EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
First of all, to refresh his memory, when I was posing questions this winter, he stated that he would set up another meeting with the federal government in regard to the fact that the only facility approved was a deep water docking facility in Pangnirtung.
Since a few months have gone by, can the minister state whether he has met with his federal counterpart and update us on the status of these discussions? Can he inform us of the response of the federal government?
We are very pleased that they are going to be building that facility in Pangnirtung.
There are six other communities that are listed in the Nunavut Transportation Strategy to receive small craft harbours.
This morning, I was able to meet with the Senate Committee and brought up the issue of the other communities that were supposed to get small craft harbours.
When we presented our position paper on the small craft harbours this morning, the Senate Committee stated that they want to see the construction of these small craft harbours as well.
Mr. Arvaluk (interpretation): Is the minister telling me that he has not had any discussions with the federal government prior to this meeting with the Senate Committee this morning?
The federal government is well aware of our urgent need to get those facilities. The six communities are already identified to get these facilities, but with respect to these small craft harbours, we will probably need more based on demand.
We will continue to maintain our discussions with respect to this issue. The Premier also met with his colleagues last week and we were told that the Western Premiers support Nunavut in the building of these facilities.
I thank the Premiers who are in support of this, but they’re not the federal government.
What I’m trying to ask is I don’t think the minister had an official meeting with the federal government, but I would like to thank the Premier for lobbying for the small craft harbours.
However, in regard to the Department of Transportation, how can they work harder to implement this initiative? Is the department planning to negotiate with the federal government? The federal government will be planning their budget soon.
So prior to the federal government officials preparing their budget plan, are your territorial officials in meetings with the federal government to stress the importance of including the other communities who are listed as getting these small craft harbours?
That is what I was trying to ask. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This is an ongoing issue with the federal government with respect to the huge infrastructure deficit that Nunavut is faced with.
One thing all of us know and have experienced is that when it comes to turbot fishing or the quotas, they don’t even consult us when they are allocating quotas for the adjacent fisheries in Nunavut.
The DFO is extremely hard of hearing with respect to Nunavut’s arguments at this time, but we are continuing to discuss these issues with them.
At this time, you would think because it’s a Conservative minority government, you would think that they would have softened their position with this minority.
When the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement was being completed, the Conservative majority government was very difficult to deal with. We had to undertake lobbying efforts by visiting places from Vancouver to Newfoundland to argue our case.
We would make presentations about our fight, we would go on the radio, and we would meet with rotary clubs and seek support for the Canadian Inuit fight for self-reliance.
Have they started to lobby the federal government with respect to these small craft harbours?
The Minister of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs will respond to that question. Premier Okalik.
The minister has worked extremely hard on this issue and we have collaborated in pushing the federal government on this issue.
We rarely get heard in our fight to be treated like other Canadians since we are such a small territory with respect to infrastructure and so on. That is why I brought it up at the Western Premiers’ Conference.
I requested the support of my western colleagues and I obtained the support of the Western Premiers. This is part of our overall strategy - to get support from our fellow governments because if we get the support of all the Premiers, it would make the federal government more amenable to our requests.
This situation definitely needs to be improved.
This is not going to end anytime soon, so I will continue to work with the minister on this issue.
Question 592 – 2(4): Dispute between EDT and Nunavut Tourism over Core Funding (Peterson)
Mr. Speaker, as the minister will recall, in March, we posed detailed questions to him and his officials during the COW review of the Economic Development and Transportation budget.
He indicated that he was going to meet with the Nunavut Tourism Board of Directors to discuss their funding.
My question for the minister: can the minister update the House today on the status of what is obviously a dispute between Economic Development and Transportation and Nunavut Tourism with respect to their core funding arrangements?
I had a very productive meeting with the Nunavut Tourism Board of Directors and the outcome was quite positive. I understand that we have a working relationship with Nunavut Tourism as of the moment.
Nunavut Tourism has indicated that quarterly payments make it extremely difficult for them to operate on an annual basis.
The tourism industry being what it is, they have to plan sometimes a year or two years in advance for their operations. It presents critical cash flow problems at peak times.
I mentioned to the minister that the federal government has alternative or multi-year agreements to help organizations deliver many federal government department programs and the minister said he would look into them.
My question for the minister: can the minister inform the House if he has investigated the use of alternative funding agreements to assist Nunavut Tourism with cash flow problems since our March session?
As I said earlier, I understand that we a good working relationship with Nunavut Tourism at the moment and I haven’t heard anything in terms of short cash flow problems. We have to adhere to the policy that was approved by Cabinet in terms of delivering the program.
Mr. Speaker, I have heard contrary information that Nunavut Tourism is having financing difficulties in adhering to quarterly payments. With quarterly payments, you have to spend the money, account for it, and then you have to wait until you get your next quarterly funding.
In the past, they have received 50 to 75 percent of their funding in advance, which allowed them to plan more easily to deliver their tourism programs.
Mr. Speaker, my question for the minister: can the minister indicate to the House if Economic Development and Transportation has any internal plans to contract a non-Nunavut Tourism entity to deliver tourism programs for Nunavut?
I only know of our dealings with Nunavut Tourism in terms of Nunavut tourism development within Nunavut.
That is all I can say. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I’m sure the minister’s staff will be willing to update or brief him later today on Nunavut Tourism.
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated in my Member’s Statement, Nunavut Tourism was formerly a core funded organization and it was known under the minister’s main estimates as Nunavut Tourism, and this year, they were changed from Nunavut Tourism to Tourism Development Contributions.
My question for the minister: will the minister commit today to restore Nunavut Tourism to the status of a core funded organization in Economic Development and Transportation’s 2009-10 main estimates, and if not, why not?
Our term expires October 27 and he is asking for a commitment for 2009-10. I can’t make that commitment at the moment unless I happen to be on this side of the House again.
Question 593 – 2(4): Mention of World Oil Prices at Western Premiers Conference (Kattuk)
My question is in regard to the Member’s Statement this morning concerning the rising cost of petroleum products.
As the minister was just returning from Saskatchewan, was the rising cost of petroleum products discussed at the Western Premiers’ Conference?
Yes, we discussed this topic as Nunavut will suffer the greatest impact in all of Canada from the rising oil prices.
We discussed this further as some people who want to run for federal elections want to add additional taxes on top of the rising costs.
We very much opposed this proposal and we were supported in our opposition.
The majority of ministers did not want this because it is going to be very expensive and if they’re going to put further tax on it, we will suffer even more.
We also discussed finding alternatives to fuel, such as the use of wind power, tidal power to generate electricity.
We were seeking assistance from the other premiers and they were very supportive of us.
We are going to try to work together to find ways to use less fuel and we all came to an agreement that we will work together on this issue.
Mr. Kattuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Premier.
Yes, that is very encouraging to hear. Even though this is going to be a long process and will be a process with the federal government, my question is: when will he be speaking about the topics that were discussed?
I have spoken with some of the representatives of the federal government who wish to add further taxes that when it comes time for federal elections, I will be voicing my opposition.
Any additional taxes will be a big problem for us.
It is geared towards southern Canada, but it will impact on us negatively.
What we’re going to try to do is in western Canada, they’re looking at ways of producing energy through wind power, but they don’t operate very well in cold weather.
So we’re going to try and help them find alternative forms of energy and if they find a solution, it will be very beneficial to us.
In British Columbia, they’re developing tidal energy to produce electricity.
Those are options that we’re looking at and we will be kept informed of the potential adaptation of these new sources to our region.
I know it’s for future use only, but we have to start looking at how we can reduce our dependence on oil.
I don’t know if I should direct this to the minister based on what he stated.
He mentioned the production of electricity using tides. Different communities have different tides.
In Sanikiluaq, we only have about four feet of tide.
There isn’t much flow.
Even though tides are different in every community, would they be beneficial to every community?
We thank them that they’re looking into alternative options which they will give us the results on.
In that way, we will be able to work together and I will work with the minister further on this. I was happy because I asked them to support us.
We want to be able to help each other and find solutions by doing so.
So I wish to thank my fellow premiers for being willing to work with us.
Question 594 – 2(4): Breakdown per Airline for Medical Travel for Baker Lake (Simailak)
I would like direct my question to the Minister responsible for Health and Social Services and it’s in regard to patients from the Kivalliq region that go to Churchill, Rankin Inlet, and to Winnipeg and their airfare.
(interpretation ends) I wonder if the minister could explain to me and to the people of Baker Lake, according to tabled documents, where there is the summary of the market share awarded, how the government decided that.
For example, communities to Rankin Inlet would be 61 percent Nunasi, Canadian North, and 39 percent Kivalliq Air; and communities to Winnipeg would be 63 and 37 percent; and communities to Churchill would be 62 and 38 percent respectively.
I’m just wondering if the minister could explain how those percentages were arrived at.
From the process that the Minister of CG&S explained, it was the committee that had reviewed the proposals and some of the proposals that were distributed also indicated their terms and conditions as to when they want, what share of the market that they wanted to provide services in, and whatnot.
So it was based on a combination of information provided by the company from what I understand.  I’m not familiar with the specifics, but again, through a committee, those proposals were examined and based as well on individual companies’ own conditions as well.
Mr. Simailak: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the minister.
In answers to questions from our colleague, Mr. Curley, on Friday, May 30, the minister stated that, in part, “the government made... a great decision for the north in developing a distribution of a market in the north,” and that was in relation again to medical travel.
Can the minister confirm that, in fact, in part of that answer she did say that this contract award, and I quote, “allows citizens that are going on medical travel a choice in airlines”?
The choice in airlines from what I remember of that Question Period, I’d have to go back to the Blues and review that, related to, in the past we had no contract in the Kivalliq, as an example.
In the last five years, there was no contract in place. An RFP process was conducted, and companies had an opportunity to put forth submissions to the RFP process.
Those were examined based on the conditions and criteria that I provided the Members of this House, and based on that, a recommendation was made by the committee to Cabinet and a decision was made.
In the past, there were no contracts in place; there was no choice in place.
In the Kitikmeot, we had one airline; there was no choice in that as well. Now with the two companies, there is a choice, as an example.
In the Kivalliq, there was nothing. So those were comments to that, but again, I have to review the Blues and see what the member is referring to. But that’s generally what transpired.
If I may, let me just quote briefly from the Blues for Friday, May 30...
Hon. Leona Aglukkaq: A Point of Order.
Speaker (interpretation): Just wait a moment.
I apologize, (interpretation ends) Ms. Aglukkaq, please proceed.
It’s very clear in the Blues, it says, “Do not quote.” You cannot quote anything from the Blues and the member says, “May I quote from the Blues.”
That’s my Point of Order.
Mr. Simailak, I would like to ask you to rephrase your question and I’ll allow you to continue with your questioning.
My first question, Mr. Speaker, was regarding the percentages that different airlines now have between the communities of Rankin Inlet, Churchill, and Winnipeg.
The minister stated in the House on Friday, May 30 that “This contract award allows a more fair equitable distribution of the government contracts.” She also stated that “it also allows citizens that are going on medical travel a choice in airlines.”
Did that statement that she made in this House on Friday actually does it, in fact, mean that the patient has a choice of which airline or airlines she wants to travel when it comes to medical travel?
Generally speaking, when I spoke to the RFP process, I’ll give you one example.
In Iqaluit, we have two airlines to choose from - Canadian North or First Air - to Ottawa.
That’s the choice. The fair distribution, it’s clear in the correspondence that I shared with the members, there are two airlines that we can now use under the contract.
In the Kivalliq, we also have Canadian North, Kivalliq Air, and Calm Air, so that’s a choice.
We have choices to use, whereas before, we had no contract.
In the Kitikmeot, we had one company contracted for four years. We couldn’t use the other airlines.
Now, we have two contracts, 50/50 is what’s there, so that’s a choice.
So that’s the point that I’m trying to make in the House is that there are some changes to the contract on how we do business, but not only that, the other information that I also shared in the House is that there are also choices to people that are travelling that are not going on medical travel.
The general population now has choices with the new routes that are established with the companies that are available to consumers where they have a choice in pricing and they have a choice in different companies to fly with, whereas before, they never had that choice.
So in that respect, I said the decision was good for Nunavut, it allows people in Nunavut to have a choice in airlines, as opposed to going back to 20 years where we had no choice. That was the point related to Mr. Curley’s question on Friday.
I thank the minister for that clarification. In the Kivalliq, we have always had that choice of airlines.
In fact, as per the contract, there are only two airlines in the Kivalliq that have the medical contract and they are Canadian North and Kivalliq Air, and then there’s Canadian North subcontracting, I guess, to Calm Air.
But the minister’s statement on Friday stated that “it also allows citizens that are going on medical travel a choice in airlines.”
Again, would she clarify that statement, please, as to whether it’s the patient, himself or herself, that can make a choice, or if it’s the health centre or a doctor that makes that choice on behalf of the patient? And if the patient himself or herself can make a choice of which airline to travel on, can she relay that clearly to the health centres in the Kivalliq?
As the members wish, I will relay that to the health centres so that it’s clear.
Question 595 – 2(4): Replacement for Aging Airport Terminal for Qikiqtarjuaq (Arreak)
I have stated previously in this House that the Qikiqtarjuaq Airport terminal is one of the oldest buildings in use here in Nunavut.
This building is extremely small and it is also getting to the point where it will have to be replaced.
I would like to get an update on whether this airport terminal has been included in the list of buildings requiring replacement and whether this has been looked into. That’s my question.
We are aware that the terminal at the Qikiqtarjuaq Airport is past its useful life. We know that it requires a replacement.
We will be going in this summer to ascertain the estimates to replace the terminal building in Qikiqtarjuaq and we will also be conducting a technical assessment of this facility.
Thank you, Minister, for that commitment.
With respect to your statement that there will be a technical assessment, can the minister inform me today, once the assessment is done, of whether or not his department will include it in the list of communities that require new airport terminals?
At this time, we have not found any funding available, but what we are leaning toward is to put the facility onto the replacement list and fund it through the Building Canada Fund.
If you find that the terminal has to be replaced, will you be planning on actually replacing the building rather than just making repairs to it?
Like I said with regards to the terminal in Qikiqtarjuaq, we will be going over there this summer to look at it and find out how much it would cost. We really don’t know exactly how much it would cost to renovate it right now, but we will be sending a consultant to Qikiqtarjuaq and once he reports back to us, we will approach the Executive Council for funding under the Building Canada Fund. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
Question 596 – 2(4): Statistical Methodology for Nunavut Graduation Rates (Peterson)
Mr. Speaker, on Friday, in the Nunatsiaq News, there was an article about Bill 21 and the minister is quoted in the article saying, “Only one in four children in the territory will finish school.”
Mr. Speaker, we seem to get a lot of information about education statistics and Bill 21 from the media.
I was wondering: can the minister clarify or explain to the House where you arrived at these figures?
I know that the member is not trying to needle me. I’m not trying to look around the room pensively and flick my pen and look for sympathy, but I can’t really comment on what the Nunatsiaq News has said.
What I can say is that based on our statistics, and we do have statistics on graduation rates, over the last few years, the standard number we have been using is that for every 100 children that enter kindergarten, 25 would graduate, so that would indicate a drop-out rate of about 75 percent.
However, over the last couple of years, that rate has actually changed and we’re now looking at about 27 or 28 children that enter school who actually graduate out of that 100, so that percentage has gone up.
Mr. Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the minister for that information and clarification.
Mr. Speaker, in the same article, the minister said that the absence of parenting apparently tops his list of reasons why kids stop attending classes. My question for the minister: can the minister clarify what role he thinks parents play in the lives of those kids who attend school and graduate from grade 12?
Here we have I think it was two full days of committee hearings in public and two paragraphs go into the newspaper out of eight, or 10, or 12 hours of committee hearings, and members of the committee are in this room today.
So I think it’s a bit unfair that we only get those four sentences of some very good debates from the members and from the minister in question, and so on.
What I can say and what I tried to say at that meeting several different times is that when we look at the Education Act, the Education Act can’t cure all the ills that we see in our communities and in our families when it comes to issues in schools. There are outside issues that affect our students’ successes, like any jurisdiction.
Some of those concerns include when children come home and they’re hungry, when kids don’t have a proper place to sleep, when you have overcrowding in houses, when you have these types of socio-economic conditions that affect the child’s life.
And as we said earlier, Mr. Speaker, when you go to a graduation anywhere in Nunavut, and that was quoted in the article, too, I would suggest to you that 95 percent of the time, even when we were in Kugluktuk last week, many of the students stand up and the first thing they say on graduation day is they thank their parents for helping them get out of bed in the morning.
I have tried to indicate at that time and we have heard some of the committee members also emphasize the same situation, that there are a lot of socio-economic problems that go on in our communities and it does affect our students’ success.
You can’t blame everything on the school system.
I thank the minister for that answer. I tend to agree with minister.
I know the education system gets blamed for a lot of things but I know that in Cambridge Bay, there is a lot of hard work and dedicated teachers and educators who are doing all they can to help the kids over there.
I’m very fortunate that I have two sons that went through that system, so I know what it takes as a parent in meeting with the teachers and how the community is involved.
Mr. Speaker, the minister indicated that by and among communities is important. Mr. Speaker, the district education authority in Cambridge Bay is worried that Bill 21 will dump more work on volunteers without providing additional funding for administration and they currently have a half a person year helping them.
My question for the minister: can the minister explain if Bill 21 will provide additional administrative support for district education authorities in Nunavut to help them carry out their new roles under Bill 21?
The member is correct. In the new Bill 21, one of the proposals in there is to look at some of the areas around responsibility toward DEAs and what types of roles and responsibilities they would take on under the new Act.
Part of that includes administrative funds for hiring extra staff. So if there are responsibilities under the new Act, then there would actually be funding to help them carry out that work, so I think that’s good news.
We had a good meeting with the DEA chairs in Cambridge Bay, including the DEA Chair from Cambridge Bay, and that question was posed and the member had an opportunity to sit-in with us.
I think we can safely say that there is a lot of support for the bill out there, there are some concerns and we’re trying to address them with the committee and with the stakeholders.