EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
They couldn’t even prove, I guess Mr. Speaker, that the program was working. Therefore and thus they had to move forward and close it down.
But what we’ve tried to do, since then Mr. Speaker as I’ve said before, is to provide professional training for the individual at the community level so that the person doesn’t have to be taken out of the community, to bring them to Iqaluit or other places.
That we would actually help them at the home community.
If there is a person who has a physical addiction, which has been clinically, medically diagnosed Mr. Speaker, we do have the facilities to deal with that.
Mr. Speaker we will be doing the referrals for those types of treatments.
Ms. Williams (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Speaker.
Thank you for the response from the minister.
My other question is, are those people that were given the training in communities, are they doing a lot of work in their community.
After the Apex centre was closed, is it better now that they are training them in the communities.
I thank the member for her question, that’s a good question.
Mr. Speaker, what we’ve seen in addictions counselling over the past several years now, not just in Nunavut or northern Canada but across Canada and indeed North America has been a change in the way addictions have been dealt with.
So for example, Mr. Speaker, most addiction centres were for someone who had chronic alcoholism, if they were a heroin addict and they needed a fix, they would go to a treatment centre.
In 99% of the cases Mr. Speaker, in Nunavut, that is not the case.
We have binge drinking, we have people who are relying on mostly alcohol Mr. Speaker, as a way of escape.
So the philosophy, or the way to look at it is through reality therapy and reality based therapy approaches, which we’ve been successful in including in our program here in Nunavut, is that if someone has an addiction, a physical addiction, and it has been clinically diagnosed, we provide that treatment for them.
But we have found, going back to the member’s question, we have found, is that if you take Ed Picco out of the community and treat him, then when Ed Picco, six weeks later, goes back to the community, if you haven’t dealt with that problem at the community level, or the family level, that caused me to drink, for example, then you’re not doing a very good job.
That’s why we’ve been trying to provide professional development for community counsellors.
They have been quite busy Mr. Speaker, we had 20 community counsellors just complete the choice theory, in reality therapy certification.
In the past three months, we have three different counsellors who went on to a counsellor’s ethics workshop in Hay River.
We’ve had another two community addictions counsellors who completed their certificate Mr. Speaker, in the Northern Community Drug and Alcohol Counsellors Program offered by Nunavut Arctic College.
So we’re continuing that professional development of counsellors on the ground.
I did not understand some of the responses that the minister gave me, he was in a hurry.
However, I also have another question, the treatment centre was not running properly and some the people did not understand why they had to close it down.
Who did the evaluation of the centre to find out why it was not running properly and since the treatment centre was not running properly, what have they done to correct the problems.
Mr. Speaker as I said earlier, the treatment centre was closed in early 1998 by the Baffin Regional Health and Social Services Board.
They had done a review at that time, previous to April 1, 1999.
I don’t have a copy of that report with me here.
What I can say Mr. Speaker, because it has come up in this House before, when you look at addictions and counselling, for example I can give you stats for last year, we had 16 people, 16 adults in Nunavut and three youths who were clinically diagnosed, medically diagnosed with an addiction where they needed a treatment program.
When you go to treatment programs Mr. Speaker, that's to help wean you off an addiction, a physical addiction whether it be solvent, whether it be chemical or in our case almost 80% are alcohol related addictions, where you go to a dry out centre.
What happened in Apex Mr. Speaker, we spent three quarters of a million dollars to run a program, that after the evaluation was complete, couldn’t show a success rate.
So what I am saying is when people are medically diagnosed with an addiction or affliction Mr. Speaker, they are sent to a treatment centre for that, and again in all of Nunavut last year we had 16 people that we did send out, and three youth.
Mr. Speaker, again what has happened across Canada with addictions, is that, if I had a treatment centre tomorrow, in Apex and reopened, would that make it better for people who had an addiction problem.
Probably not because Mr. Speaker, taking a person out of their community, you’re not dealing with the causes of the addiction.
Mr. Speaker, for example we have found that a lot of people who are binge drinkers, or using drugs who are using alcohol have suffered from childhood sexual abuse, physical violence and so on and curing them of the addiction has not cured them of the problems that they had in the past.
That's not just in the findings here, Mr. Speaker, but it's in the findings in other jurisdictions.
I hope that helps answer your questions as to why this treatment centre was closed.
The evaluation report, I will be able to get that, and possibly make it available to the members.
Question 075 - 1(5): Clarification on Fuel Subsidy Tabled Document
Yesterday the minister tabled a document about fuel subsidies.
I think this money is for a year and there are no other subsidies coming in the following years.
I wonder if the Minister for Finance can give me an answer as to whether this is a one-year subsidy only.
The tabling of the document was in response to some questions, I believe Mr. Tootoo had raised and some other members about the additional fuel price increases for the Government of Nunavut.
So it’s what we anticipate as additional costs to the Government of Nunavut for various departments as listed in the tabled document, as a result of the increased fuel prices.
I have numerous other questions, which I don’t think I can finish today, so I will make my questions short.
The subsidy for the hunters is about 80 thousand dollars for 2000-2001.
I just want to know whether this 80 thousand is the price of the subsidy.
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated this is the Government of Nunavut share.
As members may recall this program is a cost shared program with NTI through the Department of Sustainable Development. The total amount for the harvesters fuel subsidy program was actually 160 thousand dollars.
Is that for one year.
Mr. Speaker, yes it is for the fiscal year 2000-2001 as outlined in the schedule.
You will note that there is nothing allocated for the upcoming fiscal year yet because the agreement hasn’t been committed between the government, Sustainable Development and NTI to carry on with this.
As we move into the year, that will be discussed between the two parties.
Mr. Speaker, it just seems like these subsidies are like bait, just enough to leave the people wanting more and it is just to try to get the people to want to have a subsidy all the time.
Perhaps if the government could just decrease the fuel cost themselves.
This would be better for the people of Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, as you know the issue of costing of petroleum products was debated in quite great detail in the Assembly in the past session and I have no doubt that the issue will come up again once the department responsible’s budget comes forward to Committee of the Whole.
One has to recognize that it is an ongoing issue for the government in respect of issues outside of our control, such as world fuel prices.
It is an ongoing issue that we address as we encounter it.
Question 076 - 1(5): Calculation of Fuel Subsidy
I thought Mr. Iqaqrialu was going to ask another question.
This question is directed to the Minister of the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
She talked about the 450 dollar one time subsidy for fuel increases.
I know a lot of people will try to get the 450 dollars and I just wondered how the minister came up with the figure of 450 dollars.
In Arviat today it is warmer than it is in Grise Fiord.
In the wintertime when you own your own home, heating costs are different depending on where you come from.
If you come from a warmer community or a colder community, the fuel costs go up or down a little bit.
How did you come up with it, is it averaged out.
We came up with the amount based on the 13.9 cents per litre increase.
That is how we came up with the figure of 450 dollars. We calculated that based on the increase of 13.9 cents.
There are communities that when the fuel is delivered they have farther to go.
So there are different prices in each community.
For example, I think Kugaaruk has the highest prices because their fuel was shipped by air.
That’s why I asked the question about how the 450 dollar figure was calculated, but I guess it came from the 13.9 cents per litre.
They didn’t consider the communities with higher prices, they just based it on the 13.9 cents per litre.
All the communities in Nunavut were considered because all of them increased by 13.9 cents, so that was what we based the subsidy on.
Question 077 - 1(5): Funding for Search & Rescue Training
Mr. Speaker, all the members and yourself Mr. Speaker, have experienced in our communities people missing out on the land.
People being stranded on the land and on the sea in Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Premier. Has the Government of Nunavut allocated money to teach Nunavummiut traditional land skills.
I apologize, Mr. Speaker, I cannot respond to that at this time.
However, in regards to search & rescue, a few days ago here in Iqaluit we realized that a very experienced hunter had fallen through the ice, lost his skidoo and qamutik and fell in the water.
Because he was a very capable hunter the search & rescue team did not go looking for him right away, but it is evident that we could use the Department of Education to teach our people how to survive out on the land.
I am sure that Department will be doing something in this area.
In regards to search & rescue, we have to recognize the fact that even very capable hunters can encounter problems.
Especially out on the land and out on the floe edge.
I know that even these hunters can get stuck, even though their vehicles are not broken.
Perhaps we can encourage, as the Emergency Response Team, we can ask and encourage the Department of Education to see if they can deal with this issue on an urgent basis.
Perhaps I should be elaborating a bit more.
I apologize if I did not elaborate enough.
Yes, the elders teach people how to survive out on the land.
My question is, are there educational materials that our youth can use on how to survive on the land.
Do you have such a program. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Today, Mr. Speaker, teaching of Inuit traditional knowledge within the schools, as every one of the members is aware, this teaching of traditional skills is a little bit behind because of various reasons.
Mr. Speaker, I could say that I know that the elders, for many years now that the elders have been going to the schools to talk about traditional skills and how to survive and how to read the weather for safety reasons.
Yes, we agree that this is not done on a regular basis and we will keep trying to act on this inconsistency.
Thank you very much for the response.
When do you expect to see that kind of a program coming out.
As I was trying to say, this has been done on an ongoing basis in the various communities and the district education authorities are mainly responsible for bringing the elders into the schools.
This is something that's very hard to put a clear outline on, but I believe we are not doing as much as we should be.
We will continue to work on this.
Mr. Speaker, we are working with Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated to see what we can work out together but once we finalize the plans, I'll be able to make an announcement.
Speaker: Just a caution to members asking questions.
They should direct their questions to the same minister.
It gets a little more complicated and difficult when you have more than one minister answering your question.
Question 078 - 1(5): Amendment to Labour Standards Act
Mr. Speaker, my question today is to the Minister of Justice.
Mr. Speaker, I understand that legislation was recently introduced into the Legislative Assembly of the NWT to amend their Labour Standards Act, which is essentially the same as ours.
This amendment will increase the parental leave entitlement from 12 consecutive weeks to 37 consecutive weeks to comply with the federal government's recently implemented change in this area.
Will the minister commit to either amending Nunavut's Labour Standards Act or take other actions necessary to provide Nunavummiut with the same benefits enjoyed by the rest of Canada.
Speaker: Thank you Mr. Premier for that precise, concise, direct answer.
Question 079 - 1(5): Increase in Formula Financing Agreement
Mr. Speaker, in the minister's budget address he talked about the formula financing agreement that expires at the end of this month.
He had indicated also that he plans on signing a new agreement with the federal government and also that he plans on signing an agreement that would ensure sufficient resources that we need.
I would like to ask the minister, in this new agreement that he is going to be signing, if we are going to see an increase in funding through this formula.
Mr. Speaker, not at this time.
Right now, the plan is an extension of the current two-year agreement that is going to expire.
As I have indicated in the budget address as well, there is a commitment to review the fiscal capacity of Nunavut, which we plan to aggressively pursue over the next few months to identify if there are any shortfall areas and to try to solicit remedies to that problem.
So then, just for clarification Mr. Speaker, we aren’t signing a new agreement, we are just extending the existing agreement.
Is that what the Minister of Finance has indicated.
Mr. Speaker, because of the limitations of the powers that the Office of the Interim Commissioner had when he undertook to sign off the Formula Financing Agreement, back in I believe it was the fall of 1998, that office was only allowed to enter into contractual obligations for two years.
So it is my understanding that it was understood it was a five-year agreement, but because of the legal ramifications of the Office of the Interim Commissioner, there was a two-year agreement with a three-year extension.
That is basically where we are at, we are at the signing of the renewal for the three years, an extension of the first two years for the next three years.
Mr. Speaker, maybe I would just ask my question again as I don’t believe the minister answered it.
He gave a little bit of an explanation but in his statement in the Budget Address, he talks about entering into a new agreement.
I just wanted clarification that it isn’t a new agreement that is being signed, it is an extension of the existing one.
I don’t believe that the minister answered that.
Mr. Speaker, I answered it from the perspective of how one must view it.
It is an extension of a current two-year agreement with a three-year extension, or you can say you are entering into a new three-year agreement.
So either way, depending on which way you look at it Mr. Speaker, it is a matter of interpretation.
Mr. Speaker, I guess I am looking at the Minister of Finance’s Budget Address and talking about our fiscal situation and outlook for the future.
I think a word that could be used to describe it, if something doesn’t change in the formula, might be bleak.
If we look at the operating deficits that he has indicated we are going to have this year.
What would happen Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the minister, if the formula isn’t good for us, what would happen if we didn’t sign it.
Well two things would happen.
We would get zero revenues, that is one possibility.
Or we would continue to receive the current formula financing arrangement that we get now from the Government of Canada.
Question 080 - 1(5): Expansion of Fuel Subsidy Program
My question is to the Minister of Finance, in respect to the additional costs, estimated additional costs for the fuel price increase.
Reviewing the total amount of 4 million 701 dollars, for 2001/2001, it seems to indicate that we are not too far off from the point if we had subsidized Nunavut wide for all the consumers of Nunavut.
My question is, was there consideration for the Government of Nunavut to assist all the fuel users or consumers rather than just a select few like hamlets and the community schools, government buildings and 450 dollar homeowners, etc. and the hunters through NTI.
I'll stop there.
I didn't catch the member’s questions.
I heard him speak about different departments whether that is outlined in the tabled statement about additional costs.
Maybe the member wouldn't mind repeating it.
Speaker: Mr. Arvaluk, clarification.
I hope it is not going to be used as part of a supplementary.
My question was Mr. Speaker, is there going to be consideration by the government to do a subsidy program for all Nunavummiut rather than just the government programs when everyone else suffers from the fuel price increase.
Mr. Speaker, right now the petroleum products division through the government does heavily subsidize the fuel prices throughout Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, I think over the last several years we have noticed that the people of Nunavut are trying to be more self sufficient in acquiring the family needs like food, housing and homeownership etc.
In fact, some people are working on seasonal jobs, part time instructors in schools, cultural programs.
They are getting very little money.
I think these are the people who really need help to survive through the winters.
My question to the Minister of Finance is what arrangement is the government proposing to recognize that the people are trying to become more self-sufficient.
Where they really need help is fuel and power.
Mr. Speaker, through the implementation and adjustment of subsidy programs similar to what has been announced by the Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation, the ongoing power subsidy program that we have and any other requirements that may try to mitigate some of the hardships that private individuals trying to make a go of it have, Mr. Speaker.
Will there be some kind of tabling of documents similar to this in reference to what it cost the government to make a preparation from department to department to department from their finance officers, what is involved in terms of person hours or person years, in this case I guess, to have individuals pockets of subsidies.
Question 081 - 1(5): Tabled Document 009 – 1(5), Additional Fuel Costs
Mr. Speaker, my question is to the Minister of Finance as well.
Mr. Speaker, on the document that the minister tabled yesterday indicating the additional cost of fuel increase.
It has a total of 1.6 million dollars for the 2000-2001 year.
I would guess that amount would show just from one increase that was implemented in November till the end of this year, and that the next column that shows 2001/2002 would be for the next full fiscal year.
With that in mind Mr. Speaker, I am just wondering if, other than this listed here, is this all the additional costs to the government as a result of the fuel increase.
The reason I ask that Mr. Speaker is that it has on here the Harvesters’ Subsidy Program of 800 thousand dollars, sorry, I guess they wish it were 800 thousand dollars.
Eighty thousand dollars, but there is nowhere on here that would show the Homeowners’ Fuel Subsidy which would be approximately 720 thousand.
So I would like to ask the minister if there is anything else missing from this.
When this was prepared, the subsidy from the Homeowners’ Rebate Program was a fairly recent item and the Housing Corporation staff obviously didn’t include that when they factored that into the social housing costs.
So that would be for the current year, the 2000/2001 fiscal year, that additional approximately 700 thousand dollars would have to be included.
But other than that, this is the information received from different departments and we think it is fairly accurate, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, I am just wondering if there was any type of analysis done on this information.
If you look at it, the fuel increase is roughly 20%, if I am correct.
For six months in the 2001 year if you look under the Public Works stuff for all government offices, all residential buildings and vehicles, there is an increase of 200 thousand dollars.
Yet, for the next full year it is only an increase of 300 thousand dollars.
I am just wondering how it can only increase by 100 thousand dollars if you are doubling the amount of time of the subsidy.
Also I would like to wonder if that includes all the fuel that is provided for staff housing as well.
Mr. Speaker, we didn’t do a detailed analysis on the information that was provided by the departments.
We compiled the information based on the best estimates that came forward, recognizing obviously over the course of the year firmer amounts come in as the year progresses, as you actually receive billing and usages are actually recorded, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, then maybe I could ask the Minister of Finance if he might want to take a closer look at it.
I will just note another example of last year in the 2000/2001 Main Estimates, there was an increase of 601 thousand dollars to LHOs to offset a 5-cent increase in fuel prices, Mr. Speaker.
This year we have an increase of, rounded off, 14 cents and it is only a 900 thousand dollar increase.
So you know, I am just wondering if any types of discrepancies like that in amounts versus the increase were looked and maybe if the minister could commit to doing a further analysis of these numbers and also the rest of the numbers provided by the departments.
Speaker: Just another caution to the members about preambles on their supplementaries.
We have two and a half minutes left and there are other members that wish to have a question.
No, I am not prepared to put a lot of additional effort into analysis of this.
I think what would be more proper probably is if members have concerns about some of the numbers that are provided by departments, that they ask the appropriate minister when they come forward during the committee of the whole review of their budgetary requests.
At that time maybe more detailed information can be provided.
We will certainly advise the different departments that may be the case and they can prepare the appropriate information.
I am just wondering then, the Minister had indicated that this information was done some time ago.
I'd like to ask him if it was done some time ago why it was just tabled yesterday.
I am wondering why did it take so long to table.
Mr. Speaker, I indicated that bulk of the information was available.
We didn't have it all and it was a matter of translation to get it prepared for the House.
Before we table anything, it has to be translated.
Question 082 - 1(5): Fiscal review - Budget Address
My question today is to the Minister of Finance.
In his budget address, he said “We are introducing our second deficit budget. I think it is prudent to undertake such a review before long term problems surface that could threaten the fiscal and political stability of Nunavut”.
My question today to the Minister of Finance is what type of review is this going to be Thank you.
There are really two.
As I indicated there is one first of all, involving Finance Canada, in consultations with our officials as the Government of Nunavut, Department of Finance.
That is the review, as I indicated, of the fiscal capacity of the Government of Nunavut for providing programs and services.
Now we haven't finalized the parameters of exactly time frames, who is going to be involved, what is the scope of the review, but commitment has been made by Minister Martin to myself.