EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Our officials, our staff, the deputy ministers, and EAs are always aware ahead of time and they inform the committees.
This is our process every year.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Simailak. Your first supplementary, Mr. Mapsalak.
Yes, I notice.
I’m asking this question because we know that they’re not going to use a certain amount of funding for a particular project and it’s in the plans.
I’m sure this is not the first case.
So when they’re not going to use the capital funds, and it’s a large amount, why do they move them to another project and just leave them in the capital plans saying that they were going use it and then not use it?
We go accordingly to our understanding for the capital funding and the request from the communities in that they’re going to be used for the whole year.
Sometimes we do encounter problems and challenges that we face in a year. A lot of times we have to look for other funding to use for the projects this year, or when the year is coming, or when the year is finishing, sometimes we do encounter problems.
Sometimes our departments do ask for permission if we could move them around and this is how the process goes.
Yes, I know the situation. This has happened more than once, that they make changes during the end.
A lot of times they do too many changes and remove them of the funding, and then the large amounts of funding are removed or moved to another project.
Were they made aware way ahead of time that the changes were coming?
Once we are in the planning stages, our staff gets together and they make us aware.
Can the minister tell us: is he expecting any changes for this year for capital plans?
Is he expecting any changes that will happen for capital projects?
I don’t know of any changes that will be made this year.
Question 272 – 2(4): Reduction in the Polar Bear Total Allowable Harvest in Western Hudson Bay (Curley)
Mr. Speaker, just last month, the Nunavut Gazette media brought out information regarding the polar bear regulations that the estimates of the polar bear quota for the Hudson Bay region was originally 56 but now they lowered it to 38.
I recognize this, Mr. Speaker, for the decision that the minister made. Was the Wildlife Management Board aware of this?
The minister has authority whether he can say yes or no to it.
My question is very obvious and understandable. Can the minister elaborate and tell the House why he approved this decrease of the quota for polar bears?
When there was a request for the decrease of the polar bear quotas, I had said no to the NWMB, and as we continued on with the process, I said yes to the decrease.
The NWMB probably had good reasons when they made that decision for it to be approved to lower the quota.
Can the minister tell the House why the NWMB asked the minister to approve the lowering of the quota for polar bears?
There was a survey done in the coast of Hudson Bay near Churchill, Manitoba, regarding the decrease of polar bears in that area, and for that reason, we lowered the quota.
GN’s own submission to the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board is available at the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board’s website. It states and I quote, “The opinions expressed by the local hunters are not in total agreement with the scientific information. They do not support any reduction in the total allowable harvest.”
Can the minister explain to the House why the opinions of local hunters were ignored?
We have been in consultations with the HTOs for that region regarding that and their argument was that there have been a lot of bears witnessed but our numbers show that the polar bear population is in decline.
For that reason, we decided that the reduction of the quota would be best for the future users of the polar bears.
Mr. Curley: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe that it is important that we openly and honestly acknowledge that when it comes to quotas in wildlife management, there’s a fundamental divide between the opinions of scientists, the wildlife advocacy group, who wear the same hat with different organizations, and the experience and knowledge of lifelong Inuit hunters.
It is clear where I stand. I trust the hunters and I trust the elders.
Can the minister clearly explain to the House why he does not?
I have utmost respect for IQ knowledge, and if it wasn’t for my father who passed away in the recent years, he and other elders, along with the members asking questions, used IQ knowledge to ensure that we have the benefit of hunting our polar bears now.
Mr. Speaker, we have considered IQ knowledge quite well, and NTI studied the IQ studies in Western Hudson Bay and we may undertake this depending on whether the NTI study has been completed.
Question 273 – 2(4): Accuracy of Newspaper Article (Tootoo)
My question is for the Minister responsible for Health and Social Services, and it refers to the document I tabled earlier in this sitting on October 23, titled, ‘No Quick Fix for Agency Nurse Problem: Aglukkaq.’
Mr. Speaker, in that article it indicates and it says, “Aglukkaq said she will reveal a new plan to address Nunavut’s critical nursing shortage after the legislation comes back in the session on the 23rd.”
Mr. Speaker, we’re back and I guess I would just like to ask the minister if that is accurate because according to her, a lot of the stuff in here hasn’t been accurate. So I would just like to ask her if that’s an accurate comment in there.
It’s no secret. I’ve said that many times in this House that I would be tabling a Nursing Recruitment Strategy in this session, between October and November 9, and during that time I would table that information.
That also can be found in the Hansard of June.
I know in the spring when we were talking about that, she had indicated it was almost complete and it had to go to the Cabinet.
Has that strategy gone through Cabinet for approval yet, and if so, when? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Recruitment Strategy has gone to Cabinet and right now, we’re finalizing how we will be presenting the information.
I had also said that I would have to go back to FMB to get the final approval before I can release that document. Hopefully, I would be able to do that before the session ends on November 9.
It says the Nursing and Recruitment Strategy contains measures that will go a long way towards giving nurses more reason to work for the GN on a permanent or indeterminate basis.
The minister just indicated that that strategy has been approved by Cabinet.
Could she give us some indication to us and to all the nurses out there what some of those measures will be?
I have shared, off and on, what may contain in that report. What we’re trying to say here is that it will be a multi-dimensional approach that we’re looking at to try and address the situations and the challenges we face in Nunavut.
Once that information is tabled in the House, I will be more prepared to speak to the specifics of each of the items in the strategy but not until such time as I’m able to release that document.
Again, earlier the minister indicated they’re just looking at trying to figure out how to present it.
It has been approved by Cabinet and surely, the minister would agree this is a good news story.
Can she please inform the Members of this House and the nurses out there what kind of specific measures are in that strategy, that has been approved and that they’re just waiting to figure out how to present it, are in there for them?
Will the minister please do that?
We will be presenting the information; we’re translating it.
I also said in my earlier response that yes, we’re looking at releasing it but I would have to go back to FMB to ensure that the commitments, financially, are also approved before I table that report.
I had responded to Mr. Arvaluk as well earlier this week that I would be prepared to speak to the specifics of the strategy and I’m anxious to release it just as much as the members are.
Once it’s released, I will be able to present it and speak to the specifics of the strategy.
Question 274 – 2(4): Support for Homeowners (Barnabas)
It has been a week long since we’ve had a question for him.
Mr. Speaker, my question is in regard to the homeowners; (interpretation ends) let me speak in English; Nunavummiut who can afford the cost of buying and maintaining their own home.
As the minister will be aware, the Nunavut Housing Corporation offers a series of programs and financing options to help Nunavummiut who want to own their own homes.
Can the minister clarify what support services the Nunavut Housing Corporation provides for Nunavut homeowners? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Barnabas. Minister responsible for the Nunavut Housing Corporation, Minister Akesuk.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank the member for asking the question.
For homeowners and for potential homeowners, the Nunavut Housing Corporation has programs and they are available to assist potential homeowners.  Our staff visit the communities to look at ways of how they can provide more assistance and support to the homeowners or to the potential homeowners.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Minister. Your first supplementary, Mr. Barnabas
Some housing associations approve the applicants, but some members who belong to the Nunavut Housing Corporation don’t...
(interpretation ends) Owning a home is not simple.
Just like owning a vehicle, you also need insurance for your house. That insurance is based on a value of the house which is determined by a property surveyor or a property appraiser.
Can the minister clarify for this House how many professional property surveyors are in Nunavut and in which communities?
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Barnabas. Minister responsible for the the Nunavut Housing Corporation, Minister Akesuk.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): I don’t have the figure on how many inspectors but I will get back to the member with the response. Also, our staff should be notified as to which homes need inspections so when the inspectors go to the communities, they have a better idea of what they need to do within the community.
I will get back to the member on the number of inspectors and how much they cost. Thank you.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Akesuk. Your second supplementary, Mr. Barnabas.
For those communities where there’s no property surveyor, can the minister explain how homeowners can have their houses evaluated for insurance purposes?
Like I said earlier, we would like any region of our territory to contact the district offices in the regions to make an appointment to get somebody into their community for the purposes of evaluating their units, or the houses that are owned by our people.
I think it’s important that we work very closely with the MLAs, the Housing Corporation, and the homeowners of the territory to come up with ideas of how we can improve our delivery of how we evaluate the houses that we have in the territory. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Barnabas (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I know that this responsibility is in Iqaluit but there is no building inspector here in Iqaluit.
There are new units being constructed. When spring comes, the new buildings start shifting, even though they’re brand new.
That’s just an example that I’m going to use because we are experiencing the same problem in the smaller communities.
(interpretation ends) Will the minister commit to working with his officials in the Nunavut Housing Corporation to ensure that all Nunavut homeowners have the services they need to insure and protect their homes?
Yes, we will work with them on how we can deal with this issue and I will speak to my officials on this issue.
Members, the time for Question Period is over.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like unanimous consent to go back to Item 5.
I am very pleased and proud of our visitor who rarely comes here, our good friend from Keewatin, Mr. John Hickes, I would like him to be welcomed.
Tabled Document 128 – 2(4): Workers’ Compensation Board of the Northwest Territories and Nunavut – Annual Report 2006 (Netser)
Tabled Document 129 – 2(4): Ministerial Meeting Report – Intergovernmental Ministers Responsible for Workers’ Compensation Board of the Northwest Territories and Nunavut June 19, 2007 (Netser)
I wish to table the following documents: the Workers’ Compensation Board of the NWT and Nunavut Annual Report for 2006; and also, the Workers’ Compensation Board of NWT and Nunavut Joint Ministers’ Meeting on June 19, 2007.
Tabled Document 130 – 2(4): Home & Community Care Services Annual Report 2005-2006 (Aglukkaq)
I wish to table the Annual Report for 2005-2006 Home Care and Community Care Services.
Could the member please provide the tabled document to the Clerk’s table?
Bill 19 – An Act to Amend the Income Tax Act, No. 2 – First Reading
I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Iqaluit East, that Bill 19, An Act to Amend the Income Tax Act, No. 2, be read for the first time.
The motion is in order. All those in favour. Opposed.
The motion is carried and Bill 19 has had its first reading.
Bill 18 – An Act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act and Related Statutes – First Reading
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Nattilik, that Bill 18, An Act to Amend the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act, be read for the first time. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The motion is carried and Bill 18 has had its first reading.
Bill 15, I apologize, Bill 16... I apologize. Bill 16, with Mr. Evyagotailak in the Chair.
Before we go into Committee of the Whole, we will take a 20-minute break.
>>House recessed at 15:21 and Committee resumed at 15:55
In Committee of the Whole, we have the following item to deal with: Bill 16. What is the wish of this committee?
We wish continue with Bill 16 and commence with the review of the Capital Estimates for the Department of Environment, followed by the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Are we in agreement we deal with the Capital Estimates for the Department of Environment?
Bill 16 – Appropriation (Capital) Act, 2008-2009 – Consideration in Committee – Environment
I would now like to ask Minister Netser, Minister of Environment, to make his opening remarks.
I am pleased to be here this afternoon before the Committee of the Whole to present the department’s capital plan for the 2008-09 fiscal year.
Mr. Chairman, the Department of Environment’s proposed capital budget for 2008-09 is $1.7 million.  The capital projects for 2008-09 focuses on two areas which are: Wildlife Management and Parks and Special Places.
Mr. Chairman, Nunavut parks play a crucial role in the protection and promotion of Nunavut’s outstanding natural and cultural heritage, and in supporting positive recreation and tourism experiences.
Our parks are developed for the benefit of Nunavummiut and for both national and international visitors.
Through our capital plan, we are continuing to ensure our parks meet the needs of Nunavummiut and visitors.
A substantial portion of the department’s 2008-09 capital budget is within the Wildlife Management Division.
The focus is on maintaining and renovating present wildlife offices, and replacing some of our aging wildlife mobile equipment.
During this fiscal year, we completed three new wildlife offices located in Chesterfield Inlet, Whale Cove and Hall Beach. A fourth wildlife office in Cambridge Bay is in progress and we are hoping it will be completed within a couple of years.
Mr. Chairman, the Department of Environment’s Capital Plan is focused in areas that clearly support the needs and priorities of this government as well as the needs of communities throughout Nunavut.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Netser. (interpretation ends) Do you have witnesses you would like to bring to the table?
Hon. Patterk Netser: I do.
Chairman: Sergeant-at-Arms, can you please escort the witnesses?
Hon. Patterk Netser (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. On my right is Simon Awa, Deputy Minister, and on my left, Mr. David Monteith, Director of Parks and Special Places.
Mr. Mapsalak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Standing Committee Ajauqtiit has reviewed the proposed Capital Estimates of the Department of Environment for the 2008-09 fiscal year, and I am pleased to provide you with the committee’s comments.
The committee notes that the department’s proposed 2008-09 capital budget of $1,700,000 is approximately 16 percent lower than its 2007-08 budget.
Mr. Chairman, $600,000 of this amount is going towards the Kugaaruk Park Development, which is a new project. $1,000,000 will go toward small capital projects and the final $100,000 is for Wildlife Office Renovations.
Mr. Chairman, although there is new funding for the Kugaaruk Park Development, the committee was informed that development of the park cannot proceed at this time as the proposed area is currently being leased by prospectors though INAC.
The minister indicated that it is difficult to state when work will be able to begin on this park.
The committee recommends that the department work with INAC and the hamlets to share information when land is being leased by prospectors or mining companies in order to avoid future problems such as this one.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Chairman, members have expressed concerns regarding capital projects in various departments that have previously been delayed because of problems associated with the tendering process.
It is important that municipalities receive clear information from the department when the timeline or scope of projects changes during the middle of the year, so that they have a clear understanding if a project has to be delayed or when a project will be completed.
Mr. Chairman, the standing committee supports improvements to the territory’s park facilities and visitor centres, which are the responsibility of Economic Development and Transportation.
Members noted that $1,000,000 is budgeted for small capital projects.
This budget is to provide funding for mobile equipment, laboratory equipment and parks centre equipment.
Members urge the minister to provide separate substantiation sheets for each project, with a breakdown of how these funds will be used and to clearly identify how much funding each project will receive.
Mr. Chairman, members noted a recent Request for Proposals to conduct an organizational review of the department.
When the Department of Sustainable Development was split into Environment and EDT, this was to allow each one to focus on its different mandate.
Mr. Chairman, it has been a concern that while the Department of Environment has responsibility for parks, the Department of Economic Development and Transportation has responsibility for the related areas of tourism and visitor centres.
Another example is that while wildlife officers purchase pelts from local hunters, these pelts are then given to the Department of Economic Development and Transportation.
Members look forward to being kept fully informed on the results of this organizational review.
Before we proceed, I would like to remind members of the following: according to Rule 77(1), you have 10 minutes to speak, and according to Rule 77(2), subject to the discretion of the Chair, a member may speak more than once to the matter under discussion but not until every member who wishes to speak has spoken.
I suggest to members that wherever possible you ask your detailed questions during page-by-page review of the departmental estimates.  Do members have any general comments?
I will be raising some questions but I would like to point out a couple of things.
The minister’s comments in regard to the parks, for example, in Kugaaruk, we are not sure, as he stated, looking at what they have done, $600,000 for design, twice for $150,000 each. I am wondering if they were adequate, or exactly what they are going to use and why they need $600,000.
I will be raising questions on that as to what the Chairman mentioned on the second page, the Department of Environment asked to be reviewed.
I believe for two years now or more that hunters who sell their sealskins were handled by Economic Development.
As regular members, we haven’t understood exactly… it’s not treated like a developing thing but the hunters sell their skins so they can get hunting equipment and gas money. That’s what they use it for.
It’s not exactly an economic development and it’s not fully supported, or where they can make entries and the government spends a lot of money in that.
For example, in Pangnirtung there’s a fish plant and in Rankin Inlet there is a meat plant.
It’s not developed like those two.
Why was it transferred to the Department of Economic Development? We don’t understand that.
During your organizational review, I want that to be included.
I have a concern under the Department of Environment as the minister is fully aware, and I agree with Mr. Arvaluk because I don’t fully understand why the sale of sealskins is under Economic Development.  I often asked the minister in regard to that because it’s concern of ours in my constituency that we don’t have a wildlife officer.
Since I’ve been here, for those hunters who wish to sell their sealskins, there hasn’t been one there, so there is a concern. I want the minister to recognize our concern in my constituency.
One of the concerns is the polar bear study during 2007-08. I believe it’s to be concluded in that year.
Not too long ago, some quotas were increased and Sanikiluaq residents were envious of that increase for the quota. They didn’t increase it because they still have to do a study in our area. That’s also one of our concerns.
With regards to tourism, this is not the first time that I bring this up. The residents are very interested in operating tourism projects because there’s not very much about Sanikiluaq to attract tourists to our community. I want that to be considered, too, because I believe there is a committee for economic development in our community.
I wonder if the next time you make plans that Sanikiluaq be included, especially with the tourism.
I would like to remind the members that we are dealing with Environment.
Also, Mr. Netser, I’m just wondering, for the members’ concerns, if you can provide them with more information on sealskin sales because a lot of communities don’t have economic development.
Are we open for questions already?
Chairman: Not yet. We’re still on general comments.
Perhaps, later on you can give more information to the committee members.
There are consultants that go into my community, Pond Inlet, and Igloolik with regard to the route.
Yes, the mining companies, we wish to see such development because they will produce jobs.
But the residents of Igloolik, Pond Inlet, and Arctic Bay will be affected because that’s where caribou migrate. The roads that they will be building, the proposed highway, goes right through the migration route.
Just before Nanisivik closed down, we used to have a concern.
We weren’t sure if there were dangers from the mine. Even though we wanted to acquire the buildings from Nanisivik, we were not sure if they were safe for health reasons.
If they’re going to be developing, then they’ll be affected in both ways, whether they travel by land or by water. I know the governments will do their studies on waters but they haven’t said anything up to date.
The Inuit have other concerns with the mining companies.
I wonder if the minister will be able to brief us as to what they are doing for the concerns of the Inuit.
We will now proceed to page-by-page review of the departmental estimates starting with page I-6.
Environment. Detail of Capital. Program Development.
Members, questions about why and the reasons for the sale of sealskins being the responsibilities of Economic Development and Transportation should be asked in Question Period not here in Committee of the Whole as we are dealing with Environment.
Environment. Detail of Capital. Mr. Mapsalak.
In my opening comments I mentioned that I wanted to ask some questions.
Yes, I understood that the wildlife office projects were delayed, especially for Hall Beach and Cambridge Bay. I already heard that it was completed in Hall Beach.