EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I wanted to clarify what the (interpretation ends) Nunavut Impact Review Board (interpretation) will be doing in their review.
They will conduct community tours to consult with the impacted residents, bodies, and stakeholders in a public forum.
Our departmental staff is currently collaborating with several departments on this file, namely, EIA, ED&T, DOE, as well as the Department of Health, or HSS in English.
They are detailing out the plan and the plan is also being reviewed by the Sustainable Development Committee with whom they will be continually consulting as well.
This is augmented by the Sustainable Development Advisory Group, which is providing their expertise.
We are working with various levels of government in planning for the community consultation tour.
Once the consultation tour has commenced, the review panel will request that the stakeholders make their presentations to the panellists who make up the review panel.
The panel will be composed of representatives of various organizations and they will be listening to the presentations of stakeholders.
As an example, several bodies we would want to be included are the Nunavut Makinnasuaqtiit Society, the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission, and the NWT/Nunavut Chamber of Mines.
In particular, we must also ensure that communities and their residents are able to voice their concerns to this panel.
Some of the bodies I mentioned have already been invited to attend and we hope that all of our invited representatives take up the offer.
Additionally, we will use the entire spectrum of media, such as digital files, websites, emails, correspondence, as well as any letters we send out that will be copied to all members.
We have sent out these letters and most of the members should already have a copy, but if you haven’t received a copy yet, please let us know and we will ensure that a copy is made available to you.
We will utilize the radio stations, correspondence, public announcements, and various media.
The Government of Nunavut would like to hear from Nunavummiut in regard to this issue. People would like to talk about how dangerous uranium is.
There are various perspectives and I’m sure that we will hear different views through the public forum once it has been initiated.
Question period is very short, so please make sure that your responses are brief.
When I asked questions to the Premier about this issue last fall, I raised the issue of whether the Government of Nunavut’s new Uranium Mining Policy will ultimately be developed by paid consultants or by Nunavut public servants.
As the Premier is well aware, members on this side of the House have noted that while consultants have a legitimate role to play in providing information to decision-makers, we have significant concerns regarding the government’s use of outside consultants to develop our government’s socio-economic policies instead of asking public servants to do their jobs.
Will the Premier commit that the GN’s new uranium policy will be written by Nunavut public servants and not by outside consultants, yes or no?
It is very important that we are non-biased when we are consulting with the public, especially when we are dealing with uranium mining, and to make sure that we want to have an unbiased position.
When we are trying to consult and get input from the public of Nunavut, the staff themselves will be working on the public forum.
We will be able to table information on the issues that the government agrees to and what the government believes in.
Question 002 – 3(3): Status of New Igloolik Community Hall (Tapardjuk)
As the minister is well aware, the people of Igloolik have been waiting for a new community hall.
It was seemingly going to be constructed because our current facility is very old and dilapidated.
I believe it has been used for about 25 years and it is in very bad shape.
Just last week, the Hamlet of Igloolik received correspondence from his departmental officials. It stated that the construction project that was scheduled for this summer would be deferred.
We were led to expect that it would be initiated in the summer, but basically the problem seems to be the design and blueprints not being up to par, as well as additional facilities that are related to the community hall.
Mr. Speaker, I just recently heard that the project would be deferred.
I’m always kept up to date by the mayor as well as the senior administrative officer about their concerns.
Why did the minister neglect to inform me personally about this? Although the community is very adamant about continuing the project this summer, it will be deferred.
The project deferral was based on good reasoning, but I will not get into the details on the deferral.
However, based on your question, I did include you in the correspondence when I responded to the mayor and staff of the Hamlet of Igloolik on this issue.
If you didn’t receive a copy, I apologize since you were copied when I sent the correspondence outlining the reasons for deferring the project.
With regard to the correspondence, sometimes it’s very slow when you send it by snail mail, and I’m not too worried about the correspondence that the mayor received from Roy Green.
What I’m more worried and concerned about is that Igloolik is recognized as one of the communities that are in the forefront of dramatic arts and filmmaking.
Again, a lot of these traditional games and activities are a priority of our community.
This is also the home of one of the most world-renowned artists and the founder of Isuma as well as Arcirq.
The hamlet council has been requisitioning new facilities to allow these two bodies to be able to prepare better.
Can the minister inform me of whether or not they could look at downgrading the project?
I’m referring to the findings resulting in the deferral, so I want to know if this is indeed the case prior to the decision being made.
What I’m trying to ask, Mr. Speaker, is: do we have any space to defer the project based on the concerns or will the construction project proceed as planned?
Hon. Lorne Kusugak (interpretation): I am very grateful that you have voiced the concerns why there should be a community hall and the reason why you need a larger facility in Igloolik.
It had to be deferred based on those kinds of reasons.
My departmental officials went to the hamlet and they met with the mayor as well as several councillors and/or the senior administrative officer, elders, and representatives of the community, including students. They met with all of these interest groups and they came to show the building blueprints.
It was during this consultation that they saw that it would be too small already based on the needs of the community.
The groups had representatives and they made a decision that if we were to look at a larger facility, including an addition for a theatre, it would be much better and allow the community to meet its needs further down the road.
This was a decision by the group. The departmental officials agreed that the facility would have to be larger.
If you included a stage, then it would increase the cost and you would have to look at the foundation and various other changes.
If we were to delay the project by a year based on those reasons, then we would be able to provide a facility that better meets the community’s needs in Igloolik.
That is the only reason why this project would be deferred, Mr. Speaker.
Speaker (interpretation): Your second supplementary, Member for Amittuq.
I also thank my hon. colleague from Community and Government Services.
Just last fall, this House approved a funding allocation of $144,000 for this project.
Mr. Speaker, I can also state that they have already used millions of dollars to plan and prepare for this project.
A fairly large amount of funding was used to lay the groundwork. To me, it would be better if this project was approved and continued.
What I want to ask, Mr. Speaker, is: even if the project is deferred by a year, can the department at least look at laying or driving in the piles for the summer?
I wouldn’t want to see all phases of construction be deferred for the whole year but to try and do preparatory work in advance of the approval, such as the pilings and groundwork.
Can these items be taken into consideration, Mr. Speaker?
Whenever a building’s blueprints require a change, whether it’s to enlarge or decrease the size of the building or to make changes to the interior, the foundation needs to be changed as well.
In some cases, they need to strengthen the foundation.
Indeed, if they tried to keep the same foundation with the proposed changes, then it would be almost impossible to fit the new changes, even if they were to install the pilings prior to the construction.
I will look into this matter to see what can be accomplished and I will endeavour to keep the member from Igloolik apprised, including what aspects can be moved forward and which parts can be done, Mr. Speaker.
When you are on this side, you really want to ask a lot of questions.
What I have gathered from the minister’s response is that this design will be looked at and not all aspects of the project will be deferred. They will look at and explore certain parts that can be undertaken.
The Igloolik residents have been clamouring for this facility for a long time and due to this reason, we always want to have the best facility we can.
At this point, I will just thank the minister for his hard work, Mr. Speaker.
Question 003 – 3(3): New School in Sanikiluaq (Rumbolt)
My questions, too, are for the Minister responsible for Community and Government Services.
Mr. Speaker, the construction of the new school in Sanikiluaq was recently completed. My constituents are very thankful for this new facility. The teachers and students are very eager to be able to start using the new school.
Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the keys to the new school in Sanikiluaq have been turned over to the principal, but the Department of Education will not occupy the facility until a number of issues have been resolved.
Can the minister indicate what work still needs to be done to have the school completed?
There are still a number of issues that need to be dealt with, but they are mainly on checking of different systems. If it’s the fire alarm system, the sprinkler system, the water system, and the telephone system, it’s more of a testing and making sure that all of those different parts of the building are working adequately and are meeting all codes.
Mr. Speaker, at that time, it should be completed.
It is also my understanding that there is still some work to be done by NorthwesTel.
I wonder if the minister can update us on the progress of that part of the contract.
That’s another part of the issues that are being worked on in the school there.
Our IT department is working with NorthwesTel to ensure that the sound systems and telephones and all of that are in place. Once all of those different things are put into place, it should be ready to go.
Can the minister indicate when his department is expecting to complete this work and when can the Department of Education expect to occupy this new facility?
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you for that question, Mr. Rumbolt.
Our department is looking at having most of this substantially complete probably mid-March to third-quarter of March, so anticipate something like that or shortly thereafter.
Of course, all things being equal and all of the tests, alarms, bells, and whistles are in working order at that time, but we will shoot for that target, Mr. Speaker.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Minister. (interpretation ends) I look forward to inspecting it again on behalf of the government. (interpretation) Oral Questions.
Question 004 – 3(3): McClintock Channel Polar Bear Population (Ugyuk)
On November 30, 2001, the former Minister of Sustainable Development informed the Legislative Assembly that the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board, on the recommendation of the department, would be imposing a moratorium on polar bear hunting on McClintock Channel beginning in the 2001-02 hunting season.
Mr. Speaker, the year is now 2011.
Last month, in January, the Gjoa HTO passed a motion calling on the Department of Environment to work with the community to review the health of the McClintock Channel polar bear population. This decision was communicated to the minister in a letter dated January 25, 2011.
Can the minister tell me if he has replied to the hunters and trappers organization letter and, if so, will he table a copy of his reply in the Legislative Assembly at tomorrow’s sitting?
I want to thank the member from Nattilik for that question.
She is absolutely right. The McClintock Channel and Gulf of Boothia population was studied very heavily from the years of 2001 to 2003.
It is estimated from the 1970s to 2001-03 that the population declined from 700 to 280 polar bears. In consultation with communities and NWMB recommendations, there was a moratorium set in place.
However, in 2005, after further consultation with communities, there was an agreement with communities that there be a quota of three established for the McClintock Channel and quite a substantial increase in the Gulf of Boothia from 41 to 74, I believe.
After that increase has taken place, the McClintock Channel is a very sensitive population.
By taking such a drastic decrease over those many years, steps are now being taken very slowly to deal with that population.
I have received a letter from the HTO and I also received questions from the member.
I believe it was back in June. I believe I have written that letter back to the community and it is a very detailed letter. If I do have it, I will table it.
Mr. Speaker, also, I would just like to say that in the future coming up, I can commit to the member that consultations will be taking place this year, the 2011-12 fiscal year, in the preparation and the beginning of a survey to happen in the near future.
Your first supplementary, Member for Nattilik.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) Last November, news reports indicated that the Government of Nunavut is “way behind on its surveys of the different polar bear populations, especially for the populations of the Gulf of Boothia, McClintock Channel and Lancaster Sound.”
Can the minister update me today on what steps his department is taking to work with the Gjoa Haven and Taloyoak HTOs to obtain up-to-date population numbers for polar bears in our region?
I thank the member again for her concern and the community’s concern.
Again, everybody knows that polar bears are very important to Nunavut.
Polar bear population surveys are very expensive.
This year, we have planned to do western Hudson Bay and Baffin Bay, which are two very important populations that need more information on them.
In partnership with other groups, either the federal government or the World Wildlife Fund, we are accessing more monies to do this.
The plan is, as I stated before, I will commit to the member that consultations will begin in all of those communities affected by the Gulf of Boothia and the McClintock Channel polar bear populations in this fiscal year and surveys will be planned soon after that.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) In its letter to the minister of January 25, 2011, the Gjoa Haven HTO expressed its commitment to the sustainable management of all wildlife populations in the area, including McClintock Channel.
Will the minister direct his department to sit down with the HTO within the next month to jointly develop a plan for the future of polar bear hunting in McClintock Channel?
I’m not sure about the next month timeline, but as I say, at the end of this fiscal year and next fiscal year, I would commit, probably in the next three months, that my staff sit down with the community and discuss polar bears in the McClintock Channel and the Gulf of Boothia.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) In March of 2009, a summit meeting was held in Rankin Inlet between Nunavut’s wildlife co-management partners to discuss such issues as the integration of science and Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit in wildlife research and management.
The 2010-11 business plan of the Department of Environment indicated that one of its priorities during the current fiscal year was to “Finalize the development of aerial surveys as an alternative less invasive method to estimate polar bear populations...” Can the minister indicate how his department has been working with HTOs in the Kitikmeot on wildlife management issues?
We have been working very much in the Kitikmeot and all across Nunavut in developing wildlife surveys and wildlife systems that involve less intrusive means by not handling wildlife as much.
Mr. Speaker, in the Kitikmeot, we have recently conducted all of our caribou strategy meetings on developing our strategic plan and things are going very well. We do consult with communities on the management of muskox, caribou, grizzly bears, and as I committed, we will do the same on polar bears.
Question 005 – 3(3): Devolution Update (Elliott)
My questions are directed to the Minister of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs, the Premier.
I want to revisit my questions from last week on devolution. Mr. Speaker, from the answers from the Premier from last week and the comments today in the Commissioner’s address, it would appear that the Government of Nunavut would like to continue to move forward on this file.
On the issue of devolution, it seems we are at a bit of a standstill because, for the last two years, the federal government has not named a chief negotiator.
This is a pretty strong message that the federal government is sending us. My question to the Premier is: has the federal government committed to a date as to when that person will be hired so that negotiations can begin?
The question is for the Premier.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) No, they have not committed a date. (interpretation) Thank you.
Your second question, Member for Quttiktuq.
My second question is: what specific reasons does the federal government give as to why they feel the Government of Nunavut is not ready for devolution?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I have not been given, specifically in writing, their rationale for not appointing a negotiator, but a capacity issue has come up.
Again, last week, when I spoke in the House, I mentioned that the capacity issue is to be addressed according to the agreement in principle that was signed by the three parties, that it would be addressed in parallel to the negotiations. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
So after two years of trying to negotiate with the federal government, the federal government has not, at any time, provided any written correspondence as to what specifically it would like to see the Government of Nunavut do so we can move forward on this file, yes or no.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) When I meet with the officials and Members of Parliament, including the Prime Minister, I reiterate the importance of this file to Nunavut and I will continue to relay that information to them.
As a matter of fact, just a few weeks ago, when I met with the Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs, we agreed that we would continue talking about it and find ways to move forward with it.
What indicators has the federal government given your department that justifies the resources and PYs we currently put to the devolution file for your department?
Our officials are working on the required number of people who would be involved if we were to attain the level of devolution that we are talking about.
It’s not something that is solid yet and this is something that we are currently working on in terms of the exact number that we would need in order to carry out the devolution file.
In terms of talking about numbers of employees, we have almost half the number of required employees already in place.
So I’m confident that it would not take very long to attain the rest of the number of employees that would be required once we start the negotiations and addressing the capacity issue.
Question 006 – 3(3): Overdue Land Lease Payments to Pangnirtung by NHC (Komoartok)
I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Last week, I raised a question about the Hamlet of Pangnirtung and the fact that the Nunavut Housing Corporation hasn’t made any lease payments that the hamlet billed to them over six years ago. The bill is now $129,000.
So my question to the minister is: has the minister looked into the matter and whether the hamlet will be receiving the payment for the leasing of their lots?
Yes, the correspondence was received by our office.
We also saw the 2005-06 bills and what he stated was true.
However, the reasons for the lack of payment are currently being reviewed.
I want to inform the member that these issues have to be reviewed carefully and they have to double-check all of the lots, especially the lot numbers, to see who owns and leases those lots.
Once those details have been completed, we will need some verification on whether they are owned by the housing association or the hamlet.
All of these details are still being clarified and once they are, I will be able to provide a response.
To date, the review is not complete.
These bills were not paid for a number of years due to the various reasons we have found.
We have started to clean up the paperwork and we will conduct more reviews.
That is the reason why the payments were deferred.
So once that occurs, I will inform the member.
Your supplementary, Member for Pangnirtung.
Again, this is an operational issue that impacts the budgets of the day-to-day operations of the hamlet and the money that comes from the Nunavut government has to be paid in a timelier manner.
I would like to raise this question to the minister: is Pangnirtung the only community that is owed these payments or are other communities in the same boat?
We haven’t heard of any other communities in the same situation with regard to lots and late payments.
Other communities send a bill that generally identifies the lot, who owns it and who is leasing it.
However, for the community of Pangnirtung, those details were not listed although they listed the units and that is why we have to conduct quite a bit of research.
We had to determine if these lots are owned by the housing association and we looked at why the previous year bill notices were not completed.
That is what we are trying to identify, but it will be completed and once all of the details have been firmed up, the bills we are required to pay will be paid. We need to complete our review first.
I understand his response, but when could we conceivably expect a payment on these leases?
Once I am given a time period and once information has been passed on to me, I will be able to provide the member with this information, including the review.
It’s obvious that the Hamlet of Pangnirtung will be consulted more about the lot number, legal registry of the lease holders, and exactly who was leasing the lot. Unfortunately those details were not included.
Once we have found out all of the details, I will inform the member during our sitting.
Question 007 – 3(3): Airport Shelter for Chesterfield Inlet (Ningeongan)
I always feel privileged to be the only one on this side of the House to be able to ask questions.
Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation.
Last summer, Chesterfield Inlet was supposed to get a shelter for the airport grader. To date, I have learned that no material was received even though a tender was out to construct the shelter.
There was, in fact, funding approval for the construction.
I had asked the deputy minister by way of email concerning the same topic, but I have not received anything yet to date.
I would like to ask the minister if he will give me an update as to what the status is on the shelter for the grader in Chesterfield Inlet.