EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Pointing out some of the things on how it’s been and things that they like to do, but again Mr. Chairman, I’ve ask the Minister and staff how they plan on doing that.
It’s all fine to say we want to do this, we want to improve this, I’m just wondering if there’s any mechanisms or preliminary plans for the actual implementations to achieve this goal.
Chairperson: (interpretation): Mr. Anawak
Hon. Jack Anawak: Well at this point, yes, we want to improve the way we deal with the communities and at the same time we want to make sure we have a plan that will work, rather than reacting to let’s say one community, we will react to communities that are having a problem.
At this point it would be too soon to say we have a policy on how to deal with the communities that are having problems, because in developing those policies, we want to make sure that the Members as well as the communities have a role in developing those policies to ensure that the communities will know what to do if they start getting into some problems, whether it’s financial or otherwise .
We are just developing those and all I can say is that we will improve.
Regarding the relationship between the government of Nunavut and the communities, right now the only way we're doing it is electronic monitoring, but other than that we basically have adopted the policies of the Government of the Northwest Territories at this point in the actions of the Government of Nunavut.
Chairperson: (interpretation): Mr. Tootoo
They don’t really have any concrete plans in how they're going to achieve this goal in dealing with finances and monitoring evaluating, performance.
Could the Minister or his staff provide us with the time frame as to when they plan on having such policies in place.
Chairperson: (interpretation): Mr. Anawak if you wish to answer this or your officials may respond to that.
Hon. Jack Anawak: (interpretation): Yes Mr. Chairman, we have not developed anything.
We have just started and , again, even if we were to develop anything w e would involve Members and the communities.
If we were to unilaterally make a policy we would not meet the needs in the community, we want to involve the communities and the members.
Perhaps my Deputy Minister can respond to the issues as to how our Department operates, if we are to develop new policies we want to involve the communities and the members and that is the reason why have not developed a policy today.
My Deputy Minister will respond.
Chairperson: (interpretation): Deputy Minister Mike Ferris you may proceed.
Mr. Ferris: Thank you Mr. Chairman.
One other thing that we are exploring is using the new electronic highway, but we need to have discussions with our partners in the communities.
There will eventually be a government server in every community, there will be 1 or 2 staff from the IT Department in every community and we're looking at one of the avenues for better monitoring and evaluation being able to put electronically on the system community by-laws, community financial information, so we can share information back and forth and we can get the early red flags before they become a real problem and were responding after the fact.
That is one of the avenues being looked at, but that’s the time line on that, I can’t tell you today it's going to be 2 months, 3 months or 6 months, we're meeting with the IT people, we’ve given them an idea where services are needed in the early process, because we got growth communities where we put in the decentralize positions into.
But that’s one avenue that’s being explored, again we have to get current agreement from the Hamlets that they are willing to put all of the information into the system so that we could be reviewing it on a fairly regular basis rather than picking up on inspections or picking it up to ask them to mail a document specifically.
We do have some other options that we will be looking at, in my briefing with my counterpart in Municipal and Community Affairs, they are looking at enhancing the system and they are sharing some of the information, but it’s to be preventive and proactive, in other words to identify work with the communities in positive way, to try to eliminate the problems as they occur and don’t make it very difficult for the community to get back on it’s feet.
The Justice Minister indicated , that we're just a bit early in the process but it was important enough to put it as a goal and we’ve got the sub task, that we’ve got people now looking at.
Chairperson: Qujannamiik.
The Minister indicated that they want to consult with the communities in regards to concerns and issues.
I believe in December there was a conference here sponsored by the Department to hear those concerns and stuff.
I’m just wondering, has any of that information been utilized to date in developing policies, law, along these lines and address the issues that the communities expressed at that time.
Chairperson: (interpretation): Mr. Anawak.
Hon. Jack Anawak: (interpretation): Yes, regarding those concerns or issues, there has already been discussions on the issues raised by the communities.
We have written to the communities and we will keep these in mind.
In respect to some of the issues, when the conference was held in December, there was still no Nunavut Government and they raised their concerns, issues and their priorities.
With the new Nunavut Government in place now we have some of those recommendations and issues but we knew that if we were to state we were going to do it a certain way now it would cause problems, because we are the government of the people, and we should consult further with the communities.
We knew there would be concerns or problems raised and that’s why I’m bringing it up now.
If we are going to develop a policy, a proper policy that will address the needs of the communities and the community operations, we wish to use the community because they're the ones who know what’s going on in their back yards and the Members as well, because again we are the residents of the communities and when we are developing these policies, we will try to keep those in mind and whether we can co-operate more with the communities.
We wish to consult them but in respect to the conference that was held in December and the report, the report has have been sent to every community.
Yes I’m a little confused I guess, if the Minister indicated that they want to consult with the communities in issues and concerns regarding what they have in their communities was not the goal conference that was sponsored, I believe by the Department of Community Government, Housing and Transportation, was that not for the purpose of them being able to express their issues and concerns, so I’m just wondering why is the Minister waiting to consult them to hear their issues, concerns.
If they're waiting to do that I’ve wondered what the purpose of the material if the material from that conference is going to be utilized and if it was even worth if they're not going to utilize those issues and concerns and go through the whole thing again.
I guess I’m just wondering, you know is there a need to go back and consult was not done during the conference.
Hon. Jack Anawak: I’ve lived in a small community and I do not consider one meeting to be consultation enough from the Government, however I can tell you about two measures that we’ve already started dealing with.
The first one is we are going back to quarterly funding for the communities; that was a recommendation by the conference.
The other one, a single time zone for Nunavut, that were working on now.
However again I say that if I was coming from a small community, I’m sure that I would rather want to be a part of the process in developing policies for the Government of Nunavut rather than just through the conference .
Chairperson: (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Anawak.
Mr. Tootoo you may ask more questions, however there are other Members, so keep that in mind, so I will ask you to ask your last question, Mr. Tootoo.
Mr. Chairman I believe as elected members we're able to ask as many questions because were not limited by the time frame or any thing like that, I will stop after the other members ask.
I do have other questions, but I would like to ask, what the Minister indicated, was that conference a first step in developing policy for the Department of Community Government, Housing and Transportation in dealing with the community government issues.
Is that correct.
Chairperson: (interpretation): Before you answer Mr. Anawak, Mr. Tootoo you asked earlier, I know you have more questions after the other members I know you can return to that issue.
Hon. Jack Anawak: Mr. Chairman, I expect to have an ongoing relationship with the communities at all times and again the conference was start , a new start for the Government of Nunavut in how it deals with the communities, but I expect to have ongoing dialogue with the communities improve the relationship between the communities and the government of Nunavut.
Chairperson: (interpretation): Thank you.
In respect to the issue that Jack was alluding to they are true, it’s only when the community gets visited and inspected that the only time that they get a true idea what the community needs are, but perhaps if I ask this question it would be better because you're dealing with transportation and housing as well as community government.
The communities being visited by the official, if they were inspected at the same time I think that would allow the Department to understand all of the community concerns and issues, that’s why I’m asking that question, I will ask a further question later Mr. Chairman.
Chairperson: Thank you Mr. Iqaqrialu.
Hon. Jack Anawak: (interpretation): Yes, yesterday I believe Mike stated something yesterday on the visitations made either from the headquarters or the regional offices.
We’re trying to give them more of a mandate to deal with the issues such as that I hear you express Mr. Iqaqrialu, because if we were to send an official to inspect the government, they would only deal with the Municipality or with the Hamlet, but we would like to develop that when we are dealing with all three of these issues and the one department that if there is going to be a visitation to one community that official would be able to deal with all three issues within the department.
When he goes to help the communities or when he goes to consult with the communities, we can use that suggestion Mr. Chairman.
Chairperson: (interpretation): Mr. Iqaqrialu
I don’t have a whole lot of questions but I find it good to hear those kind of comments, but in these main estimates or in respect to the paper work my communities five year plan that were dealt with by the GNWT and now with the Nunavut Government, when they were given to the Nunavut Government I want to show you something in one of the report.
There’s three different things if we were to look at these main estimates those are very different from what my community wanted or what they had as their priorities.
When our community plans for five year Capital plan, we know when we saw the amounts have been changed from when these were transferred to Nunavut Government, and I’m not too pleased with the way that was done, but I know that we have to be physically responsible, but if we are to do that, if we are to look at a Capital Plan whether these can be deferred till next year or to see a larger amount allotted for the next year that could be done, than our Capital plans for the year, I would not have too many regrets about.
This year if these were to be deferred until next year, because it could be built or constructed in the next year if it were done that way, again bearing in mind fiscal reality we have to look at the capital plans I think that would help the problem.
Hon. Jack Anawak: (interpretation): Thank you, regarding the five year Capital Plan for the communities as well as the funding, when they were given the funding by the GNWT for example, when they sent the Capital Plan it would come back and be completely changed.
I would like to look at how we do the capital planning program, I think there are still some difficulties in it so we need to improve it.
The communities and ourselves we’ve got to get together and deal with these kind of issues properly with the communities involvement perhaps because they are expecting to get something when they make the 5 year capital plan.
When they submit it to the government it usually returns as a completely different capital plan, because they don’t work together at the same time .
In respect to the five year capital plan exercise perhaps if we were involved either our staff or if we were involved to some extent, the capital planning exercise for communities would be better in that way.
I recognize that problem and when we have finish these issues we will speak to the community capital plans and I think we can meet with the communities as to how we can better plan for this year.
In respect to his comments we will look at those things, but again when we are trying make improvements perhaps if all were involved even if not actually present, but if we were to work closely with the communities on their priorities I think it would be better that way.
Mr. Iqaqrialu do you have further questions or comments.
I really cannot try and challenge them because he states what I want to hear and I hear the proper comments and I’ve been dealing with this issue ever since.
If we are to proceed smoothly, if we are to have more benefits for the community those of us from Nunavut I know we're going to have to proceed with that. But I think it’s clear that, because of the limited funding we cannot get everything on our wish list because we have agreed for this first year that we need a balanced budget because that’s been our goal all along.
I know that seems to be the goal but if we are going to have a 5 year capital plan, I think that exercise is good but I think it should be done that way.
Chairperson: (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Iqaqrialu.
I really think that was more of a comment, therefore when there’s no question, I want to make a short statement again.
All of us members of the House and also our Ministers who are from Nunavut and from our communities our Constituents are expecting that we were expecting a proper policy.
I know we want to see that as soon as possible, but again the Nunavut Government is very new and it’s still in infancy and we know were tired of waiting.
Even the Ministers and I know all the Members and our constituents, I know expecting a lot of good things, in order to make the Government proceed smoothly.
We know in the future that were keeping the future in mind and what journey will end up, I think we have a clear goal.
I know that some people are getting impatient but were expecting this government in this day and age will be closer to the communities and the people, there are some people who have raised their hands.
Mr. Akesuk: (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Chairman.
David probably mentioned a portion of my question that I was going to ask regarding the Municipalities in the Nunavut area and them being more involved, but I think that the communities weren’t consulted enough.
They wait anxiously to see those projects being done at the community level and I think that it would be best if the Ministers talk to the communities before they make any changes on the projects that are going to be taken off from their communities.
I think that it would be better working relationship between the two, so that was my question Mr. Chairman.
Chairperson: (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Akesuk
Hon. Jack Anawak: (interpretation): When the communities are fixing up their five year capital plan, they do it individually on a community basis and then their request is given to the government and they are adjusted and then given back to the communities which doesn’t work very well.
People's expectations are raised and then they are given a lot less then they thought they were going to be getting.
I think that the Nunavut Government and the Municipalities can work a lot closer together, if they work together so that the expectations are not raised too much at the community level, there would be a better understanding between the two, the government and the municipality.
The Nunavut government shouldn’t be looked at as an opposition but should be in co-operation between the two and I think that the government could run a lot smoother, if we work on the plans together or if there’s going to be any projects changed or anything different than I think that the government should take the initiative and talk to the Municipalities, so that they’ll know exactly why the proposed projects were taken out of the 5 year capital plan or something different done.
So I think that it’s best if there's a closer working relationship between the two governments than things would be able to go forward.
Sometimes we just argue about the things that are taken out of the Capital plan and if they were well informed we won’t unnecessarily have to go through that debate.
Chairperson: (interpretation): Mr. Akesuk
Mr. Akesuk: Thank you for your response Mr. Minister I hope to see that the close working relationship between the two governments shortly in the future and of my next question regarding the Appropriation, there’s some for Baffin, there’s some for Keewatin, there’s some for Kitikmeot they're all hearing the main estimates and exactly how much will be given where.
I hear that in the Keewatin they tried in the communities to have the Mayors set up the Capital Plan or set up the block funding to be given to the Mayor.
My question is would you consider giving block funding to the Baffin, so that the Municipalities could look through it and see what would fit in to their communities.
Do you have any such plans in the future. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Hon. Jack Anawak: (interpretation): We’re looking at means to make improvements on how we deal with the governments and how we can work closer together with the Municipalities.
Chairperson: For those members who have comments or questions.
Mr. McLean your name is next on the list.
In regards to, I'll be all over the place here.
In regards to the MDAP program where people are eligible from 5% - 7% of the purchase price of a house.
In dealing with myself and in the business community, I think it is basically for new homeowners, and the feedback that I am getting, and it is just the feedback that I am getting, it doesn't necessarily represent Nunavut, but I have to bring it forward anyhow.
A young person gets a job, they go out and want to purchase a house on the open market, the house is worth 200 thousand dollars and they are eligible for 70% of the purchase price of a house, which works out to 140 thousand dollars of the purchase price of the house.
Another couple, working and been in the job market for quite a while, are working hard and progressing through the system whether it is government or private sector, their incomes are higher, they apply for MDAP and they get 5% of the purchase price of a new house.
My community, as an example, I have heard a lot of potential homeowners and people that purchased houses, and the total inequity of the system.
It even went so far that people who do qualify for the 70%, their spouses, whether it is him or her, may take time off so they can qualify for that extra grant.
I have heard stories, I don't know if they are true or not, that people are getting 120 thousand dollars for the purchase price of a house.
Nowhere else in Canada, does anyone get 70% free money for the purchase price of a house.
I am not condemning the program, what I am talking about is, wouldn't it be far better if people were given a straight, across the board 40 or 30 thousand dollars, to purchase a house?
The average price of a house up here, aside from Iqaluit, everywhere else in Nunavut, is probably, roughly a three bedroom 1200 square foot bungalow is 200 thousand dollars.
If a lot more of these 70%'s are given out to homeowners, doesn't that restrict the amount of housing that we can put on the open market, and say if 40% of the purchase price of a house was given to residents of Nunavut that have been here for 5 - 10 years, whatever the criteria, wouldn't that stimulate twice as much, or wouldn't that stimulate more housing for people in need?
In my community I have people in public housing that are paying more rent because for some reason, past banking experiences and things like that, are paying more in public housing than the subsidized government staff housing.
The reason they are not in the subsidized government staff housing is because they don't work for government, they work for the Hamlet or the Housing Association or things like that.
It is just that, it was a good program, it served its' purpose, but I think in this day and age, Mr. Minister, somebody getting 70% of the purchase price of a house, I think has got to come to an end.
I think 40 or 50 thousand dollars on a 200 thousand dollar house is more than fair for anybody today, and it may open up more, and if it opens up more maybe we can get the pressure off the public housing units.
We have been saying that for the past three months that we need more public housing units for the people in need, that don't have the employment opportunities that a lot more people have.
So I won't dwell on that much longer, other than that I think it should be looked at.
I can go on and tell you cases of where somebody got 5% and they're walking around with a lip on and I feel sorry for them and they came to me and said, "Glenn we only got 5%", and I've been working and trying to improve our lives and this person got 70%, but I don't want to pick on it anyhow.
Community Empowerment.
Baker Lake and I think Cape Dorset, and I think there are a few other communities, really went out and wanted to take control of their own destiny and decision making and thinks like that.
But we have an old saying now in places where we have taken over everything, "the government wants to give us all the empowerment we want without the money."
I think it is a good program my experience with community empowerment while I sat on the Hamlet Council for five or six years was, yes it gave more decision making to the Municipalities and that is a step in the right direction.
I don't think communities should be forced into community empowerment, I think that should be their decisions.
At this point or stage in the game the only thing that Baker Lake hasn't taken over, to this point today, is hiring nurses and teachers.
So community empowerment has worked in our community, I think it should be a priority of this government, at the community's own pace.
We have in Baker Lake, 120 full time employees, and one non-aboriginal employee, so through the training programs that MACA provided to that community, the community of Baker Lake has really, really taken upon itself to train local people to fill all the positions.
It has been a successful endeavour.
So I don't want to see us deviating from community empowerment or to de-emphasize it, don't take this wrong, where the government may want to take some of the things back.
This is where it comes to where I hope the government will help more in monitoring and evaluating and training in regards to community empowerment.
I don't think we are ready for block funding yet but that may be down the road.
Getting back to housing again, there is one issue that was brought up in my community and I am sure every community in Nunavut has to deal with it every day, is the serious state, and I know it is your issue but also probably a couple of other departments issue, is the serious state of elders' housing, in a lot of the Keewatin communities if not Nunavut communities.
I think there is a tremendous, tremendous lack of recognition for elders' housing in communities.
Talking with Mayors and just people on the street, I know in my community we have four designated elders units and we have over 100 elders.
We are trying to convert single one bedroom units that were designed for single people into elders' residences.