EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I understand that there’s really no contract except the agreement to provide services at whatever the cost they will charge.
Is there any way, in order to control your finances, to actually sign an agreement with Telehealth because we learn our lessons from these I.T. technical programs for our computers that have skyrocketed beyond control?
Is there a possibility with that happening with Telehealth?
Well, there’s less travel and it saves money for the departments.
But I would like ask Ms. Hines to add further to this comment.
As the minister has stated, there is a contract in place with Telehealth. The contract value was $1.6 million and the only budget line that we had because we were in a no forced growth environment was at $1.2 million almost $1.3 million.
What we’re asking for now with the additional money is to recognize the true cost of meeting our requirement under the contract.
So there is a contract in place, it’s just that we didn’t have sufficient money in our budget and we’re asking for the additional.
As the minister stated, it does cut down on other costs for Health and Social Services but it does cut down on the travel cost of doctors and nurses. There is an increase in Telehealth but it does reduce the cost of travel costs for doctors and other professionals.
Perhaps in the CGS report on Telehealth they will be able to tell us and ask the Department of Health to provide some kind of information on how much travel cost is being saved for that first year or second year.
By identifying, how many people have used Telehealth technology to determine what’s wrong with them?
I really appreciate and I supported the Telehealth Program, but I would not want to start right away with the funding requirements, too. That is extremely important that the contract is... when you find out actual costs annually, then it will be advisable to actually sign a contract with Telehealth for that cost, that way we can be able to control the rising cost of the service. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Yes, those are very good remarks. I would ask the member that perhaps he could ask the Minister of Health for those cost lines.
I missed part of the question.
I don’t know what the question was but I’m assuming that it relates to the services that are provided under the Telehealth system in our communities.
There has been some cost avoidance with the establishment of the Telehealth systems in our health centres, particularly around travelling when it comes to training and development of our staff.
They are able to take distance learning, as an example, at the community level through the Telehealth system.
At the same time, the Telehealth system has been used to communicate with family members who are living in residential care, in and outside of the territory.
Visitations with the doctors that are providing services in out-of-territory to the families, as well in cases where it is quite serious, that’s the means that is being used with Telehealth. At the same time, it is being used for some diagnosis.
So there is some cost avoidance for travel but it doesn’t necessarily mean that there is less medical travel. In fact, we have seen an increase in medical travel in the last three years, consistent with an increase in cases.
At the same time, increase in medical travel has been of a direct result of fuel price increases of aviation fuel in the north.
So that’s some background to what and how we use Telehealth in the health centres around medical travel but it doesn’t necessarily mean that we are not going to have medical travel.
It’s a method used for a number of things and in one area it’s also used for a means for a diagnostic tool, as an example, for providing better patient care services to people in the communities.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister Aglukkaq. (interpretation) Are you done, Mr. Arvaluk?
I have a simple question.
Could the minister provide a detailed breakdown of this $1,584,000 to these program areas, including Telehealth, and Iqaluit?
I’m not sure I’m on the right page. Oh, yeah, I’m on the right page but my question is the wrong one. I had that one for the other side.
With respect with this grant to the community support, is that over and above the current agreement we had with the long-term agreement, if it still exists, that the Municipality of Iqaluit and CGS contribution agreement that was agreed upon about four years ago?
We’re on page 10.
I believe that the contract the member is actually talking about with the City of Iqaluit that has been around for about four years is actually an agreement that we have with them for capital projects.
That is not what this is.
We’re talking O&M on this and not capital. So it’s not the agreement on the capital project which has been around for four years.
Just to make sure, for clarification, I would just ask if that’s what the member was asking about.
That budget line was agreed to.
We’re on the second budget line.
Thank you for your reminder, but we have not agreed to the total, I don’t believe yet.
But having said that, I appreciate your response.
When a grant or an additional contribution is made, I’m sure there are lists of contributions that are agreed to, or in the contribution for grant support.
Is this a contribution or a grant program?
Under the forced growth, it was requested that CGS provide a grant to the City of Iqaluit on an annual basis in lieu of paying property taxes on Government of Nunavut owned infrastructure within the City.
The grant is based upon the City’s established mil rate and they assessed value of the property.
The 2006 property assessment for Government of Nunavut facilities is $13 million.
The assessment leaves CGS with a shortfall of $1.1 million for its grant to the City and the remainder of the shortfall will be funded internally.
I have another question with the next set of projects: Government Services in the amount of $2,900,000; that’s almost $3 million.
Does the minister have a breakdown of each division, like Telehealth, an actual amount, including sealift, property management, Qikiqtani General Hospital, Nunavut Arctic College, and the middle school expansion because this is a huge amount - $3 million - for additional resources. I bet you that probably means PYs and what not.
I would like to see a breakdown of this request to the Assembly.
Thanks to the member.
Under this there are no PYs.
For Qikiqtani General Hospital utilities, $1.8 million; Nunavut Arctic College utilities, $565,000; sealift for Kugaaruk that includes containerization and dispute resolution, $272,000; middle school expansion, $153,000; property management leases, $340,000; Informatics and Telehealth, $400.000.
For the Nunavut Arctic College allocation, does that refer to headquarters, or throughout Nunavut?
Yes, that’s correct. It’s throughout Nunavut for Nunavut Arctic College. The GN has it in 22 Nunavut communities that are used by Nunavut Arctic College to run their programs.
CGS required an increase in the 2007-08 budget to enable to the department to continue providing the services mandated by the FMB, when they transferred the responsibilities for building maintenance and utilities of the Nunavut Arctic College facilities.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister. Mr. Curley. Thank you.
Page 10 of Bill 11.
Not previously authorized. $2,911,000.
Chairman: Total Government Services. $2,911,000.
Chairman: Thank you. Capital Planning and Technical Services.
Not previously authorized. $1,900,000.
Chairman: Total Capital Planning and Technical Services. $1,900,000.
Chairman: Thank you. Total Department. Not previously authorized. $6,395,000.
Thank you Minister Brown, Ms. Hine, Mr. Rafter.
We will go on with a different department.
I will ask Mr. Simailak to return to the witness table.
For the record, Minister Simailak, please introduce your witnesses again.
To my left is Peter Ma and to my right Roy Green.
Page 11 of Bill 11.
Not previously authorized. $1,950,000.
Chairman: Total Transportation. $1,950,000.
Chairman: Page 4 of Bill 11.
Not previously authorized. $8,959,000.
I would like to ask the minister; recently, there was a local housing association gathering in Rankin Inlet to consider the new rental rate structure for the Nunavut Housing Association.
I wonder if the minister is prepared to indicate whether or not there is now a new rental scale. And if not, when is it coming into effect?
To the Minister of the Nunavut Housing Corporation, please.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister. Minister responsible for the Nunavut Housing Corporation, Minister Akesuk.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation) We have not brought any rental scales at this time. They have to be referred to the Cabinet first, so I’m not really sure whether or not there’s going to be a rental increase.
When does the minister expect that the report will be provided and when will it be implemented because they were talking about rental scale in Rankin Inlet.
Can the minister provide us with a timeline on the rental scale and when he expects to have that ready?
Hon. David Simailak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To Minister Akesuk, please.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister. Minister Akesuk.
Like I said that the report will probably be ready this fall after the Cabinet has looked at it, so we’re not really sure exactly whether the rental scales will go up, or if some of them will go down.
So before the report is out, I’m not exactly sure when that report will be provided. We will be looking at the report in the near future.
The local housing associations have forced growth when they’re making a profit.
I wonder why the local housing authorities don’t… like there is an amount of $9 million that is requested.
After the rental scale workshop or meeting in Rankin Inlet; is there going to be, in the report, will there be a report on whether there is going to be an increase on the rental scale?
We have to find out what is in the report and we just don’t want to leave the recommendations, we’d like to follow up on the recommendations.
The meeting went successfully and the report was produced.
After the Cabinet has a chance to look at it, we will find out what is expected of us.
I just don’t want to shelf it, but we will have to follow the recommendations of that meeting in Rankin Inlet. I just want to assure the member that we will not just leave it.
Page 12 of Bill 11.
Mr. Arvaluk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I would like to ask the Minister of Finance that instead of forced growth provision to…
I see the same thing on page 10, community support for other communities except Iqaluit for increased housing units that will force the hamlets to increase its expenses for servicing these.
Is there a provision somewhere, or is it already in the old O&M with the expectation that there will be $200 million more housing that will be provided to the communities?
We are still working on that exact issue with CGS.
I believe the units will be completed by this summer or early fall. Is he planning to present some kind of additional requirements for supplementary appropriation-type this fall for the hamlets?
We don’t know that right now because the increased housing units that will be built are over a three-year period. So it’s not all happening in one summer.
With this forced growth in housing needs, is there any way that you are including in there a need for additional storage space required for some items that you cannot leave outside?
There are a whole lot of new products now that you cannot simply leave outside.
Is there a provision in there from housing that addresses that?
No, this request is for O&M. The member’s request is regarding a capital item.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister. (interpretation) Is that it?
(interpretation ends) Okay. Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Not previously authorized. $8,959,000. (interpretation) Do you agree?
Chairman: We still have Page 9 to deal with.
I’ll ask the minister if she is ready.
Minister of Health and Social Services, she’s ready to give out the information that was requested. Minister of Health and Social Services.
I’m still waiting for the breakdown for that, so for the interest of time and keeping processes rolling, I don’t have problems going into the section under the treatment programs of those items, if there are any questions from members on those.
Mr. Curley: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Under the treatment program, the second item has an indication that there is a newly developed Nunavut Nursing Recruitment and Retention Strategy.
If the minister has not already tabled that, will she table that request right now?
I had hoped to table this report during this sitting.
It’s not quite completed yet as I mentioned earlier last week. I hope to release that information to all members once it’s finalized and approved by Cabinet in final form.
My apologies for calling you Ms. Brown.
Mr. Curley: Thank you. I think it’s important to understand exactly what we’re buying here because $1.5 million is something that many of the groups or whatnot; we cannot afford to just be giving it out without reason.
The strategy apparently is supposed to cover this, but why should we give the minister $1 million extra, at least $542,000 in new spending requirements, if she’s not prepared to give us the case for it?
Hon. David Simailak: To the Minister of Health, please.
Twofold; we’re looking at finalizing the Nursing and Recruitment Strategy as an area of need that we need to develop for the north. There have been many questions and issues around trying to fill the nursing positions in the north to deal with the ever increasing cost of agency nurses and so on.
That report is based on a number of recommendations from the House, like Arvaluk. We looked at a number of areas. It is not quite finalized in its final form and I hope to table that.
It will be used as a strategy in recruiting nurses in and outside the north, not just at the tail end of filling a job but at the earlier piece of recruiting students to go into nursing programs and so on.
That’s one reason why we should approve it.
The second area is that we do have vacancies.
We have to fill them to provide essential services at the community level. We’re still dealing with having to hire agency nurses to fill those essential positions. Without this funding, we’ll have a very difficult time providing services at the community level, when there is a need to treat a sick person at the community level.
So in a nutshell, those are the two reasons why we’re recommending you to support this.
Mr. Curley: Thank you. The case that the minister outlined is weak. We don’t get $1.5 million for something that is not complete.
You just don’t get it anywhere in the world in the private sector. Normally, do you get extra money from something that is not complete? It’s just like asking for blank cheques and we’ll just promise you that we’ll have that strategy when it’s ready.
The minister can wait until the fall to have the extra funding. She already has at least $106 million in treatment programs which she can re-profile and delay some projects, and what not.
She is not short of money, actually.
What she’s short of is developing a strategy, which is normally the case for any public government, or any group that is making a request to the public, whether it is contributions, or any other funding. You have to have your stuff ready. You can’t say, ‘I’ll promise to you later that I’ll get the strategy; I’ll get the report done.’
You don’t do that.
For any other grant and contribution that doesn’t happen. Only with the Assembly does the minister say, ‘I’ll promise you that this is going to be good. It’ll work.’
The agency nurses are not something that Nunavummiut are happy about. I have letters and indicators that they’re not happy with it.
I’m afraid to table them. I’m afraid to table them because in a place like Rankin Inlet, not only are we’re having people from overseas coming in, it’s not only affecting the nursing industry, it’s affecting all the other private sector groups, even public sector jobs.
Everyone else is ignoring the local housing needs and therefore something is starting to move. So as a result of that, I believe the minister I think... we do understand that she’s trying to develop a case but we don’t see any tenders, we don’t see any registered companies, whether they actually are a lobbying agency, we don’t know who their representatives of the nursing agencies in Nunavut are; they seem to be phantom individuals.
I would love to see a nursing agency representative come here and actually appear before the House and hear from the members.
So for that reason, Mr. Chairman, I believe this allocation is not ready. The minister would be better to get her job done that she needs to do, get the strategy complete, table it, and then request extra funding if required.
I’m not convinced you need it now because you only had three months, at least, before the new fiscal spending was given to you.
So I’m asking the minister just to agree to defer this project until next fall or next year.
I don’t agree with the member at all.
In terms of moving forward on a number of areas, whenever we do our business planning case, we put forward new initiatives, new programs, and so on, and those matters are debated in the House as presented by the Minister of Finance.
No new initiatives generally start unless there is funding approved for those projects to move forward. And members will recall when the Minister of Finance did his budget; it was a status quo budget because we were waiting for the federal government to come forward with some of the TFF changes, which is why we’re dealing with supplementary
bills at this point in time.
What we have put forward from the Department of Health is issues that we’re dealing with internally, where we’re dealing with the pressures of forced growth in the organization, the pressures of trying to reduce our costs around agency nurses, and the pressures of shipping out people to be treated because of our high shortage of nurses or doctors.  The categories in this document talk to, one example, the recruitment and retention of our doctors.
With 1.9 items, in that document, under treatment programs, is an enhancement to our doctor’s compensation, and so on, so that we’re a bit more competitive across Canada to recruit our doctors, as an example.
The same goes for our nursing. Members in this House have asked me to go forward to put a Nursing Recruitment Strategy in place and that’s near completion.
I have to go forward again to Cabinet to get the final process approved for that, and that will look at some of the recommendations coming from this House.
If you want to delay that one more year, then that’s your prerogative but I don’t think that’s the right direction we want to go in, in supporting our nurses in Nunavut. We have four or five graduating this Friday. And, if we’re looking at recruitment strategies and so on, how do we support them?
I think we’ve come forward for some ideas around that and we will be finalizing the strategy in a short time.
The other area is: how do we fill the jobs that are vacant?
By not approving some funding, we’ll be short in filling those jobs through agency nurses. There is more of this associated with not filling those jobs, than filling them. We’re putting people’s lives at risk to delay this item for another year, as an example.
We have to hire agency nurses until we are able to meet some of the vacancies we have in the north.
It’s a tough decision. Yes, we’ve spent a lot of money in treatment, but what are the alternatives?
I’m open to some suggestions around that. What we’ve put forward; I think is reasonable to address the direction that I’ve received from this House to come up with a Nursing Recruitment Strategy, at the same time, to fill essential services at the community level.
So I don’t agree with the member, and for the record, that’s why don’t we put this forward until April 1, or March because we had a zero-based budget presented by the Finance Minister.
So I think we need to rethink suggestion by the member, and I would strongly suggest that we approve this to support the development of our nurses in the north.
Mr. Curley: Yes, minister; I fully understand completely what you want: you want us to approve this item without any case, without any strategies, without any backup, just approve it.
I’m a little surprised that the minister would indicate that the item like this had been approved. I just want to remind you that it has not been approved by this Assembly, and that’s where the call is.
In this Assembly matter, it raises a concern to Nunavummiut; it raises concern to the communities.
The minister has not developed percentages with the strategy. She has not said exactly where these nurses are going to be located.
The minister would be better I think to just agree to disagree with me that she should develop a case and say exactly how many number of nurses will be hired in Kivalliq, Kitikmeot, and Baffin, that they’re sending down into the communities.
That’s a strategy to me.
A word of honour can work just as good as a working strategy if it’s credible. I don’t disagree with anyone who runs in the word of honour. It could work.
But to say, ‘Just approve it,’ because this, again, we heard from one official the other day, ‘It’s a good project.’ But we need a backup; we need that strategy.
So having that approved, how many nurses, in short, will she put in for Rankin Inlet?
Overall, for the department, we have 915 positions and 66 percent of those positions throughout the department are filled on a given day.
How it will be broken down by nursing positions; the last few years we’ve gone from 40 percent of the positions being vacant to approximately 50 to 60 percent of the nursing positions being vacant and we’ve been working towards that. Many of those positions have been filled through a number of leads.
So in terms of exact numbers for Rankin Inlet, a breakdown by that, I can give the numbers to the individual. But what this funding is saying is that whenever there is a vacancy in a community the agency nurses will fill that until such time we are able to find permanent or casual nurses.
And one example, we have four or five graduates coming up Friday. To work in the health centres, they need to be oriented into working in health centres for an additional eight months. The bachelor program is completed but we still need to train them to work in the health centres.
Until such time, they can only work in a hospital setting. And these types of programs would support initiatives like that in the long-term.
I think it’s clear that the strategy is going forward in being developed at the same time while we have no positions filled.
Plan B is to fill those positions where we can find agency nurses or casuals to fill them.
Yes, I would like to thank Minister Aglukkaq for indicating that she’s trying to fill these vacant positions.
That’s one strategy, but I don’t recall that as ongoing maintenance. I’m not 100 percent sure what percentage of it is a strategy.
Strategy is something that idly enhances what’s going on, or it’s a new strategy to put in more active recruitments that could fill it.
It’s very unclear. I know that this government is quite used to just grabbing something without anything, without any backup, but in the public sector, that’s not allowed. The Auditor General certainly would not be happy about approving such huge amounts without any backup, promise only, ‘We will get the strategy done.’
So who knows, the strategy may change given the fact that they already have their approval amounts needed.
So having said that, Mr. Chairman, I’m not 100 percent sure that we are being asked to approve something that we have not seen.
So I think the minister needs to speed up her strategy and address each of the health centres throughout Nunavut, instead of just expecting that she can get a blank cheque.
It perhaps delays her strategy. I’m not sure.
So it’s very confusing. The minister needs to make a clarification with her statements because, after all, we are not just speaking to each of us here. We are speaking to the Nunavut community, to each and everyone that have a public health centre.