EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Speaker (interpretation): Good afternoon, Premier, Ministers, Members, and our viewers in Nunavut.
There’s nothing wrong with the volume on the TV or the system, it’s just that my voice is a little hoarse this morning.
Minister’s Statement 172– 2(4): Report on the Future of the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation and the Nunavut Development Corporation (Netser)
Hon. Patterk Netser: Thank you, Mr. Speaker and welcome back. (interpretation) Your voice still carries well.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, yesterday I tabled a report entitled “The Future of the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation and the Nunavut Development Corporation.”
The report discusses a number of options for the future of the territorial corporations, and stresses that before any option is adopted, the recommendations of the Auditor General of Canada for improvements in the operations of the NBCC must be fully implemented.
The report, Mr. Speaker, incorporates the first phase of the Crown Agencies Report prepared by RT and Associates.
As a result, Mr. Speaker, the principal recommendation of the report is to move the operations of the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation from Cape Dorset to Iqaluit where they can be located with the Department of Economic and Transportation.
In making this recommendation the working group points out that the support and services needed by the NBCC is more readily available here in Iqaluit at this present time.
Mr. Speaker, this report was prepared by an interdepartmental working group with members from the Department of Economic Development and Transportation, the Department of Finance, as well as the two territorial corporations, and an external consultant.
While we will withdraw NBCC from Cape Dorset, we remain committed to the objectives and benefits of the government’s decentralization targets. Therefore, the three NBCC positions that are currently staffed in Cape Dorset will be replaced by three positions from the Department of Community and Government Services.
We will also add a fourth position through the Department of Justice correction service.
Once the changes recommended by the Auditor General are in place, Mr. Speaker, consideration will be given to the other options concerning the future of NBCC.
Member’s Statement 412 – 2(4): New Role as Member of the Executive Council (Barnabas)
Mr. Barnabas (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, Members, and Ministers.
First of all, I would like to thank the member who nominated me for candidacy for the Cabinet post. (interpretation ends) Taking on a role, Mr. Speaker, of a Member of Cabinet will mean a large amount of extra work and effort on my part but I feel that I am up to the challenge.
Mr. Speaker, I have consulted with my constituents and have their full support to proceed in taking up the increase in responsibility.
Since the creation of Nunavut in 1999, the representative of the Quttiktuq riding has never been a Member of the Cabinet.
During that time we were part of the NWT, the only minister that had served the High Arctic was for six months, which is my predecessor, Lootie Palluq.
My constituents and I feel that it is time that our voices were heard more clearly around the Cabinet table.
Three communities in my riding, Grise Fiord, Repulse Bay, and Arctic Bay, are all non-decentralized communities and they have seen none of the infrastructure growth that has accompanied the movement of the Government of Nunavut out of Iqaluit into the decentralized communities.
Indeed, Mr. Speaker, since the creation of Nunavut, our riding has seen the closure of two mines, which are the Nanisivik Mine and Little Cornwallis Island.
Several of my constituents worked at these mines and had their livelihood negatively affected by these closures.
Mr. Speaker, members of my constituency have some of the highest living costs in Nunavut.
Travel to communities outside the riding is long and expensive. In order to travel from Arctic Bay to Pond Inlet, for example, one must fly to Iqaluit first and spend a night at the hotel. It is faster to go by...
Mr. Barnabas: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you my colleagues.
It is faster to go by snowmobile, maybe even by dog team. For these reasons, we feel that it’s time for our riding to have a representative in the Cabinet in order to more clearly explain to others the problem which we face in the small, widely scattered settlements.
My personal experiences include: I was a Constituency Assistant for six years for my predecessor, Mr. Lootie Palluq, in the old GNWT days. During that time, I worked as a Lands Administrator of the Hamlet of Arctic Bay and I have been a member of the Arctic Bay Housing Association as the Chair, and as the Chair of the DEA. These experiences gave me insight into our problems faced by these two very important municipal bodies.
Upon my election as MLA in Yellowknife, I spent five years working on the transition towards the creation of Nunavut. Since 1999, I have served as the MLA for the High Arctic riding for almost eight years.
In closing, I feel that I can use the experience and outlook that I have gained over the years to contribute to the proper operation of the Government of Nunavut. I wish once again to thank my nominator for putting my name forward for this position and I respectfully seek the support of other Members of this Assembly.
Member’s Statement 413 – 2(4): Community Needs in Repulse Bay and Kugaaruk (Mapsalak)
Mr. Mapsalak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I would first like to take this opportunity to congratulate my colleague from Quttiktuq on his selection as our new minister.
As a Member of the Legislative Assembly who also represents small communities, I know that he is sensitive to our unique needs and I look forward to working with him on issues of concern.
Mr. Speaker, as we prepare to end this sitting and return to our constituencies, I am pleased to rise today and offer some comments on the needs of my communities.
Mr. Speaker, as the Member for Akulliq, I face the challenge of representing the needs of two communities - Repulse Bay and Kugaaruk.
During our sitting, I was extremely pleased to hear the announcement in the Budget Address that the new health centre in Repulse Bay will commence this year.
Mr. Speaker, my constituents have been waiting for many years for this important project to get underway and I have been strongly advocating on their behalf in this House.
I am grateful for the support that other members have provided.
Mr. Speaker, although the capital estimates for the coming year include funding for parks development, public housing and the sewage lagoon in Kugaaruk, the community has many other needs.
I will continue to raise the concerns of non-decentralized communities, including the need for adequate school facilities, health centres and modern community infrastructure.
Their concerns also include the need to support economic development in the Kitikmeot, ensuring that our communities receive their fair share of government support and working to make sure that our communities and constituents benefit from natural resource development.
Mr. Speaker, the Amaruk diamond project near Kugaaruk is moving forward. This is an exciting development and I support the community in its efforts to promote responsible development.
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to working with all Members of the House when we reconvene in the spring.
Member’s Statement 414 – 2(4): Assistance Provided for Search of Sanikiluaq Resident (Kattuk)
I would like to congratulate the Member for Quttiktuq for becoming a Member of Cabinet.
I would like to make some comments on what developed in Sanikiluaq during a search and rescue effort for an individual that we had been searching for.
Although we did not want to have this type of result, this sometimes occurs. His mother and sisters are now in Sanikiluaq to be close to their loved ones.
Mr. Speaker, we initiated fund-raising for the immediate family of the lost person to enable their travel to Sanikiluaq, but without the assistance of the Members from the Legislative Assembly, as well as Amanda Ford, Mr. Tootoo’s CA, who was very helpful, we would not have had the success.
I would also like to thank Ed Zebedee has kept me up to date on what’s happening with the search in Sanikiluaq.
The search and rescue were also keeping me informed and I would like to extend my gratitude to them.
With regards to our fund-raising efforts, I would like to recognize some of the contributions of the following organizations and people:
Qikiqtaaluk Corporation has donated $1,000;
Nunavut Legislative House, Members of the Legislative Assembly and staff, $670.46;
Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, $500;
Sanikiluaq Recreation Bingo, $1,000;
Nuiyak School, $572.35;
The Qikiqtani Reunion Committee, $1,863;
Sanikiluaq Youth Committee, $3,000;
Pairivik Day Care, $6,000;
Qikiqtani Inuit Association, $2,000;
And also, 33.5 hours of air time has been donated and we also got support from Kautak Construction of 4.5 hours.
Member’s Statement 415 – 2(4): Whale Cove Athletes at the 2008 Arctic Winter Games (Brown)
I would like to congratulate individuals from Whale Cove who are participating as athletes at the Arctic Winter Games in Yellowknife.
Yesterday, I watched Sean Nipisa, who participated in the high kick, Sulimali Okalik, and hockey participant, Geoffrey Okalik.
I would like to congratulate those athletes from Whale Cove.
Member’s Statement 416 – 2(4): Nunavut’s Skills Canada Competition (Tootoo)
I rise today to wish the best of luck to competitors at the Territorial Skills Canada Competition that will be held here in Iqaluit on April 3.
Mr. Speaker, between 50 and 60 competitors from 12 different communities across Nunavut will be showcasing their talents at this competition.
The students will be coming from Gjoa Haven, Kugluktuk, Cambridge Bay, Chesterfield Inlet, Rankin Inlet, Baker Lake, Arctic Bay, Pond Inlet, Sanikiluaq, Iqaluit, and Repulse Bay.
Mr. Speaker, the purpose of Skills Canada is to expose youth to trade and technology occupations.
I would like to acknowledge the hard work of Michelle Jacquard, the Executive Director of Skills Canada, and all of those who were involved in setting up and running this event.
This competition counts towards the end of specific educational programs for each of these individuals.
These talented young people will be using the skills they have learned to take part in various contest areas, including cooking, restaurant service, baking, TV and video production, information technology, graphic design, website design, hair dressing, carpentry, welding, prepared speech, job interview, work safety, and job skill demonstration.
Mr. Speaker, the event will be held at the Inuksuk High School here in Iqaluit and I look very much forward to being there and supporting our young Nunavummiut as they showcase their skills.
Member’s Statement 417 – 2(4): Need for Open and Transparent Government (Curley)
We are starting to hear about our athletes at the Arctic Winter Games winning medals. They may not be winning the most number of medals but they are giving their all and deserve our full support.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to make a brief statement and because it probably is the last day of this sitting.
We are the elected members of the government and our constituents, the public, expect to see an open and transparent government on things that will affect their interests.
Some might believe we, as leaders, are doing a good job, so we shouldn’t change the way we do things.
I can say this, however, that there are things that still need to be done where communities can be more involved in. I can also say that elders speak out against decisions of government.
If, for example, I was to say that the school system is changing, we still haven’t heard much.
Often, it seems we should be holding more public meetings because there are still people out there who are in the dark and are rightfully alarmed.
Mr. Speaker, if a consultant is tasked by the government to produce a consultant’s report, they automatically get paid even before going to the community.
That should be changed.
Constituents say that they are waiting and expecting the government or the minister to come to their community. For that reason, those are the changes that we should make towards the public policy.
We should be able to have a say if the prices are going up, not just the consultants. For example, electricity, if the rate is going up, the public should have a say.
We, as the House, should keep our constituents informed.
Speaker (interpretation): At this time, I would like to recognize and thank Mr. Arreak for having acted in my absence.
I know there’s no one here from Sanikiluaq but I would just like to recognize Jobie Nutarak’s grandson, who is one of our pages, Bradley Nutarak.
If there are none, Item 6.
Members, before we proceed to Item 6, during our proceedings yesterday, the Member for Iqaluit East rose on a Point of Order.
The basis of the Point of Order was that the Member for Rankin Inlet North used unparliamentary language.
I have reviewed the audio tapes of the proceedings and the English and Inuktitut Blues, and am prepared to issue my ruling on the matter.
The Member for Rankin Inlet North was speaking in Inuktitut.
The comments in Inuktitut which gave rise to the Point of Order translate to English as: (interpretation ends)
“Why is it then that the minister didn’t appear to be telling the truth when the Cabinet had already approved the Fuel Stabilization Rider on October 23...”
That this translation is accurate does not appear to be in dispute, as the Member for Rankin Inlet North responded to the Point of Order as follows:
“I said in Inuktitut, Sulijuujaanngittuq. It doesn’t appear to be the truth what the minister indicated at that time when I asked him on October 31.”
(interpretation) Rule 23 (j) provides that a member will be called to order if a member charges another member with uttering a deliberate falsehood.
In determining whether language is unparliamentary, the following factors must be considered:
The purpose of question period is to elicit information and make government accountable;
The context in which the statement was made, including tone, manner and intention of the speaker;
The position of the person to whom the comment is directed;
The degree of provocation, if any;
Whether the comment created disorder in the House.
It is not permissible for a member to accuse another member of deliberately lying or deliberately misleading the House as such comments amount to a personal attack on the character of a member.
However, there are many reasons why a statement may in fact be false. (interpretation ends) The maker of the statement may have been provided with incorrect or incomplete information. Circumstances may have changed since the making of the statement. In such instances, there is no intention to deliberately mislead the House.
In most cases, however, there is simply a legitimate disagreement between members as to the accuracy of a statement.
Ruling on Points of Order is not an exact science. What is unparliamentary in one context may not be unparliamentary in another.
In deciding Points of Order, I must favour a ruling that promotes robust and vigorous debate.
On balance, I am unable to find that the Member for Rankin Inlet North accused the minister of uttering a deliberate falsehood.
Accordingly, there is no Point of Order.
Question 515 – 2(4): Announcement on Territorial Election (Tootoo)
Mr. Speaker, as all members are aware, on March 4, we had a Full Caucus meeting where a decision was made on the next election date and we’re waiting for the Premier to make that announcement.
I’m just wondering why he hasn’t made that announcement yet.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) As any government relies on a budget passing, a vote of confidence is before the floor for this government. If our budget doesn’t pass, our government falls.
It would be a moot point for me to announce a date and then see our government fall on the budget, so that’s why I haven’t announced a date yet. I’m waiting for our budget to pass so that I can say with confidence the date that we can have an election. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Maybe I could just ask the Premier, this time around, why he’s using that argument. At the end of the First Assembly, they didn’t wait for the session to be finished to issue a press release.
An announcement went out shortly after the decision was made at Full Caucus.
Premier of Nunavut, Minister Okalik.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I am trying to respect the House. For example, if I said it before the budget is passed, I would be told that I’m prejudging the outcome of the budget.
So I’m trying to be conscious of what the Legislative Assembly has been saying to this government that we have to listen to the members and be more respectful, so that’s what I’m trying to do.
It seems like anything I do these days is in dispute.
So what I’m trying to do is pay my respect to this Assembly and to all members and wait for the outcome of our budget before I announce it.
So I hope that we can pass our budget soon, hopefully today, so that we can move on and announce the election. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
After yesterday, I thought I would make a statement in the spring on consistency and convenience.
There seems to be another example I could use in that that it seems to be at the convenience of the Premier not to announce it for his argument that he has put forward now, when the same practice wasn’t practiced in the past.
Why doesn’t the Premier want to let Nunavummiut know what we all know already?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I said look, let’s wait for the budget to be approved by this House and then I’ll announce it.
So if the budget is approved by the members today, I can announce afterwards or shortly thereafter; tomorrow morning. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Premier still didn’t answer my question: why is he using that argument now when they didn’t use it before?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I am trying to pay my respects to this House, so that’s all I’m doing.
I have learned my lessons; I have been censored a few times, so I get to learn from those lessons.
That’s what I’m trying to do is follow and respect this House, and I will announce tomorrow once our budget is passed, hopefully today. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Question 516 – 2(4): Utility Rates Review Council (Curley)
My question to the Premier isn’t too far from what we discussed yesterday and I didn’t receive notice as a result.
The question I want to raise is in regard to the URRC having raised electricity rates which need to have an Inuktitut term.
Mr. Speaker, I continue to have concerns with respect to the URRC’s review of the Fuel Stabilization Rider that the QEC applied for last year in the fall. Here are the facts as I understand them:
The QEC did not submit its application to change the Fuel Stabilization Rider until October 23, 2007. In the new application, they requested that the new rider go into effect on November 1, 2007.
This allowed for less than 10 days for it to be fully reviewed and scrutinized.
Can the minister indicate to the House exactly what date the URRC members received the QEC’s application (interpretation ends) to increase the rate?
Minister of Energy... I’m sorry. The Premier will respond to the question. Minister Okalik.
The QEC gave the URRC an application on October 23 to review the request for a rider and they started reviewing that.
The consumers who were impacted were invited to review the request and they approved 6.40 cents per kilowatt-hour for the Fuel Stabilization Rider.
In the minister’s replies to me yesterday, he stated that the URRC “usually undertake a thorough review and invite concerns from the public.”
Can the minister tell the House today exactly how many public hearings the URRC has held on this matter?
We invited the public, although we did not receive a response from them.
The minister told the House yesterday that “there were concerns given to us regarding that increase, so we will table the report once we have reviewed those objections further.”
Can the minister indicate what these concerns were and outline for us how the Cabinet will review them?
The QEC gave the report to the minister, and according to the legislation, it’s up to the minister to determine when it’s ready and available for tabling.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the minister for that information.
This matter was formally referred to the URRC on October 24 of last year, almost five months ago.
Why is it taking so long to table the report of the URRC on this matter?
On October 23, the URRC was asked to review the request to see if was in order.
Once the URRC completed their review, they were able to provide a brief report at the end of January. They did a thorough review because it’s their job and they’re at arms length.
I would like to thank them very much for reviewing and making a report.
Question 517 – 2(4): Dental Benefits for Nunavummiut (Arreak)
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, as the minister will be aware, dentures are one of the benefits available to Inuit under the Non-Insured Health Benefits Program.
Under the current policy, the lifespan of a new set of dentures is considered to be eight years; you can only get replacement dentures eight years after receiving a set.
Can the minister inform this House whether she is aware of any quality problems with dentures that have been provided to Nunavummiut under the Non-Insured Health Benefits Program?
I seem to recall, in the Non-Insured Health Benefits, that replacement dentures are every two years but I will have to double-check that.
Denturists come and visit Nunavut every year; we have spent about 549 days in various communities in the last few years.
So I need to verify for the member, under the Non-Insured Health Benefit guideline, the timing that’s between new dentures and so on, but I think it’s two years.
I was told more than once that the lifespan of dentures is eight years. I have heard from my constituents that the dentures that they have been given under the Non-Insured Health Benefits Program never lasted as long as eight years.
For the information of the listening public, can the minister clarify what processes must be followed to request a replacement set of dentures before the eight-year time limit is up?
It seemed as though he forgot about something.
I will be tabling that information.
I think I had tabled the Non-Insured Health Benefits booklet in the past in this House that outlines the benefits that are covered under the Non-Insured Health Benefits. Again, I will confirm for the member, I believe it is two years, but I’ll try and get that information before the end of the day today for the member.
At the same time, this year, we’re increasing the number of days dentists will be visiting the communities. So that’s something that I will also be providing the Members of this House just to update them on the negotiations and discussions we’ve had with Non-Insured Health Benefits in increasing the dental visits in our communities.
I’m sure that there would be no objection to the two-year waiting period, but if it is to be an eight-year time limit for the replacement, could you, as the minister, try and reduce that amount of time?
If that is the case, I will absolutely try and address that.
Question 518– 2(4): Implants for the Deaf or Hard-of-Hearing (Arvaluk)
Mr. Arvaluk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Health and Social Services.
Mr. Speaker, studies have shown that in First Nations and Inuit populations, the number of individuals with hearing problems is significantly higher than other groups.
For many of our constituents who are deaf or hard of hearing, the only medical device currently available to help them hear better is a hearing aid.
Some have suggested that their quality of life would improve with a device such as a cochlear implant, which is also called a bionic ear.