EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
My Ministers will form an intergovernmental committee to deal with this, and we will be putting out information releases as we progress so that the people of Nunavut will be kept informed on what this Government is doing.
Speaker: Thank you. Your final supplementary, Mr. Elliott.
I guess part of the reason why I was asking that question was maybe giving her a break from me asking all of the questions all of the time, but I will keep asking the questions.
My final question: has your department had conversations with the Speaker or the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly in terms of how this independent body will be set up?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. First of all, I would like to thank the member for asking that question.
We are doing a review and after the fact-finding mission is completed, we will decide how it would operate. I have yet to talk to the Speaker about it.
I want to make it clear to my colleague that we are doing research at this point.
We’re also looking at other jurisdictions to see how they’ve set up their advocacy offices and to see what sorts of roles and responsibilities these offices are given.
I also want to make it clear, Mr. Speaker, to my colleague that this requires patience.
We want see a made-in-Nunavut set up, one that is people- and user-friendly.
We believe that there is a lack or inadequacy in representation of child and youth rights, so we would like to set up an office that is culturally responsive from the start.
Question 326 – 3(2): Purchase of Units in Smaller Communities (Rumbolt)
My questions are for the Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation.
They’re some follow-up questions to what Mr. Ningeongan was asking earlier.
In cases where you have communities where there are no markets for housing and people are unable to sell their homes because of the lack of markets, would the Housing Corporation consider buying these houses for use as public housing?
Hon. Hunter Tootoo: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the member for asking that question.
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated to Mr. Ningeongan, the government is trying to encourage homeownership in communities.
I say that the first step that we would look at is to try and find another potential homeownership client in that community to move into homeownership if an individual wanted to get out for whatever reason.
At present, I do believe it’s costing about $350,000 to build a single family unit in communities.
In communities where there is no market for housing, some people are selling their units for as low as $60,000 or $80,000.
So I’m trying to find out why the Nunavut Housing Corporation wouldn’t consider buying them back, investing a little money to upgrade them, and end up with a unit a lot of cheaper than building new ones.
I thank the member for bringing that out.
As I indicated earlier, the first priority for the corporation would be to try and find another client seeking to get into owning their own home into their own home. So that would be the first priority.
Also, as I indicated earlier, in certain circumstances where that’s not possible, in some cases, they’re based on the circumstances of the specific situation. There have been cases in the past where if there is no other alternative, then a unit is just going to sit there and go empty or whatever.
Again, based on the individual circumstances around that situation, the corporation could and has in the past taken all of those different factors into account.
In some cases, they purchased a unit and either turned it into a public housing unit or a staff housing unit, depending on the requirements in the community.
Again, Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, that’s something that’s done as a last resort. We want to try and get people into homeownership. Again, it’s based on the circumstances.
Speaker: Thank you, Minister. Thank you, Mr. Rumbolt.
Question 327 – 3(2): Baffin Bay Polar Bear Management (Okalik)
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I want to follow up on my colleague’s questioning on the issues in your riding, Mr. Speaker.
(interpretation) This is a CITES issue that touches upon what our government is doing in dealing with polar bears of Baffin Bay.
I want to ask the Minister of Environment about his plans to get the export ban lifted.
This ban was imposed by the federal government to exact commercial and economic sanctions for harvesting our polar bears.
What is our government doing to get this ban removed?
As I explained before, Mr. Speaker, the ban that is imposed on the Baffin Bay population has nothing to do with the CITES decision that was made yesterday.
I would just like to explain that we have implemented our conservation requirements and reduced the total allowable harvest in Baffin Bay for sustainable and management reasons.
Now that we have done that, I have written a letter to Minister Prentice. I am encouraging him to revisit this situation in Baffin Bay and to lift that ban.
I would just like to add though, Mr. Speaker, that the decision that was made yesterday is very good for Nunavut.
We are very proud and happy of that decision in that it will allow all other communities in Nunavut that share the other 12 polar bear populations that we manage the opportunity to continue sport hunting and provide economic benefits.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I am very pleased with the outcome of yesterday’s decision of the international community.
At the same time, it doesn’t do much for your riding, Mr. Speaker.
As the ban is enforced in your communities today, the longer that it stays in effect, your communities lose out.
Those hunters who could be proud hunters today and earning their own way will be relying on our government for assistance and welfare.
That’s not a good way to make a living.
So I’m asking our government to continue to pursue this matter to reopen the export of polar bears, from your riding in particular.
Can the minister assure us once again that he will continue to lobby the federal government and our MP to reverse this decision?
Yes, I can make that assurance that I will continue to lobby the federal government, the federal Minister of Environment, and our MP in lifting the ban on the Baffin Bay polar bear.
I will encourage them as much as I can and as I have said, we feel that we have taken steps to manage the polar bear population sustainably and I will continue that pursuit.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I want to thank the minister for making that commitment and I look forward to getting copies of correspondence that he may have written on this matter.
Another matter that became obvious is that the international community is in support of our initiatives and our sound management practices in polar bear issues.
The proponent of this ban, the United States, is now under scrutiny.
For example, the current president said he will work with international bodies to make sure that international efforts are working properly.
So the international community has said, “Look, the issue of polar bear bans should not be enforced.”
The current US administration has put a ban on our polar bear exports to their country. Can the minister recommence a campaign to open the border with the United States in exporting polar bears and polar bear products to their country?
I share the member’s concern.
I wish we had control and jurisdiction to open what’s imported to the United States, but we don’t.
However, saying that, we will continue to educate the public across the world, not only with us, my department and our government, but with the good work we have been doing with NTI, ITK, and all of the Inuit associations involved.
At this point in time, I would just like to thank those groups and congratulate them and all of us for working together on the polar bear situation.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) Currently, the United States is the only country that banned the import of polar bear products and polar bear skins, so we are prevented from getting sport hunters from their country.
I would like to make sure that our government continues to press this matter so that more opportunities are created for all Nunavummiut, sports hunts, and other activities relating to polar bears. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
There is also Mexico that has a ban on polar bear products.
However, we will continue, as I said before, to educate and encourage people on how our polar bear management system works. We will continue to lobby that countries allow their people to hunt polar bears in Nunavut.
Tabled Document 144 – 3(2): United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change – COP15 Meeting, December 7 to 18, 2009, Copenhagen (Aariak)
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I would like to table the following document: United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change – COP15 Meeting, December 7 to 18, 2009, Copenhagen.
Tabling of Documents. Hon. Tagak Curley.
Tabled Document 145 – 3(2): WSCC 2009-2011 Corporate Plan (Curley)
I would like to table the following document: WSCC 2009-2011 Corporate Plan.
Tabled Document 146 – 3(2): Correspondence from the Hamlet of Pangnirtung and Senreq Canada Incorporated (Komoartok)
I wish to table today a copy of a letter from the Hamlet of Pangnirtung regarding the Pangnirtung solid waste improvements and a copy of a letter from Senreq Canada Incorporated regarding the Senreq’s closed-loop gasification technology.
As a courtesy, I would like to inform the Minister of Community and Government Services that I will be posing questions on this issue in the near future.
Bill 24 – Legislative Assembly Statutes Amendment Act, 2010 – Notice
I give notice that on Monday, March 22, 2010, I will move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Iqaluit Centre, that Bill 24, Legislative Assembly Statutes Amendment Act, 2010, be read for the first time.
We will wait a moment.
I seek consent to waive Rule 62(1) so that Bill 24 can be read for the first time today.
The member is seeking consent to waive the two-day requirement so that Bill 24 can be read for the first time today.
There are no nays. Mr. Elliott, please proceed.
Bill 24 – Legislative Assembly Statutes Amendment Act, 2010 – First Reading
I move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Iqaluit Centre, that Bill 24, Legislative Assembly Statutes Amendment Act, 2010, be read for the first time.
The motion is carried and Bill 24 has received first reading.
I seek consent to waive Rule 62(1) so that Bill 24 can be read for the second time today.
The member is seeking consent to waive the one-day requirement so that Bill 24 can be read for the second time today.
Bill 24 – Legislative Assembly Statutes Amendment Act, 2010 – Second Reading
I move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Iqaluit Centre, that Bill 24, Legislative Assembly Statutes Amendment Act, 2010, be read for the second time.
Mr. Speaker, this bill amends the provisions respecting the indemnities of members in accordance with the Report of the Independent Commission.
The motion is carried. Bill 24 has received second reading.
I seek unanimous consent of the House to waive Rule 67(2) and have Bill 24 moved into Committee of the Whole.
The member is seeking unanimous consent for Bill 24 to proceed directly in Committee of the Whole.
There are none. Bill 24 is referred to the Committee of the Whole.
Thank you. (interpretation) Please remain seated until lunchtime and we will commence with Committee of the Whole with Mr. Schell as the Chairman.
We will be dealing with Bills 14, 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25.
Chairman (Mr. Schell): I would like to call the committee meeting to order. In Committee of the Whole, we have the following items to deal with: Bills 14, 21, 22, 23, 24, and 25.
We would like to review Bill 24 and continue with the review of Bill 22 and the main estimates for the fiscal year 2010-11. We will continue with the review of the Department of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth. If time permits, we will proceed with the review of the Department of Human Resources.
Chairman: Are we in agreement that we deal with Bill 24?
Bill 24 – Legislative Assembly Statutes Amendment Act, 2010 – Consideration in Committee
Chairman: I would now like to ask Speaker Arreak to make his opening remarks.
Could the Sergeant-at-Arms please escort [the Speaker] to the witness table.
I would now like to ask Speaker Arreak to make his opening remarks.
I am very pleased to have the opportunity to appear today before the Committee of the Whole on the occasion of its consideration of Bill 24, Legislative Assembly Statutes Amendment Act, 2010.
As you will recall, the establishment of the first Independent Commission to Review Members’ Indemnities, Allowances, Expenses and Benefits was announced on March 27, 2009.
The commission held a total of five meetings. A public call for submissions was issued shortly after the commission’s establishment. Although interested individuals and organizations were provided with three months to make submissions, none were received, Mr. Chairman.
The final report of the Independent Commission was tabled in the House on December 8, 2009.
I would like to take this opportunity to publicly thank the members of the Independent Commission for their work.
The responsibility of making recommendations concerning the remuneration for elected legislators is a challenging one, Mr. Chairman. As members will appreciate, there is no perfect approach to determining the appropriate level of compensation for the unique positions in which we and other Canadian legislators and Parliamentarians serve.
However, I would like to emphasize the process undertaken by the Independent Commission was transparent and comprehensive.
I would also like to take this opportunity to thank all Members of the Legislative Assembly for their careful consideration of the Independent Commission’s recommendations.
Mr. Chairman, I believe that the Independent Commission deserves praise for having recognized that any system of remuneration for elected legislators must be sufficiently reasonable so as not to deter well-qualified individuals from standing for public office while also being fair, transparent, and affordable.
I am pleased to take this opportunity to note for the public record that this bill implements the recommendations of the Independent Commission in a manner that takes into account the impact of the current collective agreement between the Government of Nunavut and the Nunavut Employees Union. I also wish to note for the public record that these proposed amendments to the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act enhance the fairness and transparency of our system of remuneration by eliminating additional pay for meeting attendance.
Mr. Chairman, all members recognize that the current economic climate requires us to make decisions that are both responsible and of course, affordable. I would note that the Management and Services Board, in its consideration of other matters that the Independent Commission recommended be further reviewed, has decided the members’ living and constituency allowances should not be increased at this time and will remain linked to the duty travel rates that are provided to members of the public service.
I look forward to responding to any questions that my colleagues may have.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and fellow members.
For the record, Mr. Speaker, please introduce your witness.
To my right is Mr. John Quirke, the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut.
We’re going to Bill 24, Legislative Assembly Statutes Amendment Act, 2010.
Chairman: Does everybody agree with clause 3?
Chairman: Does everybody agree with clause 4?
Chairman: Go to Schedule on the next page.
Do you agree with Schedule C, Indemnities and Allowances?
Chairman: Clause 5. Does everybody agree?
Chairman: Clause 6. Does everybody agree?
Chairman: Do members agree to Bill 24 as a whole?
Some Members: Agreed.  Chairman: Pursuant to Rule 62(2), do members agree that Bill 24 can immediately be placed on the orders of the day for third reading?
Chairman: I would like to thank the Speaker and his official. What is the wish of the committee and does the Speaker have any final comments?
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. At this time, I would just like to thank you for passing the bill right away.
Will the Sergeant-at-Arms escort the Speaker and the witness out.
We’re going to take a break now until one o’clock. Just make sure everyone is back here for one o’clock.
>>Committee recessed at 11:50 and resumed at 13:01
Minister Tapardjuk, do you have witnesses that you would like to bring to the table?
Chairman: Sergeant-at-Arms, if you escort the witnesses in.
Does the Chair of the Standing Committee on Social Wellness have comments?
I am pleased to deliver the standing committee’s opening comments as we begin consideration of the 2010-11 Main Estimates and Business Plan of the Department of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth.
Members noted that the Department of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth is proposing to increase its budget for 2010-11 by $2,671,000.
This is an increase of approximately 12.6 percent from the 2009-2010 fiscal year.
Approximately 80 percent of this amount is accounted for by an increase of $1.1 million for the Taiguusiliuqtiit Branch and an increase of $1 million for the upcoming Piqqusilirivvik Cultural School in Clyde River.
The remainder of the increase is mostly in the area of compensation and benefits.
The standing committee notes the creation of a new Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Branch in the department.
This newly created branch has two divisions, the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Division and the Piqqusilirivvik Division.
In the 2009-2010 fiscal year, these two divisions were located in the Directorate Branch.
Mr. Chairman, members are pleased to note that the department is in the process of hiring staff for Piqqusilirivvik, the new Inuit Cultural School in Clyde River.
During his appearance before the standing committee, members raised the issue of establishing a governance framework. The minister advised the standing committee that Piqqusilirivvik will have a board of governors.
The minister tabled the Piqqusilirivvik Status Report on March 3, 2008.
The status report states that “the principle user group that will participate in Piqqusilirivvik programming will be individuals who have at least basic Inuit language skills, and possess a strong desire to enhance their knowledge and understanding of traditional Inuit language, culture and heritage.”
Members are interested in the recruitment process and would appreciate further information on eligibility requirements and application procedures.
The standing committee looks forward to ongoing updates on the progress of the development of Piqqusilirivvik as scheduled in the “sequence of events timeline” provided in the status report.
The department’s business plan indicates that the opening of Piqqusilirivvik is scheduled for April 1, 2011.
During the minister’s appearance before the standing committee, members emphasized the importance of continuing efforts to collect oral histories from elders across Nunavut.
The minister expressed his wish to collect oral histories from elders in each Nunavut community, but that there is no strategy to do so.
The department’s business plan indicates that a priority for the 2010-11 fiscal year is to develop a strategy to ensure that this important work take place.
The minister affirmed that the development of a sound strategy to collect Inuit traditional knowledge and oral histories is a priority for the 2010-11 fiscal year.
Mr. Chairman, the minister tabled an Elders Strategy on November 23, 2005.
During his appearance before the standing committee, the minister advised members of the department’s continuing efforts to develop a new Elders Strategy.
Passing on traditional knowledge was one of the recommendations that appeared in the 2005 Elders Strategy.
Members applaud this recommendation and continue to stress the importance of addressing the need to pass on traditional knowledge to children.
There is a widespread, increasing dissatisfaction with the amount of elements of Inuit heritage that remain in the present day culture of Nunavut youth.
During the minister’s appearance before the standing committee, members also stressed the importance of including elders in the Government of Nunavut’s current review of the Liquor Act.
The minister advised the standing committee that he intends to bring this suggestion forward at his next meeting with members of the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Katimajiit.
Mr. Chairman, as all members are aware, the Official Languages Act and the Inuit Language Protection Act were passed in 2008 and the Official Languages Act received parliamentary concurrence in June 2009.
As was stated in the Committee of the Whole during the most recent consideration of the department’s main estimates in June 2009, the standing committee recognizes that these two new pieces of legislation raise a number of complex issues and that both will require a number of years to be fully implemented.
The standing committee once again indicates that the issue of language services provided by federal government bodies and federally regulated entities is also very complex and the extent to which these entities will comply with territorial official language legislation remains unclear.
During his appearance before the standing committee, the minister advised members that the language legislation implementation plans are progressing as planned.
As part of the process of setting priorities for implementation of the two new pieces of language legislation, the Nunavut Language Summit took place during the second week of February of this year.
The standing committee looks forward to the tabling of the first annual reports on the two Language Acts, which will include details on the status of the implementation plan.
As announced by the minister in the House on December 3, 2009, he will, in his capacity as Minister of Languages, present a “comprehensive implementation plan” to the Legislative Assembly in 2010.
The minister stated that this plan will identify all the “resources needed to effectively implement and administer” both pieces of language legislation.
The standing committee will continue to monitor the development of the new Inuit Language Authority, Taiguusiliuqtiit, created under section 15 of the Inuit Language Protection Act.
The Taiguusiliuqtiit was established as a branch of the department in the 2009-2010 fiscal year. According to the department’s business plan, it is scheduled to become an “independent public agency at arm’s length from the GN by September 18, 2011.”
Members note the appointment of Taiguusiliuqtiit’s first five members was announced in a GN news release dated November 18, 2009.
Members also note the appointment of the chairperson and vice-chairperson as announced in a GN news release dated February 11, 2010.
As it did when the minister appeared before the standing committee in 2009, members once again engaged in an exploratory dialogue with the minister about the possibility of using one writing system in Nunavut.
The standing committee looks forward to monitoring progress made on this long-standing issue, including input contributed by the Inuit Language Authority.
During the minister’s appearance before the standing committee, members discussed the need to provide support to municipalities in their efforts to comply with the new official languages legislation.
Members were pleased to be informed that the department is able and willing to assist municipalities with these matters.
Mr. Chairman, members raised the issue of fundraising for the new heritage centre during the minister’s appearance.
Members look forward to receiving more updates on the status of the Nunavut Heritage Centre.
The standing committee also notes that the department’s business plan indicates that a project brief for the heritage centre “will be completed in January/February 2010.”
Members look forward to reviewing this project brief as soon as it is tabled in the House.
As all members are aware, the department’s Culture and Heritage Branch is responsible for delivering the Archaeology Program.