59 - 1(3): Sanikiluaq's Position on Time Zone Change (Kattuk) 232
60 - 1(3): Arvaluk and Hall Beach Memories (Irqittuq) 233
61 - 1(3): Compromise for Time Zone Issue (O'Brien) 233
89 – 1(3): Time Zone (Out of Order) (O'Brien) 236
90 – 1(3): Time Zone (Out of Order) (Irqittuq) 236  91 - 1(3): Infrastructure for Businesses (Puqiqnak) 236
92 - 1(3): Health Centre Construction Delay (O'Brien) 237
93 - 1(3): Rankin Inlet Utilidor Project (Iqaqrialu) 238
94 - 1(3): Gjoa Haven Fish Plant (Puqiqnak) 238
95 - 1(3): Purchase of Country Food from Kivalliq Communities (McLean) 238
96 - 1(3): Housing for Social Worker (Akesuk) 239
97 - 1(3): Funding for Access Road (Kattuk) 239
98 - 1(3): Wheelchair for Clyde River Resident (Iqaqrialu) 240
99 - 1(3): Doctor for Igloolik (Irqittuq) 241
100 - 1(3): Bowhead Whale Study (Alakannuark) 243
101 - 1(3): Appointment to Boards (Puqiqnak) 243
102 - 1(3): Internet Services in Communities (McLean) 244
103 - 1(3): Health Statistics (Iqaqrialu) 246
104 - 1(3): Telehealth Systems (Irqittuq) 247
105 - 1(3): Wrong Translation Attachment (Nutarak) 248
106 - 1(3): Qikiqtarjuaq Airstrip (Iqaqrialu) 249
107 - 1(3): Location of Old Dump Site (Nutarak) 249
108 - 1(3): Multi-Year Plans (Nutarak) 250
109 - 1(3): Social Services Employee in Arviat (O'Brien) 250
110 - 1(3): Arctic College Centre in Hall Beach (Irqittuq) 252
111 - 1(3): Full Time Mental Health Worker (McLean) 252
112 - 1(3): Cape Dorset Water Pipeline (Akesuk) 252
113 - 1(3): Staffing for Elders Societies (Iqaqrialu) 253
114 - 1(3): Marketing for Fish (Irqittuq) 253
115 - 1(3): Elders Housing (McLean) 254  116 - 1(3): Rules of the Assembly (Iqaqrialu) 254
13 - 1(3):Letter from Cape Dorset Mayor 255