EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
So we do have to weigh the options of how, down the line, we’re going to procure more money from the feds to build more housing for Nunavummiut.
Also, the Minister’s Statement of yesterday described the community allocation of new public housing units as a “preliminary” list that is “subject to change.”
Can the minister clearly indicate what factors the Nunavut Housing Corporation will take into account when deciding whether or not to make changes to the list?
Mr. Speaker, doing construction work up in the north is always a challenge.
We do have to work with other departments and the Qulliq Energy Corporation to make sure that all the infrastructure, power lines, and power poles are in place before construction starts.
We’ve got to make sure that the land is available at these locations that we have selected, although preliminary discussions have indicated that these are in preparation now to make sure that the second fiscal year of the $70 million is going to be strictly construction for the vast majority of the units that are going to be built.
As the member is well aware, disregarding any other things that may happen out there, there is the shipping time, shipping season, and mobilizing contractors throughout the vast territory is always a challenge.
It may come to a point where, if there’s a real need to change the allocation, that’s going to be done on a dedicated basis, once the alternatives are found that there is no other alternative to construct where the houses are allocated.
I’m wondering: when will a final decision be taken on the community allocation of new public housing units?
We are hoping that this is the final allocation for the units going into the communities. Like I said, Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the member’s concern.
The units are going to the communities they are most needed.
As I indicated, in the methodology, if we use the waiting list alone that’s provided by LHOs, most of the units are going to go into Iqaluit and the bigger centres, such as Arviat, where it’s needed the most. Even if the amount of units that are going into Iqaluit… .
Just using Iqaluit and Arviat for example, the need is still going to be 45 percent, even if 30 units go into Iqaluit, compared to 7 to 12 percent in the other communities that I had mentioned earlier on.
Question 668 – 3(3): Resolute Bay Utilidor System Tender (Elliott)
One of the huge combined federal and territorial projects happening in Resolute Bay, valued at $32 million through the Building Canada Fund, is the repair and replacement of the community’s utilidor system. A tender was recently put out for that work. Could the minister update the House on this project?
He is correct, Mr. Speaker. We did close the tender for Resolute Bay, I believe, around April 24.
We received two bids and the lower bid of the two was 30 percent over the estimated cost or close to $20 million over the estimated cost of doing the work, Mr. Speaker.
Last week, this House appropriated $4.5 million in capital carryover funds that were allocated to this project.
What is the plan to utilize these funds this fiscal year?
At this time, our department is taking a look at the process.
We’re reviewing what to do next or what next steps we need to take to see if that project can go ahead.
Originally, the repairs and replacement of the utilidor system was on a five-year timetable.
I was wondering if that timetable has now been revised and if the minister could update the House on what the new timeline is.
Unfortunately, the tenders came in way over, you know, close to $20 million over what was anticipated.
Our department has cancelled the tender because of the significant difference.
Right now, our department is going over the whole issue in Resolute Bay.
We’re trying to find the best solution at this time and that will take time to do, to try to figure out what it is we could do in the community of Resolute Bay, what the best options are, and how we could continue on with this.
At that time, we will have a better picture of if there are going to be any changes into the five-year plan in the community.
I assure my colleague that we will work with the community to keep them posted if there are any changes to the timelines.
Question 669 – 3(3): New Public Housing Construction (Schell)
My question is for the minister of housing.
My two communities of Cape Dorset and Kimmirut did not receive any new public housing units. Can the minister clearly explain what specific factors led to the NHC deciding that no new public housing units will be constructed in these two communities with the new federal funding?
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, the allocation was based on a methodology that was based on a needs analysis. Of course, that’s the waiting list combined with the 2010 housing needs survey and a mathematical formula that is used to make everything fair percentage-wise.
Kimmirut did not fall into that category; they were further down the list.
As I indicated in my Minister’s Statement, the power generation capacity in Cape Dorset is maxed right out and they just don’t have the capacity for any more infrastructures there.
As the minister is probably aware, we are going to be receiving a new power plan in Cape Dorset. I’m assuming that by the time these housing units are built, we will have the capacity for the power. Also, the current waiting list for Cape Dorset is 96 tenants.
Can the minister explain again why Cape Dorset didn’t get any units?
I’ll try and make that clear for the member.
Mr. Speaker, the power generating capacity in Cape Dorset is maxed out. They don’t have the capability of providing power to any more infrastructures there, including housing units.
Will the housing minister commit to using the current information, not outdated information, on the waiting list for the communities that are going to be receiving housing units?
At the Nunavut Housing Corporation, we make every attempt to use updated information.
The wait list used was ending January 31 of this year. Some of these communities are fairly small and the numbers do change from time to time, month to month.
At the time, the wait list used was from as recent as the end of January this year.
Question 670 – 3(3): Status of the GN’s Public Housing Strategy (Ugyuk)
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Health.
Mr. Speaker, on November 6, 2007, the government of the day tabled a document called “Developing Healthy Communities, A Public Health Strategy for Nunavut.”
That document contained no less than 21 specific objectives and strategies focusing on improving the health of newborns, preschoolers, and young children.
All of those objectives were to have been met by the year 2013.
Can the minister provide an update on the status of the Public Health Strategy objectives and what specifically has been done to improve the health and well-being of young Nunavummiut under the age of 6?
Mr. Speaker, the Department of Health continues to work towards meeting the recommendations in the Public Health Strategy.
As you can appreciate, it’s a very daunting challenge given our limited resources and our human resources.
Mr. Speaker, if I understand the question correctly, newborns to age 5, for example, we do have a range or prenatal programs, Well Baby visits, and we have parents and tots programs.
I understood that the funding comes from the federal government.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that there is not enough collaboration in offering programs dedicated to the preschool-age target group.
Many studies have shown that family issues, such as literacy, poverty, and violence, can have a serious impact on the health and development of a young child.
My colleagues have raised concerns about nutrition, dental health, and daycare.
Can the minister clarify how he works with his counterparts in this government to ensure that there are adequate programs for preschoolers across Nunavut?
Last summer, I had the good fortune to host Sir Michael Marmot from the World Health Organization in Cambridge Bay for a day. We discussed at some length the social determinants of health and the three key areas are housing, food security, and early childhood development. By that, we mean within the first few years of life.
So it is important that our children get off to a good, healthy start in life. Our department works very hard in that area. We do receive funding from the federal government to assist us through the Canada Prenatal Nutrition Program.
Specifically to preschoolers, we do work with children in ages 4 to 5 who will be starting kindergarten.
We have check-ups for dental, hearing, vision, and developmental screening so that we can assist the Department of Education when the kids enter the K program.
I also thank the minister for his response. (interpretation ends) The government’s Public Health Strategy was tabled over five years ago and set a number of objectives specifically to improve the health outcome for Nunavut’s youngest residents by 2013.
Will the minister commit to tabling the final outcomes of the Public Health Strategy before the end of this Assembly?
Mr. Speaker, our staff is working on a document entitled “The Public Health Strategy Progress Report.” It’s currently underway.
As of today, I don’t know what the status of that report is, but I will check with my officials. If it’s possible, hopefully by the end of the sitting of this government, I could table it. I can’t commit to it, but I’ll do my best.
Question 671 – 3(3): Mental Health and Wellness (Aupaluktuq)
I want to follow up today on the theme of mental health and wellness.
The Department of Health’s current business plan indicates that it is currently undertaking an internal review of the territorial Mental Health Act.
Can the minister indicate what specific changes to the legislation are being considered?
Mr. Speaker, I can’t give specific information, but it is an internal review.
We have looked at other jurisdictions to see what their Mental Health Acts are providing.
It is our intention to update the Mental Health Act to reflect the current situation in Nunavut. I’ll have to get some more information at some point that I can share with the member.
I very much appreciate the minister’s awareness into the matter that the framework is in place and he just touched on it.
Mr. Speaker, just for the record, I want to clarify that the Department of Health’s business plan also indicates that it is working to “Develop an implementation plan for the Nunavut Addictions and Mental Health Framework.”
Can the minister update the House today on the status of this important work?
I again thank Mr. Aupaluktuq for the question.
Mr. Speaker, mental health and addictions is a priority for our government.
Last year, the Mental Health Commission of Canada came out with their report that served as a guide for all provinces and territories.
It’s going to take time for all provinces and territories to reprofile funding into key areas, such as mental health.
We’re very happy that the Arctic Council came out with their announcement that mental health will be a priority area for them and all the circumpolar countries.
Again, as I mentioned to Mr. Aupaluktuq, we’re undertaking a Mental Health Act review to update our legislation to reflect Nunavut as it is today.
As I noted in my Member’s Statement yesterday, mental health is directly linked to the issue of substance abuse.
One of the commitments in the government’s Tamapta Action Plan is to “open a culturally-relevant substance abuse treatment facility…” Can the minister update the House today on the status of this commitment?
As the member is aware, the government has a lot of priorities across the territory. Even today, we’re talking about housing. There are ice arenas, community halls, schools, and hamlet offices we’ve got.
I could go on all afternoon. We’ve got a lot of priorities. We’ve got a lot of demands in all the communities in Nunavut.
The mental health and addictions facilities, yes, are needed.
As the member will recall, last year in our business plan, we made a priority to look at a mobile addictions treatment pilot project which we rolled out in Cambridge Bay last November or December. It was six weeks. There were eight folks on it and six graduated.
It involved working with elders and working with the community and getting everybody involved at the community level.
As I said, it’s mobile, so we can use what we learned in that program and move it to other communities.
Rather than just having a specific facility somewhere in Nunavut, we feel that there’s good potential to have this mobile addictions facility.
It’s currently being evaluated for how it can be improved.
So we hope that at some point, we can offer it again and offer it continuously in all communities in Nunavut.
Question 672 – 3(3): Two Additional Nurses for Repulse Bay (Ningark)
In the fall of 2012, the mayor of Repulse Bay and I wrote a letter requesting if the Department of Health could, in fact, review the need for two additional nurses for Repulse Bay, one community health nurse, the other one a mental health worker.
As requested, we received a reply from the Hon. Minister for Health and Social Services, which was on January 2, 2013, indicating that yes, the Hamlet of Repulse Bay was not getting additional two nurses after the fiscal year, April 1, 2013.
My question to the hon. minister, through you, Mr. Speaker, is: are the two additional nurses still in place for Repulse Bay?
I thank Mr. Ningark for his question. Also, I would like to thank Mr. Ningark for participating in the opening of the new Repulse Bay Health Centre last week.
I had a very good visit. The community really enjoyed our visit. I had an opportunity to talk to the nurse-in-charge and other health professionals there.
It’s an absolutely beautiful facility. It’s going to serve the needs of the community for many years to come.
Mr. Speaker, in a previous answer to Mr. Ningark, I think I answered that the community is getting one additional nurse.
I’ll have to check on it. He said that there’s a second nurse, but I’m pretty certain that the community is getting at least one additional nurse.
Here with me, Mr. Speaker, I have this letter written by the hon. minister dated January 2, 2013, signed by the minister himself.
With the privilege of the pages here, I will send a copy to the hon. minister and I hope he will seriously consider retaining the promise he made to me and the mayor of Repulse Bay.
Moving to Oral Questions.
Question 673 – 3(3): New Public Housing Construction (Tapardjuk)
Good afternoon to my constituents in Igloolik and Hall Beach.
Mr. Speaker, my question is also directed to the Minister responsible for the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
In 2006, this government made a decision on the funds the Nunavut Housing Corporation was administering under the Nunavut Housing Trust. Based on that decision, all Nunavummiut were supposed to receive housing based on the funds allocated for housing and not to leave out any communities.
Now, with the new funds we have been allocated, why didn’t they decide to allocate even a few units to every community?
This seems to break up the previous agreement in 2006 to ensure that every community would at least get a few units.
I’m not aware of any 2006 agreement that every community gets a unit or two.
Mr. Speaker, again, there are third party funds that we were given through CMHC to try and maximize, to try to reach this 250 units that’s stated in the federal budget, and the method used is to equalize the needs within communities.
As I said earlier, I’m thankful that we did receive the $100 million, but if we try and build in every community, I think the number would go down to 180 units, which is a far cry from the 250 units that we’re targeting for.
With this allocation, we’re looking at 210 units.
If we try and mobilize construction companies throughout all the communities, it’s going to be a huge task and a huge cost. With this methodology, we’re trying to prove that we’re capable of maximizing the federal investment that was made to our territory.
However, it may be due to feeling envious, at least for some members, that we are directing all these questions to him.
I am very grateful and happy for the communities that are being allocated new public housing units.
However, this matter is something I wanted to ask about.
Based on the information provided, let’s say I were to look at the Igloolik figures, it states that there are 61 people are on the waiting list and we are being provided five units. Furthermore, there are several other communities with lower waiting list numbers, with 45 to 53 people on their waiting list, yet they are getting more units.
My colleague’s earlier question is similar to what I am asking about. Although there is a larger waiting list compared to these other communities, why is Igloolik only receiving five units? Is this due to the lack of power generation capacity?
Is our water reservoir too small?
What is lacking here? What is the reason for the lower number of units?
Mr. Speaker, the methodology developed is for fair allocation of units, even to the smaller communities. If we use the wait list itself, the smaller communities will get nothing because the wait list is so demanding for the bigger communities. This is based on a mathematical formula.
Let me try and get this straight.
It’s an algebraic formula that I will have to try and get straight in my head there, but the methodology is the number of people on the waiting list divided by the number of public units within the community. That’s the fairest way of allocating units to, not all communities, but to communities that are on the top of the list.
Once that formula is ratioed into a percentage, that’s how the allocation was done, from the highest percentage on down.
When this government came into power, they identified principles to abide by, such as being transparent and accountable.
They stated that this government would be completely transparent and open to Nunavummiut to ensure that they are well informed.
Mr. Speaker, if I were to look at the figures bandied about in the minister’s response, for all of Nunavut, 1,465 units are required based on waiting lists.
It states here that the Baffin region has 698 people, the Kivalliq region has 516 people, and the Kitikmeot region has 251 people.
If we were to follow these figures, why is the Baffin region only being allocated 55 units, even though the people on the waiting list are twice the number of the other regions? 115 units are going to the Kivalliq region and 40 units are going to the Kitikmeot region.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the minister a question. He said that the Nunavut Housing Corporation has looked at this and so did the cabinet.
Can the minister provide the Members of this House a list that they have made?
I would like to see it. 62 percent of the houses are given to the minister’s communities.
Mr. Tapardjuk (interpretation): That leaves the other 38 percent allocated to the rest of the communities.
Can we be provided with the list of the methodology that was used?
Absolutely, you can have that list because a list that did come from the Nunavut Housing Corporation is a list that we have used to allocate the units.
Mr. Speaker, with this funding allocation, we do have deadlines to meet, we do have agreements that we’ve got to abide by with the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation, and we intend to be open, transparent, and deliver according to the agreement that is going to be signed with the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation.
The list is the same list that I read out yesterday, that list did come from the Nunavut Housing Corporation board, and I can make that list available to the members anytime this afternoon.
Question 674 – 3(3): New Public Housing Construction (Rumbolt)
Again my questions are for the minister of housing.
In his Minister’s Statement yesterday, he stated that where the 210 units that are going to be built will be allocated to is subject to change. However, the minister publicly stated where the units were going.
Can the minister explain why or how we would be able to change where they’re going now that he has made it public that they’re going to specific communities?
Absolutely I did make that statement where the allocations are going. That’s where they’re going to be attempted to be built, unless there are some unforeseen circumstances that we can’t control, whether shipments never come in on time or power poles or land availability, just unforeseen circumstances we don’t know. As I indicated earlier, there are certain circumstances that we cannot control up here, especially up north.
If we do have to make a change, we will make the most efficient, practical changes to allocations if we have to.
The community of Sanikiluaq will not be receiving any new public housing units.
Can the minister clearly explain what specific factors led to the Nunavut Housing Corporation deciding that no new public housing units will be constructed in Sanikiluaq?
Mr. Speaker, Sanikiluaq and Whale Cove do have almost the same number on the waiting list, but Sanikiluaq represents a 12 percent shortage which, in actual fact, when you do a mathematical formula, is one unit for every ten that they now have. Mr. Speaker, on the other hand, for Whale Cove, Whale Cove represents a 27 percent shortage in housing, where they need close to three units for every ten that they now have.
So there is a mathematical formula that’s used which is the fairest formula that’s used for the allocation of the units.
Mr. Speaker, this type of allocation is transparent and fair to every community, although this may not look like for the communities that are not getting any, but we dare not risk utilizing the $100 million to maximize and have the most impact for the investment that we did get from the federal government, and I intend to do that.
In 2006, the government made a decision to use the Nunavut Housing Trust Fund to ensure that all Nunavut community received some new public housing units.
Why did the government decide against this approach with respect to recently announced new funding?
This government did not make the decisions in 2006.
We didn’t exist at that time, but the member is well aware of the consequences that followed. Mr. Speaker, there were political decisions made on how the program was going to be delivered. There were all types of things that were included in there for training which shouldn’t have been the housing corporation’s mandate for the construction of badly needed units for Nunavummiut.
The member is well aware that it took $110 million to fix and we do not want to get into that process again. We want to make sure that we abide by the rules that are given to us by the agreement and to maximize the $100 million.
That way, we do not risk lessening our funds that may be possible to secure down the future from the federal government.
Question 675 – 3(3): New Public Housing Construction (Elliott)
Mr. Speaker, my community of Grise Fiord did not receive any public housing units.
Can the minister clearly explain what specific factors led to the Nunavut Housing Corporation deciding that no new public housing units will be constructed in this community with the new federal funding?
I thank the Member for Quttiktuq for that question. Mr. Speaker, again, we use the needs assessment analysis. The allocations were based on the needs of the information in the data that we used.
Based on needs, Grise Fiord didn’t rank on the list for allocation.
The second community that I represent, Resolute Bay, did not receive any new public housing units.
Hon. Peter Taptuna: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I again thank the member from Quttiktuq for that question.
Again, it’s based on what the needs analysis was based on. With the $100 million, you can’t please every community.
It would be great if we had $1 billion, but we don’t have that.
We’ve got to try and make do the best we can with the $100 million that was, thankfully, invested into Nunavut.
We all know that some jurisdictions are quite envious of how Nunavut got the $100 million. The other jurisdictions never got that. I am pleased and happy that we were able to get that $100 million.