EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
When I was in Cape Dorset, there were three boats that were upside down in the water because they don’t have docking facilities as well.
Whenever we meet with the Federal/Provincial/Territorial Ministers, what we try to say to them is that Nunavut does not have those kinds of facilities and we would like to be treated the same as any other place and have those facilities. We have been requesting the federal government to have those facilities, but we have not been successful.
The reason why I asked that question is because when they talk about the docking facilities, and I think they use the economic development part to acquire those facilities, but we want it for other things as well for the smaller communities.
We will be talking with the federal government when we talk about those facilities in the communities, and what we will be saying is because it’s a danger without having docking facilities, that’s why we really need those types of facilities.
We will relay that message to the federal government because all of the communities receive shipments and that would be part of our negotiations with the federal government whereby we need those facilities in order for us to bring in material from the barges and from the ships.
So those are the types of things that we will be relaying to the federal government once we start negotiating with them.
Perhaps, if I could just give the minister some advice or recommendations; when the provinces were being divided, the provinces had a network whereby all of the provinces that wanted a highway collectively got together and negotiated a highway.
Perhaps, if the minister can talk with the federal government to say that these communities up in Nunavut do not have highway systems, so the only means for them to receive shipments and materials is to have those docking facilities.
They have a big bridge in the Maritimes and I would urge the minister to negotiate with the federal government saying that the only means of transportation is by air or by ship. We need those docking facilities in order for us to have a better lifestyle.
Because the provinces negotiated a big highway, we could probably do the same thing.
Yes, I will include the wishes of the member to make it a little bit stronger when we’re negotiating some funding for docking facilities. We could say, like if the provinces have done these types of negotiations, that we could do the same thing here in Nunavut.
We are on page K-7. (interpretation ends) Economic Development and Transportation.
Transportation. Grants and Contributions.
Total Headquarters Region. $1,500,000.
Total Kitikmeot Region. $75,000.
Chairman: Total Grants and Contributions. $1,575,000.
Total Headquarters Region. $2 million.
I thank the minister and his officials for appearing today. I wonder if the minister can give us an update on the federal program, the Airport Capital Assistance Program. In particular, I’m interested if the program still exists and how the Nunavut airports can qualify for funding under that program.
The federal funding that we receive, or we negotiate funding from the federal government…perhaps if Mr. Kunuk can elaborate on how we negotiate for that funding from the federal government.
What we get is Airport Capital Assistance Program (ACAP) to maintain the airstrips in Nunavut. We have received some funding for Iqaluit and Chesterfield Inlet for the maintenance of those airstrips. Also for Taloyoak, we have requested some funding and we will try to negotiate again with the federal government to get more funding for those types of things.
ACAP consist of airports that are already in existence to make them a better runway or to extend the runway or to relocate the runway or to widen the runway. I don’t think ACAP is really for widen the runway but there’s different type of rules that we use to negotiate those types of funding.
I thank the minister and Mr. Kunuk for that information.
As the minister is well aware, Cambridge Bay has indicated or expressed an interest to improve the runway. It is 5,000 feet long right now and it’s a little short I think for most jets, although a 737 can land there, but they would have to put the reverse thrusters on real fast.
If it’s overshot, it could pose a danger to the passengers. I think we also want to widen the runway.
I’ve brought this up a couple of times with the minister in the past and I was wondering if the minister could give some indication of where the department is in terms of seeking funding for the Cambridge Bay runway, under the ACAP program.
There are various runways that need maintenance of that type as the member stated. And because we need to use those airstrips and…but we will also try to urge or to try getting some more funding from the federal government to maintain those airstrips.
The federal government also has some guidelines that we have to follow when we’re negotiating for some funding.
I will include the airstrip and that the people of Cambridge Bay requested their airstrip extension, and give them the reasons that Mr. Peterson has stated when we start requesting from the federal government, again, for the purpose of the maintenance of those airports.
There are a lot of concerns that the communities have, as well as the member himself, and we would like to represent them equally, so we will try our best to request more funding.
I thank the minister for that reply. I just want to mention to the minister what kind of information the minister’s department looks at.
I’m reading a monthly report for July 2006 from Transport Canada. It’s a report called Aircraft Movement Statistics. Looking at just for July alone, the monthly movement of aircraft on that runway, there were 773 flights.
Communities such as Hay River, for example, were only 592. Many communities in Nunavut are less than 100.
So it’s an extremely busy airport, if you compare the movements to communities across Canada. These are aircraft movements by class type of operations without air traffic control towers.
In the Northwest Territories, a busy place like Tuktuyaktuk the count is 609 movements.
So I don’t know what to tell you, minister: it’s a busy airport, it needs to be lengthened, it needs to be widened, it needs surfacing, the community it is a hub for the Kitikmeot, and we get a lot of people coming through there, north and south.
The community has indicated that a runway is key to the future of economic development in the Kitikmeot; you know, with tourism, business, and medical. So the runway definitely needs your attention.
I urge the minister to make it a high priority when he’s discussing with ACAP, submitting ACAP applications to the federal government. Mr. Chairman, if the minister could give me some feedback on my comments.
Our staff have rewritten in Cambridge Bay because to improve the runway it would cost quite a bit and if we hear that we are going to get quite a bit of money from the federal government then we have considered that because we know that the Member for Cambridge Bay has been working really hard to get this done.
We keep asking the federal government and if we happen to get some funding from the federal government, if we think that we’ll have enough, and especially with the heavy traffic in Cambridge Bay.
I just want to let you know before I ask a question on K-8, what Tootoo mentioned.
It says highway upgrades in 2006-07, there was $154,000 on the 2006-07, and it’s not there. I believe it should be put in there, too, because it was from last year, and the funding was used and they have stated $100,000.
My question is, in 1994 the Arviat airstrip, we wanted an extension on the runway and there was a study done by Ministry of Transport. They said that if we extend it another 1,500 feet that we would be able to get 737s and different types of aircraft because it’s very expensive for the freight. So there were some talks, but they said there was no funding and the Northwest Territories Government put a stop to it because there was not enough funding.
There are 600 plus movements every month and a lot of them are Hawkers and they go into the community lot of times.
The cost of freight is very expensive.
I’m pretty sure that you have some paper, when it was under the Northwest Territories, about the plans they had.
I wonder if the minister had checked into this up to now.
While the minister is thinking about the answer, we don’t have a quorum.
These are very important, so try to stay in the House.
The extension of runways, the federal government doesn’t seem to see this as very important, but if there was an extension of 1,500 feet on whichever airstrip it would cost about $5 or $6 million for an extension. The funding that we do get from the federal government is $10.9 million.
We can look into this further. The federal government has to recognize that our airstrips have to be in better condition and we’ll definitely have to push for this.
We keep telling them that they are way behind compared to the provincial infrastructures that they have down south.
We keep pushing for these.
Before the split of the Northwest Territories and Nunavut, there used to be some funding that were available to be used for extension of runways but within Nunavut, we don’t have too much of that.
That might be the case; you all know that Arviat is very flat, and it wouldn’t cost that much.
Originally they said it shouldn’t cost that much and the Ministry of Transportation checked and said that if they extended it 1,500 feet and the hamlet council talked to different people that the freight would be a lot cheaper, just like in Rankin Inlet.
We know what the benefits would be and a lot of people who go on medical because there’s not enough room on the planes. They keep putting things off, or even passengers. You can go that way but you can’t return on the date that you want to.
We definitely have to do something about this and let the federal government know.
The smaller planes, the Hawkers, if we were to say they would use a lot less energy if it was a bigger plane.
When you have so many smaller planes it gets more expensive and the population is growing in my community.
Those passengers who have to go down south for medical, or the travel between the government officials; they can’t go just whenever they want to go, they have to schedule their timing.
We have to find some benefits. As somebody said, maybe the only time we might be able to get breakwaters is if all the boats in the communities were facing down.
Maybe if there was a major accident or disaster, then maybe they would finally pay attention.
So I would like to ask the minister can you check into the extension of our airstrip in Arviat this winter.
Yes, we understand and hear what he’s saying. We are keeping track of the concerns and comments that we are hearing. We will keep that in mind.
What I’m talking about, the extension of the airstrip. I think there should be a study because everything is going up.
Sometimes when you estimate that it’ll cost this much it sounds impossible, but when you do an actual study and listening to the concerns of the residents of the communities, because it would benefit the community and they’ll have better routes.
If we just keep bumping into how much it would cost, then there’s no advancement whatsoever.
I wonder if the minister can commit to get more statistics this winter to start this study.
I am the Chairperson.
There are actual studies that happen in those communities and we try and work on these very seriously.
Our staff from the Nunavut Government also goes to the communities to check the airports and airstrips to make sure that everything is being followed.
I will ask one of my staff if they can give us an estimate as to how much it would be and our studies on airstrips, because we got quite a number of requests from the communities and Mr. Arvaluk also asked if they would be able to get jet services, we consider all these things and in the transportation strategy we have tried to make improvements so that it suits to the community, Nunavut community needs.
Maybe if we had more funding, then we could do more studies to put improvements in the communities, if such a funding becomes available for airports in the communities in Nunavut.
I have a very short question.
I know we already approved K-7 under Canadian Drivers Licence.
Looks like they are going to get a very good photo equipment and they will be able to make IDs.
Would it be possible to use that camera for passport pictures?
Chairman (interpretation): We already approved K-7.
We are on K-8.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): Even though we approved K-7. I will respond to Mr. Barnabas’s comments.
We’ll have to ask the federal government if we are going to use that camera for passport photos. We could probably have a discussion with the federal government.
We are on page K-8.
Transportation. Qikiqtaaluk region. Total Qikiqtaaluk region $9,970,000.
Chairman: Total Tangible Assets. $1,970,000.
Chairman: Going back to page 4.
Total Capital Expenditures. $13,545,000.
Chairman: Are you agreed that the Department of Economic Development and Transportation is concluded?
Chairman: Thank you, Minister and your staff. (interpretation) Do you have any closing comments, Mr. Minister?
And I would also like to thank the members for posing excellent questions and reminders of what Economic Development and Transportation will be doing. We will take everything into consideration and I would also like to thank my staff for being here with me.
As today is probably the last day, I would also like to take this opportunity to thank the interpreters who have been very helpful during our stay.
(interpretation ends) At this time, I would like to ask our Speaker to enter the Chambers to give his opening remarks.
Mr. Speaker. (interpretation) Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the Speaker.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, go ahead with your opening comments.
Bill 26 – Appropriations (Capital) Act, 2007-08 – Review in Committee – Office of the Legislative Assembly
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Almost feels like I’ve been here before, Mr. Chairman.
It is a pleasure for me to appear before you and the members today to present the 2007-08 Capital Estimates of the Office of the Legislative Assembly.
As members will note, the 2007-08 Capital Estimates of the Office of the Legislative Assembly amount to $640,000. This constitutes less than one percent of all Government of Nunavut capital spending.
A total of $20,000 has been allocated towards routine furniture replacement. Ongoing information technology improvements of $20,000 will provide a higher degree of functionality for Assembly precinct operations.
As members will recall, I tabled the final report of the 2006 Nunavut Electoral Boundaries Commission earlier this sitting. The recommendations contained in this report, along with recognized population growth in the territory, has made it prudent to allocate resources for the potential expansion and renovation of our Chamber and precinct to accommodate new members. $1,000 has been identified for the design phase should the recommendations of the Electoral Boundaries Commission be adopted by this House.
The Assembly’s capital estimates also include an annual amount dedicated to our capital reserve for the long-term vision of a new facility. Members will note that $500,000 has been reserved for 2007-08. This reserve will increase over time and will allow funds to be available to a future Assembly for the planning and design of a new legislature.
That concludes my opening remarks, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to the comments and questions from the members.
Before I proceed, I would like clarification on page 3, second paragraph.
Accommodate New Members. Did you say $1,000 or $100,000?
For the record I would clarify that it is $100,000.
At this time, I do want to have my officials at the witness table.
Sergeant-at-Arms, if you would escort the officials, please.
Thank you, Sergeant-at-Arms. (interpretation ends) For the record, Mr. Speaker, please introduce your witnesses.
On my right I’m sure everybody knows John Quirke, our Clerk of the Assembly; on my left, Steve Pollock, Director of Corporate Services is also going to be up here with me today.
Welcome Mr. Quirke and Mr. Pollock to the Chambers.
Turn to page A-6.
I understand that we are going to be using $100,000 based on the recommendation of the Boundaries Commission. The capital reserved for a new building is $500,000.
Does that mean that it’s just a number; it’s not going to be expended?
And for furniture replacement, it’s $20,000 and that’s the only one that is actually going to be expended?
Yes, that is going to be the case. They have just been set aside to be used in the future for the Chamber upgrade, and capital reserve. $20,000 will be used for furniture replacement and another $20,000 will be used for computers and information technology.
We are on page A-6. The Executive Council can ask any questions if they wish to do so.
Page A-6. (interpretation ends) Office of the Legislative Assembly.
Total Headquarters Region. $620,000.
Chairman: Total Tangible Assets. $620,000.
Chairman: Computer Hardware and Software.
Chairman: Total Computer Hardware and Software. $20,000.
Chairman: Go back to page A-4.
Total Capital Expenditures. $640,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and your staff.
If you have any closing remarks, please feel free to do so.
Before we proceed, Roman numeral VII. Summary of Capital Expenditures.
Total Capital. $91,778,000.
Chairman: Then go to Bill 26 in your white legislation binder for a clause by clause review. Bill 26, Appropriation (Capital) Act, 2007–08.
Chairman: Going to our schedule. Page 2.
Schedule. Vote 2. Capital.
Capital Appropriation. $91,778,000.
Chairman: Does the committee agree to Bill 26 as a whole?
Chairman: Do you agree Bill 26 is ready for third reading?
Chairman: Thank you.  Thank you.
I would now like to ask the Minister responsible for Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs to make his opening remarks. Mr. Premier.
Bill 08 – Statistics Act – Review in Committee
I have a brief statement on Bill 8 prior to consideration by the Committee of the Whole.
First, I would like to thank the Standing Committee on Government Operations, their staff, and counsel, for the careful consideration of this proposed Act.
The main purpose of this legislation is
To formalize the legal existence of Nunavummit Kiglisinisrtiit – the Bureau of Statistics, and
To provide a legal framework for its operations, including agreements with potential research partners such as Statistics Canada, INAC or others.
(interpretation ends) With Bill 8 in place and providing the framework for agreements:
the Nunavummit Kiglisiniartiit will become eligible for access to more than 35 detailed Statistics Canada data sources relevant to the socio-economic and demographic conditions in Nunavut, and
both parties will be able to promote higher quality and more efficient collection of data
(interpretation) Bill 8 also provides the legal basis to work more closely with the Statistics Canada, Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, communities, and other organizations engaged in research.
The Statistics Bureau held internal to government and external consultations in 2005 and 2006 regarding this bill.
Our consultation with Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated was particularly helpful, and I am very pleased to advise this Assembly that the bill has their support.
(interpretation ends) Several provisions of Bill 8 were adjusted to accommodate concerns expressed by the Privacy Commissioner before Bill 8 was introduced to the Legislative Assembly.
The Information and Privacy Commissioner will have an independent role to ensure compliance with the Act by government. Section 19 of Bill 8 authorizes the Commissioner to review information sharing agreements and other relevant government records, allegations, or evidence and if she or he has concerns about the government’s performance of enforcement duties, he or she may exercise all the same powers as he or she would otherwise have under the ATIPP Act.
Section 23 has been included in the penalties section of the Bill to ensure that we do not impose penalties where education, or more effective supervision and discipline will ensure future compliance.
It is Government of Nunavut policy that charges and prosecution should be only be used as a last resort and when other methods are not appropriate or not likely to result in compliance.
Finally, the Statistics Act was not drafted to be paramount over any Acts other than ATIPP. Many Acts like the Medical Care Act, Mental Health Act, Education Act, and Vital Statistics Act have special privacy requirements. These prevail over the Statistics Act.
However, to address concerns raised during our discussions in the standing committee last week in order to clarify questions of paramountcy; I am proposing a further amendment to make it clear that this Act does not prevail in an event of any inconsistency or conflict with any other Act.
In summary, the proposed Nunavut Statistics Act will provide better use of existing information already collected by government and ensures that the Bureau and it’s partners maintain strict confidentiality and enforce penalties against anyone who does not handle private and confidential information in compliance with the Act and guarantees the security of confidentiality of all private information collected from individual citizens or businesses by the Government of Nunavut.
Mr. Chairman, I hope this statement will be of assistance to my colleagues in this final of review of Bill 8 and I urge all members to support this bill.
Do you have any witnesses that you would like to bring to the Table?
Chairman: Thank you. Does the committee agree to bring in witnesses?
Chairman: Sergeant-at-Arms, if you could escort the witnesses in.
Thank you, Sergeant-at-Arms.
Mr. Premier, if you could introduce your witnesses.
My officials this afternoon are Deputy Minister John Walsh to my right and also to my left Director for our office; Johnny Tuckto will also be here.
Does the Chairman of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Accountability have comments?
Mr. Chairman, the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Accountability has had the opportunity to review Bill 8 and I am pleased to be able to make some comments today on the proposed Statistics Act.
Mr. Chairman, Bill 8 was introduced earlier in the Third Session of the Second Assembly.
The standing committee is in support of the principle of the bill, which is to establish a clear framework in which the Government of Nunavut’s Bureau of Statistics will operate.
The standing committee recognizes that most jurisdictions have similar legislation.
Mr. Chairman, when the minister and his officials appeared before the standing committee, members took the opportunity to pose questions concerning the current initiatives and future projects of the Bureau.
The committee was pleased to note that the passage of this legislation will enable the Bureau to increase the range of data to which it will have access from such national partners as Statistics Canada.
During its scrutiny of the bill, the standing committee was pleased to support an amendment that had been recommended by Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated.
This amendment clarifies the Bureau’s authority to conduct research and engage in information sharing with respect to the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement.
The standing committee also proposed an amendment to introduce a requirement for the responsible minister to table, in the Legislative Assembly, an annual report produced by the Bureau.
This would serve to enhance the transparency of the Bureau’s operations and provide useful information for the benefit of all Members of the Legislative Assembly and the public.
The committee was pleased that the minister accepted this amendment.
The standing committee recognizes that the bill includes provisions with respect to the safeguarding of personal information held by the government.
The bill also introduces a formal role for the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Nunavut in this regard.