EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I asked him about Newmont’s commitment to respecting and protecting the environment; their commitment to training and hiring Inuit employees; and their commitment to being a good corporate citizen in my constituency and in Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, I was very encouraged by the answers that he gave to me.
Mr. Speaker, Miramar Mining has done a tremendous job in bringing the Hope Bay project to this stage and attracting the global interest of Newmont. I toured the project in August with the Miramar President and Vice-President to get a close-up view.
I spoke with many of my constituents who are working down there and they told me that they were very happy with the company. In addition, I was pleased to notice several of our Inuit joint venture companies are working there.
Miramar has done things the right way to ensure that the Kitikmeot is involved.
Mr. Speaker, should this deal be successfully concluded I have no doubt that there will be decades of employment and business opportunities for Kitikmeot Inuit.
It will be very important that the Government of Nunavut offer training for the careers that are available in the mining sector.
There is no reason why we can’t have geologists, metallurgists, computer operators, mine engineers and mine managers from the Kitikmeot running the Hope Bay mine or other Kitikmeot based mines in a few years.
Mr. Speaker, I would like the House to join me in welcoming Newmont Mining to Nunavut and wish them and Miramar Mining success in concluding this important mining deal.
Member’s Statement 189 – 2(4): Courage of Constituent (Kattuk)
I rise today to pay tribute to one of my constituents, Mr. Darrel Goodyear. Darrel is a grade nine teacher in Sanikiluaq.
Mr. Speaker, about two weeks ago, the Sanikiluaq grade nine students went on a boating trip.
On this boating trip, an elder, Lucassie Inuktaluk, fell into the water while trying to get out through the front of the boat.
Teacher Darrel Goodyear immediately jumped out and was able to grab the elder’s hand and pull him out to safety.
Two students, Markoosie Eyaituk and Josie Novalinga, also followed to help Darrel.
They were able to assist him in getting the elder to shore where they immediately removed his wet clothing in order to warm him up.
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of Lucassie’s family and from me, I would like to take this opportunity to thank Darrel, Markoosie and Josie for their quick actions and getting Lucassie safely to shore.
Member’s Statement 190 – 2(4): Special Olympian Terry Kuliktana (Evyagotailak)
Mr. Evyagotailak (interpretation): Good afternoon, Mr. Speaker, and thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I rise today to congratulate Mr. Terry Kuliktana who is originally from Kugluktuk. Terry used to live in Kugluktuk but he moved to Yellowknife in order to be able to receive support for his special needs.
Terry still visits Kugluktuk as often as he can. (interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, Terry recently competed in the 2007 Special Olympics World Games held in Shanghai, China.
Terry is a blind swimmer, and he won a silver medal after qualifying for the games in 2006.
Terry worked very hard with the help of his trainer, Tracy Robertson.
His training schedule consisted of swimming practice three times per week, and working in the gym twice a week.
Terry’s family also helped in supporting him through daily walks. Mr. Speaker, his hard work paid off.
I’m sure his family is as proud of his achievement as I am. In fact, the whole community of Kugluktuk is very proud of him. Everyone encouraged him to go for gold when they found out he qualified.
Mr. Speaker, Terry does not stop here. His dream is to be able to qualify to attend the 2011 Special Olympics in Athens, Greece.
Mr. Speaker, please join in congratulating Terry for winning a silver medal, and showing us that disabled people succeed in all areas of life.
There are no more. Item 4.
Member for High Arctic, Levi Barnabas.
I would like to recognize some people.
Behind me are Mr. Jaipeetee Akeagok and his son, Russell Akeagok.
These two men are going down to Ottawa because Jaipeetee’s father-in-law is going to be recognized in Ottawa.
Welcome, feel at home.
Question 236 – 2(4): Passage of Supplementary Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, No. 1, 2007-2008 (Barnabas)
(interpretation ends) Earlier this year, the Minister of Finance introduced Bill 11, Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) Act, No. 1, 2007-2008.
Can the minister confirm for the public record that this bill was in fact passed by the Legislative Assembly?
I would like to ask Nunavummiut to pray for the two young people who got lost out on the land in Baker Lake.
(interpretation ends) Yes, Mr. Speaker, the passage of this bill is already part of the public record. Hansard will show that Bill 11 received third reading and assent on June 6 during our last sitting. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Barnabas (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) Bill 11 included additional funding for the Department of Health and Social Services.
Can the minister confirm for the public record today that every penny of the government’s request for additional funding for this department was in fact approved by the Legislative Assembly?
Yes, the amount of the money requested at first reading was the same amount as approved by members at third reading. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This will be my last question. (interpretation ends) Can the minister confirm for the public record today that the amount the Assembly approved in additional funding for the Department of Health and Social Services was $13,295,000?
Yes, the total amount that was approved in Bill 11 was $45,382,000, and yes, $13,295,000 of that was appropriated for the Department of Health and Social Services. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Question 237 – 2(4): Clarification of Minister’s Comments on Funding for Nunavut Nurses (Tootoo)
Mr. Speaker, yesterday I tabled an article from the Nunatsiaq News edition of October 12 and the title of that was, ‘No Quick Fix for Agency Nurse Problems: Aglukkaq.’
In that article, Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Health and Social Services was quoted as saying that she had requested $1.5 million as a supplementary appropriation at the Legislative Assembly sitting in June in order to develop a Nursing Recruitment Plan.
The article states and I will quote it, “Aglukkaq suggested the increasing unhappiness of GN nurses could have been avoided if the extra money had been approved in June.” This is totally inaccurate.
The supplementary appropriation under consideration in June for the Department of Health and Social Services included $1,542,000 for nursing.
As the Minister of Finance just indicated, everything that they asked for was approved.
Can the minister explain to the Members of this House why she would blame the dissatisfaction of GN nurses on the outcome of a vote and by implication of the Members of this House for something that wasn’t even asked for?
Just to clarify. First of all, there is no quote from me in that paper.
The articles are unquoted and are comments made by the reporter herself. So first of all I want to clarify that I didn’t say to Jane George that it suggested unhappiness within the staff. I made no reference during my interview to the amounts that were discussed in this House.
In fact, those in the article are all unquoted statements made by the reporter herself.  I would refer the member to the Hansard of June 6, 2007, where we talked about the figure in question; the $1.5 million.
The amount was approved in the legislature, as indicated by the Finance Minister. What was changed during that debate, as you will recall in the Hansard, was the wording in terms of how that money would be spent and where it would be spent.
I, too, have reviewed Hansard from that time and the reason that wording was changed was because the minister, herself, made it very clear that all of that funding was going towards casual agency nurses, and none of it was directed to the strategy, which she had indicated at that time, hadn’t even been approved; hadn’t even gone before Cabinet yet.
So that’s the reason why that was corrected because none of that money that was being requested at that time, as she had indicated, was going towards the strategy, and that’s why that was changed.
My question, then, to the minister is; I know last week there was another article that was out and I received a letter from the minister this morning on that, correcting the comments made in that article by the media.
If she was on top of that one so quickly, why did she not do anything in relation to what she is saying is inaccurate information that was put out in the article on October 12?
I don’t make it a practice to respond to every article written that’s inaccurate from Nunatsiaq News.
In fact, the reporter herself is my own personal fashion critic. So I don’t respond to her for that.
Very simply, I didn’t respond to this because I think it’s quite clear in the June 6 Hansard what the discussions were in this House. I think the matter here was resolved.
We concluded based on how it would be spent based on discussions in this House and we changed the wording to how that money would be directed. The Hansard is public record.
Why did I respond very quickly to the situation that happened at the Kitikmeot Inuit Association conference? It was because that meeting is not public to Nunavut through this House. The discussions that took place in KIA are recorded through the KIA Executive Directors.
In their proceedings they record their minutes and so on.
The headline was absolutely misleading; the comments in there were stating facts that were absolutely incorrect, and I thought that it was in the best interest of this government and Nunavummiut and Kitikmeot that I set the record straight that what was said during the KIA meetings was inaccurate.
Since then, I also received, from the CEO of the Kitikmeot Inuit Association who took the minutes, that some of the write ups in that article were never discussed or never brought up during the KIA meetings. Those discussions are not recorded in the House, which is why I responded very quickly.
I made it clear that I’m not looking at critics and what they criticize on in the media. They can do what they want.
But when information like this comes out a number of months later, I think I can quote another quote from the minister, and I’m sure that she would agree with me, she said that “it is a disservice to all parties to misrepresent clearly presented factual information,” and as she has stated, she believes very strongly in that and yet when it comes out October 12, the article is totally inaccurate and there is misinformation in there that implies that the Members of this Assembly didn’t approve something, and that’s why the nurses are unhappy.
In fact, it was something that wasn’t even asked for is there, that she would not take any measures to try and rectify that, given her latest letter that she sent out.
I would like to ask the minister if she would submit something to the newspaper with the correct information out there so that the public who, not everyone goes in and reads the Hansard, especially something from last spring, will have an accurate picture and restate the relevant facts in order that the public has a clear picture of the accurate information on this issue.
I can’t take ownership to articles written about me that, ‘Here’s what I said, or that’s what I said,’ by the paper. I can’t own those and I cannot defend those because I don’t necessarily agree with a lot of the stuff that are written about health and positions.
It’s important, and the members correct, to ensure that the correct information is out there.
And it’s also important, I think, for the members to share what they recommended in the House as well, in the re-wording and changes, and why they did that. I’m fine with that.
I tried to convey that at the time when I spoke to Jane George that we did try and put some money in there, but through debate that was changed, which is the facts of the Hansard.
So I think it’s important to say and provide information correctly. The information is in the Hansard, the journalists have access to the Hansard, and it’s also the responsibility, I think, of the journalist to report accurate and valid information.
With that, I will do my part to ensure the nurses and Nunavummiut have the correct information and I ask for the support of the members as well.
I have no problem putting factual, accurate information out there and restating why things were changed.
That, as you’ll recall, Mr. Speaker, that amendment was made to Bill 11 because the minister herself had indicated that absolutely zero dollars of that $1.542 million was allocated for the strategy.
She had indicated that all of that money was going towards agency and casual nurses, and that’s why that amendment was made at the time.
I have no problem putting that out there when truthful and factual information is there.
That’s why I would support that, and I would encourage the minister...
Speaker: Sorry, Mr. Tootoo.
A Point of Order has been raised.
My Point of Order is I would refer the member to the June 6 Hansard, on page 56, where I clearly stated where that money was going to be used during the debate in this House.
Let me quote what I said there.
I want that set for the record because the intent here.
“In addition to that, as the member is in agreement with the way it was trying to be worded was any savings not used for casual and agency nurses would be used to implement the nursing strategy, I want that said for the record because the intent here was to continue using casual agencies in filling jobs while we implement the nursing strategy. Any savings would be put towards that.”
But for the record, that was the intent of this line, that recruiting is multi-dimensional and that statement there was trying to capture that. The way it’s worded is now is very clear it’s going towards casual and agency nurses.”
For the record, I wanted this explanation. Page 57, “...I want people to understand that the intent of this was to use any savings that we don’t spend on casual hiring and agency nurses was going to be towards the recruitment strategy.” That’s what I said Mr. Speaker, and the member is incorrect for saying otherwise.
Members, I remind you that because this matter goes back to June of this year, I would like time to review the matter in question, and also I’ll bring back my ruling to the House at the appropriate time.
Do you wish to speak to this matter, Mr. Tootoo?
Again, I have to disagree with the minister as I did in June that she had indicated that any savings from that money from casual agency nurses would go toward that.
That means that none of that money was going; it was all geared towards that.  I don’t believe that a supplementary appropriation bill that we’re asked to approve is for something that might happen.
We’re asked to approve monies for a purpose; for something substantive. All that money she had indicated was going towards casual and agency nurses.
So in fact, none of that amount was allocated and that’s why the amendment was made and changed by the minister to clearly identify what that money was being appropriated for.
So, again, hopefully, we can review the Hansard, and I look forward to your decision on that.
But I just wanted to state clearly for the fact that the minister even agreed with it back then.
Speaker: Thank you, Members. (interpretation) Just to remind the members again, this issue goes back to June and I will have to have time to review the Hansard, and I will make a ruling tomorrow.
Question 238 – 2(4): Air Quality Sanikiluaq School (Kattuk)
My question will be directed to the Minister of Education.
So far, for the month of October, students in my community have been in school for only four days, and today is October 24.
As the minister knows, the problem is the air quality is bad in the school.
I wanted to know what the minister has done as of today.
The situation in Sanikiluaq and at the school has been ongoing, as the minister indicated, since October 2.
Since that time, I guess, basically, what is occurring here is this: we have a heat recovery system from the power plant, which is located adjacent to the school, and that provides the heat to the school in Sanikiluaq.
One of the heating lines failed, and because the heating line failed, we weren’t able to heat the school.
So we do have a backup set of boilers in the school itself and they had to be activated. Once that occurred, there were fumes or odors coming from the boilers, and again, from the line that is coming from the power plant, which necessitated the school to be closed because the noxious fumes were in the school and some students were getting sick, as well as the staff who were complaining about that.
Through Community and Government Services, we had people brought in to review the situation, get the lines fixed, and then try to reopen the school.
And as of today, CGS is in the process of having air quality testers brought in from Ottawa hoping they will be on the ground tomorrow in the school to test the air quality.  The school has tried to open on two or three occasions since then, but there has been, again, strong evidence of fumes or odors in the school.
The minister indicated that there’s going to be some people coming in from Ottawa. Are they going to be on their way to Sanikiluaq then?
As I indicated, the staff at the school has tried to reopen the school, and when I say “have tried,” they’ve actually opened the school for classes.
With their ongoing issue is with the fumes in the school, we felt that the best course of action now is to bring the air quality testers to ensure that the school is safe to be in and to ensure that all of the remedies that have been put in place are actually up and working.
The air testers that we’re talking about, the specialists are based in Ottawa. We’re trying to get them in there as soon as possible.
My understanding, as of right now, is that, if need be, we will be chartering them into Sanikiluaq and we’re hoping they will be on the ground in the next 48 hours.
Question 239 – 2(4): Status of Dispute between Nunavut Broadband Development Corporation and Qulliq Energy Corporation (Curley)
My questions today are for the Minister of Energy, concerning the ongoing dispute between the Nunavut Broadband Development Corporation and the Qulliq Energy Corporation.
Mr. Speaker, earlier this summer, I wrote to the minister to express my concern about this issue.
On October 9, Justice Earl Johnson ordered the Qulliq Energy Corporation to remove site access restrictions imposed on the Broadband Corporation and SSI Micro.
The minister has indicated that the Nunavut Government is attempting to mediate this dispute.
I recognize that he will not comment on the matter before the court, but I would ask him to provide an update to the House on the government’s mediation efforts.
First of all, I would like to thank the member and members who have written me concerning the dispute that’s underway. And again, I’m not at liberty to go into detail, as the member mentioned in his question, because it’s before the courts.
What I can say on the mediation effort, I want to take this opportunity to thank the Department of Economic Development and Tourism and Minister Simailak.
Because of the impasse that was occurring on the file, we approached the minister and his department to help us through mediation between the Qulliq Energy Corporation and the Broadband Development Corporation, or Qiniq Network.
On an update on the resolution, a mediator has been appointed and both parties have agreed to the mediator. Mediation will actually occur on November 15 and 16 in Ottawa.
So again, that’s a good position to be in right now.
I believe that, through the mediation efforts, we would be able to look at this in a more positive light.
I appreciate the minister bringing the update, but I think the minister fully understands that is one of the most essential services that Nunavummiut need.
We are lagging behind with technological changes that are happening so quickly.
It’s so sad that they have to go through this process at the moment.
Mr. Speaker, I have been disappointed that this situation had to go to court in the first place.
Can the minister clearly explain to the House why no effort was made at an earlier time to bring the two parties together to work out their dispute?
I don’t want to prejudice anything that we say in the House with an ongoing court case.
So I don’t want to get into any logistical, or financial, or indeed, the administrative issues that have occurred on the file.  What I can say is that both parties and I’ve had an opportunity to speak to the CEO of the Power Corporation and some of the senior people within the Qiniq Network and the Broadband Development Corporation.
It is a dispute.
The Board of Directors of the Power Corporation felt that based on the discussions that had gone on and so on, based on their legal opinion, that the way to proceed was the legal way. And we had to let that process go forward. That process is continuing.
At the same time, as I said earlier, we are very pleased to be able to say that both parties have agreed to a mediator, and those meetings will occur in November, as I stated earlier.
For the last couple of years, formal “Letters of Expectation” from Nunavut’s Cabinet Ministers to the Crown corporations for which they are responsible have been tabled in the Legislative Assembly.
Although the Boards of Crown corporations do have some independence, they cannot ignore these letters.
Can the minister clarify whether or not he has been kept fully informed of this issue by the senior executives of the QEC, and if not, why not?
I can say, without fear of contradiction, that on a regular basis; that on a weekly basis, sometimes more often than I care to mention here in this House, I am in conversation with the CEO of the Power Corporation.
This issue has indeed come up. Indeed, the letters of expectations are tabled in the House so that they become a public document.
So I can concur and answer the member’s question that indeed I have been briefed and been up to date on the issues, as provided by the CEO of the Qulliq Energy Corporation.
The dispute, obviously, the conflict has created the progress to actually occur to improve our communications, and the only major choice that we have in Nunavut.
That’s shameful for this government to go through this route.
If mediation between the GN and the NBDC is not successful, what options does the minister have to resolve this issue?
I just want to say that I think we’re moving very close together now to meet the mediation effort.
I’m confident that we’ll have a positive outcome but I can’t foreshadow events to occur, so I can’t comment on the member’s question on what if something doesn’t occur or what if something else doesn’t occur.
What I can say to him is that I am positive about the idea of having the mediator in place; they will be meeting in November.
We are following it very closely and I would like to leave it at that.
Question 240 – 2(4): Status of Devolution and Federal Investments in North (Peterson)
Mr. Speaker, as MLAs all know the Government of Nunavut has publicly committed itself to achieve an agreement in principle on devolution by December 31, 2007, and the devolution final agreement by December 31, 2008.
My question for the Premier, in light of the Mayer Report on Nunavut Devolution released in June this year, the recommendation to adopt a go-slow approach to devolution was made.
Can the Premier give us a clear and candid assessment today if these dates and goals are realistic, and if not, what is the Government of Nunavut’s new time table on devolution?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I continue to impress upon the federal government to get a mandate so that we can start negotiations.
As recently as a few weeks ago, I met with the new Minister of Indian Affairs and stressed our expectations of getting a mandate so that we can actually start negotiating. It is becoming quite frustrating to even start discussions at this point.