EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I have not had this discussion with my Cabinet colleagues but we would like to get the twenty five dollars back because I remember that they were paying seventy five dollars a day.
Then again afterwards they deducted twenty five dollars and started paying fifty dollars per day.
It is still under discussions and if it is not reinstated, as a last resort, I will approach colleagues.
We all know that dealing with the federal government can sometimes take a lot of time, it is even worse than some people say in dealing with our territorial government.
So this could go on for ever and ever.
Would the Minister be willing to fund the difference of the twenty five dollars a day out of her existing budget to bring those private accommodation rates to the same level, not more, but to the same level that this government feels is fair to pay for employees staying in private accommodations out of her budget until it gets resolved with the federal government?
I understand what the Member is trying to get at.
There is an agreement between the governments and we are going to continue lobbying them although it may be a very long process.
At this time I am saying that we are not going to be able to supplement it with the twenty five dollars.
Maybe I would like to ask the Minister to explain why they feel they won’t supplement patient travel private accommodation rate to the same level that this own government, our own colleagues and Ministers, all the Cabinet feel is a fair rate that they pay for employees to stay in private accommodations for the same thing.
Maybe I could ask her why they are not willing to do that.
Are they planning on reducing the private accommodation rate for Government of Nunavut employees to set at fifty dollars per day too?
This is a federal responsibility and so it’s a federal program.
I will be waiting for their response and find out about if they can reinstate the extra twenty five dollars.
At one point they were paying up to seventy five dollars a day, but in October 2004, they deducted twenty five dollars.
As the Minister responsible, I can’t increase that rate at this point because it’s going to have an effect on our budget.
I will wait for the federal government’s response and Health Canada.
Member for Nanulik. Mr. Netser.
Question 367 – 2(2): RFP for Medical Evacuations in the Kivalliq
I would like to ask the Health and Social Services Minister.
During the session last month, they were going to come up with an RFP in the Kivalliq in regards to dealing with medical evacuations.
I would like to ask if this RFP been submitted subsequently?
Speaker (interpretation): Minister for Health. Ms. Brown.
I wonder which RFP the member is referring to, the one for medical evacuations or for travel schedule.
I am not clear, so I would appreciate it if the Member can repeat his question.
Speaker (interpretation): Mr. Netser, can you please clarify your question?
I’m referring to the medical travel for patients flying to Churchill and Winnipeg for the people of Kivalliq.
The regular medical travel schedule was completed and a contract awarded.
There also now is a contract for medivac services.
I had asked a question asking if a copy of the RFP could be provided to regular members.
I would like to ask if this has been done.
Once again, I am not clear on the Member’s question and that I find it better to give a clear answer when I fully understand the questions being raised.
Perhaps if I spoke in English.
(Interpretation ends) At the recent sitting when we were deliberating her budget, the officials committed that we would get copies of the RFP for medical travel.
Can we get copies of the RFP now?
I hope that is clearer.
I also thank my colleague for making himself clearer.
Yes, they will be given copies as requested.
Question 368 – 2(2): Tabling of 2003-2004 Public Accounts
I was reading the Statutory Requirements for Tabling of Reports and Other Documents in the Legislative Assembly that was tabled yesterday.
On page 11, I noted that Public Accounts for 2003-2004 have not yet been tabled, despite statutory requirements, to be tabled by December 31st of the fiscal year, or if the Legislative Assembly is not in session, no later than 15 days of the commencement of the next Legislative Assembly, which was in February and March of this year.
I wondered if the Minister could update us on the status of 2003-2004 Public Accounts, when we might expect them to be tabled.
The report has been submitted to the Auditor General of Canada.
Once the Auditor General of Canada reviews them and signs them off, I will be prepared to table that report.
From what I understand, that document was sent to her some time this past month.
I would like to thank the Minister for that reply.
Can the Minister tell the house why there was a delay in getting the Public Accounts prepared for submission to the Auditor General of Canada?
There are a number of reasons.
Part of it has to do with the differences in year end, getting the reports from the various agencies.
Some of them are in the summer months and some are in the winter months.
Specifically what the issues are per agency, I’m not sure of but there was a delay.
Every year we make a commitment to try and move forward our reporting of the public accounts by month.
We have been in line with that.
So, there are some reasons for that but I’m not familiar with each agency.
At this point in time the report is with the Auditor General of Canada and once she’s had an opportunity to review them and sign them off I will table the report.
I would like to thank the Minister for that response.
I wish to note that the only agency with a different year end in the Government of Nunavut is the Nunavut Arctic College.
A whole lot of other organizations have the same year end.
I’m on page twelve.
Most of those agency’s boards, Worker’s Compensation Board, Nunavut Housing Corporation, Qulliq Energy Corporation, the Liquor Commission and whole lot of others here, they all seem to be getting their year end reports in well after the March 31st each year end.
Mr. Speaker, I noted in the Northwest Territories that the Comptroller General, put the cut off deadline for departments and agencies to get their information into the Department of Finance by April 22nd the following the year end that’s less than a month after year end.
I’m wondering if the Minister of Finance could tell us if they’re considering proposing some more stringent reporting requirements on departments and agencies to get their financial information in so that Public Accounts could be prepared in a more timely fashion.
Yes, we are working towards trying to meet the same target deadlines as the Northwest Territories.
There have been a number of concerns that have been raised with regards to reporting by this house and by the Auditor General and we recognize that.
We have been working diligently to try and address the whole issue of the reporting of the agencies in the last seven years of our existence and every month we have gotten better.
Each year we have not met the deadline as outlined in the legislation.
This week we will be tabling in the House, a mandate letter for each of the crown agencies that will outline all of the reporting requirements of the agencies to this House and those mandate letters are consistent across the board.
So each agency has a clear idea of the timelines and requirements of meeting legislation and for tabling information in this House.
I share the member’s concerns.
Each Minister responsible for the agencies recognize that there are issues to try and improve the reporting requirements of agencies and we are working towards that.
This week the mandate letters will be tabled as I promised during the last session.
The Crown Agency Council as well has been working very hard to review all the legislation governing the crown and there are different governance structures for agencies and we need to look at trying to stream-line some of those so that we are able to report on activities to this house in a timely manner and provide the kind of resources or support that these agencies need to meeting these legislative reporting requirements.
I thank the Minister again for that interesting reply to my question.
Last summer, during the standing committee, I think the Deputy Minister mentioned that it would be a good idea to change the Nunavut Arctic College year end to match up with our year end.
That would bring all agencies and departments in line with reporting year end.
I wanted to ask the Minister if she thinks it would be a good idea to have those officials who are heads of these departments, I’m not talking about Ministers, but Deputy Ministers and Presidents, if would be worthwhile holding back payment of their bonuses until they comply with the year end reporting relationship.
Why pay bonuses if they aren’t complying with statutory requirements.
I heard two questions and I will try to answer both of them.
The first one, in terms of the reporting or fiscal year end related to Nunavut Arctic College, when I sat on the Nunavut Arctic College Board of Governors in the late 80s to early 90s there were discussions around the year end.
When I sat on the board, the problem was always around trying to run programs and perform financial reporting in the middle of actual program delivery and at that time there was a change to reflect the year end of the college to reflect actual delivery of programs offered by the college.
So, in that, I continue to support that deadline because it is more appropriate I think in the structure of the corporation or the college in the delivery of programs.
In terms of my opinion on whether the Board of Directors for these crowns should withhold payments of bonuses to their presidents, I can’t speak on behalf of the board.
The presidents report to their Board of Directors, they don’t report to myself.
But certainly in the review that we are doing under the Crown Agency Council, we are also looking at the human resource practices of each agency and we’re trying to streamline some of those human resource management issues in line with how we handle our senior personnel secretariat initiatives.
Question 369 – 2(2): Wildlife Regulations Community Consultation Tours
I would like to direct my question to the Minister Responsible for Wildlife.
First I would like to say first in regards to the wildlife regulations and hunting on Inuit lands, it’s s fact that according to our traditional and cultural aspect we don’t hunt for sport, it’s not just simply hunting, we hunt for sustenance.
The store bought foods, it’s not our culture, it’s not our diet, maybe 15 percent of the Inuit population rely on the store for their food, according to our tradition, it’s not like that.
In view of that, when you do the community consultation tour, will you be visiting all communities?
Speaker (interpretation): Minister Responsible for Wildlife.
Yes, we will have consultations with all of the Hunters and Trappers Organizations across Nunavut.
We will be consulting with them and their regional wildlife officers.
We will try to accommodate all communities.
We are open to meeting with others, particularly from the communities, that would like to provide input before this Act and regulations come into force.
It would be best, if we as Members of the Legislative Assembly could work with HTO’s to provide them with support for the community consultations.
My department will listen to the interests and concerns of Nunavummiut, all the communities and representatives for the Hunters’ and Trappers’ Organizations.
This way, they could have further opportunities for input.
I think that it would be best if we were to consult with all the communities.
This is our intention.
The timing of these consultations is unknown at this time.
Yes, it’s regrettable that not all the communities will be visited.
Under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement we have hunting rights, but it gives hunting rights to non-Inuit and I want this to be focused on.
If this is agreed upon, will it be then that a non-Inuk will be able to catch five caribou, because it seems to state that.
If that person goes out hunting fifty times and catches five each times, they will have caught one hundred fifty caribou, the one non-Inuk person.
Yes, this has been a comment we’ve heard and we will be paying attention to this.
If, after the consultations, the wish is to revert to the original wording, then it will go back to the way it was.
The way I understand it, a resident non-Inuk is allowed five caribou.
If he catches the five caribou, then he has to apply again to the Hunters and Trappers Organization to catch another five caribou.
If this is a major concern, we can revert to what we were using in the past.
The way I read it, it states possession only, as if there is no quota for non-Inuit, it mainly concentrates on the possession.
The way I understand it, if a non-Inuk goes out hunting fifty times or three, not five, if he goes for three hundred sixty five days a year, that’s one hundred fifty.
I don’t think too many people will approve of this if they fully understand this because you’re giving hunting rights to non-Inuit and more wildlife will be killed. They will be doing it just for sport, it’s not their diet.
I wonder if you will be able to bring that up.
Yes, if that is the wish of the members, we can do that.
I’m pretty sure that the majority of Nunavummiut will want to go through that route anyway.
It will be included in the consultation that is being planned.
Question 370 - 2(2): Kivalliq Air Operations
Lately, we have been hearing that Kivalliq Air is being bought by another company. Kivalliq Air has been used for medical evacuations from Sanikiluaq for a number of years.
I’m wondering if the Minister of Health is aware the services provided for Sanikiluaq will be affected.
Hon. Levinia Brown (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Speaker, thank you for bringing this up, from what I understand Kivalliq Air was purchased, but the general manager is still going to be there and the Department of Health has contract with them.
For those people who are going on medical evacuations or medical travel, it will remain the same as long as the contract is still in effect.
Speaker: First supplementary Mr. Kattuk.
I certainly appreciate her response, but do I understand that the operation as it is now will remain the same.
There will be no changes from Sanikiluaq who have to take the airline to go to the hospital.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you Ms. Brown.
I will try to keep my colleague informed if there are going to be any changes to the operation or the delivery of the services because at this time, before the contract is terminated or expires, we cannot make many changes, but if there are going to be changes, I’ll keep Members informed.
Question period now is over.
Petition 006 – 2(2): Long Term Care for Disabled People
I would like to table a petition I received from the mayor of Gjoa Haven, there are two hundred eighty seven signatures from the community in support of a long term care facility for persons with disabilities.
Speaker (interpretation): Please pass the documents to the clerk.
Tabled Document 121 – 2(2): Return to Oral Question 221-2(2) Larga House Contract Update
Tabled Document 122 – 2(2): Return to Oral Question 240-2(2) Conducting Investigations on Incorrect Diagnosis
Tabled Document 123 – 2(2): Return to Oral Question 227-2(2) Financial Help for Ladies’ Auxiliaries
I wish to table documents which include three responses; returns 221-2(2), Larga House Contract Update.
The second one, 240-2(2), Investigation into death due to misdiagnoses, asked by Member of the Legislative Assembly, Mr. Peterson and the third one, 277-2(2), Financial Help for Ladies’ Auxiliaries, asked by Member of the Legislative Assembly, Mr. Arreak.
Tabled Document 124 – 2(2): Editorial from Nunatsiaq News
I would like to table an editorial from Nunatsiaq News and I thank Mr. Bill and his staff for that.
This was done on April 15, 2005.
This editorial discusses how the government will need to address it’s policy of supporting or not supporting community based Health and Social Services Programs provided, such as the Ilisarksivik Society of the community of Clyde River.
Tabled Document 125 – 2(2): Core Area and Capital District Redevelopment Plan
I would like to take this opportunity to table the Iqaluit Core Area and Capital District Redevelopment Plan.
This plan won an international award that will be presented on Friday in Vancouver.
Tabled Document 126 – 2(2): Report of Contracting Activity for the Office of the Legislative Assembly for the Fiscal Year 2004-2005
Speaker (interpretation): Honourable Members, I wish to table today the Report of Contracting Activity for the Office of the Legislative Assembly for the fiscal year 2004/05.
I will table another one.
Tabled Document 127 – 2(2): Actuarial Funding Valuation Reports on Retiring Allowances Act.
Tabled Document 128 – 3(2): Actuarial Funding Valuation Reports for Supplementary Retiring Allowances Act.
Speaker (interpretation): Pursuant to Section 21(1) (A) and 4(6) of the Legislative Assembly Retiring Allowances Act, and Section 20(A) and 4(5) of the Supplementary Retiring Allowances Act, I wish to table today, the Actuarial Funding Valuation Reports for both plans as prepared by the Actuaries of the plan, Hewitt Associates, as of April 1, 2004.
Notices of Motions. Item 15, Notices of Motions for First Reading of Bills.
Bill 15 – An Act to Amend the Wildlife Act - Notice
I give notice that on Friday April 29th, 2005 that Bill 15, an Act to Amend the Wildlife Act be read for the first time.
Speaker (interpretation): Notices of Motions for the First Reading of Bills.
Bill 19 – Legislatives Assembly Statues Amendment Act- Notice
Hon. Leona Aglukkaq: Mr. Speaker I give notice on Friday April 29th 2005, I shall move that Bill 19, Legislatives Assembly Statues Amendment Act be read for the first time.
Bill 16 – Supplementary Appropriations (Capital) Act No. 1. 2005/06 - Notice
Also give notice that on Friday April 29th, 2005 that Bill 16. Supplementary Appropriations (Capital) Act No. 1. 2005/06 be read for the first time.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. Notices of Motions for First Reading of Bills.
Bill 17 – Supplementary Appropriations (O & M) Act No. 1. 2005/06 - Notice
I give notice that on Friday April 29th, 2005 that Bill 17. Supplementary Appropriations (O & M) Act No. 1. 2005/06 be read for the first time.
Considerations in the Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters.
Tabled Document 58-2(2).
Tabled Document 100-2(2).
Tabled Documents 101-2(2). Tabled Documents 102-2(2) with Mr. Arreak in the chair.
Well take a 20 minute break.
>>Recessed at 15:08 and resumed at 15:38
Chairman (Mr. Arreak): Thank you, I would like to call the committee meeting to order.
In committee of the whole we have the following items to deal with Tabled Documents 58-2(2), Tabled Documents, 100-2(2), Tabled Documents 101-2(2), Tabled Documents 102-2(2).
Mr. Peterson?
Mr. Chairman we wish to continue to review Tabled Document 58-2(2), Reports of the Chief Electoral Officer.
After we complete this review, we’ll want to report progress.
Ms. Sandy Kusugak, if you could go up to the witness table and your official.
For the record I would like you to introduce yourself and your official.
Ms. Kusugak: I’m Sandy Kusugak, chief electoral officer for Nunavut, and this is Patrick Orr who is the legal counsel for elections in Nunavut.
We were on general questions yesterday.
Does anyone have any additional questions in regards to the Report of the Chief Electoral Officer.
I would also like to thank Ms. Kusugak and Mr. Orr.
Before I start, I would like to say that during the previous election, while we were all campaigning, in the Kitikmeot Region, prior to the results being released CBC shut down as well as APTN.
The residents of Kitikmeot Region did not find out the results until the previous day.
They went to bed without learning the results of the election.
I was repeatedly asked whether or not I knew the results.
It’s not the same throughout Nunavut because we have different times zones.
Voting opens and closes at different times.
During the elections, we used Eastern Standard Time.
At the time of the election, in the morning, polling stations opened at 9:00 am and closed at 7:00 pm, maybe Eastern Time or Mountain Time. This was not indicated and so we used Eastern Time when we were voting.
In Kugluktuk, Cambridge Bay, Gjoa Haven, Pelly Bay and Kugaruuk, we are two hours behind.
We use Mountain Time.
The Kivalliq Region is one hour different from the Kitikmeot Region and an hour different from Iqaluit.
Yesterday, you spoke saying that perhaps we should switch to Central Time in the next election, although you also mentioned Kivalliq time.
I would like to give you a suggestion for thought.
After I ask this question, I will be raising this issue again.
I know that the election will be from 9:00 in the morning to 7:00 in the evening, but are you indicating on that page, 9:00 am to 7:00 pm, Mountain Time, or Eastern Time?
Chairman (interpretation): Ms. Kusugak.
Ms. Kusugak: In the last election, we voted from 9:00 am to 7:00 pm local time, where a constituency was only in a single time zone.
We do have three constituencies that cross time zones depending on the time of year the election is held.
Correct, the Member for Nanulik would know.
I was suggesting that if we wish the reporting of results to happen in a more compressed amount of time, we could consider everybody beginning to vote and end voting at the same moment.
In other words, begin in one time zone at 8:00 in the morning, one time zone at 9:00 in the morning and one time zone at 10:00 in the morning which would be at the same moment so that the end of voting would happen at the same moment everywhere and perhaps the reporting of the voting for all constituencies would be a shorter period of time.
I only put that out for the Assembly’s consideration if they wish to make an amendment in that way.
The Member for Kugluktuk, I would be interested in talking to him about this further, because the information went into the newspapers and the notices that we created in our office for display in the constituency of Kugluktuk certainly said voting would happen between 9:00 am and 7:00 pm.
If they happened at a different time, I was not made aware of it previously and I would really like to know about it.
Thank you Ms. Kusugak, I’ll speak in English.
(Interpretation ends) Yesterday I wrote on the note on the paper here, I’m just wondering how you got my notes from 8:00 am to 9:00 am, 10:00 am.
I was going to suggest that because if we have another election, why don’t we suggest that in Kitikmeot we can start off 8:00 in the morning, Kivalliq 9:00 and Qikiqtaarluk 10:00. and then finish 6:00 pm Kitikmeot, 7:00pm Kivalliq, 8:00 pm Qikiqtaarluk, everybody would be listening to all the results more likely in the same time, but even though we have different times, Kitikmeot, Kivalliq and Baffin nobody would have to wait until the morning like 1:00 am because some of my constituents had called me after 1:00 am if I had heard the results.
I think the time that you had thought, too, that I wrote yesterday, would be a good one to check out anyway so that everybody could finish at the same time, we get all the news at the same time, results, I think that would be a lot better for everybody right across Nunavut otherwise if we start again 9:00 Qikiqtaarluk, 9:00 Kivalliq, 9:00 Kitikmeot, and news is going to be way back again in Qikiqtaarluk by 12:00 midnight or 1:00 in the morning, if you’re done, some of our constituents might not even hear about the results again. So maybe what we should do is check these times out that I just gave you.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. Kusugak.
Ms. Kusugak: Yes, I’m taking note of all of these remarks and suggestions for the Management Services Board to take into consideration as they prepare, look at the amendments we’ve suggested and then prepare others for the assembly’s consideration.