EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Why is the department doing that review and not Nunavut Tourism?
If you look at what’s working and what’s not, they’re the ones that are out there providing that service and delivering the programs across the territory and not the department.
I mean that’s why they give them their money. So why are they not doing it and someone that isn’t doing it, doing it?
Like all reviews on policies and program development, the department takes it.
With all the programs that the department does, in terms of these economic programs, we do an independent review and we’re going to do the same thing with Nunavut Tourism.
I think I’m pretty sure that Nunavut Tourism is run by a board. Has the department had any discussions with the board on its plans?
Hon. Patterk Netser (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I’m going to finally have a chance to meet with the board after this session is over tomorrow.
Hopefully we will be done by tonight and we are meeting together with the board tomorrow afternoon.
We will definitely be done by tomorrow afternoon so the minister shouldn’t have to worry about missing that meeting.
Is one of the things that you’re going to sit down and discuss with the board the way that their funding arrangement has been changed to ask them what it is that they need and sincerely take a look at that?
Hon. Patterk Netser: That is what we will be discussing tomorrow, yes.
I have seen or heard from one side and I know there are always two sides to every story, but if the board can demonstrate to you, as the minister, that they require alternate arrangements rather than equal quarterly payments, would you commit to providing them what they need in order to keep afloat and be able to operate and provide their services for the government?
As I said, we’re going to meet with them tomorrow to discuss the funding arrangements that we have with them.
Mr. Chairman, the funding that we give to Nunavut Tourism is public funds and at the end of the day, I’m responsible to the public as to what the funds are used for in program delivery through Nunavut Tourism.
At the end of the day, like I said, I’m responsible for public funds and we want to ensure that it gets used towards Nunavut tourism development and that’s what we are going to discuss tomorrow.
Tourism is very important to God’s country. I’m from one of the places where it is extremely important.
Will you then increase Nunavut Tourism’s efforts on PYs and funding?
Is that the reason for introducing this new bill that you are planning to develop?
In terms of how tourism development is currently administered in Nunavut, the decision was made during the Northwest Territories days, so that’s part of the reason why we’re doing a couple of things. We’re taking a look at the Travel and Tourism Act because it is again inherited from the Northwest Territories; we want to make sure that it’s reflective of Nunavut.
The other factor is the need to update the tourism strategy. The strategy is the responsibility of government.
However, consultation does need to happen with industry and that is our intention.
We’re hoping that with an updated strategy, we will be able to build sound arguments for additional resources whether it’s from within Nunavut or from our federal partners.
So that’s what we’re hoping.
Mr. Arvaluk, you have already spoken on this matter and I will exercise my discretion and allow you to ask additional questions, but this will be the last time for this page.
I don’t think I spoke on page K-5; however, I’ll respect your ruling there.
Do you know how many cruise ships landed or at least attempted to land in Pond Inlet this summer? What I mean by “attempting” is that we have been asking for docking facilities there and during a storm, they are anchored right in front of Pond Inlet but can’t get their crew to bring people ashore. Do you know how many of these ships went to Pond Inlet and tried to land there?
You have spoken on this page and I keep tabs of members who have asked questions on certain pages. Mr. Minister.
We don’t have the answer to his question but (interpretation ends) we can commit to following up that question for the member and get back to him as soon as we can.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): I think I already asked this question but I just want to ask again.
Nunavut Tourism went through court as to who owns the Nunavut Tourism title.
Did the department have to pay when they went to court or from grants for legal fights?
We didn’t pay their legal fees. They have their own budget and run their own affairs.
Yes, you had already asked questions, Mr. Curley.
Using my authority and discretion... (interpretation ends) Branch Summary. Economic Development.
Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $27,457,000.
Page K-6.
Mr. Chairman, in the business plan on page K-25, one of the priorities for 2009 states that “The Nunavut Transportation Strategy will be completed 2007-08.”
Has the Nunavut Transportation Strategy been completed?
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Curley. (interpretation)We’re on K-6. (interpretation ends) Transportation.
It’s still under review and they have asked for an extension on this review because they’re very busy.
Mr. Chairman, the Nunavut Transportation Strategy is very important.
With their request for an extension, have you consulted with the Regional Chamber of Commerce, the Nunavut Tourism, and the Nunavut Economic Development Forum? Will you be contacting them before you finish the review of this particular item?
Hon. Patterk Netser (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) All the stakeholders (interpretation) will be consulted as we develop the (interpretation ends) Nunavut Transportation Strategy. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This is really quite an important policy document to have.
I think not only should the groups be consulted but I think there should also be a major conference one day and have a real exchange publicly with those groups because any change to the strategy has an impact on not just passenger service but the economy of the regions.
Therefore, it’s really quite important that there be more transparent events take place somehow. Could that be considered?
Maybe the minister could provide an outline of exactly how he’s going to proceed with the development of the Nunavut Transportation Strategy because it’s such a major issue that it can’t just be done in closed-door meetings here and there with this group and that group.
So would the minister at least commit to that?
Hon. Patterk Netser (interpretation): We already met with the departments in regard to this matter. We consulted with them on this strategy, but we still have to work with the stakeholders on the strategy (interpretation ends) and we will do it in a transparent manner.
I think it would be important to have the positions of the major economic groups, including all of the regional groups, development corporations, and so on, positions that clearly have been presented to the government by way of briefs or whatnot; they should be tabled in this House.
I would also encourage the minister: would you be committed to having at least a part of a day during the May session and debate part of the document here, and ask for some comments and advice from MLAs because we all have constituencies that could have a major impact if the policy change occurs in the regions in isolated locations and so on.
Would that be possible? If not, why not?
Hon. Patterk Netser (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) That’s what public consultation is all about. (interpretation) It probably wouldn’t be possible for the spring session, (interpretation ends) but we can commit to maybe do consultations with the standing committee in terms of that strategy.
I think it should be. Surely, I think any one of us can introduce a motion to try and get a piece of the action.
I think debating is one way.
I am not 100 percent sure what the strategy objectives are, but if they meant to increase the economic development in Nunavut, then the debate should be occurring at every level, including political, economic, and transportation groups, and so on. I’m sure that will include the shipping companies and airlines, and so on.
I would like to ask the minister one more question, not one but an area, on whether or not he has any significant involvement with the Medical Travel Policy; I believe that should be guided by a strategy. Are you involved when medical transportation contracts are being considered?
With the medical travel process, our officials from Health and Social Services and Economic Development and Transportation work together to write proposals in a fair manner as possible and based on all airline proposals.
I would like to continue to urge the minister to ensure that there is competition throughout the regions because the medical contract is the major driving force right now with air transportation in Nunavut and any major change that lessens the competition tends to have a negative impact.
So I am urging the minister to have a significant involvement, and therefore, could he assure this House that he will undertake to make sure that the impacts to the regions are not negative?
The members will recall that the Member for Iqaluit Centre has posed questions in the House in terms of the government preferring one airline to another and I indicated that the government does not endorse any particular airline but is in favour of competition between airlines to reduce the cost of travel.
Mr. Curley: I think that’s very important. We would urge the minister to make sure that his position is at least understood by other ministers that putting out a tender to alternative transportation, even if it’s medical transportation, is really the key for changing major routes right now.
I have another question with respect to the small craft harbours. It continues to be the objective and the priority of the government to develop and to get funding arrangements with the federal government.
I would like to ask the minister whether or not the minister, in some cases, can go alone on some of the smaller harbours because I believe when we talk about small craft harbours, we’re not talking about a major one that we can afford; they are mainly gravel and everything that protects certain areas of communities for the small crafts and so on.
Could the minister explain to us whether or not he would be prepared to go alone with the funding that they have if the federal government is not coming up with their expected share of paying for the costs of these harbours?
Hon. Patterk Netser (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Yes, the federal government is being very slow in terms of providing us funding to do the seven communities that have been identified through the Small Craft Harbours Program.
The department has a $1 million budget to repair harbours or to make shelters for the communities and this is what we are going to have to do because we cannot wait forever for the federal government to come up with the funding.
It’s going to be a slow process but we have to start some time, so we hope to start doing something this summer.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister. Mr. Curley, (interpretation) are you finished?
(interpretation ends) We’re on page K-6.
Total O&M for Transportation is $19,750,000.
We all know and the minister indicated that the federal government is very slow.
I don’t know whether or not they’re going to go ahead with those small craft harbours, although we got one for Pangnirtung.
How much funding are they requesting while the Government of Nunavut is lobbying the federal government? We have communities right behind us and we see a lot of wharfs, docks and all kinds of facilities down south where they spend billions of dollars, but they’re not making anything from Labrador northward.
I don’t know exactly what the reason is, but how much money are you negotiating for from the federal government for operations and maintenance of these small craft harbours and finally make the federal government realize that these are a necessity in Nunavut?
We don’t have anything to negotiate with, but the member knows that we have been working on this for a long time and the federal government knows that those facilities are needed in the communities.
We have received $1 million from the federal government which will be used for planning purposes and to see what our department can do the communities (interpretation ends) in terms of the Small Craft Harbour Program.
What I’m trying to ask here is: how many PYs do you have in the $19,750,000 budget and who will be negotiating or lobbying the federal government to access those funds and make them realize that those facilities are required? How many PYs do you have that are dedicated to lobbying or negotiating with the federal government? How many PYs are employed under the $19,750,000?
Hon. Patterk Netser: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation) We’re not just sitting around and waiting.
We have four PYs within the department who are doing the negotiating. (interpretation ends) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister. (interpretation) Mr. Arvaluk is finished.
On page K-25 of the business plan, one of the priorities is to “work with Transport Canada on the implementation of a policy and funding mechanism to recoup costs incurred in meeting obligations for long range aircraft operations in Nunavut airspace.”
Can the minister or his officials update us on the progress of those negotiations?
Order in the House, please.
Hon. Patterk Netser: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation) I would like to have Methuselah Kunuk respond to that question.
We are looking into how we can get support. Iqaluit is an international airport. We can’t really do something about it but we are going to look at how we can get additional assistance.
I thank the minister and Mr. Kunuk.
Can you give us an idea of how many long-range aircraft operate in Nunavut airspace on an annual basis?
Hon. Patterk Netser (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I didn’t know we had a person who counted aircraft flying in Nunavut airspace.
I’m told that there are 40,000 long-range aircraft that operate in Nunavut airspace. (interpretation) Thank you.
If you’re successful, what kind of costs would be entailed in terms of recouping costs that you mention in your statement?
Hon. Patterk Netser: I don’t have the figures but I have a pretty good idea that we would have pretty good star wars going on.
Perhaps one of the minister’s officials has those figures available.
Hon. Patterk Netser (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Maybe I can ask John Graham, (interpretation) if you don’t mind, to come up to the witness table.
Does the committee agree to bring in John Graham?
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Graham can go to the witness table for a moment.
Mr. Graham.
Mr. Graham: Mr. Chairman, could I get the question again, please?
I was looking for some information on what are the costs that you’re trying to recoup on an annual basis. You made a statement that you’re recouping costs, so obviously, you’re incurring costs.
What figures are involved?
Mr. Graham: On annual basis, the Iqaluit airport spends about $325,000 on the provision of airport emergency fire fighting services. All of those costs are recovered by call out fees that we charge to international carriers.
However, out of those 40,000 international flights that go over the top, the ones that go across during daylight hours while the fire department is open from eight o’clock in the morning until five o’clock are not paying anything. They’re taking advantange of the fact that we are providing a service and nothing is being recouped.
Transport Canada has really not done anything to assist in terms working with us to provide a mechanism to recover a cost.
Basically, they have advised us that we should be dealing with the International Civil Aviation Organization and working with them in terms of working on a fee structure for recovery.
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Graham.
I would like to thank Mr. Graham for that answer; it’s very interesting information actually.
I guess there are other airports in Canada, but do they have to individually negotiate with the International Civil Aviation Organization or do they seek assistance with Transport Canada?
Hon. Patterk Netser: To Mr. Graham.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister. Mr. Graham.
Mr. Graham: Mr. Chairman, the Iqaluit airport, by virtue of its geographic location, finds itself in a very advantageous position.
With this overflight business, there really is no other airport in the country that’s in the same position as we are. The international carriers, however, are reluctant to enter into agreements with an individual airport for fear of what’s going to happen worldwide with other nations and then being taken advantage of from a cost recovery perspective.
However, dealing through the International Civil Aviation Organization, the eight major world airline alliances that we met with said that they had no problem paying a fee as long as it could be recovered through some kind of mechanism through the ICAO, the International Civil Aviation Organization, and the dollars that probably could be collected would probably more than offset the costs of what it costs to operate the Iqaluit airport at the moment.
I would like to thank the Minister and Mr. Graham.
Can you tell us, minister or Mr. Graham, do you think you will be successful in resolving the discussions or negotiations with Transport Canada and ICAO?
I understand we haven’t actually met with the proponents yet, but my employee tells me that he’s pretty confident that we can come to a terms of agreement.
Can you indicate to us when you plan to meet with the ICAO and when you hope to resolve the issue?
Hon. Patterk Netser (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) We haven’t set any dates up but we are hoping to meet with them within the next six months.
I look forward to getting a progress report. We brought up a similar issue in the past in the standing committee meetings but I think we were thinking to actually help fund the CARS Programs in Nunavut but this would help fund the Iqaluit airport.
My next question is related to the following objective, “Encourages and assist in the development of the Bathurst Inlet Pot and Road Project.”
I’m wondering if the minister could just clarify what he means when he says “encourage.” That’s an interesting word in that statement.
Could he please repeat that question, please?
The priorities for 2008-09 says, “Encourage and assist in the development of the Bathurst Inlet Port and Road Project,” and I just wanted him to clarify what the means when he uses the word “encourage.”
Hon. Patterk Netser (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) There’s a potential for a very promising mining development around that area and that’s why we’re encouraged about the prospect of the road around his region.
What you’re saying here is that you support the Bathurst Inlet Port and Road Project. Is that what you’re saying?
Hon. Patterk Netser: Yes, we are actively engaged as Members of the Management Committee and we’re giving them annual funding of $75,000 for that program.
That’s certainly encouraging because last year, one of the objectives was to determine the best options forward for the Bathurst Inlet Port and Road Project or an alternative. This year, there’s no alternative, so it’s good to know that you’re supporting it.
Those are all the questions I have, Mr. Chairman.
In the Transportation, there’s an area that’s responsible for Motor Vehicles and Transportation, I think it was last year that there was an audit that was done there that outlined some serious concerns in that office.
I’m just wondering if we could, I think it’s been about a year now, get an indication of what kind of steps have been taken to address the concerns that were outlined in that audit.
Hon. Patterk Netser (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) We are reassigning staff in preparation of a plan for an increased staff compliment and immediate implementation measures to secure the office and the department is prepared and is implementing an action plan in response to the review.
Just for the record, can we get an indication of when the department received that review, or audit, or whatever it was?
I understand it was some time last year, but to address the issues, too, we have included in the positions to hire three more PYs to assist with the Motor Vehicles Department.
The minister indicated that they’re working on an action plan now. If that review was received over a year ago and there were some pretty damning findings in that review, why was it taking a year to develop an action plan for it?
I know if you look at the NBCC, they had an action plan right away and with the FANS audit, there was an action plan right away on it. So I’m just wondering why it has taken a year to get an action plan to address something that was brought to the attention of the department over a year ago.
Methuselah Kunuk would like to answer the question. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
We have been working on this Motor Vehicles problem since last winter actually. Because of a backlog and all that stuff, we didn’t realize that we were that behind until it was audited by an outside consultant.
We have been bringing in help from Gjoa Haven as well as that consultant to try and help us with the backlog.
Right now, I can say that we have caught up with the backlog and at the same time, we were making a request to get more PYs for that office because our workload has increased quite a bit since we became Nunavut.
So we were approved this coming year to have three more PYs. We are now in the process of trying to at least go through the hiring process for the first two.
Mr. Tootoo: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I know government-wide, we’re about 80 percent staffed, but can you tell me what the vacancy rate is in ED&T?
We don’t have all the information, but in the Airport Division, we have a 30 percent vacancy, but we can commit to providing more information to the member when we have it.
I just found my IEP capacity thing as of the end of June and I think the latest one was September. I think in June, they were at 73 percent capacity.
If you have that many vacant positions in the department and if the issue was identified in Motor Vehicles that you needed some PYs, why didn’t you just transfer some of those vacant positions there instead of waiting for approval for additional PYs?
Hon. Patterk Netser (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) The ADM, Methuselah Kunuk, explained it quite well that because of the backlog of the department, the division was neglected and we’re addressing those issues right now.
I realize that but said that now, you’ve got three new PYs that were identified as a result of that audit that that division was understaffed and now, that that process, once it’s approved, to be going forward.
A year ago, you probably had a 25 percent vacancy rate.
You identified a year ago that you needed staff in there and you could have easily transferred PYs there, I mean 25 percent of the department was vacant. Why couldn’t they have just taken vacant positions and reclassified them into positions for the Motor Vehicles Division if that was something that was identified as an urgent need, instead of waiting for this process to go through to get the new PYs approved before doing anything?
Methuselah Kunuk would like to answer that question. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
I can only speak for Transportation. Yes, we’ve had nine vacancies in the Airports. However, we tried to fill those nine vacancies as well because they are really needed positions in the Airports Division.
We had a hard time filling those positions because of the specialized trades like in electrical technologies or things like that. It’s pretty hard to hire right now. We have been trying to fill them for a while now because of the labour market in Canada and we cannot give them enough compensation to hire them.
That’s our problem right now.