EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
You state that the contractors are to utilize the local hotels for accommodation, but all Nunavummiut know all the contractors have their own units. They purchase a unit and not utilize the local hotel.
Each and every one of us is aware of this issue.
There are other issues as well. In our community, the small contractors have no opportunity at all.
The huge contractors are being contracted out and the smaller contractors in the smaller communities are not being utilized at all.
The Premier read the mission statement of the current government, that the communities need opportunity to meet economic development.
It seems like we are not utilizing the smaller companies in the local communities for contractors because your department awards the contracts to large companies.
If there is going to be penalties imposed on me, how much percent of the contract would you penalize me for? (interpretation ends) So what if I pay $30,000 in penalties? (interpretation) I believe that they don’t mind paying the $30,000 in penalties.
How did you come up with that figure? I would like you to elaborate on that so that I could have a clearer understanding.
I will respond to some parts of the question, but I’ll ask Ms. Kimball to respond to a part of the question.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to state, whether it be a hotel or a local business, we keep reminding the contractors to utilize the local contractors when awarded a contract. With respect to large contracts involving any (interpretation ends) ship, supply, and erect (interpretation) contracts, if a small local contractor is unable to bid on the contractor, then the local contractor is identified as being eligible for subcontractor status. There are requirements within the large contracts to utilize these local subcontractors in the community, to work with them.
Further, the contractor is required to also conduct training for any (interpretation ends) trades apprentices (interpretation) in the community where apprentices have been identified to the contractor upon notification that that requirement applies. It is obvious that this may be part of the reason for these difficulties.
With respect to local accommodations, and here I will use an example of difficulties with local hotels, some hotels are booked for months at a time or even for the entire winter, especially in smaller communities with only one hotel.
Some communities have more than one hotel and this probably leads to some local hotels not being utilized or only used sparingly. That is what I wanted to clarify here.
However, the smaller contractors at the local level have to be subcontracted and that requirement is clearly identified in the contracts. That is one requirement for local subcontractors, whether it is a local company or hotel that is to be subcontracted, as well as training any local apprentices upon notification.
With respect to a part of your question, I wanted Ms. Kimball to explain the contract penalties and how that process is followed if a contractor is found not to be adhering to these requirements. I would like Ms. Kimball to respond to (interpretation ends) that part.
I thank the minister for responding about local contractors, to be precise, local businesses that can be involved in these contracts. It is unfortunate that local contractors are only offered tidbits or tiny portions of the contracts through this process as a government.
In other words, we are only giving them crumbs from these contracts that they are able to bid on through this contracting process and this is regrettable for our small businesses, although this government stated that we want to empower our communities and increase local capacity for economic development.
With respect to the letter of instruction you referred to, where it identifies the requirements in writing, if that requirement isn’t followed, what amount… ?
Let me use an example where, if I was the contractor and I didn’t follow the written requirements, such as staying at a local hotel although there was room, if I didn’t stay at the hotel and the department finds out that I didn’t use the local accommodations, how much of a penalty would I incur?
Now I understand his question about how penalties can be assessed, but I don’t know whether it is set at a percentage of the contract or how these penalties are assessed or if the Nunavut Housing Corporation has these written down for contracts. I would ask that Ms. Kimball elaborate with more detail. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
As I mentioned, there’s a detailed formula to calculate the penalty that compares their original bid commitment of what they would spend on different aspects of the contract, which would include things like the accommodations.
We work with that formula to assess the penalty and bonus. I can’t speak to a specific amount because it’s a quite complex formula taking in a bunch of different things.
Actually, perhaps what I am trying to ask about is with this percentage penalty.
I am of the mind and perhaps I am mistaken in my assumption, but I personally believe that these penalties are easily sloughed off by these companies and they aren’t even fearful of the penalty.
Some contractors may also be building these punitive amounts into their contract bid. At least that is my opinion on this issue. They already know they will incur the penalties, so they include that percentage, as the amounts are not enough to cause hardship for them.
As I stated earlier, if I know I am making a $500,000 profit from the contract and know that I will be incurring a $30,000 penalty, then that is absolutely meaningless in terms of scaring off the contractor. I wouldn’t even think twice about paying that penalty.
Let me ask this question then: with this percentage penalty that applies for not adhering to the requirements, do you seriously think the amount terrifies any of these companies?
You just asked us if we think this penalty is sufficient. If I were to answer, it would just be an opinion, so I can’t respond to his question. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
For companies that break these requirements and have to pay a percentage, as per your response that penalties are imposed using a percentage rate, is this percentage high enough to deter these companies?
Hon. George Kuksuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation) Again, I won’t presume to speak for these contractors as that isn’t my role here. Is it deterrence?
(interpretation ends) I don’t know. (interpretation) I can’t answer that question. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
When you award a contract, as an example, a yearlong contract has been awarded, within this yearlong contract, what is the limit of the penalties assessed to the company for breaching their contract?
If I understood your question correctly, I will refer the question to Ms. Kimball so that you can receive your response in detail. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
The formula actually works as a percentage of labour and the maximum penalty is 25 percent of labour.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Let’s say that I would incur up to 25 percent of my contract for breaching the labour requirement of the contract.
If the hotel had space for my workers, but I didn’t bother to utilize the hotel, what percentage would I have to pay for breaching that requirement?
Hon. George Kuksuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation) With respect to that level of detail, perhaps Ms. Kimball can elaborate on the penalties that would be assessed, if any. Since it is different and she already provided the labour component penalties, perhaps she can identify the different requirements as she would know them.
Perhaps it would be easier if she replied to that question if it exists, but these requirements are generally contained in the (interpretation ends) contract agreement.
There are numerous components that are bundled together. Not just accommodation, but there is accommodations, travel, material, and other items that are actually lumped together, and there is a formula to calculate the penalty.
Off the top of my head, I cannot recall what the maximum penalty is of that component. I know the main penalty is 25 percent of labour.
We do endeavour to make sure we encourage the contractors to follow what they set out in the tender B2 schedules.
We do hold the face-to-face pre-construction meeting at the outset of the contract prior to anything occurring, hold a detailed review of their plans and how they plan to meet the commitments in their tender documents, and then we proceed with monitoring to that at each payment progress draw. As well, we utilize our LHO partners as eyes and ears on the ground to observe what’s going on, on the construction site and provide us feedback if there are issues.
If there is non-compliance with commitments made in the contract, we do contact the contractor and try to work with them to resolve a lack of compliance.
With respect to the labour component that entails a 25 percent penalty upon breaching this requirement, which employees are we talking about here?
Are we talking about Inuit workers or all the workers under the contract?
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): For the labour component, we are talking about the (interpretation ends) total (interpretation) number of workers that would be looked at, in other words, the total personnel. (interpretation ends) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Furthermore, when a contract is awarded, you stated that there is a pre-construction meeting outlining the requirements and agreement is reached.
After this meeting, you stated that inspections start. Now, is the LHO staff included in these inspections?
I assume so, but are inspectors available in all the communities who have taken the proper training to inspect these projects? Are there qualified inspectors in all of the communities and is that how you conduct your inspections with the LHO?
Further, how many times do they conduct inspections?
Every two weeks? When?
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): Thank you very much. When this process has been undertaken, the Nunavut Housing Corporation has inspectors in the (interpretation ends) districts, (interpretation) such as the districts for the Kivalliq, the Baffin, or the Kitikmeot districts wherever the project is managed.
The inspectors then visit the sites as part of the inspection process as well as the LHO staff that are able to conduct theses inspections to assess the contractor’s construction project.
If it is required, the Nunavut Housing Corporation tasks one of their inspectors to conduct the inspections.
(interpretation ends) Thank you.  Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much.
I am actually getting more confused with each response when I should be starting to understand the process.
I wonder how to word this.
With respect to the LHO staff that form part of the inspections, do they have qualified staff to conduct inspections and thusly, performing inspections?
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): Let me respond with a question of my own. Please elaborate on exactly what type of inspection you are referring to.
What exactly do you want answered with that question?
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, the minister and his officials stated earlier that once a contract is awarded and construction starts, inspections are done on these construction projects.
Hon. Minister Mr. Kuksuk
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, earlier, Ms. Kimball stated that in these cases, it would be better to use an example and perhaps it is better to have our officials to conduct the investigation or perhaps the LHO staff can do the inspections. Yes, we work together to complete these investigations to assess the situations.
However, Mr. Enook seems to be referring to qualified inspectors in his question and whether any exist in these local housing associations and if we are utilizing them as they are qualified to do.
I will refer this question to Ms. Kimball to respond in detail. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
We utilize different staff for different forms of inspections. For instance, LHO staff would be used.
They would know what’s going on locally, so they would be able to provide feedback in terms of using the local accommodations. They can also provide feedback as to whether or not there are beneficiaries working on site and whether or not they are in compliance with the amount of local labour.
In terms of formal inspections, obviously things like electrical inspections, plumbing inspections, we make sure that our appropriately qualified staff are flown out to view those inspections.
We also make sure, as part of every progress draw, that we have NHC staff observe the site and verify that the work being claimed as complete is actually complete as part of the payment process.
With respect to the local hotel accommodation requirement, let’s not play around with that type of lip service.
As per my comment earlier, the rules that were made and that we stated would be followed as contract requirements, the penalties aren’t severe enough to deter contractors from breaching them.
The amount is laughable due to the limit of the penalty.
If I were a very large contractor with many contracts, my earlier statement about the $30,000 penalty being assessed wouldn’t be enough to deter me since it wouldn’t hurt in the slightest, as I would be making a $500,000 profit from this government.
It is as if I just threw that from my pocket cash since it is basically small change to these types of large companies.
I believe that the Nunavut Housing Corporation has to seriously review these penalties.
Another matter that is disconcerting to me is that every community faces housing shortages and there are very few private homes for sale. Whenever a private home is put on the market, sometimes the contractors just snap up the units.
This is in the face of local people who may be trying to purchase the same unit because the contractor has the deep pockets to offer the highest price and local people can’t compete and give up trying. It compounds the problems communities’ face since that house is out of the market and is unavailable, leading to further housing shortages.
I wonder how best to try to make this a more tangible penalty. I wonder how we can review all of these issues in light of the housing shortages we face.
We want our residents to have private homes, but when a house is put on the market, local people can’t compete with the contractors who buy the house.
At least that is the situation we face in the smaller communities. That is the reality we face.
I think we have to seriously reconsider our approach in this area.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) I take that as a comment.
Moving on with my list, we are on Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Branch Summary. Total Capital Expenditures. $30,072,000.
I have, I think, just one question.
Earlier this year, one of the responses brought up the topic of the blueprint for action. Earlier this year, I had asked the minister a question regarding the continuum of care and the continuum of affordability.
The response Ms. Kimball provided is that there was a strategy to identify the goals and objectives and they were looking at meeting with different stakeholders to develop this blueprint for action.
It specifically mentions Community and Government Services, the City of Iqaluit, and the Department of Finance.
If the Chairman will allow me, I’ll make it kind of a two-phased question, which led me into the topic of the 10-year Inuit Housing Action Plan that was developed in coordination with NTI and the Nunavut Housing Corporation. Would the minister be able to update me on those two documents?
When we discussed that matter earlier, we were talking about the (interpretation ends) blueprint for the action plan on housing (interpretation) that allows us to see the bigger picture in order to plan for meeting our housing shortages.
This will be developed through an RFP process and any companies wishing to bid may do so. This includes the (interpretation ends) scope of work (interpretation) for the contractor. This will start from that point onwards.
With respect to the other part of his question about NTI and the need to include them to meet our housing shortages, it is outside of my mandate and I can’t answer that point.
If Ms. Kimball wants to respond to that question, I would like her to do so. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
Chairman: Thank you. Ms. Kimball.
Ms. Kimball: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In terms of the blueprint for action, it’s really about interdepartmental collaboration within the GN. We are in the process of finalizing a request for proposals to seek a facilitator that would help us with the consultation that we want to have in the winter, spring, and summer.
The intention is then to compile a formal report with a path forward some time in the winter of 2015-16.
Chairman: Thank you. I just want to remind members that we are dealing with proposed capital budgets for 2015-16. Please keep your focus and questions on the proposed budget.
Mr. Hickes: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With your indulgence, I will continue on this line, as this directly affects the strategy on the capital budget.
The 10-year Inuit Housing Action Plan that was developed has lapsed.
When I asked the minister questions on it earlier this year, he quoted, to quote, “To date, we have not had any new talks with NTI.”
This was back in March, Mr. Chairman.
I’m just wondering if any talks have been initiated now to assist in the development of this Inuit housing action plan.
With respect to member’s question, yes, there is a plan being developed with NTI to meet with them to discuss the next 10-year plan for resolving our housing needs. (interpretation ends) That’s the plan, is to meet. There’s planning in discussion to meet with NTI on that.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Back to page L-2. Department Summary.
Nunavut Housing Corporation. Detail of Expenditures. Total Capital Expenditures. $30,072,000.
Some Members: Agreed.  Chairman: Are you agreed that the Nunavut Housing Corporation is concluded?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. Do you have any closing comments?
No, I don’t have too much to comment on further.
My chair is getting quite warm and I would prefer to stand up at this point.
I just want to thank all the committee members for their questions as well as the suggestions to improve the work of the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
We have to work in partnership with other departments and our partners, and that is the only way to move forward. I just thank everyone here. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
(interpretation ends) Thank you. (interpretation) We will take a five-minute break (interpretation ends) before moving on to the next department, Community and Government Services, after our break.
>>Committee recessed at 18:01 and resumed at 18:13
Bill 08 – Appropriation (Capital) Act, 2015-2016 – Community and Government Services – Consideration in Committee
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) I would now like to ask Minister Sammurtok: do you have officials that you would like to appear before the committee?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok: Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman: Thank you. Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the witnesses in.
For the record, Minister Sammurtok, please introduce your officials.
To my right is Roy Green, Deputy Minister of Community and Government Services, and to my left is Bu Lam, Director of Community Infrastructure.
Please proceed with your opening comments, Mr. Sammurtok.
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I am pleased to have this opportunity today to update the Committee of the Whole on the 2016-2020 five-year capital plan and, in particular, the 2015-16 Capital Estimates for the Department of Community and Government Services.
The Department of Community and Government Services has a central role to play in the delivery of capital projects for the government.
We provide support to all departments during the initial stages of project planning, design development, technical review, construction, and commissioning.
In addition to assisting government departments, CGS is also responsible for assisting all Nunavut communities in the long-term planning and delivery of capital projects.
These efforts have forged strong collaborations with our communities and these relationships continue to strengthen.
Mr. Chairman, the proposed capital budget for the Department of Community and Government Services for 2015-16 is $27,855,000.
This requested allocation will primarily be for ongoing initiatives and reflects our department’s responsibility to support both GN and municipal programs.
Our proposed capital budget for the upcoming year includes:
$7,390,000 for upgrades to fuel storage facilities in four communities and a new point-of-sale payment system to better track fuel inventory across the territory;
$5 million for minor capital projects which will primarily be used to assist communities with minor infrastructure upgrades and repairs and for lifecycle renewal of GN owned assets;
$3,400,000 as a block funding contribution to the City of Iqaluit to assist in upgrades to core municipal infrastructure;
$2 million for upgrades to communication technology infrastructure, funding that will support ongoing improvements to telecommunications for all GN departments and municipalities;
$10,065,000 for municipal infrastructure projects in six communities across the three regions.
Mr. Chairman, the infrastructure needs across the territory are simply too vast to adequately address in the short term with the limited capital funding available. Regrettably, this is the infrastructure reality facing our territory.
It is, therefore, paramount that scarce capital funding is administered as effectively as possible to best address the core needs of our communities.
To ensure our approach in identifying priority projects is prudent, officials in my department work very closely with municipalities, the Nunavut Community Infrastructure Advisory Committee, and other branches of government to rank and prioritize infrastructure projects.
This approach allows us to address the most urgent and critical projects in the short term to support our government and our communities.
To assist in advancing municipal infrastructure priorities, the department utilizes capital funds from federal infrastructure programs.
Most recently, the Government of Nunavut signed the Canada-Nunavut Federal Gas Tax Agreement in February 2014, which will bring a total of $143 million over a 10-year period to address water, wastewater, and solid waste infrastructure upgrades in our communities.
Additionally, officials within my department continue to work with Canada to negotiate the terms and conditions under the New Building Canada Fund, which will provide $256 million of federal funding from 2014 to 2024.
Both funding agreements provide much needed infrastructure investments to the territory that will help establish a foundation of infrastructure that will be resilient to the changing climate of the north and produce strong and prosperous communities.
Building and planning for sustainable infrastructure in Nunavut requires cooperation between all three levels of government: federal, territorial, and municipal.
The department is committed to working with communities to identify priorities through the Integrated Community Sustainability Plan website, www.buildingnunavut.com.
Mr. Chairman, the development of sustainability plans is an important tool for Nunavut communities. These plans need to be easy to use, effective, durable, and adaptable.
Sustainability planning will prepare our communities to support growth and development and safeguard our environment and our culture.
Good afternoon to the minister and his officials here today.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to provide opening comments on behalf of the Standing Committee on Community and Economic Development as the Committee of the Whole begins its consideration of the Department of Community and Government Services’ proposed 2015-16 capital estimates.
Members note that the department’s proposed capital budget for the 2015-16 fiscal year is [$27,855,000].