EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Our Prime Minister stated in Hamilton in May 2002, this is a direct quote, “Municipalities do more with less,” and have many good ideas.
He made this promise to 1,000 mayors from across Canada.
I urge our government to listen to our Nunavut mayors and involve them in every opportunity for discussion where decisions are made.
I urge the government to include them during their meetings with foreign ministers on how to make Nunavut a better place to live.
I urge the government to respond formally to the recommendations and ideas made by the Nunavut Association of Municipalities.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to close by asking all members to join me in a salute to Nunavut’s hard working mayors and councillors.
The Member for Quttituq, Mr. Barnabas.
Member's Statement 046 – 2(2): Marine Infrastructure Needed
I rise today to inform members of the great need for marine infrastructure in my constituency.
Over the last two weeks, my communities in the High Arctic were hit especially hard by high winds that caused damages to homes, shacks, and boats.
Some residents of Grise Fiord were forced to take shelter in the school.
My constituents will be cleaning up from these winds for some time.
I know that they will work together and help each other.
I do not know, however, how long it will take for people who lost their boats or whose boats were damaged to have them repaired or replaced.
It is very important for communities to have proper marine infrastructure in the form of breakwaters to protect our constituents’ investments in boats.
These boats are very important.
They are necessary for Inuit to maintain their connection to the land and sea.
I realize that the construction of breakwaters is the responsibility of the federal government.
Representatives of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans visited Grise Fiord and Resolute Bay this summer and fall.
Residents of Grise Fiord have been fundraising for a breakwater.
I urge the minister to act as a facilitator in talks between the hamlet and the federal government to see that construction of a breakwater in Grise Fiord is initiated.
Resolute Bay is in a unique situation, and issues surrounding the current breakwater are challenging.
In addition, the community would like the breakwater to be relocated.
I urge the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation to work with his federal counterpart to ensure that every community has adequate marine infrastructure to protect their boats.
Member's Statement 047 – 2(2): Nunavut's Official Languages
I am very pleased to rise today and speak my own language.
It is very important that we have the ability in this House to represent our constituents in their own language and broadcast our sessions in those languages.
(interpretation end) Mr. Speaker, while our first assembly was undertaking a review of the official languages act, a similar process was happening with our neighbours in the west.
As a result of the review in October 2003, the government of the Northwest Territories passed an act amending their official languages act, one of the amendments including the recognition of Innuinaqtun as an official aboriginal language of their territory.
I look forward to the day when we recognize Innuinaqtun as an official aboriginal language of Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, last month the government of the Northwest Territories acted on number of recommendations put forward by the special committee to review the official languages act.
The government of the Northwest Territories established an official languages board.
This board has members from each official language community and has the responsibility to review official languages services as well as the effectiveness of the official languages act.
I congratulate those individuals who have been appointed to represent their language communities.
I especially want to acknowledge Lena Peterson, Beverly Amos, and Marie Jacobson for their appointments as representatives for the Inuktitut, Innuinaqtun, and Inuvialuktun language communities of the Northwest Territories.
Mr. Speaker, I encourage the Department of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth to work hard on Nunavut’s official languages.
On October 27, 2004 the Minister of the Department of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth tabled a document in this House containing the framework of the process.
(interpretation) Mr. Speaker, I would like to seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
And “thank you” to my fellow members.
Mr. Speaker, the government will be undertaking a feasibility study between June 2004 and March 2005.
The preliminary list of stakeholders to be consulted during the feasibility study includes focus groups from the public.
Innuinaqtun-speaking communities are an important group that should not be overlooked.
The government’s process must take into account the issues and concerns that have been raised by the Innuinaqtun-speaking communities.
At the appropriate time, I will be asking questions on this issue.
Member for Tasiujaq, Mr. Kattuk.
Member's Statement 048 – 2(2): Nuiyak School Makes Use TeleHealth Radio Conferencing
I rise today to express how proud I am of the students and staff of Nuiyak School in Sanikiluaq.
Mr. Speaker, the staff and students at Nuiyak School learned how to make additional use of telehealth’s videoconferencing equipment to bring elders from Sanikiluaq closer to elders in other communities.
Yesterday they did some videoconferencing with other elders.
This project was to offer the students a course in how to use the telehealth equipment for media and business purposes.
They are now hoping to use this new knowledge and equipment to encourage elders to speak with other elders, in order to bring the old dialect back through videoconferencing and taping those conferences for future educational use.
I would like to thank the Minister of Health and Social Services for lending the students this equipment and the Minister of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth for giving the staff and students financial support.
Mr. Speaker, I wish the staff and students of Nuiyak School continued success on a job well done.
Member's Statement 049 – 2(2): Habitat for Humanity
Last night I had an opportunity to attend an organizing meeting for the Habitat for Humanity here in Iqaluit.
Habitat for Humanity was set up in 1976; since that time Habitat has built over 170,000 homes in 100 countries around the world.
In Canada over 700 homes have been built.
Here in Iqaluit, the organizing group hopes to begin construction of two homes in 2006.
This organization consists of volunteers and companies who donate services and supplies to the organizing committee.
Mr. Speaker, individuals are needed to make this a successful project.
Mr. Speaker, the potential homeowners of the unit will need to contribute 500 hours of sweat equity to the project.
I want to take this opportunity to thank the Iqaluit organizers: Susan Spring; John Henderson; Rob and Sherry McCullough; Tim McLeod; Don Sinclaire-Chenier; and Ms. Pam Hine.
Mr. Speaker, this is a community-based initiative to help facilitate new housing.
Join with me in wishing the group every success in their endeavor.
Member's Statement 050 – 2(2): Acknowledgement of Individuals Supporting Disabled Persons
I just want my colleagues to remember that during the elections one of my campaign speeches was that we have to remember and provide services to individuals with disabilities.
I also want to remember all those who work with them.
I rise today to acknowledge the people who provide services to people with disabilities.
I ask the members to identify and congratulate these individuals and also these individuals who give support and services to people with disabilities.
I would like to recognize my wife Sally.
I’m very glad that the people of Iqaluit have accepted and have been very hospitable.
I’d like to recognize Kelvin Ng, the former member representing the riding of Cambridge Bay for, I think, 10-11 years.
Just behind me, I’d like to recognize Gordon Ordberg and Chris Coté of the Northern Transportation Company Ltd. of Hay River, a subsidiary of Nunasi Corporation.
Chris is originally from Iqaluit and is in Hay River checking things out for us, then he’ll come back here.
>>Aplause
Recognition of visitors in the gallery, Mr. Alagalak.
Mr. Alagalak (interpretation): I would like to recognize my brother-in-law who is sitting over there as the Sergeant-at-Arms.
Just to make a short comment, his father’s name was Pillarik, and he used to be the nurses’ aid and the interpreter for the armed forces.
He got a medal for providing those invaluable services and we never thought that we would see my relative sitting over here.
Harry Gibbons was his father and they traveled all over the North with the explorers and other people.
I am very pleased that we have him as our Sergeant-at-arms.
I would also like to recognize the Sergeant-at-Arms who is training the individual and he is also a council member.
(interpretation ends) I also want to recognize a former colleague of mine who is now in a fortunate position of having some time on his hands.
So he decided to fly up to Nunavut and see how we are doing.
I can now say to him that we are doing pretty good as a government; he used to sit next to me.
I saw him over the summer, even though he has all of the time in the world and all of the golf courses where he lives now in Edmonton.
We played three games and I beat him in two games.
So I feel sorry for the poor man, even though he has all of the time, he still hasn’t progressed to the next level of golf.
So I look forward to rematches and beat him some more.
I would also like to recognize Kelvin Ng. He used to represent Cambridge Bay and Kugluktuk in the NWT.
I would also like to recognize Gordon Norberg, he is well known throughout the Kitikmeot region as well.
Johnny Norberg, his father, owned a Peterhead boat and used to have a store in the Kitikmeot region.
He used to travel in the Kitikmeot, also re-supplying some stores as well.
I would like to recognize Gordon Norberg.
First of all, I would like to take this opportunity to recognize and welcome home Mr. Chris Cote back to his community hometown of Iqaluit.
I would also like to take this opportunity to welcome Mr. Kelvin Ng and it is very important to point out that Mr. Ng’s last name, NG, some people say ning, some people say ing, some people say something else, but I wouldn’t repeat that in the House.
Kelvin was known as the Kelvinator.
He was known as the Kelvinator because for terminating things, for terminating questions, for terminating answers, for terminating discussions in poker balances.
Back in 1990, Kelvin and I were attending the liberal convention in Calgary, Alberta and I played a couple of jokes on Senator Kelvin Ng at that famous convention.
Mr. Ng always told me that he would get me back and he said that, I remember very well, that revenge was silent.
I would suggest to you that Mr. Ng was anything but silent in this Assembly and, indeed, the Assembly in Yellowknife when I had an opportunity to sit with him.
I can say now for the public record, Mr. Speaker, I paid Mr. Ng his $350 last night.
It wasn’t certified check and I would ask at this time that Kelvin would wait until Friday to cash it.
I, too, would like to recognize Mr. Ng in the gallery.
I know a former colleague of ours didn’t say ing or ning, he said ink.
So, that was just one that Mr. Picco forgot.
Mr. Ng, I’m sure unlike Mr. Picco, is very happy to be sitting in the gallery, he probably has some time on his hands and is happy not having to answer anything, even though he knows the answer.
I know that’s an attribute that he has that Mr. Picco doesn’t have.
So, I would just like to point that out for Mr. Picco.
Also, Mr. Speaker, I’m sure that you’re probably quite pleased too, and Mr. Quirke, that Mr. Ng is in the gallery.
There seems to be a lot fewer points of order going back and forth between myself and him.
I’m keeping you guys busy.
I’d like to take this opportunity, again, to welcome Kelvin back.
I’m sure our heated debates are missed.
It was work.
I’m sure that Mr. Picco is going to try his best to fill your shoes in that area, and I’m sure if you stick around for question period, you’ll see.
Also, I’d like to recognize Chris Coté to the gallery and welcome him back to Iqaluit.
Question 062 – 2(2): Clarification – Good Money to Bad
My question is for the Minister of Energy, a.k.a the Energy Bunny, as somebody called him.
Mr. Speaker, yesterday, and I’ll quote from Hansard, the minister, in responding to a question, said “So, before you throw good money into bad…”.
Relating to the power corporation, I’d like to ask the minister if he could elaborate a little bit on what he meant by that: throwing bad money out there.
I just want to add, first of all, that when I’m answering the member’s questions I try, like Mr. Ng, not to procrastinate and indeed to try to be pragmatic.
I will do that today in answering Mr. Tootoo.
I don’t have a copy of Hansard, but I believe the conference yesterday and the debate in the House centered around some previous history of the corporation.
At that time, I said, when the Government of Nunavut, in the year 2003, decided to freeze the rates, we only had one financial statement.
At that time we were in a position where we wanted to analyze the current financial condition of the corporation, so we froze the rates for one year.
At that time, I said to the House, and I’ll say it to the House again, we weren’t sure what the issue of the corporation was: was it a revenue issue or was it an expense issue?
As of today we still only have the two financial statements from the corporation.
Not having information is not bad, but as the minister indicated before, “you throw good money into bad”, it’s like saying there were problems there that they were aware of.
Whether it be bad rates, bad spending practices, or bad decisions, he did indicate “before you throw good money into bad.”
So, I’d just like to ask for some specific examples of why he would say, or what would make him say, he’d be throwing money away if he put money into the corporation at that time.
Mr. Speaker, it’s just a turn of phrase, it’s a figure of speech.
It’s like saying “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.”
In this case, as I said earlier, when the opportunity came forward at that time, it was the fuel subsidy rider.
The corporation had asked for five cents.
They had changed their mind and came back and said they needed 10 cents.
The Utility Rate Review Council looked at it and said, “We only have one financial statement, and we’re not sure of the figures.”
So when we looked at that as a cabinet a year ago we decided, based on the information and public consultations, that we would freeze the rates for one year, and that’s what we did.
Now it’s 2004 and we are going forward with the GRRA application.
So, in short, it was based on that premise: that because we didn’t know the complete financial picture we didn’t feel at that time that we should put all this money back into the corporation until we determined what the issue was.
That is prudent and constructive business practice, and that’s what we endeavor to do.
At the same time, instead of putting the rider in place, as the members know, we actually gave the corporation a grant, increasing the equity of the Government Nunavut, for the fuel subsidization rider; I believe it was about $14 million.
So, I hope that helps clarify the question.
If you go back... . As the minister indicated, they knew there were problems, but they didn’t know exactly where they were.
But they did know that there were problems there.
I think giving the corporation a bail-out of $14 million was a good indication that there were some problems there.
So, based on that, that’s why, at the time, if they knew that there was a problem, that they really didn’t do anything to try address that problem and just covered it up with a band-aid bail-out of $14 million.
It wasn’t a bail-out.
We made it very clear a year ago, the member was in the House, and I sat in the Committee of the Whole and I tried to explain what had occurred... .
We only had one financial statement from the corporation.
Mr. Speaker, the corporation started on April 1, 2001.
In December 2002 we had the first statement, 3 weeks later, in January, they came forward, asked for the fuel subsidization rider of 5 cents and 10 cents that we talked about in the House.
In May we received a report from the URRC, we rejected their proposal, the corporation’s, for an FSR of 10 cents and said, based on the numbers, the best guesstimate they had was 7.5 cents.
So, instead of putting a 7.5 cent rider on we would freeze the rates for one year, which is what we did, and we contributed $14 million to the FSR.
At the end of the day, if we had to put the amount down on the FSR, 80 percent of that cost would have directly came from the government anyway.
Mr. Speaker, it wasn’t a bail-out, it was a grant in lieu of a rider.
The corporation is owned by the Government of Nunavut, the people of Nunavut, and we thought at the time that was the best thing to do.
As of today, November 2004, and as I said earlier, we only have two financial statements from the corporation.
When the URRC comes forward with their recommendations from the QEC proposal in February we will have an opportunity to look at that time at a complete picture.
We’ll have three financial statements and then we can look at what the recommendations are for a new rate on April 1, 2005 and be able to bring the corporation some solidity within its corporate and income structure.
As the minister said the other day, “I’m not Nostradamus” But one could assume that if the first financial statements showed a deep hole and the second financial statements showed a deeper hole, then the third one is going to show the deepest hole that they’ve seen yet.
It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure that out.
Mr. Speaker, that rider that was requested from the power corporation.
I’d like to ask the minister, wasn’t there an earlier rider in 1999 that was requested by the corporation from the then Public Utilities Board and that was withdrawn by the Government of Nunavut.
Hon. Ed Picco: No, Mr. Speaker, there was no application or submission for a rider in 1999 that was rejected by the Government of Nunavut.
That timeframe is wrong.
But I want to go back to the members’ original question.
Mr. Speaker, it’s important to point out, in December 2002 when we had the statements that we just talked about, it indicated the $5.2 million loss.
We had just started the corporation.
We are trying to ascertain what the revenues of the corporation would be on rates that were set in 1998.
Today, the rates are still in place for 1998.
There is no business in the world that could generate a profit on six-year-old prices.
The subsidy, for example, that is in place right now is based on a Yellowknife rate.
It’s not based on an Iqaluit or Rankin Inlet rate; it’s based on the subsidy rate that was brought forward in the General Rate Application in 1998.
So, it would not be correct to say or assume that the corporation will be coming forward knowing what the amounts of the deficit was, but we said a year ago that we would freeze the rates for one year, get the two or three financial statements from the corporation, and then be able to see what the need is.
By the way, that is the same process that the General Rate Application is doing right now.
It is saying: now that they have two financial statements, they are in a better position to look at what that anticipated need would be.
I wasn’t Nostradamus, and I couldn’t foresee the price of oil, and who could with it going up to $50 a barrel, and with some of the other contingent expenses, the two collective agreements that have been signed since, and so on.
I think at the end of the day, this process is going forward.
The rate will be in place as of April 1, 2005.
We don’t know yet what that will be; it will be based on the recommendations from the Utility Rates Review Council and for the cabinet then to have has an opportunity to look at it.
The Member for Rankin Inlet, Mr. Curley.
Question 063 – 2(2): Made in Nunavut Power Rate Subsidy
First of all, I would like to say that (interpretation ends) I note there is quite a bit of a confusion.
I think there still is, with the confusion of three or four years ago with respect to the proposed power rate increases.
Anywhere else except Nunavut, the minister responsible for the fiasco with the power rates would have been asked to resign.
But now that he’s in there, I would like to ask the minister whether or not he is going to be prepared to look at the other side of the point.
The rate application proposal that has been publicly discussed will, I hope, complete its course without political interference.
So my question is this: will the minister commit now to this House that there will be a made-in-Nunavut power rate subsidy for residents and consumers in Nunavut?
Speaker (interpretation): Minister of Energy. Mr. Picco.
I appreciate the member’s question, and I appreciate the opportunity that the Premier has given me in the last couple of weeks.
Mr. Simailak would be able to descend and probably articulate exactly what has occurred on the file because, as Mr. Curley has stated, there are a lot of misconceptions and so on.
There is a chronological sequence of events that occurred when we received the first statement in December 2002, 16 months after the fact.
We had just started the corporation on April 1, 2001; we had to relocate an office of the new corporation with billing and invoicing, there were problems with the computer system, there are some of the issues that have been raised, for example, by the Auditor General.
The Auditor General says that the corporation lost money.
The Auditor General doesn’t get into any kind of detail of what occurred.
For example, the Auditor General would say that the boat sank and five people died.
It doesn’t explain what happened: if there were forty-foot waves, if there were five holes in the boat, if there were seven people rescued.
Her report doesn’t get into those types of details.
I can commit to the member that the Utility Rates Review Council process is underway.
I am not in a position right now to say what the recommendations of the Utility Rates Review Council are, but they are doing their good work; we have some good people: Mr. Ray Mercer, Mr. Rennie, and some other people on that committee.
They will come forward with the recommendations, and the member and other members of the House and the public at large have an opportunity to do submissions.
When they get all of their information together, they will come forward.
They will either reject the application by Qulliq Energy Corporation or they may accept it or they may offer a modification.
They will come to the cabinet, and then we will have an opportunity to look at it.
Mr. Curley: Mr. Speaker, I hope the minister will listen to my question.
My question had nothing to do with the proposal being considered by the Utility Rate Review Council.
My question is: will the minister commit to reviewing the current subsidy that is being provided to Nunavut that he said was made in Yellowknife.
Will there be a commitment by the minister to review the subsidy so that it will be a made in Nunavut subsidy right across the board, in view of the fact that there will be some adjustments throughout Nunavut with respect to the other side of the coin.
Not only did it cost $14, 000,000 to provide what the Minister of Finance calls a subsidy, or we call it something else on this side, but it also cost the power corporation’s CEO at that time, for disagreeing with the minister, in my estimate.
So, I want to ask the minister… . Now is the time to consider subsidies made in Nunavut.
That work should begin now.
Will the minister commit to do so?
The member has pointed out quite a few pieces and nuggets of information, and I just want to respond to his direct question.
I want to say that the member has made an allegation that the CEO of the corporation some how left their position because of a disagreement with the minister, and that is categorically wrong, first of all.
Let’s make sure that the record is clear on that.