EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
This has been successfully dealt with. Yesterday morning, there was a plane that came in to Sanikiluaq even though it was quite windy. They usually arrive around 11:00.
They were there for 12 hours at the airport because they couldn’t go anywhere.
One of them went home and he indicated that he had frostbite on his cheek, but the other Qallunaat just stayed at the airport because the road was closed due to the storm.
I’m happy to report that everybody is okay, except maybe minor frostbite.
Member’s Statement 159 – 2(3): Coldest Part of Nunavut (Alagalak)
First of all, I would like to make a correction of what I stated earlier.
I said we have two members from the Keewatin people at the Cabinet level. I should have said three.
First of all, it’s very hard to work seriously all the time, so I’m just going to probably...
(interpretation ends) I’m pleased to learn that Iqaluit is no longer considered a far north community. (interpretation) It’s evident now according to traditional knowledge, but for those of us who are part of the younger generation, we know what the weather is like.
(interpretation ends) If Iqaluit is no longer considered as a far north community, due to the world itself, it has moved into the warmer parts of the world, which means, Mr. Speaker, that the Infrastructure Fund provided by the federal government, without a doubt, will be assigned to the communities in the colder climate parts of Nunavut.
One cannot wear a regular rubber boots in the coldest parts of winter in February.
(interpretation) Because the month of February is the coldest part of the year, and we’ve never worn rubber in the months of February according to traditional knowledge, but in Iqaluit, I have seen people walking around with rubber boots.
You didn’t see me Mr. Speaker?
I rise today to acknowledge one of the interpreters, my namesake, Naimee Kilabuk-Bourassa, I would like to acknowledge her and also welcome her.
I also acknowledge her mother, Aitainak Mary Kilabuk from Pangnirtung.
Naimee’s mother has turned 76 today and I wish her happy birthday wishes for today.
Just be patient for a bit.
Question 169 – 2(3): Discussions with the Prime Minister (Peterson)
Mr. Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker for taking me first.
Everybody wants to ask questions, but my question is for the Premier.
Mr. Speaker, the Premier recently traveled to Ottawa over the weekend to meet with the Prime Minister, along with other Premier colleagues.
Can the Premier tell us what he discussed with the Prime Minister while he was in Ottawa?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It was very, very nice to see you guys looking just like harp seals coming out of the waters.
(interpretation ends) I was hoping to do a Minister’s Statement tomorrow on this very important subject, but the member has beaten me to it.
So my main issue was Kelowna, it’s the most important item for our territory and me, as well as the housing situation.
We also discussed devolution, but during the all-Premiers’ meeting dinner with the Prime Minister, there were wide-ranging issues discussed, but my main issue, again, was Kelowna.
I was very pleased with the amount of support that we had from all walks of life throughout Canada by my fellow colleagues during our meeting with the Prime Minister on Kelowna.
And the following meeting, the breakfast meeting with the Prime Minister, we also again discussed Kelowna and devolution and Arctic sovereignty. I found the Prime Minister to be open.
At the same time, he made commitments during the campaign that he felt strongly about that he would look at all issues.
He may not respond to them all at once, but that he will keep an open mind.
One of the media reports I read this morning was that Prime Minister Harper told northern leaders that there will be no new deals for the north in the first Conservative budget.
My question for the Premier: did the Prime Minister indicate to the Premier that his government would honour commitments the Kelowna First Ministers’ Meeting?
The Prime Minister is committed to the target. That’s the commitment he’s made, but as for dollars for Kelowna, no dollars had been identified by the prior government or committed.
So that’s the dilemma he was facing, that he’ll have to find dollars to try and meet Kelowna. So that was his dilemma.
As for new commitments, the Prime Minister was quite clear that on fiscal imbalance, he will await the results of the Expert Panel, which is scheduled to table their report this spring. He’ll respond to it in the next fiscal year.
So our issue was that if he can’t deal with the fiscal imbalance, our financial situation, that he should try and find ways to at least address some of our most pressing needs in the north.
So I left that open to the Prime Minister.
I believe that this government will table their budget in April and I will not pre-judge them until that time.
I thank the Premier for that response.
In addition to the Kelowna First Ministers’ Meeting, could the Premier tell us what he told the Prime Minister was Nunavut’s number one priority challenge to address?
I mentioned that our main priority was Kelowna at this time, but that we have many, many challenges for the government including infrastructure, arctic sovereignty, and devolution.
So there are many challenges that we face, but our primary focus at the moment is Kelowna and housing.
So I was quite clear on that and I do hope that they respond accordingly.
I thank the Premier.
Can the Premier tell us if he’s invited the Prime Minister of Canada to visit Nunavut in 2006, including visiting the Kitikmeot region?
Hon. Paul Okalik: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, I did invite the Prime Minister.
We did have a brief discussion that his wife had actually been in Nunavut, but he hasn’t personally, but that his wife has gone up to my hometown of Pangnirtung as a tourist. So that was encouraging to see that at least he has some firsthand knowledge of the beauty of our territory.
Question 170 – 2(3): Auditor General’s 2005 Report (Tootoo)
I would like to have a sense of humour as Mr. Alagalak said.
I’m just wondering, it’s not a question that I need publicly responded to, but I thought I heard the Premier say Harper seals. So I’m just wondering if he said Harper seals or harp seals.
That’s not my question Mr. Speaker.
I think it’s always one of the biggest challenges that we face in Nunavut is educating our fellow countrymen in the south as to what our challenges and circumstances are.
I would say in almost all occasions when Iqaluit or any part of Nunavut gets national attention, it’s good.
However, one could say over the weekend, some of the publicity we’re getting for being pretty close to the hot spot in Canada for over the last few days, it could be a bad indication that global warming is coming.
Another area that we received national media attention on in the last few weeks was thanks to Ms. Sheila Fraser, the Auditor General of Canada, when she tabled her report in our legislature here for 2005.
Mr. Speaker, in the report to the Assembly, the Auditor General warns that the risk of fraud is higher than it should be in our government because its financial management is “weak and fragile.”
Mr. Speaker, another quote that is throughout her report in there is, “Past problems continue, situation worsening.”
We learned last week, thanks to the media, that funds were missing from one of the development corporation subsidiaries and that charges are expected. I would say clearly, as I have said over the last number of years, the Auditor General’s warnings need to be taken seriously.
Mr. Speaker, in the management’s response and the government’s response to the report, the government indicated that it had recently initiated a review of GN financial structures with the final report scheduled to be delivered in March 2006.
Can the minister provide us with the details as to where this review is at today and what concrete steps the government is looking at taking to address the issues raised by the Auditor General and the Members of this House?
Speaker (interpretation): Minister responsible for Finance, Mr. Simailak.
Yes, my colleague is correct because we do face many challenges on financial issues. Not just in the Department of Finance, but in all of the departments, we face many challenging issues; they will still continue to work on them and I know that we will continually work on that.
In regard to your question of where the review is, I can’t tell you exactly where we are, but perhaps by the end of March that report will be given to me. I expect that it should be completed by the end of March, in regard to the member’s question, for review.
We are still continually working on those issues, Mr. Speaker. Our officials and staff in the Department of Finance work with the corporate services from each department and they train the corporate services’ directors.
Our Finance officials are continually taking training courses that they require. Yes, we continue to work on them and we will continue to work on them.
But my colleague is correct that we do face huge, large challenges within our government.
The minister indicated that he is anticipating that report would be handed to him by the end of March. Would the minister commit to tabling that report in the legislature and if we are not in session, if he could use the backdoor tabling rule and provide it to the Clerk for members to be sent copies then.
Yes, I will see if I can table the report in the House during this session or afterwards.
I appreciate the minister’s response and look forward to seeing that report.
Mr. Speaker, also in the Auditor General’s Report on Chapter 1, page 6, paragraph 8 and 9, where it indicates that where their audit work continues, we have already seen enough problems to agree with the government’s own assessment that significant problems remain; that’s in paragraph 9.
In paragraph 8, the Auditor General indicates that it agrees with the government’s own formal assessment that the central controls were not yet in place.
And, as it’s reported here, it said in late 2004-05, a government report concluded that, again, those essential controls were not in place yet.
Would the minister also be willing to table that report so that we can compare reports and see what progress has been made from 2004-05, to the current one that’s going to be done in 2006?
As I stated earlier, I will see if I can table that report, and if I can, I will table it in the House during this session or afterwards through the Clerk’s office.
Another thing that is always seen over the last six years... it hasn’t been six Auditor General reports, but every report that we’ve seen from the Auditor General, and the management response, that’s the only time I have ever heard the government agree to everything.
In the report, it always says, to the recommendation of the Auditor General, that the government agrees and that we’re doing this and we’re doing that.
I guess my question to the minister is; in these recommendations, why is it that we always see there is a problem, and nothing really concrete in there as to how to and what they’re doing, and what they’ve done to address those concerns.
I’m just wondering if the minister could state any specific steps that have been taken over the past few years that show the government has been making some progress in achieving and following through in their agreements.
Progress that shows they’re actually doing something other than just saying, we agree, there is a problem.
That’s exactly what our finance people keep saying, but I’m sure there are improvements being made on an ongoing basis.
The staff at the Department of Finance is improving and there is ongoing training taking place for the staff.
There is training provided to the people at the community level and we’re increasing our numbers within our department.
There are more and more people who are working in the departments in Finance and other departments. There is ongoing training provided to Government of Nunavut staff.
We are looking at all the recommendations being made by the Auditor General.
We are making responses to them, and we’re starting to initiate some work that hasn’t been started by the government yet.
We are looking at the recommendations and looking at rectifying the problem through our department, and we will keep doing so.
Question 171 – 2(3): Harvesters’ Support Program and Disaster Support Review (Kilabuk)
I guess in an effort to be consistent with my line of questioning, I want make my question for our friend, and colleague, the Minister of Environment.
I may give him a break after this Question Period before I move on to a new minister.
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Minister of Environment, and it stems from, upon further checking and reviewing, stems from November 17, of last year, where the Minister of Environment announced in this House a joint review with Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, of the Harvesters’ Support Programs.
At that time, he said and I quote, “I’m expecting the final report of the review to be completed in the very near future. Copies of the final report will be provided to all Members of the Legislative Assembly for review and consideration. I anticipate that new updated harvesters’ support policies could be in place by the beginning of the next fiscal year.”
So with that Mr. Speaker, my first question is: is this specific Disaster Compensation Program I’ve been talking about and questioning the minister with the last couple of days; is this program a part of this review?
The Disaster Compensation Program is being reviewed and we are waiting for the recommendations from Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. Once the final report is complete, I will be giving out copies to the members.
Can the minister let us know when we will be able to get copies so that we can review and be updated? When are you going to be expecting those recommendations from Nunavut Tunngavik?
Once Nunavut Tunngavik has completed their report, they will be giving us copies and we will give you copies right away as soon as we receive them.
Mr. Kilabuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I apologize.
My fellow minister, oh, I’m sorry, my colleague, of course, he didn’t know when he was going to be getting that portion from Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated.
My question then is: once you get that portion from Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, how long are we going to be able to keep a copy of them so that we can review, make deletions, additions or changes?
You stated that the Harvesters’ Support Policy could be in place by the beginning of the next fiscal year. Well we’ve only got about a month or so left before the next fiscal year. How much time are you going to give us?
I’m not exactly sure how big the document is, but we will make sure that you have ample time to review the report.
I’m not exactly sure how long you will have, but I will do everything I can to accommodate you so that you have time to review and make whatever changes are required.
We would like to do that while we’re updating the support policies.
I think that you should give us those copies as soon as possible because the beginning of the next fiscal year is approximately a month away, and it would be best if we get it as soon as possible.
Mr. Speaker, for my last question: could the minister look into this so that the minister could tell us when we will be able to get that report?
We will look into it right away and see if the report is almost completed. I would like to make sure that you get a copy right away. We will see if there are further changes required.
Question 172 – 2(3): Update on the Heat Recovery Plan (Curley)
Most of the questions were asked already by the Member for Cambridge Bay. I would like to thank the member.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the Minister responsible for Energy.
Some of the comments he made in the fall have never been brought up again in regard to the over-consumption of energy.
They were going to be moved, for example...they were talking about using heat recovery.
Could the minister give us an update on, I believe, the project manager? Could the minister indicate to us as to which communities are going to be using that heat recovery plan?
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. Minister responsible for Energy, Mr. Picco.
The reheat or the residual heat project is an exciting project that the Qulliq Energy Corporation is involved in. Mr. Speaker, at the present time, several systems are owned by the Government of Nunavut and/or the Qulliq Energy Corporation.
For 2006 and 2007, we have several projects underway including in the member’s home community of Rankin Inlet, as well as here in Iqaluit.
We are connecting the water treatment plant and the new hospital. Some of the funds involved in these projects have come from the federal government, through the signing of the Kyoto Accord and the agreement that we signed with the former Minister Anderson, myself, and Minister Akesuk.
We have been able to leverage some federal funds.
Mr. Speaker, what reheat does is take the excess heat that is going out of the power plant into the outdoors, using that heat in government owned buildings. Again, there is a lot of efficiency there, a lot of economies of scale. By doing this, we are actually helping meet the, more than the one-ton challenge being offered up by the federal government.
Mr. Curley: I want to thank the minister for updating us. I think it’s important that he continue to do so like that. These Crown corporation projects are normally not as readily available as the other departments are.
So it’s important that he continue to update us on these various projects.
I would suggest to the minister that he include other communities out in the regions. Unlike Iqaluit, we have extreme weather conditions out in our regions; that’s well known.
So I think that the order of these projects be in other locations.
Having said that, Mr. Speaker, I urge the minister whether or not the contracting policy of NNI, particularly where local equipment is available, will be considered by the contractors rather than transporting new equipment, for instance, heavy equipment, where local heavy equipment in local communities are available.
Could the minister undertake to provide letters of instruction to those Crown corporations to not bring in whole new equipment at the expense of local contractors?
The NNI Policy does apply on Qulliq Energy Corporation contracts. First of all, I think that was a question the member had asked. In the recent tender in the newspaper, I think we will see that the NNI is applied.
At the same time, almost half of communities right now in Nunavut are involved with or have a type of Residual Heat Program in place. That includes Rankin Inlet, as I said earlier, Cambridge Bay, Kugaaruk, Igloolik, Sanikiluaq, Kugluktuk, Taloyoak, as well as Pangnirtung, and Arviat. We are trying to expand, as I said earlier, some of the work that is going on in Rankin Inlet, as well as here in Iqaluit.
As to the other question that the member asked, I believe there is an opportunity to make sure that when contracts are rewarded, local businesses that are bidding on contracts that are on the ground should not be put at an unfair disadvantage, and if there’s equipment, for example, that can be had by a given contractor then that’s what should occur in that case. That’s something that I will pass on to the corporation.
Mr. Curley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the minister being willing to apply the NNI Policy in that locale, wherever equipments are available, that they will participate.
But that’s not exactly what’s happening on the scene. I have information that the government and the Power Corporation are entertaining other contractors that are foreign contractors, not foreign but in Canada, that are willing to just transport equipment into those places.
So I would like to ask the minister that he will undertake to review those projects and bring in a further statement to the House exactly who is awarded those contracts. Would that be possible?
I appreciate the member raising the issue and the concern, and if the member would provide to me the community in question and the background information, I could follow that up to ensure that compliance is done. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Complying with the NNI means that local jobs are retained, that local employment are used and taxes are paid in Nunavut and so on. So it’s quite important that the NNI Policy and all of these provisions be applied in order to have an expanded benefit to our local businesses.
I will certainly undertake to communicate with the minister on a confidential basis.
The member raises a good point that in this forum he has an opportunity to raise issues and so on in areas of confidentiality of anything should be raised in a different forum, and I would agree with the member that once that information is provided to this office, then we will follow it up.
Question 173 – 2(3): Building Inspections (Barnabas)
Under my Member’s Statement, I said that the Grise Fiord elders’ and youth facilities...
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, the hamlet wants somebody to do an inspection to confirm that:
There are no contaminants, and if there is so, what needs to be done.
Do a cost estimate to bring the building up to code.
What will the Department of Community and Government Services do on this matter?
I would like to thank the Member for the High Arctic.
To test if there are any contaminants in that building, I think maybe another minister can respond.
Now I’m not too sure which way to direct my question, but to the same minister.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated earlier during my Member’s Statement that the hamlet council doesn’t have the funds to try and work on this building that was donated to them; they also don’t have any funding if they’re going to move it from Crown land.
Public Works Canada deferred the time when the inspection will be done up to March 1, but when the hamlet doesn’t have any funding, they encounter problems.
I wonder if the Community and Government Services will do anything about that.
Yes, I understand his concern, and what I would like to do is; I can talk with the Minister of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth and also with other departments if I have to.
And I can advise my officials as to how we can deal with this. I will give him an answer at the appropriate time.
If there were contaminants and if it’s going to cost too much, if we were to renovate the building, and bring it up to code...(interpretation ends)…a new building to house the elders and youth in Grise Fiord would eliminate this current stumbling block. The hamlet needs a drop in centre for youth and a place for elders to meet and teach youth on sewing and other areas.
Would the minister consider the costs related too high to build a new youth centre in Grise Fiord?
Yes, it’s very true that we have to do a lot of inspections, especially if we bring it up to date.
We have gone through it in Rankin Inlet because once buildings are too old; we have to bring them up to code.
In Rankin Inlet, we had encountered the same thing because it was erected before the Government of Nunavut.
After 27 years, they finally did an inspection and they had to bring it up to code and put sprinklers and additional pipes and some wiring.
And, that building, the size didn’t even change.
Now, they’re going to be bringing buildings up to code, and we have to do that to most of the old buildings we have. Yes, it sounds like the building has to be brought up to code and we’ll be able to do an estimate as to how much it would be.
Yes, I can understand, but the other departments, I will be asking for their support and hopefully work with them.
Question 174 – 2(3): Update on the Construction of Houses in Nunavut (Mapsalak)
I have a question for the Minister responsible for the Housing Corporation.
We all know that in Nunavut we are dire of need of housing in every community.
This affects the wellbeing of the people because there are shortages, and the houses are overcrowded all across Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, my question to the minister is: can he give us an update as to what stage they are at with what was being talked about a lot about erecting houses up in the north within the next year?