EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
So the good news for Cambridge Bay is that we do have a facility now, the student accommodation facility, and the next step is to start improving and trying to integrate and amalgamate, when possible, the college buildings, classroom space, and so on under one roof in the community.
I think that’s the desire that we have heard. That meeting will take place very soon in the New Year.
Mr. Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman and I thank the minister for that answer. That’s good to hear. I might also encourage you to involve the municipal officials because I know when the accommodation facilities were being planned, when I was with the hamlet, we had some involvement there.
I think one of the reasons we were able to get that going is, at the time, it was equity leases on the land. You had to have land selections. So the Hamlet of Cambridge Bay would certainly want to be involved in terms of selecting a location and, over the next five to ten years, the planning.
Just a small aside, you mentioned earlier that the new tenants in their new accommodations are very happy. There is just one thing that they’re not happy about, there is the coin operated laundry.
They have to... I think it’s $3 a load.
When they were explaining that to me in Cambridge Bay and some of my colleagues from the standing committee, they were wondering why, what’s this all about?
So, it may be something... yeah, like they say, they can’t afford to buy food, yet they have to pay for laundry. So, I don’t know what the policy is on that, but it may be something you might want to look into.
My second question related to the Kitikmeot again is, and this is more of a regional thing. This is the mining school at Lupin that people are looking to develop.
I’ve discussed this a few times over the last year and a half. It’s moving along fairly quickly. From what I hear, time is of the essence from the proponents.
They’ve completed an initial study with two or three scenarios. The one scenario that looks best in terms of advancing that product is the one where they might have to come up with $3 to $4 million to buy some of the assets.
My question to the minister, I recall from the Commissioner’s Address, that there was $10 million for a trade school.
I’m wondering if the minister could tell me today if some of that funding would be available to help the private sector, in partnership with the Government of Nunavut to acquire the assets of the Lupin Mine for a Nunavut Mining Training School.
The member has done, I believe numerous service on this file. He’s raised it numerous times and I think it’s safe to say there is some action occurring.
We’ve made some announcements in the House about training, mines training in the Kitikmeot and other locations in Nunavut.
The opportunity here is, with the Kitikmeot Development Corporation and the Kitikmeot Inuit Association, if they assume an operational standard at the Lupin Mine, and for example, have a training instructor on site and equipment or a simulator and so on, to be able to deliver, let’s say, heavy equipment operator training, then the opportunity is there for the department to purchase seats to provide that training to our constituents, to our residents.
That would support the operation of the facility as a private training institute. That is something that we’re willing to look at with the Kitikmeot Inuit Association.
Further to that, Mr. Levy, and his team of capital planners are intending to go into Lupin to have a look at the site itself, and that’s something that I’ve mentioned to the member, that I would be interested in going in myself, with him and some of his people in there, to review the site.
So, we’re trying to plan that. It might be better to do that after Christmas, in the New Year, and those are the kinds of dates that we’re looking at right now.
What I can say and what I can commit to is that, if a registered training site is open where certification can be done on the site, then there is an opportunity where the government could purchase seats from the Kitikmeot Inuit Association or KDC, who are delivering that type of training.
I think that is a move in a good direction and that is something that we would support.
On the second part of his question, very quickly, on the trades’ school issue, we do have monies within the Northern Strategy, $10 million, to move forward on a trades’ school.
Hopefully we’ll have the information on the FOL site, some of the logistic as well as the administrative and the financial concerns with the FOL site, in the next few weeks, I’m hoping to have that by the middle of this month, December and then be able to make a decision with the cabinet some time in the new year, on how we proceed with that site.
That’s the best I can do right now on an update.
I’m not quite clear on the answer. Are you saying that the $10 million is going to go entirely into one trades school? Is the money going to be available for different types of trades’ schools?
I am not sure what the money is going to be used for.
Right now, as I explained earlier, it goes back into July, and some of the discussions that we had with the Minister of National Defence, Mr. Graham, we believe that there is some opportunity with the FOL site. The Minister’s office said that they would be interested in being able to provide that, to facilitate that with the FOL site in Rankin Inlet, and that would help us with our stated goal, coming out of our Arviat caucus meeting from last September, to move forward on a PPT school. However, we don’t want to put all of our eggs in one basket.
If it comes to be that when the logistics for these finish and the costs are too high, and there are too many candidates involved in the FOL site, we have the ability to have the $10 million to look at opportunities throughout Nunavut where we would be able to have some dedicated facility, or facilities put in place.
I would suggest to you that the consensus is that the major trades site should be in Rankin Inlet. We have to build up some capacity there.
It is centrally located and there is some opportunity for mining development. At the same time, as I earlier stated, there is some opportunity also in the Kitikmeot, through the Lupin Mine of purchasing seats, and so on, we already talked about that, and an opportunity to use some of that money to upgrading existing facilities there and at the other major campus.
Again, we would be in a better position to make those acknowledgements, and make those decisions once we get the complete report on the FOL, which I would hope to have by the 20 of December, at the latest.
Mr. Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My big concern; the concern of the folks in the Kitikmeot is that they have these mining facilities; that Kinross Gold had to file their mining reclamation plan; the wheels are in motion there, so we are certain of the window of opportunity to acquire those assets.
I’m not 100 percent certain that the private sector guys, working as hard as they can and doing the best that they can with their limited resources, will be able to put a plan in place in time to acquire the assets of the Lupin Mine, and then we would be in the situation where Kinross Gold would have to decommission everything; remove all the facilities from their mine site, and that opportunity is lost to the Kitikmeot and to Nunavut forever.
It is a very nice facility.
It has everything that you would want. It is strategically located right in the Slave geologic province. You got three or four mines; Tahera, Miramar, a couple of big diamond mines down in the Northwest Territories, that includes Snap Lake.
So you got all those mines that are there now and then the ones that will probably open once the road and port is constructed.
So we are strategically located in that. We just don’t want lose that facility.
So the Kitikmeot Corporation and the Kitikmeot Inuit Association would be looking around probably for support from the Government of Nunavut, and elsewhere. I am not sure that purchasing seats would be sufficient to address our needs. I’m not 100 percent on that until we see the business plan, but these things don’t come a big price tag.
So we’re going to need some support from the Government of Nunavut to acquire those assets.
Chairman: Thank you. I didn’t hear a question there but if you wish to respond to that, Mr. Minister.
We’ve had an opportunity to review the two other reports on the Lupin Mine site. The member is correct.
There are different assets that are there that are of value in regards to some of the vocational training that the department has talked about.
Those include but are not limited to the building infrastructure as well as the runway infrastructure.
The unique opportunity here Mr. Chairman, is that the Lupin site is an isolated site. If you send people up there for 3-4 weeks for training it would be similar to if you had to go to an actual mining site for work. So you are acclimatizing people.
That is a good selling point as far as we are concerned when we look at the mine site itself.
On the asset investment, that is something else all together. We’ve haven’t had an opportunity to go to the site and we talked about doing that. I don’t have money in my budget to actually purchase equipment, graders and so on and so forth.
What I am suggesting is, if the Kitikmeot Development Association you know for the training plan to use the site as a training vocational training base, then the Department of Education as a partner in training would be more than welcome to step up to the plate, purchase seats and so on in that process and be a partner in that side of it.
If the Minister could commit to keeping me informed of the progress he is in making on that file and let me know the dates when you are coming to Cambridge Bay.
And keeping me informed of the plans of the Lupin so that I will be available to accompany you to Lupin.
Those are comments not questions Mr. Chairman.
I have one area that I would like to ask the Minister.
I know that some of the O&M funding will probably have some announcement with the federal contributions with a third party funding and a number of labour market training side or industry side of a development fund.
Just for the record. I know that we are dealing with the capital items here. But the two tend to go hand in hand.
Do we expect some announcement from the federal side whether we are not if we are going to get extra federal dollars for infusion of these kinds of training requirements or infrastructure that we need for these kinds of facilities, the programs that many of the Members of the Legislative Assembly are asking for. Or are we going to do it alone for the next few years.
There are two or three pots of funds available that are used by the Department of Education when you look at training opportunities. One is the Aboriginal Employment Skills
Program (AESP). Under that program and some of the Members have heard me when I talked about this before.
When we submitted our original plan it was quite detailed and indeed was considered one of the top four received in the country by a jurisdiction at that time. We’ve had further discussions on that and those are on-going with our federal partner. We had to resubmit it because there were some issues with the uptake on that program from across the country.
We’ve also have the Labour Market Development Agreement (LMDA) there is some money available.
And we are in the process now of signing off a new multi-year program which the Member is referring to which is a little over $3 million which is called the LMP, Labour Market Program. That program will be coming forward to as far as training.
Those are the three different programs that are available to Nunavummiut which we are working on. They are in process or about to be signed.
Chairman: Thank you. Mr. Curley any further questions.
We are at the Kitikmeot Region. Total Kitikmeot Region. $3,903,000.
Chairman: Total Tangible Assets. $19,000,737.
Chairman: Back to G-4.
Education Department Summary. Detail of Expenditures.
Total Capital Expenditures. $19,737,000.
Chairman: Are you in agreed that Department of Education is concluded; do you agree?
Chairman: I would like to thank the minister and his staff for being here. Do you have any closing comments?
Hon. Ed. Picco: Just for the record, thank you, very much, Mr. Chairman for doing a good job.
I know that it has been kind of hectic over the last few days in the Chair, and Mr. Arreak, too, I think you did a great job in keeping the flow going.
A special thank you to you for the gift that you gave me on Thursday, and we had a good weekend and it was very good.
Chairman: Please go.
Thank you. (interpretation) Department of Economic Development and Tourism. Does the minister have any opening remarks for the Committee of the Whole?
Bill 01 – Appropriation (Capital) Act, 2006-07 – Economic Development & Transportation – Consideration in Committee
Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
I am pleased to be here to present my department’s capital plan for fiscal year 2006-07 to the Committee of the Whole.
The Department of Economic Development and Transportation is proposing $7.95 million capital plan for the fiscal year 2006-07. (interpretation ends) The department’s capital plan concentrates on transportation-related expenditures.
Therefore, $7.86 million is related to transportation expenditures so that the department can continue to address the growing pressures on our aging transportation system, as well as the construction of a new airport in the community of Arctic Bay.
The majority of the department’s total capital commitment is related to community specific projects throughout the territory.
Many of the airports are in need of heavy equipment such as loaders, plough trucks, graders, and snow blowers to maintain the airport facilities. As such, a total of $1.19 million is proposed to the capital plan for the fiscal year 2006-07 for the purchase of airport equipment.
As a department we are responsible for maintaining high standards of airports and related infrastructure.
Planning for airport upgrades is done based on the condition of the airstrip and the remaining lifespan.
The capital plan for fiscal year 2006-07 proposes $400,000 to continue work on the rehab of the runway apron in Grise Fiord.
This is a multiyear capital project that will see $925,000 in planned expenditures over a three-year period.
It is proposed that the airstrip in Kimmirut will receive $125,000 for the first year of a three-year runway rehabilitation project totalling $1.07 million.
The airport runway in Taloyoak will also receive $450,000 worth of work in the 2006-07 fiscal year.
The three-year total cost is estimated to be $2 million.
The department also proposes additional capital funding in 2006-07 fiscal year for the following projects.
The department is proposing a three-year project totalling $16.4 million to construct an airport in Arctic Bay as a result of the closure of the Nanisivik Mine and town Site. A total of $4 million is allocated to this project in the fiscal year 2006-07 and the department has identified a total of $1 million towards the Iqaluit Airport Taxi and airport rehab project in the fiscal year 2006-07, and the department was successful in accessing $2.7 million to this project from the federal government.
There is a requirement for the Government of Nunavut to contribute $1.9 million for this project over three years.
The department is proposing to increase the Community Access Road Program from $150,000 per year to $500,000 per year starting in the fiscal year 2006-07, which is an increase of $350,000.
Mr. Chairman, access roads are public roads or trails that connect a community, and its residents, to nearby locations, including recreational sites, camps, and archaeological sites.  They are critical in giving the people of Nunavut access to local resources, access to water or ice, and to support fishing, hunting and tourism opportunities.
The investment reflects my department’s commitment to upgrading access road infrastructure within the territory and will result in increased economic potential for our communities.
A further $100,000 has also been included in the capital plan for fiscal year 2006-07 for the Bathurst Inlet Port and Road Project.
The Government of Nunavut’s contribution will go to fund a feasibility study and environmental assessment directed towards the development of a deep water port on Bathurst Inlet and the construction of a 295 kilometre all-weather road between the port and the Izok mineral deposit, which will also serve a number of existing mineral properties both in Nunavut, and the Northwest Territories.
Mr. Chairman, the 39.7 kilometre Arctic Bay-Nanisivik Highway is the only ground transportation link between the communities of Arctic Bay and Nanisivik, and also the Nanisivik Airport.
The highway is still needed until the Nanisivik mine site reclamation is complete, and the new airport is constructed in Arctic Bay.
The condition of the highway has been deteriorating over the past few years and user’s concerns regarding safety and vehicle damage have been brought to the department’s attention.
The department is proposing an allocation of $100,000 in the capital plan for the fiscal year 2006-07 to fund the ongoing work of remedial repairs to the sections of highway experiencing the most severe deterioration.
Mr. Chairman, at the outset of my presentation, I stated that the majority of the Department of Economic Development and Transportation’s capital plan is transportation related, but the remaining is targeted to three projects.
A continued investment of $10,000 for the Nunavut Art Bank. This investment will focus on the acquisition of artwork by Nunavut artists and will be displayed in the Government of Nunavut offices.
Secondly, Mr. Chairman, visitors’ centres play an important role, not only as places for tourists to learn first-hand about a community, but also as centres that actively support community activities and events.
A total of $50,000 has been allocated in the capital plan for the fiscal year 2006-07 for Nunavut visitor centres.
Finally, $25,000 has been allocated for the purchase of booths and equipment for the upgrade and enhancement of visitors’ centres.
Mr. Chairman, believe this plan makes good use of existing resources by clearly focusing on supporting initiatives under the department’s mandate.
Certainly there is much more that needs to be done to ensure economic development and transportation continues to be a priority.
As minister, I will continue to work with all our partners, including the federal government to seek ways to access more funding in order to meet our growing economic and transportation infrastructure needs which are vital to our economic wealth and social prosperity.
With that, I’ll be glad to answer any questions from my fellow members.
Do you have witnesses you would like to bring to the table, Mr. Kilabuk?
Chairman: Does the Committee agree to bring in the witnesses.
Sergeant-At-Arms if you would escort the witnesses please. Please introduce your witnesses.
With me today in my immediate left is my Deputy Minister, Alex Campbell and to my immediate right Mr. Methusalah Kunuk, my Assistant Deputy Minister for Economic Development and Transportation.
Mr. Curley: (interpretation): Yes, Mr. Chairman.
First of all, I would like to welcome the minister, his deputy, and his assistant deputy minister for making an appearance before the Committee.
I would like to congratulate you for being the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation.
(interpretation ends) Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As Chairman of the Standing Committee on Infrastructure, Housing and Economic Development, I am pleased to be able to provide opening comments as we begin the review of the 2006-07 Capital Estimates for the Department of Economic Development and Tourism, I mean Transportation.
Mr. Chairman, the Standing Committee had the opportunity to meet with the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation in September to review the draft 2006-07 capital estimates.
The recently released 2005 Nunavut Economic Outlook raises concerns with respect to the need for the GN to recognize that it cannot immediately fulfill all of its economic development goals and that it must realistically prioritize its plans and strategies.
Committee Members have commented on the significant number of strategies that the GN has funded in the past.
The Department of Economic Development and Transportation has funded and/or published many strategies.
To illustrate, some of those strategies include:
The Time is Right – A Vision and a Strategy for Tourism Development in Nunavut;
The Nunavut Economic Development Strategy;
Nunavut Transportation Strategy (2001);
Nunavut Air Services: System Implementation Options;
Iqaluit International Airport: Master Plan;
Nunavut Arts and Crafts Strategy;
Carving Stone Strategy;
Community Economic Development Framework;
Nunavut Mining Strategy;
Nunavut-Manitoba Road Project: Route Selection Study;
Safe Harbours – Healthy Communities and Airports for Nunavummiut and their Economy; and
Iqaluit Deep Water Port: Feasibility Study.
Members appreciate the minister’s recent letter updating the committee on the status of these initiatives and look forward to further information being tabled as they move forward.
Mr. Chairman, members recognize that the GN’s resources are limited and that every aspect of every strategy cannot be immediately implemented. It is unclear and confusing as to exactly what this department’s priorities are with respect to both its economic development and transportation strategies.
Members urge the minister to work with his Cabinet colleagues to complete implementation plans and identify funding for specific projects in the interest of transparency.
Mr. Chairman, members are frustrated that there is no long-term funding for such large scale infrastructure projects as the Bathurst Inlet Port and Road Project and the Kivalliq-Manitoba Road Project. It is not clear what the long-term plan is for the actual construction of these projects.
The standing committee supports tourism initiatives, including the improvement of visitor centres. However, members remain concerned that our territory’s tourism potential remains underdeveloped, and note that the while the Department of Economic Development and Transportation has responsibility for tourism and visitor centres, the Department of Environment has responsibility for parks.
It is unclear how well these two departments work together in coordinating these responsibilities.
Members continue to be concerned by the lack of marine infrastructure across our territory.
Harvesters rely on their boats to travel throughout the summer and in many communities there is nowhere safe to moor boats so that they do not suffer damage in high winds.
Members support the minister in his efforts to secure federal funding for these projects and look forward to ongoing updates.
The standing committee recommends that the department table information in the House concerning the final costs of its major capital projects, including information on the Inuit labour content of each project, as well as any bonuses or penalties that have been assessed under the NNI Policy.
That concludes my comments on the 2006-07 Capital Estimates of the Department of Economic Development and Transportation. Individual members may wish to raise questions or make comments as we proceed.
Before we proceed, I would like to remind members of the following. According to Rule 77(1), you have ten minutes and according to Rule 77(2), subject to the discretion of the Chair, a member may speak more than once to a matter under discussion, but not until every member wishing to speak has spoken.
I suggest to members that wherever possible you ask your detailed questions in the page-by-page review of the departmental estimates.
Turn to page K-6 on your capital estimates.
Economic Development and Transportation. K-6. Economic Development and Transportation.
Detail of Capital. Mr. Peterson.
Mr. Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the minister and his officials for coming today.
Could the minister just give me a kind of an indication of how many trade shows or tourist shows that the department attends on an annual basis where you would use a booth?