EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I was a lot younger back then and now I am close to old age, yet some of these buildings remain exactly as they were years ago.
As the minister, how will you attempt to resolve these concerns?
As per my earlier statement, I seem to get different answers when I ask about these buildings. What is your position on this matter?
I’ll first explain how the process is supposed to work.
When a building is not used anymore by a department, they can write it off.
Once it is written off, it can be offered to the hamlet or it can be disposed of for sale or for destruction.
That’s the process, but CGS would assess the building to make sure that it is in safe condition.
Right now, we’re in the process of doing an overall inventory of any old or unused buildings in Nunavut.
We don’t want old, derelict buildings around because it is a safety issue.
We’re in the process of finding out exactly what is out there.
That being said, sometimes a department will not use a building anymore, but then they don’t go to the next step of writing it off.
When it’s seen in the books, it’s still seen as an asset that is viable.
When an asset is not being used anymore and written off, we have to make sure that there are no contaminants because some of the older buildings do have asbestos and we would have to deal with that. That is how the process is supposed to work.
Like I said, right now, we’re doing an overall inventory of buildings that aren’t being used.
Once a building is deemed to be unsafe, it would have to be dismantled or torn down because if it’s unsafe, then we wouldn’t want to turn over a building that is unsafe to anybody.
Once a building owned by a government department has no more official use, what length of time or period from that assessment has to pass before the department can write it off?
That is, if you understood my question.
There is no set time as, “Okay, the building is not being used. Therefore, in 90 days, it has to be turned over to someone.” There are no set times.
I know that sometimes some buildings fall between the cracks, sometimes it’s at the fault of CG&S, other times it’s at the fault of departments, but we don’t want old, derelict buildings around.
When a department quits using a building, if it’s not needed and it’s still in good condition, then we wouldn’t destroy it because infrastructure is expensive and limited in Nunavut and we want to take advantage of anything that is useable to be used.
As the minister stated, they are currently doing a review or inventory of the conditions of all buildings, especially the old buildings that are no longer being used.
Are Qulliq’s buildings included, such as the oil generator buildings?
Are they included with government department units?
No, we would not deal with Qulliq Energy’s assets.
They are their own entity and they would deal with it however they deal with their old surplus buildings, if they have any.
If Qulliq’s buildings are not included, which buildings are not included in the GN buildings?
Are those the only buildings that are not included?
I should have elaborated. It’s the same with the Nunavut Housing Corporation because it’s a Crown corporation. Any Crown corporation would deal with their own asset disposal methods.
Perhaps he responded and I didn’t comprehend it.
How long do you expect the review to take place?
I can’t give an exact timeframe because, when a department deems… .
I used the word “write-off,” but it was not the proper word. I should have used the word “surplus.”
When a department surpluses a building, then we would have to assess it and see what state it’s in. No, I don’t have a timeframe for the member, but it is a priority in terms of it has to get done.
We have heard from many MLAs about old, derelict buildings that have been in the communities for a long time that are an eyesore, a safety hazard, and a fire hazard. We don’t want any old buildings around at all.
Perhaps the minister and I are having difficulty understanding each other.
I believe that the minister had stated that there’s a review being done currently with the derelict buildings that are no longer being used. I thought that the minister had stated that.
That’s why I asked when the review of the derelict buildings or inventory will be completed.
I’m talking about the derelict buildings that are no longer being used.
I thought you were doing an inventory.
Didn’t you say that you were doing an inventory on those?
Yes, I did state that we are in the process right now of doing an inventory. Once the inventory is done, we have to go back to the departments to make sure that the data and information is, in fact, correct, and then that would come back to us again and we would go from there.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): That’s my question. When do you expect to have this completed?
I can’t give an exact timeframe because we have to work with all the departments and we don’t have an exact timeline, but I assure the member that it is going to get done.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Thank you. I also thank the minister. I would expect this to be completed before I become a senior citizen.
Moving on, I believe we’re on page J-7, Mr. Chairman.
Your department deals with the Building Code Act and the Fire Prevention Act.
In the past, it was mentioned that sometimes it takes a long time to do inspections due to lack of staff. It takes quite a while to deal with buildings that need inspection.
Buildings end up not getting an inspection way past their due time.
Do you have any new information about the lack of staff or are buildings that require some work being dealt with in a timelier manner?
Hon. Joe Savikataaq: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.
Yes, we have problems with not enough manpower and we are adding three positions. There will be two PYs in the region and one in headquarters and those are to help out with the inspections. We do have to do inspections into the building code and fire inspections, like you said.
We are adding some positions to help us out in that department.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, where are these jobs going to be and when do you expect them to be filled?
Like I stated, we have two going to the regions and one going here.
The building inspectors will be one in Rankin Inlet, one in Cambridge Bay, and one in Iqaluit.
Regarding the inspectors, can the minister indicate to us if they are going to be electrical inspectors or plumbing inspectors?
What kind of inspectors are they going to be?
These inspectors are going to be inspectors for the building code.
Community and Government Services. Infrastructure. Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted.
Are we on page J-7?
Yes. In November 2015, there’s written reference that you made requests for office spaces.
In your business plan, it indicates that you’re going to be filing a report on office spaces.
When will you be tabling this plan in the Legislative Assembly?
Hon. Joe Savikataaq: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation) I also thank the member for that question.
I responded to that question yesterday, but I have no problem answering it.
The study was Nunavut-wide to assess office space needs, whether it is adequate or required.
The study was completed and the report is lengthy with 635 pages.
At this time, the study has been completed, but we are still evaluating the results and we haven’t made a decision as to whether we need to construct office space in a specific community or if we can lease a building for office space.
The study is still being evaluated. However, the study has been completed.
I also thank the minister, but we are reviewing this page and it states that you will bring this information forward.
I understand that although the study is done, the review is not done.
Once the review is completed, will it be tabled perhaps in another year or so?
When does your department anticipate completion of this review and tabling of the information?
Hon. Joe Savikataaq: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation) Yes, the document will be provided.
I don’t know the equivalent Inuktitut word for (interpretation ends) “tabled,” (interpretation) but with respect to the timing, I don’t know the timeframe since the study is a very thick document.
We will be using this study to determine where we need to increase our office space capacity, as it was to study all the needs, communities with adequate office space or the ones requiring more office space. We will use that study to determine our priorities to determine where we need office space.
With respect to the timeframe, I can’t provide a concrete date because it is a big document.
Mr. Shooyook (interpretation): I’ll drop that subject now.
Indeed, with respect to this particular term “plans,” it is one word that has resounded ever since I sat as a Member of the Legislative Assembly.
Planning seems to be an excuse. We hear about all this planning, some extending for four years.
Where does the requirement to continually plan come from?
It seems all the actionable items are delayed by planning. Planning is something this government needs to fix. Is there any way to expedite this process?
It seems the departmental refrain is “We are planning it.” I am aware of the complexity involved, but I wonder where we can expedite the planning process for the government departments.
Have you given any thought to accelerate this process or is this too far out in left field?
Hon. Joe Savikataaq: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation) This term “planning” can only work if we follow the process properly. The government departments we work with will help determine the size of office space required, including future office space needs.
We are trying to scrutinize this need carefully because if we built office space before it is needed or even in leasing or renting an office, we may find that in several years, the building is at capacity or they require more office space as a result.
The term is used for future needs to ensure that we have adequate office space built.
The study took so long and it is so lengthy because we wanted it to be comprehensive.
We want to have adequate office space to allow for growth, even if we don’t construct the building ourselves and just least it, but the study was to determine current and future office space needs, as we know that in the future, office space may be inadequate.
That is why we have a long-term vision in this plan.
Chairman: Thank you. We’re at Branch Summary.
Community and Government Services. Infrastructure. Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $107,863,000.
Chairman: We will go to page J-3.
Okay, J-8. Page J-8. Information Item.
We can also ask questions on J-8 and I have some questions.
Just this winter in December, your department issued a news release stating that the prices in Nunavut for both diesel and gasoline would be going down by 10 cents a litre, which I’m very pleased about, and that it would become effective on January 1, 2016.
I would like to know how your department calculated this 10 cents per litre figure.
Why wasn’t it 11 cents?
I can’t explain it all here because it’s quite a complicated process. Even I have a hard time getting my fingers around exactly how they come up with the price. In a nutshell, they came up with the price.
As the member will recall, we had to ask for more monies because the stabilization fund that PPD has can be plus or minus $10 million and it was in the hole for over $10 million. It is in legislation that we can’t go over $10 million.
Extra money was asked for and granted by the MLAs to get it to $10 million.
Once that was done, we put the price of gasoline and diesel down but not as much as we could have because we have to pay off that $10 million deficit.
Once the $10 million deficit is paid off, we can look at the options again of what the price should be.
The main reason that it only went down as much as it did was due to the deficit in PPD in the stabilization fund.
Another fact that has to do with it is that all our fuel is in bulk.
It’s bought in US dollars and the Canadian dollar has been very weak, so that has a bearing on it.
Combined with those two factors, that was the best we could do at the moment.
Before I ask another question, as I’m sure we have been briefed, could the minister remind me why the deficit limit is set at $10 million?
Can you remind us why did it go over the limit?
I’ll just explain the role of the stabilization fund first. It’s there.
It’s a buffer so that we don’t have to drastically increase or decrease the price of gas that we sell it for.
Some time in the past when the price of the gas and diesel that we were selling should have gone up to a certain level, it either didn’t go up or didn’t go up to the level it was.
Therefore, we were selling the diesel and gasoline for less than what it cost us to purchase and distribute it and that’s why the fund was in a deficit.
The price of fuel should have gone up or should have gone up more at some time in the past and it didn’t.
That is why the fund was overdraft; I guess you call it, if you’re talking banking terms.
Right now, we’re trying to pay down that debt.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Could the minister remind me why that happened?
(interpretation ends) Why was it allowed to happen and why did it happen?
(interpretation) Why did that happen and why did we let it happen?
I’m not trying to pass the buck or pass the blame here, but it was a decision that was made by the previous government and I can’t speak on behalf of them.
When the price of fuel and gas should have gone up, it didn’t go up or it didn’t go up as much as it should have.
If that happened, it can reoccur in our future.
However, I don’t understand this part. Irrespective of the person holding the portfolio or the premiership, the top officials rarely change.
The lead officials of the departments don’t change, but we never see any tangible change in the direction with new ministers.
That is what I can’t quite understand.
The employees don’t quit when a minister is reassigned.
They are the ones running the departments. Although I am not personally pointing fingers, I don’t get why things stay the same.
I am in disagreement with that response primarily because, when the minister is changed, the (interpretation ends) deputy minister, the assistant deputy minister, (interpretation) and their head officials are responsible for the daily operations. It is frustrating. I will leave it at that.
Let me move to another matter in your business plan for 2016-19 where it states yet another study will be launched. It states that the POS equipment or (interpretation ends) electronic point of sale (interpretation) is being tested in Rankin Inlet.
I believe the pilot project has already been completed. Can you provide a short overview of what results accrued from this pilot project?
Just before I answer that question, I’ll go back to how the decision is made by the DMs and ADMs.
The recommendation is put there, but ultimately, the buck stops at the minister.
The minister of the day may have had something to do with it, but I’m not just going to speak ill of the past government or pass the blame. I’m just saying that the buck stops at the minister.
The minister is accountable for whatever decisions in any department that they run.
Going back to the point of sales for Rankin Inlet, yes, it’s being tried out and we’re still working on it.
There are still a few bugs that have to be worked out on it, so it’s not done. There are still a few bugs that have to be worked out.
In essence, what it does is they have a better track of inventory electronically so that if you make a sale in Rankin Inlet, it’s entered into data and it’s communicated via the Internet. There is less chance for human error. If you have somebody entering all the data physically by hand, then the odds of having data errors are great.
Plus, with the point of sales, they know what their current inventory should be as opposed to the current system we use.
They are always a few months behind in terms of if you ask them how much fuel they have, they don’t have the accurate numbers for the current date.
It’s still a pilot project and we are still working on it. So far, in general, it’s working out well.
Can the minister tell us whether these are little bugs or big bugs?
They are minor bugs. They are small things. We want to make sure we smooth everything right out before it’s used across the board in Nunavut because it’s easier to fix with small, little tweaks here and there just to make sure it’s running smoothly, properly, and efficiently before we lay it out for all of Nunavut.
They are just minor little things.
When will the study on the system be completed?
Will it be used as a model for possible use in other communities? When is this study expected to be completed?
It would start to be rolled out one by one to each community, but I can’t give a firm date on exactly when that would be.
The goal is eventually to have all the communities on this point of sale once it’s running smoothly.
It will be phased in over all the communities, not all at once.
As we just don’t have the capacity to do it all at once, it has to be done gradually.
Going to a different topic, I believe you have fuel contracts in all the communities. They are usually for ten-year terms.
Do all the communities right now have someone contracted for ten years?
All the communities have contracts, but they don’t all start and end at the same time. They are varied.
I think half are close to one time and half are close to another time. They are not all set at the same time. Contracts will be expiring at different times.
Do I understand correctly that all the communities, even though the contracts are not signed at the same time, each community has a ten-year PPD contract in every community?
They are five-year with an optional five-year renewal. That is my understanding. I don’t want to give him the wrong information, so what I’ll do is - all the dates are here - turn it over to Ms. Kimball so that she can give all the numbers because she’s better at that than I am.
Chairman: Ms. Kimball, remember we have interpreters. Ms. Kimball.
In Kitikmeot, the dates the contracts were awarded ranges from August to October 2015.
Those were done in an RFP back in 2014.
In Kivalliq, again they were all tendered in 2014 and the range that they were awarded is between August and September 2015.
In Baffin, we have RFPs for everywhere except for Iqaluit. There are a couple of communities that are still in process.
The rest deal with July to September, again 2015.
Do I understand correctly that the PPD contracts for all communities in the Baffin are going to be renewed?
The ones that are getting new contracts in the Baffin (Qikiqtaaluk) are 11. Iqaluit is on different terms with theirs expiring next year in 2017.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) And when will the RFPs be closed?
These contracts have already been awarded except for the Iqaluit one.
When Ms. Kimball was going off with those dates, that’s when the contracts were awarded. The contracts have already been awarded.
This winter, world oil prices are very low.
Have you bought the fuel for this coming summer while it’s cheaper?
Yes, we bought the jet fuel and we have bought the gasoline and the diesel, but we don’t buy the diesel all at the same time because we don’t have the storage capacity.
We have to buy the gasoline in the winter because we buy winter-grade gasoline. If we wait ‘til summer, there is no winter-grade gasoline available for us. The bulk of the fuel, yes, has been purchased and it’s being stored for us.
Seeing no more names on page J-8, go to J-3. Department Summary.
Community and Government Services. Detail of Expenditures. Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $239,143,000.
Chairman: Thank you to the minister.
I would like to thank my officials that were here for helping me out and their staff for helping them out because it’s a team effort to get here, to get the information here.
I would like to thank all the MLAs for doing their part.
What we do is we present the budget and what we want to use the money for and we need the MLAs to agree to it and if they don’t agree to it, then changes could be made.
I’m glad that all the MLAs have agreed to it because we’re here to work as a team together for the betterment of Nunavut.
Just to remind the MLAs, CGS stands for “Community and Government Services,” and I thought maybe it stood for something like “Let’s get Savikataaq.”
Iqsuqtii, can you escort the witnesses?
>>Committee recessed at 16:41 and resumed at 16:54
Bill 13 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2016-2017 – Education – Consideration in Committee
Hon. Paul Quassa (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, yes, I would like officials here with me.
Does that committee agree to let the minister’s staff go to the witness table?
I believe you’re asking me to introduce the officials who are here with me.
On my left is someone everybody knows, my Deputy Minister, Kathy Okpik, and I am very proud that she has been a deputy minister for almost 12 years in the government.
On my right is Marc Rose, Financial Controller.
Minister, please proceed with your opening comments.
Hon. Paul Quassa (interpretation): Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman.
I am pleased to meet with my colleagues to discuss the 2016-17 main estimates and business plan for the Department of Education.
In our mandate document, Sivumut Abluqta, we stated that education is the government’s top priority.
Our goal is the development of self-reliance and education is the key to realizing this goal.
We are committed to providing students in every community access to the same high-quality education and training needed to reach their career goals.
For the 2016-17 fiscal year, we are requesting $2,751,000 in new monies.
This new funding is almost entirely within the Kindergarten to Grade 12 School Operations Division.
The amount of $835,000 is included in this request for Nunavut Teachers Association salary increases.
This funding requirement is a result of the ratification of the Nunavut Teachers Association Collective Agreement in 2014.
The 2013 Auditor General’s Report on Education in Nunavut stated, “Implementation of inclusive education requires more support from the Department of Education.”
Mr. Chairman, we responded to the Auditor General’s report by ordering an external review of inclusive education. We wanted to identify how to create a model of inclusive education that gives all students the opportunity to attend regular classes with students of the same age group and receive education based on individual goals that are achieved by providing adequate support.
Our proposed 2016-17 budget provides $1,916,000 in new funding for Kindergarten to Grade 12 School Operations to develop and deliver inclusive education in all regions of Nunavut.
Support for inclusive education will help us move forward with our departmental priorities:
literacy;
support for school staff;
equity and standardization across the territory; and
accountability for student achievement and program outcomes.
This funding request is broken down into the following amounts.
We have budgeted $1,145,000 to provide eight new positions to support inclusive education.
Mr. Chairman, these positions include, and I’ll say it in English:
(interpretation ends) A behaviour and social-emotional learning coordinator to support school teams in their work to implement and maintain positive behavioural interventions;
A counselling and development coordinator who will support Ilinniarvimmi Inuusilirijiit in their roles and coordinate ongoing, regular staff development for them;
A director of student achievement who will coordinate the programs, services, and curricula used in all schools and classrooms to support inclusive education; and
A student support coordinator who will work in partnership with education staff to provide effective social-emotional learning and academic programs.
(interpretation) These four positions will be based at headquarters in Iqaluit in order to provide standardized programming and support to the regional school operations across Nunavut.
Currently, we only have one full-time position at headquarters to provide support for inclusive education.