EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Yes, the Fisheries Development and Diversification Program funds are available now.
When the budget was approved in our last session, those funds became available to all Nunavutmiut.
The fish plant in Chesterfield Inlet, I mean the hunters' and trappers' organization, has been looking for funding.
Would you be able to set money aside for them through that?
Yes, we have historically set aside these funds, and we have added on some more funding on top of that for this fiscal year.
Yes, we would like to work closely with them to see how we can assist them more with fisheries in Nunavut.
I thank the Minister for his excellent response.
Maybe he could get one of his staff to go down to Chesterfield Inlet to assist them in requesting more funds.
Yes, I will ask my staff or get someone who works for the hamlet to work with them in regard to this issue, to look for funding for fisheries.
When would he be directing his staff to do this?
Yes, when someone becomes available to deal with fisheries in Chesterfield Inlet, I will direct them to do so.
Question 396 – 2(2): Water Rates in Cambridge Bay
Mr. Speaker, I recently received a copy of a letter signed by several of my constituents to voice their concerns that our recent water rate increase in Cambridge Bay discriminates against them as tenants of private sector homes.
Under the Hamlets Act, Section 53.94, hamlets are allowed to offer utilities and set water rates.
My question for the Minister is, can the Minister tell the House how his department monitors hamlets when they are setting water rates, to ensure that they are fair rates for the residents of the communities?
Speaker (interpretation): Minister of Community and Government Services. Mr. Kilabuk.
I am aware that my staff was in contact with the SAO from Cambridge Bay regarding the water rates that the hamlet was proposing.
So, there has been contact with the SAO on this matter.
Under section 53.94(2) of the Hamlets Act, hamlets that set water rates are subject to the Utility Rate Review Council, which is commonly known as the URRC.
Currently only the Qulliq Energy Corporation has had utility rates reviewed by the URRC.
Can the Minister tell the House whether or not his department has considered hamlet water rates being reviewed by the URRC?
I am just not sure if my department has been following up on this with the URRC.
When the hamlet sets a rate, it is a council decision and the process that has been followed in this was to discuss this, and the staff at CGS was able to point out some of the alternatives.
Again, after that, it has been a council decision, as it is everywhere else.
I am reading a copy of the Hamlet Act; it clearly says, in 53.94(2), the municipal corporations, et cetera, Utility Rates Review Act, I appreciate what the Minister is saying, as a former mayor I am totally aware of all that.
I am wondering, can the Minister tell the House what is the department’s position with respect to whether the Utility Rate Review Council should be involved in setting water rates in hamlets.
I am just not aware if the discussions that have taken place between Cambridge Bay and our staff have included this matter, with the two parties involved.
However, I will definitely follow up with my department staff to see if that was considered or discussed with the two parties involved.
I thank the Minister for his commitment to follow up.
The Hamlet Act is for all the Hamlets Nunavut-wide; it is not just an issue in Cambridge Bay, it could be an issue in any community in Nunavut, as a hamlet.
I am wondering, can the Minister tell the House if the Government of Nunavut might propose water rate regulations to ensure a fair water rate setting by municipalities, so residents aren’t unfairly discriminated against.
It will definitely warrant it if we get the numbers to put in such a request and to look at the regulations.
As we speak today there has been nothing brought forward to me which would warrant the development of such regulations or guidelines.
As in my response to my colleague on his earlier question, that is also something that I can check to see, if there have been any other communities that are expressing similar concerns regarding water rates and any other rates for that matter.
The Member for Hudson Bay. Mr. Kattuk.
Question 397 – 2(2): Commercial Power Rates
I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Energy. I have been instructed to ask on behalf of our Co-op on the commercial rates on their concerns. Due to the utility rate increase they will have to come up with the $20,000.
The smaller communities that do not have the financial resources are very concerned about this.
I would like to ask the Minister if he will be able to work with the companies and the stores in the smaller communities.
Speaker (interpretation): Minister Responsible for the Nunavut Power Corporation, Mr. Picco.
The Member raises an important question, and that is the impact that the electrical rates increases that we put into place effective April 1, 2005 would have on individual communities.
I am very pleased to say that overall, our good friends at the cooperative movement as well as at the Northern Stores, which are the two major retailers in Nunavut, both are quite pleased with the rates that were announced because they weren’t the 60 to 70 percent amounts talked about.
What is involved there is that there is, for small businesses that generate less than $2 million in sales per year, there is a rebate available for their power bills.
Also, we have increased the income support amount, again, in this past budget, that the members can all be very proud of. That increase is over 15 percent over the last year.
Those types of things will mitigate and negate any of those types of costs that the member is talking about.
The actual increase is around three cents for a residential customer within the targeted amounts allocated on the April 1 increase.
I am trying to ask the Minister if he can work with the businesses in the smaller communities. The Co-op store in my community has some concerns with the impending increases and their effects on their business.
If there is a specific request from the Co-op in the Member’s community, concerning how we could logistically and administratively support them, with the increases that have been announced, then that’s something that we’re prepared to do.
Again, across the board, I believe it’s very safe to say that many of our member co-ops, as well as the Northern Stores and other businesses, were pleased to see that the increase was about 16.5 percent for commercial clients, and that was considerably less than what was talked about.
However, there may be some issues within the Member’s community that we’d be prepared to look at.
If the Member would speak to the Co-op or if they would like to address a letter to me or something like that, then that’s something that we’d be able to follow up with the member as well as with the community.
Everyone in the communities needs power and with the ever increasing costs for utilities, it seems like we’re heading towards the dark ages.
I am especially concerned about the smaller communities, and I am asking the Minister if he can work with the retail outlets.
I do not have any other questions, but there are concerns out there from our constituents and, of course, the communities would like to have a brighter future.
That is one of the major concerns of the communities, and I urge the Minister to work with the companies and the retail outlets to come up with a solution.
I think the government has been very proactive in looking at the needs of our constituents across the board.
Maybe it is a good opportunity just to point out that almost 80 percent of our constituents reside in social housing units through our local housing associations.
Mr. Speaker, those rates have been frozen at six cents a kilowatt hour.
There is no increase for 80 percent of our constituents living in social housing.
However, Mr. Speaker, if you owned your own home, as a good example, those rates have gone from 15.22 cents up to a little over 18 cents per kilowatt hour.
People who have their own homes, it has been reflected are maybe in a better position to pay a little bit more of that three cent increase.
When you look at the business side, Mr. Speaker, on the commercial customers, the increase was only up to 16.5 cents per kilowatt hour.
That was a bare minimum amount.
That is why many business communities up here, across Nunavut, are quite pleased with the amounts.
We know, based on the URRC recommendations, that the power corporation is still going to have a revenue shortfall, they’re short about $4 million.
I committed to this House and to the Members that I would hope that the power corporation, being more efficient, would bring that loss for the next fiscal year down below that $4 million into about $2 million.
At the same time, look at a probable rate increase again sometime in the near future, and there are some issues outstanding with the URRC.
We, the government, and I am sure the Members, are very willing to move forward to work with the customer base and the corporate base where we can, as I earlier stated.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Oral Questions.
Question 398 – 2(2): Education System
Thank you, Minister Picco, who just happens to be the recipient of my next question in his capacity as Minister of Education.
My question to the Minister is, our education system across the territories is an inclusive system and as far as I know, anyone who wishes to attend school is able to.
I would just like to ask the Minister if he could confirm that in the House.
The school system in Nunavut, like most public school systems across the country, is public school system, not a private school system.
By nature of a public school system, Mr. Speaker, then a definition would be inclusive of students as well as well as the student enrolment population.
My next question, as the Minister has indicated, is on an inclusive system.
That would mean that this is open for students regardless of any disability, handicaps, or learning problems they may have at the schools. Any child who wishes to attend school regardless of any disability, the schools would open the doors for them, is that correct?
Hon. Ed Picco: Mr. Speaker, that is not correct.
It depends, again, on what the student’s special needs are.
In most cases, the local education authority and local schools try to accommodate the student within the school system itself. The member’s question was so broad and I guess in general that it would be very difficult for a minister, and for this minister included, to give an affirmative answer to the member.
A good example would be if there was a student who was mute, who was blind, who was deaf, and who had other issues, then if that student was from Grise Fiord or Resolute Bay or any of our communities, it would be very difficult for our teachers, the school, or the district education authority to be able to provide assistance to that student.
Mr. Speaker, the school system in Nunavut is inclusive within the broader means, administratively, logistically, as well as the ability of the staff and the teachers to be able to deliver that assistance to the student.
So, I guess it’s almost inclusive. In an instance where someone with a disability wishes to attend school, what steps does the department take in trying to accommodate that individual within the school system?
I won’t use any other communities; I’ll deal specifically with Iqaluit here.
If there was a student with a disability who wanted to go to school, how would the department accommodate that individual so that they did have an opportunity to go to school and to learn and to progress and not just be left to fall through the cracks?
Each student is unique and each situation is unique when you’re dealing with the special needs of a student.
I guess from what the member is saying, he’s speaking about where a student may have physical and or mental disabilities that have put them in that position. In that case, the first thing is when the parents approach the school, and in consultation with the DEA, we have special needs people who are in the school working, for example, in Iqaluit, that the member is familiar with.
There are special needs students with physical and or mental disorders that put them at a disadvantage with other students.
In all cases, the DEA, as well as the school, try to accommodate that student within a regular structured classroom environment or setting.
In some cases they may not be able to do that based on whatever the special need is.
It’s very hard on a generic basis to be able to say in each case what occurs.
Each case has to be judged by its own situation.
It is my understanding that one of the individuals who is staying in a boarding home here in Iqaluit has been refused entry into a school.
Is the Minister saying that the Department of Education has no role to play in that, and again that it’s one of the lovely duties that it has delegated down to the district education authority to deal with?
My question to the Minister is have they just left the district education authorities to do that dirty work.
If this is the case, in this particular case where the student has been refused access to the schools, will the Minister of Education and his department act to help rectify this situation?
I’m not aware of the case in question, so it is difficult for me to say how the department or the DEA or indeed the school has reacted to this given case.
It is my understanding, having been involved in the school system for quite a while as a parent as well as now as the Minister, that there are processes with checks and balances through the system.
However, each case is based on its own merit.
If the member has a specific case that he speaks about, then that information can be made known to myself as the Minister and then certainly we would follow up and see what has occurred.
Committee Report 005 – 2(2): Report of the Rules Committee
I have been honoured today in presenting the first report of the Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures, and Privileges.
The Standing Committee on Rules, Procedures, and Privileges was constituted by way of motion in the House during the First Session of the Second Legislative Assembly of Nunavut.
The committee finally met in February of 2005 to review a number of matters concerning the operations of the rules of the Legislative Assembly, which have not been substantially amended since their initial adoption in 1999.
The committee’s first report addresses a number of concerns that have been raised by Members and marks the first milestone in the committee’s work.
I would like to briefly highlight three issues addressed by in the committee’s report; the necessary motions to amend the rules will be moved at the appropriate time later this week.
At present, the rules of the Legislative Assembly do not provide a fixed time within which a Return to an Oral Question must be provided.
Returns to Written Questions must be provided within 21 calendar days unless a provisional return is filed with the Clerk.
The committee took the position that the rules should be amended to provide a fixed time within which Returns to Oral Questions must be provided.
Given that an Oral Question generally requires less detailed responses than Written Questions, seven days was determined to be an appropriate time limit.
During the First Assembly, concerns arose with respect to the issue of the status of Bills following their referrals to Standing Committees.
At present, the rules are ambiguous with respect to how to advance the Bill to the next stage of the legislative process in the event that the Standing Committee does not report back within the 120-day period provided for in the rules of the committee’s scrutiny of the Bill.
A majority of the committee members were of the view that greater process clarity could be achieved by amending Rule 68.
The proposed amendment to the rules would provide a formal mechanism to advance the Bill to the next stage in the event that a motion to extend the review period was not passed.
It is also important to note that a motion to move a Bill into the committee of the whole would itself be voted upon by all Members of the House.
The end result would be a clear indication as to the will of the House with respect to a given legislative initiative.
At present, the rules of the Legislative Assembly provides for documents to be formally tabled when the House is sitting.
The rules do not provide explicit guidance with respect to making documents available to Members of the Legislative Assembly and the public during periods of prorogation or extended adjournment.
From time to time, such documents as Reports of Independent Officer, Returns to Written and Oral Questions and Annual Reports required by statute are prepared during periods of time when the House is not sitting.
The committee was of the view that it would be desirable to provide formal clarification as to how to treat such items with a view of expediting their public release.
The committee is of the view that the formal process of backdoor tabling would serve this goal.
Mr. Speaker, I will move, with that, that the report be received and adopted by this House.
Do you agree that the committee report be received and approved by the House, pursuant to Rule 91(3) and that it be recorded as read?
Committee Report on Bills 005 - 2(2): Bill 18 – Powers of Attorney Act
I wish to report that Bill 18, the Powers of Attorney Act has been reviewed by the Standing Committee Ajauqtiit and that the Bill is ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 68(5) and have Bill 18 moved into Committee of the Whole for today.
There is a motion to waive Rule 68(5) and to have Bill 18 moved into Committee of the Whole for today.
Bill 18 is now ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole for today.
Tabled Document 133 – 2(2): Nunavut Energy Management Program Pamphlet
There are approximately 518 houses and they cost approximately $14 million a year for utilities and heating fuel.
I would like to table a document from the Government of Nunavut and the Department of Community and Government Services regarding conserving energy consumption.
Tabled Document 134 – 2(2): Ministerial Meeting Report – Northern Premiers Forum, April 16, 2005
I would like to table the minutes of the Premier’s Conference that took place on April 16th.
Tabled Document 135 – 2(2): Letters of Expectation
I wish to table the following copies of the letters of expectation as per my Minister’s Statement earlier today.
Tabled Document 136 – 2(2): Government of Nunavut Department of Community and Government Services Gasoline Survey and Follow-up.
I would also like to table a document from the Government of Nunavut from the Department of Community and Government Services.
It is in regards to the gasoline study that was done and an update on other reviews that were done.
Bill 15 – Act to Amend the Wildlife Act – Second Reading
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): Thank you, as always, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Pangnirtung that Bill 15, an Act to amend the Wildlife Act be read for the second time.
Mr. Speaker, the comprehensive new Wildlife Act was enacted in December 2003.
The government expects to bring it into force later this year, once the necessary regulations and orders are ready.
Before the Act is brought into force, it requires amendments to make a number of housekeeping changes and two substantive changes.
Most of the amendments reflect minor clarification of wording to better reflect the original intent of the Act.
The first substantive change is to repeal a consequential amendment to the Travel and Tourism Act to allow a separate licensing scheme under the Wildlife Act and the wildlife aspects of the business.
The second substantive change relates to the Victims of Crime Act to allow a surcharge under the Wildlife Act to fund the Natural Resource Conservation Trust Fund.
Speaker (interpretation): The motion is in order. To the motion.
The motion is carried. Bill 15 has been read for the second time and is now referred to Standing Committee.
Bill 19 – Legislative Assembly Statutes Amendments Act – Second Reading
I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Cambridge Bay that Bill 19, Legislative Assembly Statutes Amendments Act be read for the second time.
Mr. Speaker, the purpose of these amendments is to clarify the duties of the Integrity Commissioner and to address liability concerns.
In addition, the amendments clarify when Session can be convened as well as providing a process to assent to Bills outside of the Legislative Assembly.
The amendment also brings the Legislative Assembly Retiring Allowance Act in line with the requirements of the federal Income Tax Act.
Motion 021 – 2(2): Bill 19 “Legislative Assembly Statutes Amendment Act” to Committee of the Whole
Pursuant to Rule 67(2), I move, seconded by the Honourable Member from Cambridge Bay that Bill 19 be ordered into Committee of the Whole.
Speaker (interpretation): The Minister is seeking consent to waive the Rule 67(2) to read Bill 19 for the second time today.
There are no nays, Ms. Aglukkaq.
The Bill has had its second reading and is now referred to the Committee of the Whole.
Tabled Document 100 -2(2), Table Document 101- 2(2), and Table Document 102 - 2(2), I apologize, Bill 18.
Bill 16, Bill 17, Bill 19 with Mr. Evyagotailak in the Chair.
We will take a break for 20 minutes.
>>House recessed at 15:36 and resumed at 16:11
Chairman (Mr. Evyagotailak): Welcome back from your break, committee.
In Committee of the Whole we have the following items to deal with: Tabled Document 100-2(2); Tabled Document 101-2(2); and Tabled Document 102-2(2); Bill 16; Bill 17; Bill 18; and Bill 19.
We wish to deal with Bill 18 being followed by Bill 19, after that we will continue our review of Tabled Document 100-2(2): Government of Nunavut Leased Properties.
Are we in agreement that we first deal with Bill 18?
I would now like to ask the Minister responsible for Justice to make his opening remarks.
The way in which we carry out our business of finance in Nunavut has changed radically over a short period of time.
Sometimes we move faster in this regard than the legislation that we have in place.
At the time of division the Northwest Territories did not have a Powers of Attorney Act, and because of that situation Nunavut we must now create such legislation.
Due to the fact that Nunavut does not have such an Act, it is not possible for a person living in Nunavut to give a power of attorney that would remain in effect even after the person who made it is no longer of sound mind.
It is of greatest importance that we have legislation allowing us to delegate to others some of the tasks and responsibilities that from time to time it may not be possible for us to do so as individuals.
This proposed legislation will provide Nunavummiut with the maximum flexibility in the manner in which they manage their financial affairs so that the individuals who are appointed as attorneys in the power of attorney document will be able to carry on the financial affairs of the donor in the absence or incapacity of the donor.
Those are my brief comments and I will be pleased to respond to any questions that members of the committee may have.
Chairman: Thank you, Premier.
Does the Chairman for the standing committee have any comments?
The Ajauqtiit committee had an opportunity to review Bill 18 in regards to the Powers of Attorney Act. (interpretation ends) Mr. Chairman, the standing committee recognizes at the time of division, the Northwest Territories did not have Powers of Attorney Act and for this reason Nunavut does not has such legislation at the present time.
Mr. Chairman, this Bill will provide a tool to Nunavummiut to be able to grant a present day power of attorney to be able to conduct their financial affairs in the event that it may be necessary should they leave the country or if they become incapable to do so.
Mr. Chairman, during the review of Bill 18, the committee felt that section 5 (1) required further clarification with respect to the restrictions of disclosure on health information.