EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Bill 04 – Supplementary Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, No. 3, 2008-2009 – Second Reading
I move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Rankin Inlet South and Whale Cove, that Bill 4, Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) Act, No. 3, 2008-2009, be read for the second time.
The motion is carried and Bill 4 is referred to the Committee of the Whole.
Bills 1, 2, 3, and 4 with Mr. Okalik in the Chair.
>>House recessed at 15:40 and Committee resumed at 16:11
Chairman (Mr. Okalik)(interpretation): Welcome.
I would first like to say that we have the following items to deal with: Bills 1, 2, 3, and 4.
We wish to commence our review of the bills you just mentioned, commencing with Bill 3, followed by Bill 4 and Bill 2.
Is the committee agreed that we first deal with Bill 3?
Bill 03 – Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 3, 2008-2009 – Consideration in Committee
I would first of all like to ask Mr. Peterson, the Minister of Finance, to make his opening comments.
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Good afternoon. Bill 3 is an Act to appropriate additional monies for capital expenditures for the balance of 2008-09.
The total amount being appropriated is $67,133,000.
Bill 3 will provide the final balance of $62,159,000, including interest earned by the Nunavut Housing Trust to the Nunavut Housing Corporation for the delivery of social housing units.
As well, an appropriation of $4,176,000 is allotted for the government’s share of the Building Canada Fund (BCF) projects for 2007-08 and 2008-09.
Canada recently indicated approval of the following projects:
The Sanikiluaq Truck Fill Station;
The Baker Lake Community Hall;
The Grise Fiord Hamlet Office Community Hall Complex;
Improvements to the Taloyoak Airport;
Iqaluit’s Street Paving Project.
A total of $16,046,000 has already been appropriated in the 2007-08 and 2008-09 capital estimates in support of BCF projects.
An additional appropriation of $4,176,000 will bring the total to $20,222,000.
I will be pleased to take questions.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Peterson.
Hon. Keith Peterson: Yes.
Chairman (interpretation): Do my colleagues agree to have the officials accompany the minister to the witness table?
To my right is Deputy Minister Peter Ma of Finance.
To my left is Jeff Chown, Director of Expenditure Management.
I would like to remind members of the following: according to Rule 77(1), you have 10 minutes to speak, and according to Rule 77(2), subject to the discretion of the Chair, a member may speak more than once to a matter under discussion but not until every member wishing to speak has spoken.
Do any of my colleagues have any general comments?
I was very pleased to hear that Baker Lake will be getting a community hall. I would like to know when the construction of that facility will begin.
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Peterson, would you like to respond?
We don’t have that information here. I’ll have to ask my colleague, Minister Kusugak, to answer that question.
Minister Kusugak, could you respond to that question?
Hon. Lorne Kusugak (interpretation): If we get the funding approved in this House, construction will be able to start as the piles and some other materials are already in Baker Lake.
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Aupaluktuq, does that answer your question? Does any member have any general comments?
Mr. Ningark (interpretation): I just wanted to ask you, Mr. Chairman, before we begin dealing with the supplementary appropriations, if I can take my jacket off because I’m getting rather warm.
Chairman (interpretation): It’s totally up to you.
You can take off all the clothes you want.
Does anyone else have any general comments?
Mr. Pauloosie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I also wish to say that improvements to the Taloyoak Airport are on here.
It would have been nice to see a terminal building on there too.
But like you said earlier today, resurfacing of the runway and the runway lights, would you know when this will be taking place?
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Peterson, could you respond to that question?
I will ask my colleague, Minister Taptuna, who is responsible for Economic Development and Transportation, to respond to that question.
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Taptuna, could you answer the question?
Hon. Peter Taptuna: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The tender is going to be going out in April, next month.
It’s been a really tough go at this project here for Taloyoak for a number of things, but in April, the tender is due to go.
Mr. Pauloosie, would you like to add something?
We have heard some complaints from the pilots that the condition of the runway is really bad, especially for a Learjet medevac when it lands there.
The pilots were complaining about the runway and I am glad that the tender is going to be going out this April.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Pauloosie.
There seems to be questions posed in the pages and if there are no other general comments, Mr. Chairman, I would like the page-by-page review to begin.
Chairman (interpretation): Okay, we will do that. Bill 3, 2008-09 Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) No. 3.
We will now deal with supplementary appropriations on page 4.
Total Directorate. $791,000.
These funds have to be approved again. $791,000.
Total Corporate Services. $285,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Total Department. $285,000.
Go to page 6.
Total Directorate. $161,000.
If I recall correctly, I believe it was last year or the year before that finance personnel from the Department of Health was moved to the Department of Finance so that there would be better overall alignment.
What was the reason for this error, this $161,000?
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Peterson, if you would like to respond to that.
I think the member is referring to recentralization and that’s when some health staff were moved to the Department of Finance.
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Arvaluk, did he answer your question?
They stated the finance personnel were moved from the Department of Health and Social Services to the Department of Finance in order to have better financial management.
So this is an accrual error of $161,000 in the recording of the adjustment that was never found until the finance personnel were moved.
It says here that this is a year-end accrual error of $161,000.
Have they started finding accrual errors since these staff were moved?
Minister, would you like to respond to that?
At the close of the fiscal year of 2007-08, there were five outstanding invoices for medical equipment and there was a miscommunication between the Department of Health and the Department of Finance with respect to setting up the funds to pay those outstanding invoices.
Chairman (interpretation): Did he answer your question?
$161,000.
Do members have any further questions?
Chairman (interpretation): Total Department. $161,000.
Total Capital Planning. $2,568,000.
Do you agree? Are there any questions?
Mr. Arvaluk (interpretation): I believe we’re on page 7.
The Building Canada Fund will give 25 percent to the Government of Nunavut and they appropriated $6,927,000. Did the Building Canada Fund increase the amount of money they gave to Nunavut by 25 percent so that it is now $2,568,000?
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Peterson, if you would respond to that question.
I thank the member for asking that question. The government has better financial numbers now, so they’re adjusting the figures to reflect the more accurate numbers and that’s why there was an increase.
Chairman (interpretation): So there’s an increase.
Mr. Elliott: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This goes back to some of the questions that some of the other MLAs were asking and I don’t know whether it would be Mr. Kusugak or Minister Peterson answering this. I guess Mr. Kusugak said that when these funds are approved.
Was that when we approve them or has the federal government already approved these and these are underway because this is for up until April 1 of this year, correct?
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Peterson, if you would respond to that question, please.
The Government of Canada has approved their share, we have to approve our share, and then bring it into the House for final approval.
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Elliott, did that answer your question?
Following that, you must know approximately how much the Building Canada Fund is going to give you in order to agree to your 25 percent share because if they are going to give you $2 billion, you cannot put 25 percent of that without jeopardizing other projects.
Do you know approximately then how much the Building Canada Fund will give you in order to determine that you will be able to afford 25 percent from the GN?
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Peterson, could you address the question?
The Building Canada Fund is a seven-year program and there is roughly $26 million a year to Nunavut.
So over those seven years, it’s roughly $180 million.
We could fairly and accurately calculate our 25 percent share. I don’t have a calculator in front of me, but that’s roughly 25 percent of $180 million. Hopefully that answers the question.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Get the man a calculator.
I will adjust the difficulty to get the right calculation.
$26 million or whatever the federal government will give you, you already heard that it will be used over a seven-year period.
You must know pretty well then how much annually you would agree to be using from the federal side, from the Building Canada Fund.
How did you manage to miscalculate it by $2,568,000 when you already know how much it will be per year?
Minister Peterson, maybe you should invest in a calculator.
Maybe I need one of those abacuses there. When we went out to RFP, the numbers came in, so then there were estimates and then there were more accurate numbers when the RFPs provided the information through the processes there.
Chairman (interpretation): Total Department. $2,568,000.
We will now go to the Department of Economic Development and Transportation. Total Transportation.
Not Previously Authorized. $2,751,000.
Mr. Ningark, please proceed.
Mr. Ningark (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I don’t have a question for Arviat or Taloyoak, but this question is directly related to runways.
Every year in the smaller communities, runways aren’t usually paved.
They have to resurface them every spring when there is erosion. There is generally erosion with the continuous landing of airplanes and also during snow removal in the winter. I’m sure it’s very expensive for the Nunavut government in communities where there are no paved runways.
Has the minister considered paving runways in the smaller communities or in all of Nunavut’s communities, at least one community a year?
We need to try to think of how to spend less money.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Ningark.
That’s geared more towards the Department of Transportation.
If you would like to respond to that question, Minister Taptuna.
Thank you, hon. member, for that question.
The department has considered asphalt for paving the runways, but it has been determined that it should be limited to runways which receive aircraft that cannot operate on gravel, meaning Rankin Inlet and Iqaluit.
Asphalt is really expensive, difficult to maintain in the winter, and difficult to repair once the ground beneath is slightly uneven. It’s a really expensive proposal. At this time, the O&M just to maintain asphalt on paved runways is a really huge expense.
Although the department has looked at it, it’s still a huge expense that the government can’t afford.
Mr. Ningark, do you have any more questions?
I would like to thank the minister, my colleague from the Kitikmeot.
As he stated, it’s quite hard to maintain paved runways in the winter. I don’t think it’s very hard with snow blowers and I was wondering if that has been taken into consideration.
Minister Taptuna, if you would respond to that as well.
Thank you, member, for that question.
At any given time, just to apply and maintain the asphalt runways in the smaller communities is a huge expense.
At this time, the department is still looking into that, but we have considered costs of just O&M as a huge cost to the government that. At this time, we’re just looking at that and hopefully I’ll have a better answer for you further down the line in the near future.
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Ningark, do you have another question?
In the larger communities where 737 jets land, there’s usually asphalt or concrete pavement on the runways.
Once in a while, we get Hercules or other jet planes that land in Kugaaruk and they carry passengers who are on charters.
This was just a comment, not a question.
Item 1, first, there’s a transfer from Vote 1 O&M to Vote 2 Capital.
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Peterson, if you would answer that question.
On Item 2, you have previously allotted or at least previously appropriated your share of 25 percent for the Building Canada Fund against the Building Canada Fund of $275,000. Now, you are requesting a net requirement of $2,751,000.
Why is there 90 percent miscalculation or under-calculation when you told us already that these are seven-year agreements and that you pretty well know how much it will be a year for those projects?
Can you explain the rationale behind the 10 percent you have allotted and now, you’re asking for 90 percent of your original calculation of your 25 percent share?
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Peterson, would you like to respond to that?
These two projects were added to the list of projects through the accelerated initiatives that the federal government announced earlier this year.
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Arvaluk, did that answer your question?
Total Transportation. $2,751,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Total Department. $2,751,000.
Go to page 9.
Total Corporation. $62,159,000.
Item 1, to provide funding to the Nunavut Housing Corporation to draw down the remaining balance of $54 million, and the interest is Item 2, $7 million.
Why was this not asked for or at least put in the capital in the previous year?
Did you not know that you were going to get that amount?
Is this, from the Nunavut Housing Trust, finally matured with interest or what was the plan in that? What was the rationale behind having this very large amount into the supplementary appropriation rather than a regular capital item from the previous budget?
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Peterson, would you like to respond to that question?
The Nunavut Housing Trust project had to be delivered over three years and the Nunavut Housing Corporation draws down the money when it’s required. So we wouldn’t require the whole $200 million in the first years as the materials are ordered and the houses are delivered. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
So you already built the houses for $62,159,000 and that’s why it’s in the supplementary rather than in the capital budget that we will be dealing with some time this week or next week.
The amount being requested is to order materials, do the site work, foundation development, and labour for the houses to be built in this construction season.
Mr. Arvaluk: Thank you very much.
I fail to understand this. In a couple weeks time, it will be another fiscal year and we hopefully won’t be approving the capital budget this week or next week.
Why is this not included in that 2009-2010?
Why do they need a supplementary appropriation for 2008-09 as if they have already ordered it and as if they are already building it, especially the foundation?
I just want him to explain why this is not included in the regular capital budget for next week.
Why are we doing the supplementary?
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Peterson, if you would respond, please.
Maybe the best way to explain it is that the Nunavut Housing Corporation isn’t a regular government department, it’s a Crown agency, and the funds are for the 2009-2010 fiscal year.
So in the regular budget process for capital next week, for example, there will be no appearance from the Housing Corporation at all in that total capital budget.
Chairman: Minister Peterson.
I believe there will be an appearance by the Nunavut Housing Corporation there with the other capital items such as staff housing. So there will be an appearance.
Chairman (interpretation): Total Housing Corporation. $62,159,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Total Corporation. $62,159,000.
Chairman (interpretation): My colleagues, we will go back to page 2.
Capital. Total Capital Appropriation. $67,133,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Bill 3 can now be placed on the Orders of the Day for third reading.
If you have your legislation binders, we can go clause-by-clause, (interpretation ends) in the white pages. (interpretation) Do you have them on hand?
Someone is looking for them, but I believe they’re under your desks.
Bill 3, (interpretation ends) under the “B” 3, (interpretation) Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 3, 2008-2009.
Chairman (interpretation): Clause 2; we will go to the Schedule on the back to review it first.
Chairman (interpretation): Summary of Appropriation for the Fiscal Year Ending March 31, 2009.
Total Capital Appropriation. $67,133,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Total Capital Appropriation. $67,133,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Go to clause 3.
Chairman (interpretation): Is the committee agreed to Bill 3 as a whole?
Chairman (interpretation): Is the committee also agreed that pursuant to Rule 62(2) that Bill 3 can now immediately be placed on the Orders of the Day for third reading?
Thank you, ministers and your officials.
Do you have any closing remarks, Minister?
I would just like to thank my colleagues for asking some good questions and approving this bill. It’s very important to the people of Nunavut.
Bill 3 can now be referred for third reading.
We have another bill.
Would you like to stay there, Minister, to deal with Bill 4?
We are now going to be dealing with Bill 4.
Minister Peterson can remain at the witness table.
We will now be dealing with Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) Act, No. 3, 2008-2009.
Minister Peterson, please introduce your witnesses again and proceed if you wish with your opening comments.
Bill 04 – Supplementary Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, No. 3, 2008-2009 – Consideration in Committee
Again, I would like to introduce my Deputy Minister, Mr. Peter Ma, he’s to my right, and to my left is Jeff Chown, Director of Expenditure Management for the Department of Finance.
I have some opening comments, should I continue?
Do members agree to have the witnesses remain at the witness table and make their opening comments?
Chairman (interpretation): Minister Peterson, you may proceed.
Bill 4 is an Act to appropriate additional monies for operations and maintenance expenditures for the balance of 2008-09.
The total amount being appropriated is $20,533,000.
In Bill 4, the major items being appropriated are:
The Department of Health and Social Services in the amount of $7,354,000 for
an increase in federal funding of $1,620,000 for the Non-Insured Health Benefits Program;
an increase in residential care costs of $4,334,000; and
an increase in out-of-territory hospital costs of $1,400,000.
The Department of Justice in the amount of $4,943,000 for
an increase in out-of-territory inmate costs of $3,390,000;
an increase to the RCMP contract due to recent federal legislation changes of $968,000; and
recognition of $487,000 from the federal government for funding previously identified as Vote 4/5 for the Legal Services Board.
The Department of Intergovernmental Affairs a total of $6,100,000 for federal Eco Trust projects.
This money has been re-appropriated as of last year in 2007-08.
Mr. Chairman, this concludes my opening comments. I will be pleased to take any questions.
We will just be going over the same procedure at the beginning of each bill.
Before we proceed, I would like to remind my colleagues of the following: according to Rule 77(1), you have 10 minutes to speak, and according to Rule 77(2), subject to the discretion of the Chair, a member may speak more than once to a matter under discussion but not until every member wishing to speak has spoken.
I thank the Minister of Finance.
I would like to make a comment on your opening comments on page 3, which I don’t fully understand.
When we are campaigning to get elected, we talk about how we can benefit our voters, even those who have not voted for us. With respect to development, they want assistance and we want to help them as much as they want to help us.
I cannot grasp the English terminology used here, federal Eco Trust projects. I’m not aware of what the definition is for that word, so can the minister enlighten us as to what it means?
Minister Peterson, would you like to respond to that question?
The federal Eco Trust program is a program that was announced in 2007 and it’s a one-time program. The funds are in it to be drawn down over three years and the funds are for projects that would improve energy in Nunavut. For example, fixing up the Iqaluit House with better windows, new furnace; those kinds of projects and residual heating projects.
Are there any other questions? Do members have any general comments?
Since there are no more questions or comments, we will go to page 4. 2008-09 Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) No. 3.
Total Department. $6.1 million.
I’m not totally opposing this because it refers to Eco Trust. (interpretation ends) The Energy Secretariat of the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs, (interpretation) why was this secretariat established and why do they require an additional $6.1 million for the Eco Trust Fund?
What constitutes as the Eco Trust Fund?
That very question was raised earlier.
Please clarify what Eco Trust means, Minister Peterson.
I thank the member for that question. The fund would normally go to QEC but it’s not a government department, so it flows through EIA.
Is this for something like planning hydroelectric dams so that it decreases fossil fuel dependency?
Chairman (interpretation): Which minister would like to respond?
Perhaps Minister Peterson can provide a response to that question.
Basically the funding is for $5.4 million to the Qulliq Energy Corporation for residual heating projects and $700,000 to the Nunavut Housing Corporation for the Homeowner Energy Efficiency Program, and the program ends on March 31, 2010.
I thank the minister for appearing before us.
In the interest of conserving fuel in the wintertime when it’s cold, or summer for that matter, with respect to buildings in Nunavut, especially for homeowners, snow is piled around homes.
In smaller communities, there are many who do not earn a lot of money.
Now, when snow is going to be piled up against buildings to conserve fuel in the winter, has the government looked at providing that service for homeowners?
We have experienced that, so that’s a very good question.
I’m not aware that the government itself has considered that through this program.
The individual homeowner could apply for funding of up to $1,000 to do home energy audits or hire someone to fill up their piles.
Mr. Ningark: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This government, Mr. Chairman, believes strongly in protective services in the small communities.
Many people come to me and say that when they go to a welfare office, they are asked, “Have you been looking for a job in the community?”
Jobs in the community that are taken have a very low turnover. Other than that, there is practically no choice in a community when it comes to getting a job, everything is taken.
Those jobs taken have a really slow turnover, that’s what I said before, and many people in my community, even the older people that own their own homes, will work to make their home more energy efficient by snow-banking their homes.
Mr. Chairman, I’m asking: will the government consider at least, when it comes to protective services, hiring two or three people in the community to snow-bank homes that are proved not energy efficient?
I understand the member’s question and that’s important.
I have done that, I have banked snow around my house on occasion as well and I also had the plywood on the side and on the skirting of it.