EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
By contrast, the Nunavut Development Corporation’s annual reports have improved significantly in recent years with respect to measuring and accounting for its performance in the area of job creation and maintenance. Its experience may be instructive to the NBCC in this regard.
A review of the methodologies used by the GN’s NNI Secretariat with respect to monitoring contractors’ compliance with Inuit labour content requirements may also be of benefit to the NBCC.
Page N-9 of the NBCC’s 2008-2011 corporate plan provides a detailed breakdown of the corporation’s loan portfolio by region and supported industry sector. The standing committee noted significant differences between the territory’s three regions.
During the standing committee’s questioning of witnesses, members raised the issue of which sectors of the economy and what size of business the NBCC should focus its efforts on to best ensure compliance with its core mandate of stimulating economic development and employment.
Discussions took place with respect to whether the NBCC should focus on providing assistance to smaller businesses or larger entities.
Discussions also took place on the job creation potential of different sectors of the economy.
The standing committee recommends that the NBCC develop quantifiable performance measures and annual reporting practices that will enable Members of the Legislative Assembly and the public to objectively assess the corporation’s success in fulfilling its statutory mandate to stimulate economic development and employment in Nunavut. The NBCC’s 2008-09 annual report should explicitly address this issue.
The standing committee recommends that the NBCC enhance the rigour of its loan approval process with respect to requiring loan applicants to substantiate the number of jobs that their projects will create or maintain.
The standing committee recommends that the NBCC conduct a review to identify which industry sectors and what size of business should be the future focus of the corporation’s lending activities.
The review should incorporate an evaluation of the job creation impact of loans provided to entities in the real estate sector.
We still have a ways to go. (interpretation ends) I will ask Keith Peterson to continue with this report.
I’ll just warn my colleagues that when I’m finished, then we have another chapter or two to go.
Enhancement of Corporate Transparency
Mr. Speaker, over the past several years, this standing committee has consistently called on the government to enhance the transparency and accountability of its operations and spending.
Since 1999, a number of important improvements have been achieved. These include the tabling of departmental and Crown agency business plans, the inclusion of information in the Government of Nunavut’s main estimates concerning prior years’ actual expenditures, the tabling of annual reports on the Government of Nunavut’s procurement, contracting and leasing activities, the tabling of ministerial letters of expectation to Crown agencies and the responses of the agencies, and the tabling of annual reports on the government’s grants and contributions expenditures.
I would note that while in some cases, these documents are tabled in a timely manner, in other cases, they are not.
However, there has been too little transparency at the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation for too long.
In the context of its review of earlier reports of the Auditor General, the standing committee has already made recommendations in this area.
Although the 2006-07 ministerial letter of expectation to the Chairperson of the Board of Directors of the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation echoed the standing committee’s call for greater disclosure of which individuals and companies receive public funds in the form of loans, this information has not been annually reported to the Legislative Assembly and the public.
By contrast, the annual reports of the Northwest Territories’ new Business Development and Investment Corporation publicly disclose detailed information that identifies the individuals and companies that receive public funds. Section 31 of the Northwest Territories Business Development and Investment Corporation Act provides that:
The annual report that the Corporation is required to submit under section 96 of the Financial Administration Act must include a specific category setting out the following information in respect of each business enterprise that the Corporation provided financial assistance to or in which it made an investment in the financial year:
(a) the name of the business enterprise;
(b) the name of the owner or owners of the business enterprise as determined in accordance with the regulations;
(c) the total amount of financial assistance provided to or investments made in the business enterprise;
(d) the name of the community in which the business enterprise or its head office is located.
The standing committee has also been concerned that the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation and other Crown corporations do not report annually to the Legislative Assembly on their procurement, contracting and leasing activities.
This information is now reported annually with respect to the activities of GN departments and the Legislative Assembly itself.
The standing committee was also disturbed by the Auditor General’s observation that the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation’s “collection efforts are lacking and that follow-up action on payment arrears varies, from little effort in some cases to a lot of effort and involvement in others.”
This observation calls into question the fairness and consistency of the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation’s past practices in the sensitive area of collections.
It is important the public has confidence that the government’s Crown corporations will approach such matters in a fair and consistent manner.
The standing committee recommends that the government amend the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation Act to require more detailed annual disclosure and reporting of its lending activities.
The standing committee recommends that the GN’s Crown Agency Council direct the NBCC and other Crown agencies to report annually to the Legislative Assembly on their procurement, contracting and leasing activities.
The standing committee recommends that the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation review its collection practices to ensure that they are applied fairly and consistently.
The standing committee recommends that an updated Nunavut Business Credit Corporation bid bond security policy be tabled in the Legislative Assembly, as per the observations in the June 2006 Report of the Standing Committee on its review of the 2005 Report of the Auditor General of Canada.
Disclosure of Status of Ongoing RCMP Investigation
On November 6, 2007, the Government of Nunavut announced that it had referred matters of financial records and controls to the Royal Canadian Mounted Police for consideration.
While the standing committee recognizes that the RCMP must be permitted to do its work without interference, its findings will ultimately be reported to the Government of Nunavut.
The standing committee recommends that the government table in the Legislative Assembly the final report that it receives from the RCMP on this matter.
Review of the Location and Structure of the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation
During the standing committee’s hearings of November 29, 2007, members were informed that “the government has determined that [the] Nunavut Business Credit Corporation should remain in Cape Dorset.”
This statement was subjected to intense scrutiny by members, who posed a number of questions to determine whether the benefits of keeping the corporation in that location outweighed the operational problems that its location had evidently caused.
This theme was revisited in the committee’s February hearings.
Members expressed a clear view that the corporation would benefit from relocation.
The standing committee was particularly struck by testimony from the former Chairperson of the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation’s Board of Directors, who indicated that the Board itself had previously recommended that the corporation be relocated.
On March 13, 2008, the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation announced that the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation’s offices would be relocated from Cape Dorset to Iqaluit.
To date, the government has not publicly clarified exactly which Community and Government Services’ positions will be relocated to Cape Dorset.
The Government of Nunavut’s Interdepartmental Working Group’s February 2008 Report on the Future of the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation and the Nunavut Development Corporation indicates that “there have been six major studies of one or both of [the NBCC and the NDC] conducted between 1998 and 2004.”
The working group’s report recommended that work to develop a model for a “new, ‘made-in-Nunavut’ economic development corporation” be presented to the third Government of Nunavut for review and decision in April 2009.
The standing committee recognizes that there are different perspectives with respect to the appropriate model for the delivery of economic development programs and services in the territory, including the question of whether the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation and the Nunavut Development Corporation should be amalgamated into a single entity.
Some view the two entities as having sufficiently complementary mandates to warrant amalgamation.
Others maintain that the corporations should remain separate entities.
The standing committee recognizes that a final decision on this matter would be premature until such time as the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation adequately addresses the issues identified in the report of the Auditor General.
The standing committee also notes that any fundamental changes in this sphere would require significant legislative changes, which could not proceed without the approval of the Legislative Assembly.
The standing committee recommends that the government proceed with work to develop options for consideration by the Members of the Third Legislative Assembly with respect to the potential creation of a new economic development entity, but stresses the importance of soliciting input from the Nunavut business community in this process.
Status of the Review of Business Development Centres
On October 29, 2007, the government announced that it had initiated a review of Nunavut’s three business development centres.
The announcement indicated that “the study will review the policies and procedures of each organization, and to identify and to recommend the standards and best practices to ensure that all Nunavutmiut have access to good quality business services.
These services are delivered by the Kitikmeot Community Futures Incorporated, the Kivalliq Business Development Centre, and the Baffin Business Development Centre, with each reporting to its own regionally-based board of directors.”
The results of this review have not yet been tabled in the Legislative Assembly.
Both the 2004 and 2007 reports of the Auditor General contained observations on the relationship between the Government of Nunavut, the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation and the business development centres.
The standing committee recommends that the results of the review of the business development centres be tabled in the Legislative Assembly.
Review of Board Governance and Membership
A significant portion of the standing committee’s hearings addressed issues related to the roles and responsibilities of the various parties involved in the governance of the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation, including its Board of Directors, CEO, the Financial Management Board, Cabinet, the Minister and the Department of Economic Development and Transportation.
The standing committee was particularly concerned by the Auditor General’s observations regarding changes in the reporting relationship between the CEO of the corporation, the board of directors and the Department of Economic Development and Transportation.
Given Nunavut’s small population, the standing committee recognizes the challenges facing the government with respect to identifying qualified individuals to serve on the Boards of Directors of Crown agencies.
Many of these boards are responsible for exercising oversight with respect to complex operations and programs.
While the question of whether or not to maintain the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation and the Nunavut Development Corporation as separate entities remains an open one, the knowledge and competencies required for individuals to serve effectively on either of the two corporations’ boards of directors are clearly similar.
The appointment of individuals to serve on both boards has synergistic potential.
The standing committee recommends that the government consider the advisability of appointing individuals to serve on the Boards of Directors of both the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation and the Nunavut Development Corporation.
The standing committee recommends that the government’s ongoing review of board governance issues also addresses the question of ministerial participation in the loan approval process.
Mr. Speaker that concludes my portion of the report and I would like to turn it back to the Chairman, Mr. Hunter Tootoo.
Screening of Applicants for Senior Management Positions
Members were shocked to learn that the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation’s former Acting CEO faced criminal charges at the time when he testified in November of 2007 before the standing committee in the Chamber of the Legislative Assembly.
Although the standing committee recognizes that criminal record checks do not indicate if individuals are under investigation, the laying of criminal charges is a matter of public record.
Given the news media’s ability to determine and report on the facts of the circumstances in this particular situation, the standing committee is of the view that additional background checks must be undertaken when hiring executive-level employees for Crown agencies and other senior Government of Nunavut positions.
Testimony delivered in February of 2008 by a former CEO of the Business Credit Corporation was also disturbing.
In his opening statement to the standing committee, the former office-holder stated that “In my interview, when I first took the job, I admitted to having no experience in the financial sector, so in retrospect, it’s not surprising that I failed to uphold the standards necessary.
I didn’t know what the standards were and the previous CEO’s knowledge was, I don’t think, very much better than mine, so there was no history to lean on.”
While the standing committee is supportive of mentoring and training approaches to entry-level and junior staff, especially in relation to the government’s IEP goals, it is not unreasonable to expect that the individual hired to be the most senior leader in an organization should arrive on the job with the necessary core skills.
The lessons of these two experiences are self-evident.
Fundamental standards of professional competence and personal probity cannot be compromised when hiring the most senior executives of public agencies.
Therefore, the standing committee recommends that the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation and other Crown agencies work with the Government of Nunavut’s Department of Human Resources to review the process by which background checks are conducted on candidates for executive-level positions.
The standing committee recommends that minimum qualifications be established for executive-level positions in Crown agencies and that applicants who do not possess these qualifications be eliminated from further consideration during the pre-employment screening process.
And finally, Mr. Speaker, I wish to conclude by addressing the issue of conflict of interest and certain matters related to the provisions of our territory’s Integrity Act.
As all members are aware, certain information came to light during the standing committee’s November 2007 hearings that ultimately led to the tabling of a report of the Integrity Commissioner.
As I noted earlier in this report, the standing committee approved a formal motion to issue a second subpoena for copies of additional records in relation to the entities listed in the disclosure statements of the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation.
A formal subpoena was issued on February 6, 2008.
However, I want to make it clear for the public record today and also for the editors at News/North, that the standing committee itself is not investigating the former minister.
That is not within the scope of the committee’s mandate.
No standing committee or no individual member has the authority to render a final determination with respect to another member’s compliance or non-compliance with the Integrity Act.
Our legislation is very clear in this respect, as is the process for initiating a review under the Integrity Act.
Having given careful consideration to the materials received as a result of its February 2008 subpoena, the standing committee formally approved a motion on May 30, 2008, in support of the chair of the standing committee making a formal request pursuant to section 36 of the Integrity Act in relation to the materials received by the standing committee in response to its subpoenas of December 7, 2007 and February 6, 2008.
With that, I move that the Report of the Standing Committee be received by the House.
Speaker (interpretation): Does the House agree that the Report of the Standing Committee be received and adopted by the House?
The report will be received and adopted by the House.
Members, we will have a 20-minute break.
>>House recessed at 15:52 and resumed at 16:17
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you for coming back, Members.
Committee Report on Bills 014 – 2(4): Bill 33, An Act to Amend the Labour Standards Act (Mapsalak)
I wish to report that Bill 33, An Act to Amend the Labour Standards Act, has been reviewed by the Standing Committee Ajauqtiit and that the bill is ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 86(6) and have Bill 33 moved into Committee of the Whole for today.
Just let me clarify whether you would like to waive Rule 68(6).
I made a mistake; I should have said Rule 68(6).
The member is seeking unanimous consent to waive Rule 68(6) and have Bill 33 moved into Committee of the Whole for today.
There are no nays. Bill 33 is moved into Committee of the Whole for today.
Committee Report on Bills 015 – 2(4): Bill 34, Nunavut Outfitters Liability Protection Fund Act (Tootoo)
I wish to report that Bill 34, the Nunavut Outfitters Liability Protection Fund Act, has been reviewed by the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Accountability and that the bill is ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.
Also, Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 68(6) and have Bill 34 moved into Committee of the Whole for today.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. The member is seeking unanimous consent to waive Rule 68(6) and have Bill 34 moved in to Committee of the Whole for today. Are there any nays?
There are no nays. Bill 34 is moved into the Committee of the Whole for today.
Tabled Document 252 – 2(4): Utility Rates Review Council of Nunavut 2008 Annual Report (Okalik)
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to table the following document:
The Utility Rates Review Council of Nunavut’s Annual Report for 2006-08.
Tabled Document 253 – 2(4): Nunavut Association of Municipalities Annual General Meeting – 2008 Reaffirmed Resolutions Forwarded to Ministers of the Government of Nunavut (Peterson)
I wish to table today the resolutions from the 2008 Annual General Meeting of the Nunavut Association of Municipalities and I encourage all members to review them with care.
Tabled Document 254 – 2(4): Standing Committee on Government Operations and Accountability – Materials Provided in Response to its Subpoena of February 6, 2008 (Tootoo)
Tabled Document 255 – 2(4): Standing Committee on Government Operations and Accountability – Materials Provided in Response to its Subpoena of December 7, 2007 (Tootoo)
Tabled Document 256 – 2(4): Standing Committee on Government Operations and Accountability – Information Package Provided as Follow-up to Committee Hearings on the Report of the Auditor General on the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation by the Department of Economic Development and Transportation (Tootoo)
As I noted earlier, I wish to formerly table today a copy of information I was provided to the Standing Committee of Government Operations and Accountability in response to its subpoena of December 7, 2007. This was initially entered into the committee’s record in February of this year.
Also, Mr. Speaker, I would like to formally table the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Accountability, subsequently that we got, in the response to its subpoena of February 6, 2008.
Also, as I noted early, I would like to formally table information that was initially entered into the committee record in February of this year, the package of information provided to the standing committee from the Department of ED&T.
Motion 041 – 2(4): Extended Adjournment – Notice (Picco)
I give notice that on Wednesday, June 4, 2008, I will move the following motion:
I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Akulliq, that notwithstanding Rule 4, that when the House concludes its present sitting in Iqaluit, it shall be adjourned until September 9, 2008.
Member for Cambridge Bay, Member Peterson.
Motion 039 – 2(4): Reappointment of the Chief Electoral Officer of Nunavut (Peterson)
WHEREAS section 188 of the Nunavut Elections Act provides that the Chief Electoral Officer is appointed by the Commissioner of Nunavut on the recommendation of the Legislative Assembly to hold office during good behaviour;
AND WHEREAS the term of office for the Chief Electoral Officer is seven years;
AND WHEREAS the appointment of the present incumbent expires on November 28, 2008;
AND WHEREAS the Legislative Assembly is prepared to recommend an appointment to this position;
NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the Honourable Member for Iqaluit East, that the Legislative Assembly recommend to the Commissioner of Nunavut that Ms. Sandy Kusugak be reappointed as Chief Electoral Officer, effective November 28, 2008.
I would also like to acknowledge Ms. Kusugak for her reappointment.
Item Minister of Education and Energy, Minister Picco.
Bill 35 – Energy Efficiency Act – Second Reading
I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Quttiktuq, that Bill 35, the Energy Efficiency Act, be read for the second time.
Mr. Speaker, the proposed Nunavut Energy Efficiency Act is part of Nunavut’s plan to lower energy costs, reduce our greenhouse gas emissions, and increase the availability of energy efficient products on the market here in Nunavut.
This legislation will set energy efficiency standards for a wide range of energy products, including household appliances, office equipment, and items such as boilers, furnaces, portable heaters, lighting, and humidifiers.
Mr. Speaker, we have followed the direction of the House and the standing committee, and have made substantial additions to the items covered in the legislation.
Mr. Speaker, over the last three months, we have been in contact with retailers across Nunavut and I am pleased to say that their response has been very positive.
Mr. Speaker, it is very important and it’s especially important that we are introducing this legislation right now because the price of oil continues to go up.
Nunavut’s dependence on oil is expensive and Mr. Speaker, it is not sustainable.
As a government, we need to lead and demonstrate our commitment to energy efficiency as well as conservation.
Mr. Speaker, we look forward to further discussions on our proposed legislation.
Bill 35 has had second reading and is referred to the standing committee.
Bill 26, 27, 30, 33, and 34, and I am proud to say that Mr. Kattuk will be the Chair for the first time in Committee of the Whole.
Before we proceed with Committee of the Whole, we will take a five-minute break while we prepare.
>>House recessed at 16:29 and Committee resumed at 16:43