EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
While on the topic of search and rescue, how will your department disseminate the information outlining this to the search and rescue groups? Will it be in correspondence to every search and rescue group in Nunavut?
Indeed, it is fine. If we are required to inform the groups, we can provide that notification either through letters or emails directly to the hamlet offices or directly to the search and rescue groups.
Mr. Mikkungwak (interpretation): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I also thank the minister.
I support all the search and rescue groups throughout Nunavut. I would urge your staff to send this correspondence to the search and rescue groups for their information, as the local groups can identify the issues related to which group handles the local searches.
To move on to a different subject on the same page, 161, (interpretation ends) Nunavut Emergency Management, (interpretation) is that for an emergency situation happening in the communities?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok: Nunavut Emergency Management (interpretation) mainly deals with planning for emergency situations, (interpretation ends) emergency preparedness plans. (interpretation) We can help the communities in Nunavut in planning for emergencies.
Mr. Mikkungwak (interpretation): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the minister for his response.
There are many communities in Nunavut. Do you check with the communities to see if they have updated their equipment just in case there is an emergency? Do you know what needs to be replaced?
How do you communicate with the communities to find out about the information? Do you consult them yearly or every two years? How frequently do you consult the communities about their equipment?
We have asked the communities to document their equipment and also to state or give us a condition rating of the equipment. We have asked for that information so that we can help them update or replace some of their equipment or which ones are just too old or too broken up that can be replaced or repaired.
As the minister may recall, last year, there was a press release and the minister did make, I believe, with the press, some announcements with the Gas Tax Fund’s signing. I’m on J-5 on the last paragraph, “management and reporting required under the Gas Tax Fund.”
How is that information being relayed to municipalities across the territory?
If it’s okay with you, I would like my deputy minister to respond to that.
The gas tax program is administered through the Nunavut Community Infrastructure Advisory Committee.
Right now, the gas tax is strictly used for water and wastewater programs. Each community submits a list of funding to Community Development through this advisory committee.
They then determine and prioritize the projects that will be allocated to the communities for upgrades needed to their water and waste management facilities.
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Green. Mr. Mikkungwak.
The last sentence on that particular paragraph, “Building Canada Fund and other Federal Infrastructure Programs,” can the minister elaborate on those?
Again, if I may, I defer that question to my deputy minister for elaboration.
Currently, the latest update on the New Building Canada Fund is that all departments have submitted a list of projects for consideration in the New Building Canada Fund.
They have been ranked and prioritized. There is a list of projects that are being submitted to Infrastructure Canada for consideration.
We suspect that we will know within the next three months if those projects will be approved through Infrastructure Canada.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Green. Mr. Mikkungwak.
You can rule me out of order if am out of order on this one.
I believe that Community and Government Services works with the Department of Economic Development and Transportation on these federal infrastructure programs.
I’m referring to this. Would that include airport matters?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Mikkungwak. Minister Sammurtok.
Yes, the member is correct. (interpretation ends) That is run through the P3 program. (interpretation) Thank you.
Chairman: Qujannamiik, Hon. Minister. Mr. Mikkungwak.
Having reviewed a lot of the correspondence from Baker Lake, in the past, there was a possibility of a P3 project that was about to surface, but somehow it fell through.
Would your department take into consideration of discussing this with the Hamlet of Baker Lake?
I’m not quite sure what my colleague is talking about.
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Mikkungwak, can you please clarify that for the (interpretation ends) hon. minister.
Before I became an MLA, there was an airport project being planned, but I don’t know what happened.
It just seemed to have stopped. They did a bunch of studying. I’m just asking if it’s anywhere in the radar to come up again in any meetings.
The issue that the member has raised a question on is that if the hamlet wishes to reapply for that project, they can put it on the capital plan.
Moving on, Mr. Savikataaq.
I would just like to go back a bit to the land plebiscite.
The minister stated that someone is going to designate a plebiscite authority.
I would just like to ask the minister who is going to decide who the plebiscite authority is.
Chairman (Mr. Mikkungwak) (interpretation): Thank you very much. Mr. Sammurtok.
This was an issue discussed by the cabinet and we felt that cabinet could make that appointment.
Just for clarity, then, the minister is going to recommend that cabinet decides on who the authority is.
This is currently in front of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
EIA is going to decide who the plebiscite authority is, just for clarity.
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) EIA will bring that into cabinet and it will be cabinet that will decide who is going to be the plebiscite authority. (interpretation) Thank you.
I heard part of the exchange between the minister and Mr. Hickes about who can be the plebiscite authority. I think I heard in there too that cabinet can be.
Does that mean that cabinet is going to decide who the authority is, yet cabinet can be the authority?
As per the earlier response, any one of the following can be a plebiscite authority: (interpretation ends) the Legislative Assembly, the Commissioner in Executive Council, the Minister of CGS, (interpretation) or (interpretation ends) the Council of Municipal Corporations, for the plebiscite held in that community. (interpretation) Additionally, it includes at this time (interpretation ends) the Department of Justice (interpretation) statement that it would be best for the GN to work through the (interpretation ends) Minister of CGS. (interpretation) Thank you.
I’m hearing two different things.
EIA is going to decide or recommend to cabinet for cabinet to decide and the Department of Justice, which, in theory, is part of cabinet because there’s a justice minister in cabinet who is recommending that the minister be the plebiscite authority.
The cabinet will make the decision as to which department is appointed to head this process.
The department has provided their opinion.
What they haven’t said is that this is how we will play this process out. Cabinet would have to make the decision as to who the ultimate authority will be for this plebiscite.
The reason I’m bringing this up is because the plebiscite is in 2016, which is not that far away.
By the sounds of it, there’s a lot of work that has to be done and none of it can start until there’s a plebiscite authority picked and chosen.
Is there a timeframe of when a plebiscite authority will be… ?
I don’t know if “picked” is the right word, but when is there going to be a decision on who is the plebiscite authority for the land plebiscite?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) As I mentioned earlier, it is very likely that EIA will bring that into cabinet.
We are in discussion with them that we would like to see this done sooner than later so that we can start the process with this as soon as possible. (interpretation) Thank you.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. Mr. Savikataaq.
I know that the minister does not speak for EIA, but can he give us a better timeframe of when “sooner than later” is? Is it next week? Next month?
Six months? Just a rough idea to us as to when it may happen, but I understand that he does not speak for EIA, so what kind of a timeframe can the minister give us?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) If I may, maybe you might want to ask the Premier if he would like to respond to that. (interpretation) Thank you.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) Hon. Premier, Mr. Taptuna.
As indicated in our Full Caucus get-together in Kugluktuk, we wanted to conduct the land plebiscite. As you know, on April 10 of 1995, the first referendum was held.
Of course, the majority of the votes of all the communities voted for leasehold arrangements rather than the sale of municipal lands.
Under the land claims agreement, Article 14.8, I believe, the next plebiscite was to be held within 20 years and that timeframe is coming up.
It’s probably going to be the same questions asked, but at the end of the day, there are a lot of implications, the cost to the government and the cost to homeowners, as brought up earlier.
There are some in-depth things that we’re going to look at. There are implications.
As a government, we’re going to be using the Plebiscites Act to have the plebiscite go forth in March of 2016.
There is a lot of information and implications that are going to affect homeowners, as indicated earlier, and of course, the municipalities.
That’s one of the things that we want to clarify with all the government departments, including Justice, and possibly with the committees that the minister has indicated. There are some consultations that do have to take place.
As a government, we’re not allowed to advocate for a yea or nay vote, but at the same time, Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated has that obligation to push for whatever decision that they may want. As indicated by the minister, there are a lot of implications.
Once we have those figured out, we intend to hold a plebiscite in March of 2016.
Chairman: Ma’nalluavik, Hon. Premier.
Mr. Savikataaq: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the Premier for that explanation, but I still didn’t hear of when EIA might recommend to cabinet when to pick a plebiscite authority.
Mr. Chairman, just like everything else in Nunavut, when there are elections or plebiscites or referendums, we use Elections Nunavut.
We intend to use that authority to hold our plebiscite.
We are working in conjunction with them and of course, a couple of other departments, as I indicated, Justice and of course, CGS and EIA.
Once that is established, as I indicated, we intend to hold a plebiscite in March of 2016. According to the land claims article, Article 14, we intend to do that.
Again, I’ve got to say that there are quite a bit of implications to this plebiscite.
As a member had previously stated, homeowners are going to be affected. The majority of Nunavummiut live in public housing and that’s one of the things that we want to ensure that we get this right to benefit Nunavummiut.
As you know, Mr. Chairman, there are indications out there that the mining corporations and exploration companies have indicated that it is very difficult to open offices and put in other infrastructure on municipal lands because of uncertainty of the tenure.
That is one of the things that we talked about in our Full Caucus discussions in Kugluktuk.
As I indicated, we are hoping that for sure, we will have our plebiscite in March of 2016.
I thank the Premier for more of an explanation again and that they’re using Elections Nunavut and all that. I would still like to know when EIA is going to recommend to cabinet and cabinet decides who the plebiscite authority is.
Until there is a plebiscite authority named, nothing can go forward because the plebiscite authority is the one that will be running the plebiscite.
I thank the member for that question. Maybe I didn’t make myself clear, but the authority holding the plebiscite is going to be Elections Nunavut.
It’s going to be done through the Plebiscites Act. We do have a Plebiscites Act in Nunavut. They’re going to be following the procedures and protocols that are set out in the Act.
I thank the Premier for clarifying that Elections Nunavut will be the plebiscite authority, but now I’ll ask the minister… . On his list of people who can be a plebiscite authority, I didn’t hear Elections Nunavut in there.
Is Elections Nunavut going to be the plebiscite authority?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) My understanding is that we will use the Elections Nunavut guidelines to hold this plebiscite, and I think this what the Premier was indicating earlier. (interpretation) Thank you.
I don’t want to dwell on this issue, so I guess I’ll just move on, but it seems like no one can answer me when EIA is going to recommend a plebiscite authority.
Until there is a plebiscite authority named, nothing can go forward because that is who is going to decide what the wording of the plebiscite vote will be about. That’s my understanding. Am I correct in my understanding?
Chairman: Thank you. Hon. Minister, Mr. Sammurtok. (interpretation) Thank you very much. I apologize. (interpretation ends) Hon. Premier, Mr. Taptuna.
Absolutely, we do have the Plebiscites Act in Nunavut and Elections Nunavut is a body that usually conducts referendums, plebiscites, elections, and other municipal referendums that might take place, including liquor plebiscites. They are the authority that does that under the Plebiscites Act. As I indicated, it’s one of the things to do.
As the member may recall, in 1995, there was a simple question that was asked in the plebiscite and the question is probably going to be similar to the 1995 plebiscite held at that time.
I’ll move on to another issue so that the minister may answer it.
One of my colleagues brought up the funding formula for the hamlets and the minister stated that they’re reviewing it or might be updating it.
Is the current formula per capita based funding for the hamlets?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) The current formula is based on a financing formula rather than per capita. (interpretation) Thank you.
I don’t know how the formula financing works. Would a larger community be funded to the same level as a small community or would a small community have better funding because they don’t have to do as much?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok: Thank you, Iksivautaaq. (interpretation) Actually, it is obvious that larger communities receive larger amounts of funding. The smaller communities have a proportionate but smaller amount based on their size.
When this question was raised, we had responded as to how the financial arrangements are made.
You stated that you’re looking at the new funding formula.
Is the current one not adequate that a new funding formula is being anticipated? Have there been complaints that the funding formula is not working out for some of the hamlets or is it just an initiative by the department to look at the funding formula for the hamlets?
Actually, things tend to change and this includes communities and their infrastructure.
Further, (interpretation ends) as a department, we’re always trying to improve ways of providing funding to the municipalities. (interpretation) We would like to have more time to review these so that we can assist the communities more (interpretation ends) as a government. (interpretation) Thank you.
Moving on here, about a year ago in February of last year, the department issued a Request for Information for Potential Planning for Solid Waste Management Methods for Nunavut Territory.
The [RFI] closed on March 28, 2014, almost a year ago.
Can the minister tell us what the results were for that request for information report, and when does he expect a final report on that RFI?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Maybe for the technical response, if it’s okay with you, I would refer that to my deputy minister.
The first draft of the strategy was presented to the NAMA meeting in November 2014 for discussion, feedback, and collaboration with municipal ministers.
Based on the discussions and feedback from the NAMA meeting, we have now completed the final report for the Water Compliance Working Group to use now to develop short-term, intermediate, and long-term plans to address municipal solid waste sites across the territory.
Will the minister be tabling this document so that we can all look at the information that is in it?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) We can certainly provide that information to the member if he so wishes. (interpretation) Thank you.
I think I so wish that and that’s why I asked if it was going to be tabled. Okay, if you will provide it.
In this report, I don’t know what was in there.
I assume it makes stuff of how you are going to fix your solid waste management program.
Are there any dollar figures attached to this report on how Nunavut is going to deal with its solid waste management?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) If the member is prepared to bear with me, I would be prepared to table the document.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) We are on Branch Summary.
Following the list of names, Mr. Shooyook.
Since our meeting is progressing too fast, I would like to return back to this issue.
I am confused now after responses to questions raised by the Member for Tununiq on the eligibility criteria for this referendum.
If you live in a community for one year, then you are eligible to vote based on these criteria. I want to ask about Inuit who move to another community to work.
Is this the reason or is this to allow southerners who are transient workers who have stayed in Nunavut for one year?
Have you included them here? Is that how I understand it? I’m getting confused, so perhaps you can explain that.
The current written criteria in the policy state that as long as you have attained the age of 18 and have resided in Nunavut for at least one year, you would become eligible to vote. However, as I stated, our department will conduct a community tour to explain the process and to collect local concerns on the issue.
If the majority pushes for changes, changes would be considered and it will open soon.
Yes, I understand your response.
During this consultation tour of the government, when they tour the communities, they arrive with decisions already made with no ability to change them. Even when residents fight for change, due to the decisions already having been made, the options are taken away.
Now, with respect to this planned tour, will the focus be on the concerns expressed by the local residents on this momentous event? That is, if you hear that the majority are pushing for specific criteria. Will the department follow through with the wishes of the people?
I hope that will be your objective for this community consultation tour.
Yes, the plan for this consultation tour has that objective. We will gather the feedback from the communities and will take into consideration the concerns and recommendations expressed at the meetings.
Community and Government Services. Community Services. (interpretation) Following my list of names, Mr. Hickes.
I believe I just have one quick question on here. I had brought it up a couple of times in the past and actually, the Premier alluded to it, but it’s regarding the land plebiscite’s cost to homeowners.
One the concerns that I brought up in the past is the cost to transfer a title from a land lease to a fee simple title.
To me, overall, especially if there are going to be a couple of limited firms up here that deal with that type of work, the cost shouldn’t be exorbitant.
In your query with the Department of Justice, for one, is that topic being discussed and, for two, to make sure that it’s not a money grab by the government or any other entity from homeowners in Nunavut in any community that chooses to go to a fee simple title?
My understanding is that we’re currently discussing this with the Department of Justice.
If I may, if you could allow my deputy minister to elaborate. (interpretation) Thank you.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. Mr. Green.
Based on our discussion with the Department of Justice, if the leases are transferred or if the leases are transferred over to fee simple, basically, the only cost associated would be the administration cost to transfer them from a lease to a fee simple.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, I move a motion to report progress.
Mr. Mikkungwak: Mr. Speaker, your committee has been considering Bill 16 and the main estimates, and would like to report progress.
Item 23. (interpretation) Orders of the Day. (interpretation ends) Mr. Clerk.
Just a reminder of meetings for tomorrow morning, there is a meeting of the Regular Caucus at nine o’clock in the Tuktu Boardroom, and at ten o’clock, there is a meeting of the Management and Services Board in the same room, Tuktu.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) This House stands adjourned until Tuesday, March 3, 2015, at 1:30.
Tuesday, March 3, 2015
Pages 1892 – 1966
Opening Prayer 1892
Ministers’ Statements 1892
Members’ Statements 1893
Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery 1898
Oral Questions 1898
Revert to Item 5: Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery 1917
Tabling of Documents 1918
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters 1918
Report of the Committee of the Whole 1965
Orders of the Day 1965
Tuesday, March 3, 2015 1892
104 – 4(2): Early Childhood Education Elder Consultation in Iqaluit (Quassa) 1892
228 – 4(2): Congratulations to Elaine Uppahuak-Prusky (Kuksuk) 1893
229 – 4(2): Nunavut Participants at Canada Winter Games (Taptuna) 1894
230 – 4(2): Tribute to Qikiqtarjuaq Divers (Keyootak) 1894
231 – 4(2): Tribute to Amie Panimera of Igloolik Radio (Quassa) 1895
232 – 4(2): Appreciation for Incorporating Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit in Education (Shooyook) 1896
233 – 4(2): Issues Facing Women across Nunavut (Angnakak) 1896
234 – 4(2): Congratulations to Jane Nakasuk 1897
235 – 4(2): Black History Month in Iqaluit (Okalik) 1898
375 – 4(2): Support to Alcohol Education Committees (Mikkungwak) 1898
376 – 4(2): Hydroelectric Power Transmission in the Kivalliq (Savikataaq) 1900
377 – 4(2): Administration of the Public Service (Angnakak) 1901
378 – 4(2): Nursing Positions in Nunavut (Shooyook) 1903
379 – 4(2): Administration of Medical Travel Leave (Joanasie) 1905
380 – 4(2): Dental Services in Rankin Inlet (Sammurtok) 1907
381 – 4(2): Eye Team Visits to Baker Lake (Mikkungwak) 1907
382 – 4(2): Status of Government of Nunavut Standing Offer Agreement for Medical and Duty Travel (Enook) 1908
383 – 4(2): Condition of Fire Trucks in Rankin Inlet (Sammurtok) 1910
384 – 4(2): Government Liaison Office (Rumbolt) 1911
385 – 4(2): Victims Assistance Services (Angnakak) 1912
386 – 4(2): Review of Subsidies for Homeowners (Hickes) 1913
387 – 4(2): Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women (Enook) 1914
107 – 4(2): Agreement used for the Management of Local Housing Programs (Kuksuk) 1918
Bill 16 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2015-2016 – Community and Government Services – Consideration in Committee 1918
Bill 16 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2015-2016 – Education – Consideration in Committee 1951
Speaker (interpretation): Good afternoon, my fellow Nunavummiut, and welcome. Members, ministers, the (interpretation ends) Premier, (interpretation) visitors, interpreters, and our staff, welcome.
Minister’s Statement 104 – 4(2): Early Childhood Education Elder Consultation in Iqaluit (Quassa)
Hon. Paul Quassa (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Good day, my fellow Inuit, residents of Aggu and Nunavut.
As expressed in our mandate, Sivumut Abluqta, education is the number one priority of this government.