EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
On the Government side is working together in trying to look at some options on how to best protect our assets whether they are municipalities or government wide.
At the same time as efficiently and cost effectively as possible.
I am a little bit confused here.
The Government of Nunavut has insurance on Schools, Health Centres, and Arenas.
If I am reading this right and I do not know if I understand it.
Schools that are insured for $10 million, and if the school cost $20 million, we only get $10 million if it burns down.
Okay, I know that.
Now, on a municipal level, fire halls belong to municipalities?
They’re not Government of Nunavut buildings?
So, are we sure as a government that these use the Government of Nunavut capital dollars to build fire halls, arenas, etc., that we’re getting full value?
So, what are we getting?
What are we insuring these buildings for?
Twenty-five cents on the dollar?
Fifty cents on the dollar?
And at some point, can’t we all collaboratively get together because it is the Government of Nunavut capital to decide what you’re going to insure and what you’re not going to insure.
Is there some kind of plan there?
Big picture plans, savings?
You’re nodding your head.
I don’t know if you’re, if it means yes or not.
Could you clarify that for me?
For other people out there that might be a little foggy like I am today on this issue.
Because that last thing we want is to have our hamlet offices burning down and knowing that we can’t replace them because we don’t have any insurance of them.
I mean if it’s a Government of Nunavut asset like schools, health facilities, Government of Nunavut, office building, hospitals, etc. then that’s our responsibility.
I mean hamlets have the responsibility for their municipal infrastructure, arenas, hamlet offices, fire halls, municipal garages, their equipment etc and he’s right again, in that that’s why I said there was a working group between CGT, Finance and NAM, Nunavut Association of Municipalities to make sure it’s adequate coverage and what options are available to try to make sure that adequate coverage and a cost effective rates and that’s the work that’s ongoing.
In fact, I’m told that it was actually a meeting of that committee today and we’re continuing to meet in that area.
On that issue, we’ve got the Government of Nunavut buildings, we’ve go the schools, we’ve got the health centres, we’ve got various other buildings and we have a Fire Marshall or two or three fire inspectors and we have an oil burner, a boiler inspector, okay and I find this quite ironic.
Okay, it’s all Government of Nunavut money that goes into building the infrastructure, capital infrastructure in every community whether it’s an arena, fire hall, hamlet hall, school or something like that and when we have Public Works in front of us, they were really not too sure who’s responsible.
What I’m getting here, is that the Government of Nunavut buildings like our schools or health centres and our large assets are inspected by the Fire Marshall, the territorial Fire Marshall; they’re inspected by the Nunavut boiler man, whoever he is out there or a woman, person.
But when it gets down to inspecting municipal buildings, I know the Fire Marshall in our area is very vigilant when he inspects private businesses and stuff like that because there is some kind of criteria involved there that if you don’t inspect certain buildings well you know, they could negate your insurance and I’m wondering at the municipal level that the arenas the fire halls etc. are being inspected on an annual basis to make sure that these are running properly and that if they’re not that this should be causing some kind of insurance fiasco.
Okay, we haven’t inspected this community for 8 years; we know what clauses are insured on.
You know there are just volumes of why they don’t have to pay an insurance claim.
I’m just saying that as Minister of Finance, I’m hoping that the Public Works minister, the CGT minister, are all on the same page when it comes to inspecting buildings so we don’t get stuck with millions of dollars thin infrastructure that may burn down because it’s being neglected with the proper inspections.
So, it’s just more comment than anything but I’m hoping that you as the Finance minister at the end of the day got approve all this capital by have to replace buildings that being, not being maintained properly.
So, it’s more a question, it is a question but it’s also a comment also.
Would you like to respond minister?
The member brings up a very good point and he is right. I mean also in respect of the working group between NAM, CGT, Finance, that I had indicated earlier on insurance coverage, it is also an issue of loss/prevention strategy that entails the very same components, Mr. Chairman.
On that same page, on the $50 thousand dollars to fund the design of a new fire hall for the Hamlet, are there many different designs of fire halls?
What is so special about this design, because there were comments before from other Members that it is just as square, rectangular building?
Why do you need to spend this much money for the design of a very straight forward building?
You would think that it is a very basic, why do we need $150 thousand to fund the designs?
Mr. Chairman, probably, I mean, for the matter is, it is not just for the design, it is also a cost for construction manager and its component of the $150 thousand, but for simplicity’s sake, it was put down as a design.
What did he say it was for?
Mr. Chairman, some of the construction management cost as well as the project once it gets underway.
Construction management, is that to call the construction guys to come together and start using the hammers to put the nails in? What management?
Well, Mr. Chairman, these are probably designs, some of the parameters and oversee some of the parameters of the construction tendering process, working with the architect, etcetera, depending on what the circumstances are, but there are different components to it, facilitating, discussions between the owners and the clients, etcetera, there are different facets to construction management.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): Very briefly, further to McLean’s earlier question regarding the Clyde River and Repulse Bay fires and they were covered under insurance.
How long does the process take to apply for insurance?
It depends really on the circumstances and the assessments, etc.
I mean, it could take anywhere on a quick basis, three to six months, sometimes it is years, depending on the complexity of the claims and the circumstances surrounding the claim.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): There is an assessment after a fire has happened.
Do they have to wait for the Fire Marshal’s report to do that claim?
Mr. Chairman, certainly, the Fire Marshal’s report would be a critical component of the overall assessment of the claim for the insurer.
Due to the suspect furnace fuel, I think that’s probably why that fire hall burnt down.
I think there should be a closer look by the Fire Marshal and the Public Works Minister has made some statements regarding the suspect fuel.
But regarding insurance premiums, we have to get insurance every year for buildings and assets and that uses up a lot of funds in the budget, for different organizations as well within the community.
These annual premiums, we had to set aside that much.
Where does that funding go for insurance?
The funding would go to the insurer as part of their pool of funds to offset potential losses for coverage and when there’s an incident where there is a requirement for coverage, such as the case of Clyde River and Repulse Bay and then a lot of that premium gets returned in the form of insurance compensation.
Having said that Mr. Speaker, just on the members question or assertion that is could be a result of bad fuel, I mean, I would be really reluctant to say that that was the case.
Although, obviously the Fire Marshal in appraisals in the end will show whether that was the case or not, the bad fuel in the communities right now in respect of heating oil, it seems to be a clogging up of injectors problem from what’s been report in the media, which wouldn’t necessarily mean an ignition problem.
We’re talking really of heating of oil, which has, as you know, a higher flash point then regular gasoline.
So, I don’t think that that’s the case.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Ng. On that page, I know you’re talking about home heating fuel, but we’re dealing with community government.
Supplementary appropriation, I told you not to sway too much to other subjects.
What I said earlier was coming from me.
That was my view, but I didn’t say that that was the cause.
So please, don’t misunderstand me.
This $1 million, 450 thousand dollars for Clyde River, we’re very grateful that there is immediate action by the government to assist our community.
If there was another case of these tragedies and they had no insurance coverage, would it be possible for the government to still assist those communities if they lost any assets with no insurance?
The Government of Nunavut would have an obligation to try and assist municipalities but at the same time Mr. Chairman, I would suggest that municipalities also have an obligation to ensure that they have enough or adequate coverage for their assets as well.
Community Government & Transportation, Total not previously authorized, $1 million, 650 thousand dollars.
Some Members: Agreed,
Total $1 million 650 thousand dollars.
Bill 31.
We go through clause by clause of Bill 31.
No. 3. 2002/2003.
Do you all have the page now?
Bill 31. Supplementary Appropriation.
Capital at No. 3. 2002/2003.
Chairperson (interpretation): Schedule.
Total Supplementary Appropriation, $7 million, 842 thousand.
Chairperson (interpretation): Going to number 4.
Does the committee agree that Bill 31 is ready for third reading?
Mr. Iqaqrialu (interpretation): Under clause 7, just to give a clarification in Inuktitut it states it is coming into force on April 1, 2002.
Chairperson (interpretation): Bill 32.
Moving on to Bill 32.
Operations and Maintenance, No. 2. 2002/2003.
Do you all have the Supplementary Appropriations?
O&M, 2002/2003.
Department of Finance. Operations and Maintenance, not previously authorized, Fiscal Management, Total Operations and Maintenance, $2 million 845 thousand, agreed?
That $4 million 100 thousand for insurance, are you saying, Mr. Minister, that they will not be paying for the $2 million 845 thousand for the insurance?
Mr. Chairman, what we are saying is that about two-thirds of the $4.1 million dollars will be covered off by insurance; the balance will be the Government of Nunavut expense, certainly at this point.
I am really quite sure because we never had any money set aside to compensate the people with bad gas because we did not know, it was not expected that we were supposed to compensate them.
That $4 million 100 thousand we just set aside just part of it.
So, are we looking for $2 million 845 thousand now?
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Yes, the Member is correct in that.
Mr. Arvaluk (interpretation): Lastly, Mr. Chairman has all the people that had something wrong with their vehicles because of bad gas, have they been compensated to date?
Mr. Chairman, of the total claims that have been put in, approximately 85% have been finalized.
There are still some outstanding claims out there, Mr. Chairman, thank you.
So, 2 million 845 thousand will cover that remaining 15%?
Yes, plus those that have already been paid out prior to this as well.
What was paid out prior?
My memory is sliding a bit.
Can you tell me prior to the 2.8?
Hon. Kelvin Ng: $1 million 575 thousand, Mr. Chairman, Thank you.
So, we are up around approximately 4 million 420 thousand or it must be around $4.5 million dollars to date.
My next question on that is, you removed a lot of products from the communities, and I think you sold it to a refinery in New Jersey.
Is that inventory kept in the revolving fund, or where is that inventory and how much money is involved there?
You will note, Mr. Chairman, in this supplementary bill, Public Works will have $1.9 million that the request is to offset them all from the revolving funds.
The sales of the bad products back to the refinery, proceeds went back into the revolving funds of $1.9 million, it was over and above that, the cost to the Government for that inventory.
Mr. McLean: So, to date, we are up around $6.5 million dollars for bad gasoline products.
What, that product that was removed and sold to a refinery, how much does the Government going to get back for that, if anything?
The proceeds from the gas that was sent back to the refinery was approximately $900 thousand dollars.
I had indicated the Public Work’s request here, the $1.9 million, is the net of that amount.
What I mean, Mr. Chairman, if the Member is asking for a summary, I can tell him that there is $6.2 million dollars as he has indicated that will be a loss for the Government.
Right now as expended there is roughly $2.7 million dollars that we expect to receive from the insurance, which would leave us at approximately $3.5 million dollars of which negotiations are continuing with the Northern Transportation Company Limited, and which we expect to receive some portion of that.
That is ongoing and it would not be fair to comment on that at this particular time.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.,
Yes, I am hoping that NTCL will ante up and take some of the blame.
At the end of the day, whose fault was this?
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. at the end of the day, Mr. Chairman, I would think that it is probably everybody’s fault that was involved from the perspective of how you look at it.
The refinery is certainly, the carrier/supplier, and up to the purchasers.
There are different aspects, and it is a complicated process, and obviously, with different parties involved, not everyone thinks that they are not as much at fault as the others.
The end result is I think what is important to recognize here is the consumers that end up being impacted we hope have been adequately compensated by the Government.
We have taken that responsibility and we are hoping that the others will share in that responsibility in the end.
I will say it one more time.
Whoever is responsible for quality control, they should be held accountable for three or four or five million dollars of errors.
I am hoping that this message is getting through to our Government that when people are hired into positions, MLAs are accountable at the end of the day to their electorate.
I am hoping that the people that are hired, and paid salaries at the end of the day, are held accountable for four, or five million dollars worth of mistakes that could have been avoided if in fact they had been doing their job, whether it was NTCL, or the Government of Nunavut.
I will just say it.
It is more of a statement than anything because this bad gas issue surfaced up in my colleague’s community of Gjoa Haven.
We knew about it back then, but for some reason we did not act on it quick enough probably through maybe it not being a big enough issue.
So at the end of the day, I hope that whoever is doing the quality control, down the road, and in the future, like I say, we have a history of repeating ourselves here, that they will get the message through, that quality control will be watched in the future, whether it is gasoline, or home heating fuel, or whatever this government gets into, etc., etc., etc.
Mr. Chairman, the Member made some valid points, certainly.
As Members are aware, the Government of Nunavut changed the criteria on the specifications for the re-supply of the gas since this mishap.
Certainly, the issue about ongoing diligence and quality control and testing is a valid point.
I need clarification.
I will read the Inuktitut part.
To increased costs of compensation claims to owners of snowmobiles and outboard motors.
Are those people the individuals who own snowmobiles?
What is the increase or is that the increase to compensate the snowmobile and outboard owners?
Mr. Chairman, this is for more the increase of the number of claims resolving payment on those claims, more so then the actual amount the claims themselves.
Just to repeat Mr. McLean’s comments that you will be more diligent in testing of these products to make sure that they are acceptable.
During the initial discussions about bad gas the minister stated that there is some approximately 700 additives in the gas that you cannot possibly test for them all so only test for certain of these things.
Are you saying that all 700 additives that are in the gas will be tested to be sure everything is there?
Mr. Chairman, I’m not the minister responsible for the petroleum products division.
I know they recognize the problems as a result of not having enough testing procedures an place and I believe they’re working towards insuring that there is enough testing to ensure the quality of the product that we’re receiving.
Mr. Arvaluk: Hopefully that will be for other products that are not canned like diesel and that sort of thing.
Hopefully too that the fuel that is used for airplanes also will be tested.
It a new era I guess that you could be fill anything and don’t want to scare anybody off but I still would be trying and using the diesel fuel for our stoves, their furnaces but I think this is a new thing for us.
We’ve been, historically treated very well in purchasing fuel and we became careless in but sure learned a lesson from that.
2002/2003.
Operation and Maintenance.
Total Fiscal Management. $2 million, 845 thousand.
Chairperson (interpretation): Total Department. $2 million, 845 thousand.
Chairperson (interpretation): Page 5.
Total Legal Services Board. $434 thousand.
Total Registries and Court Services. $132 thousand. Do you agree?
Under Community Justice and Correction, 235 thousand, is it for the increased cost of housing inmates outside of Nunavut in other jurisdictions, due to lack of space?
How much is the Government working to inform the public that if they deal with the inmates, if you take care of the inmates, you have just that opportunity, what kind of information is sent out to the communities and what are the opportunities?
That responsibility, Mr. Chairman, is with the Department of Justice, I believe the Member is referring to outpost camps and I believe it is a question more appropriate to the Justice.
I do not have that information.
Something is wrong here in this House.
All these Supplementary Appropriations are appropriate to all of the Departments except the Department of Finance, except for one, page 4.
Everything else is in other Departments and how are they going to be answered now, when we are reviewing this appropriation number 2.
There is something wrong here, but I am not, you know, asking this question off the cup, I have marked it before so that I can be answered.
Mr. Chairman, the process for Supplementary Appropriations, as the Minister of Finance brings forward on the information on, I generally have information on this specific request on behalf of those Departments.
In this case, Justice is for increased funding for housing inmates.
The Member is asking questions that are not really, even though it is related and not specific for this request and that is why I cannot answer what programs does the Justice has for outpost camps.
I can answer the question for the reason of the 234 thousand is because there is, as indicated, an increase cost for housing inmates, the results of new agreements in Ontario.
You know, there is a burden on the court system with more inmates, etcetera.
But that is why I am saying that it was more appropriate for the Justice Minister to explore on this for his programming for outpost camps it is not actually specific to this request here.
I know that the Justice Department have every authority to put in whatever they give to the Department of Finance, but this request of 234 thousand dollars and they have a right to try to cover what the Legislative Assembly Members might be asking.
That is why I made these comments.
I know that the Minister of Finance could only answer from the information that they get from this particular Department and I was hoping that the Department of Justice included that potential question for the Minister of Finance.
That is all I was saying.
Mr. Chairman, unfortunately, the Minister of Justice is not here or else I could have referred him to the general, that more general of a question.
I will commit to providing that information through the Member.
The Inuktitut translation in the Department of Justice and Corrections and at the registry and court services, there are some translations missing.
So, I am requesting that all of the explanations be translated fully because part of the translation is missing.
So, that is just my comment.
Total Community Justice and Corrections. $234 thousand.
Chairperson (interpretation): Total Department. $800 thousand.
Turn the page 6.
Public Works and Services Department.
Total Directorate. $1 million, 900 thousand.
Total Decentralization. $350 thousand.
For decentralization. $350 thousand.
Public Works, to provide funding to renovate Igloolik Science Centre in Igloolik.
(interpretation) That building is a very nice building.
Is that GN property or does that building belong to the Federal Government?
How is the agreement set up between the two?
That’s owned and operated by the Nunavut Arctic College right now and it will be transferred to the Government of Nunavut for the Department of Sustainable Development’s Wildlife Research Division.
Does the building belong to Nunavut, Government of Nunavut?
Total Department $1 million, 550 thousand.
Not previous authorized.
Various. $10 million.
We just dealt with the Health Department, Main Estimates, 2003/2004 for $151 million.
In 2002/2003, they have a budget for $150 million, 983 thousand. Now they need another $10 million dollars for 2002/2003 that brings up the total of $160 million, 983 thousand.
Mr. Chairman, what does the Minister of Health expect this year’s costs to be for the Health Department to be approximately $9 million dollars cheaper than 2002/2003?
Mr. Chairman, as members know, the Minister of Health, the Department of Health is continuously under stress in respect of programs and demands and services.
At the time of the budget development, we were aware that we are under some potential over expenditures as that has been the practise of the past years and recognising that, put forward this $10 million dollar supplementary appropriation, recognising as well that they’re more than likely will be one in the new fiscal year, once we close off the books, of the Department Health and Social Services.
At the same time, having said that, Mr. Chairman, we know that there is a real need to work with the department more aggressively to try to identify where the pressure areas are within the Department of Health and Social Services and to try to at least know why it is taking place and try to ensure that there are some measures, at least recognising where those pressure areas are in trying to minimize some of the impacts of their spending patterns.
So, in my language, the Minister is saying we probably will have to ask more than the original 2003/2004 budget for Health probably under the $10 million dollars, minimum.
If the trends are operating the way these, although I understand the Minister is stating that, if we look at the Health Department real closely and try to find a way to save some money that may be unnecessary or redundant.
In other words, if nothing changes, the way it operates in 2003/2004, with the 151 million dollar budget, instead of having $2.9 million dollar surplus for the total government, next year, as the Minister stated in his budget address, we are expecting approximately $8 million dollars in deficit, if all things are accounted for.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: I guess Mr. Chairman.
There’s another factor that’s out there that hasn’t come into play yet that was happening at the time of the budget development process.