EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Can the Premier clarify who the people are that the government uses for consulting contracts? We have heard that the Department of Finance has a consultant there, as well as your office, Intergovernmental Affairs, has contracted an individual.
Who are the consultants that you use and how large are their contracts?
Under our department, we use Hill and Knowlton for the Intergovernmental Affairs contracts at $5,000 a month.
I would be able to elaborate a bit more on those contracts.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Okalik, Premier.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): You named one consultant and I’m sure that each department probably goes through the FMB because it was mentioned that the Department of Finance has consultants.
I can’t respond to your question at this time but the Minister of Finance will be making an appearance in the Committee of the Whole, so you can probably ask him then.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): With regards to contracts, according to the contract regulations, they must be tendered out if they’re over $5,000.
So have those contracts been tendered out to consultants?
After the due diligence process, we look at who would be more beneficial to this government in terms of effectively lobbying the federal government and in representing our interests. First, we do a background check on the firms as to how they could best assist our government and then we select the firm who could undertake this work on our behalf.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): I found out who the consultants were but they didn’t go through the public tendering process; they were sole sourced contracts. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
First of all, we looked at all of the firms’ experiences and after we reviewed all of the firms, we then selected one under a sole source contract - Hill and Knowlton.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): In regard to this review of firms, perhaps quite a few firms were unaware that they were being reviewed.
If this was not a tendering process, how then can you review these firms? By requesting a proposal for the work or did you select a firm or a consultant from the phonebook?
We have been dealing with the issue for quite a while and we have been working with Hill and Knowlton for quite a while. When we undertook a review of the firms that do lobbying work in Ottawa, we checked with the industry and after discussing it with the other governments as to how they have resolved this issue, we then reviewed all these firms and then made a selection.
With regards to the consultants again, Hill and Knowlton, could the Premier inform the committee on exactly what this firm does and what they have accomplished to date on behalf of the Government of Nunavut?
They have assisted us tremendously and kept us informed as to what the ministers in the federal government are doing and what kind of plans they have.
If there is an emergency, they let us know right away.
They deal with a lot of issues and are always readily available when we’re going to be meeting with our federal counterparts. They set up the appointments, the meetings and the agenda items.
They make a lot of appointments for us and they assist us in various matters as well.
Could these consultants be used by other departments aside from your department, or are they only available to your office or the minister?
Yes, they provide assistance to my ministerial colleagues and we try to work together as ministers on matters of common interest.
While we’re on this page, there was a public announcement, and the Member for Iqaluit Centre also mentioned it, of the shrimp allocation in the Baffin region.
According to the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement Act, they must have considered the affects on Inuit who have offshore rights based on the principles of adjacency and I believe they got about 1.6 million tonnes.
Did the department check with the consultants to see if they lobbied the federal government prior to the decision on whether the allocation would be given to Nunavut or Newfoundland interests?
Were those consultants used at the time for this purpose?
With respect to this issue, this allocation caught us by surprise and therefore, most of us were not aware of it. That’s why it created problems for us. Although they were supposed to follow the land claims, DFO just went ahead with their allocation.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): We knew that when the DFO Advisory Committee was considering the allocation of resources, and Senator Adams’ office generally knows about these issues, it was obvious that the department knew because they had a meeting recently in Atlantic Canada and the fishermen were lobbying DFO.
We heard that the Atlantic ministers were involved during those allocation meetings.
Why aren’t our ministers included in these types of meetings?
It is hard to respond. The Minister of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans has to undertake this process as required by law.
When we try to argue, they say that they have historical use, so we can’t just take over their allocations in Nunavut waters.
It was given to an external company that didn’t have historical use and their argument on that basis is not believable anymore.
So we can tell them that whatever they’re saying is not true. In the future, we will be able to point this out when we are talking about more allocations on adjacent waters as they are using a false basis when they conduct business in that manner.
The Baffin Fisheries Coalition and others wanted support. I have heard that even in the Keewatin, it’s hard.
It’s harder for the Baffin and according to the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, we have more right. I think that was awarded because there wasn’t enough lobbying on behalf of us and if we’re going to pay them $5,000 a month, they have to do more work.
The federal government seems to realize in their budget that the commercial port will be used for fisheries and a lot more funding would have gone to the Baffin region.
It would be good if you direct your ministers to work harder in this area since we tend to lose out on a lot of initiatives.
Can you make that directive?
In regard to this issue, this is not the end of the matter and we will continue to try to resolve this matter. Although jobs are scarce in our communities adjacent to the fisheries, we are still passed over for other companies. This is completely unfair and these are fishery resource inhabiting our waters here in Nunavut.
We have to be given the resources to be able to benefit from their proximity to our communities and I agree with my colleague that we need to do more.
The Minister of Fisheries and Oceans did make a statement about what they attempted to do during this process of allocating fishery resources.
We have heard via correspondence that the federal government are being lobbied to change.
It would be good to continue to fight for this and maybe we can appeal the process.
I don’t know if there’s an appeals process but we really have to fight them on this because once they get the license, it gets very difficult to get them out of the process.
I urge the Premier to put on his other hat as the Justice Minister and Premier. You should check with your officials and maybe inform NTI, or maybe even take the DFO to court because we’re going to lose a lot of the resources offshore, especially when there are adjacency rights under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement.
I think people would appreciate you more if you can try and get more information, or try to get part of that quota allocation. I know that the Baffin communities would really appreciate this, as well as Nunavummiut, although I know we are short-staffed. I would like to see all of our possible avenues explored to resolve this issue.
Yes, we went through the courts before so that they can adhere to our agreement. The courts said that we were not signatories and that’s why we can’t take them to court but NTI can.
If NTI wanted to go through that route, we would give them our full support.
Premier and staff, welcome to Committee of the Whole. I have a couple of questions here.
In his opening statement to the standing committee during the 2006 review of the Report of the Auditor General, the Government of Nunavut stated that “the Senior Personnel Secretariat has been directed to enhance the Deputy Ministers mandate letters to provide additional focus on their accountability for results in the management of financial resources.” Has this initiative achieved its objectives and what new priorities will be included in the 2008-09 mandate letter to the deputy ministers?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Evyagotailak. Premier Okalik.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) It has definitely helped.
I’m sure that we all know that before that was cleared in the mandate letters, it used to be quite obvious that there were some challenges, but there has been more attention paid by the deputy ministers to their respective departments.
As you know, there are other entities of our government that have ongoing challenges for tackling at this time, but that part of the mandate letter will continue to be enforced and will continue to be a part of the mandate letters each year.
Mandate letters cover other areas, not just financial. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
During the June 2006 Mid-Term Leadership Review, you publicly stated that you had “made a direction that if deputy ministers are employed within the Government of Nunavut in 2008, then they will have to be able to speak Inuktitut.”
Has the Government of Nunavut now developed objectives and standardized the Inuktitut Language Proficiency Test and can you confirm whether or not the Deputy Ministers of Justice, Finance, Health and Social Services, and the Presidents of the Qulliq Energy Corporation, Nunavut Housing Corporation, and the Nunavut Arctic College have successfully passed their proficiency test?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I know that one of my deputies is at the final stage. The firm we were working with has done a wonderful job. I’m very proud that my deputy is almost fluent and the other deputies are doing well.
So I’m very encouraged by the signs of the effort shown by our deputies and presidents with the directive that we issued, that we would like to have a bilingual deputy system by 2008. The signs are very positive and it’s trickling down to other employees in our government; they’re making the effort to learn Inuktitut within our government. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My first question was a policy question and kind of covers most of the pages, all except for B-6.
When we come to B-6, I’ll accept his answer. However, Mr. Chairman, I would like to supplement Mr. Curley’s question a little bit more on the situation of the federal statute on the land claims agreement.
I know that the territorial government is not directly a beneficiary but it’s a result of the agreement between Inuit and the Government of Canada to create the Nunavut territory, effectively creating this government under the federal statute.
The federal government’s argument on the historical use of these oceans by Atlantic provinces, like Newfoundland, is generally on the sovereignty issue. It’s not written down as fishing rights in the statute.
How is the federal government allowed to prejudice Nunavut on the basis of geographical location? In the Constitution, you cannot be discriminated against race, religion, or geographical location, etcetera.
Can the minister then tell me what fights he has in his hands with the federal counterparts that we have statutory rights in any question of adjacency on those fishing areas?
If the federal government says, “They’re just from Nunavut. They’re little guys; they have a very small population.
We need to get votes from Atlantic provinces, so we better give the fishing rights to them for those areas in Davis Strait.”
Can they do that under the law of Canada?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) The land claims agreement is there for Inuit and it guarantees rights and benefits for Inuit.
So we tried arguing that the shrimp allocations weren’t fair and that the land claims agreement provided for Inuit to get fair allocations within our waters where we have adjacency.
So we tried arguing that on the shrimp situation outside of Qikiqtarjuaq and Clyde River where we get I believe 25 percent of the overall allocation.
The courts said that we, as a public government, weren’t representing Inuit at the time, I believe; that NTI was the body that should be enforcing those provisions.
So that is why we couldn’t argue, unfortunately, even though we tried arguing that we were representing everyone, in particular Inuit as well, in trying to get a fair allocation for Inuit.
So I agree with my colleague that what was allocated more recently on the turbot is just not acceptable for Nunavummiut and we will support NTI in their efforts if they choose to exercise their rights.
We have been lobbying hard to try to get our fair allocation and we will continue to do so.
Even though the courts have decided against us, it doesn’t prevent us from lobbying for our fair allocation within Nunavut. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just have a quick last question.
In this case, have you spoken to NTI to ask them to take this action against the federal government in the question of adjacency and the land claims benefits that are supposed to come under that?
Surely, they can do something because I think the minister knows that NTI has been quite vocal about Bill 21, Bills 6 and 7, and language rights and education, etcetera. They must have resources and energy to fight the federal government on behalf of the Inuit that they are supposed to represent.
Have you, as the minister, spoken to NTI or the Cabinet and say, “Look, we’ve got to get this done, otherwise we’re going to lose out under the adjacency issue”?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I would normally talk to the President of NTI on these matters and as you know, they’re having an election at this time.
So it’s been difficult to find out who I can talk to on this matter.
We have expressed our frustrations on this affair publicly so that everybody knows at this time.
I hope that all of the candidates are aware of this and that they’ll take a position on this during the election campaign of NTI. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Just a quick comment.
I’m going to keep the Premier until the other one is sworn in next time. I think the President of NTI is similar in that same arrangement as president until the next one is sworn in and takes over. So I don’t think there’s any excuse for him not to respond to the Premier with this very important issue.
I didn’t hear a question, (interpretation ends) but I will allow you (interpretation) to respond, Premier Okalik.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) We do have different regimes in place.
I believe that NTI’s President is on leave, unlike our position where we retain our position until the new one is sworn in. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to welcome the Premier and officials today.
I want to follow-up on a question my colleague, MLA Evyagotailak, asked about the requirement to learn Inuktitut.
I don’t think he quite answered his question.
He made a reference to his proficiency test.
I wonder if the Premier could indicate how the deputy ministers are tested for proficiency in the Inuktitut language.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I believe we have retained services of an Inuit firm that are teachers.
It’s their profession and they have developed a system where it’s three steps - there are the beginners, intermediate, and the final.
One is in the final stage.
All of the ones that have gone from the first beginner’s stage are in the intermediate stage at this point, except for one that’s in the final stage.
So those are the tests that have been put in place by this firm that’s been providing this service to us. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Could you provide the name of that firm?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) That firm is called Pirurvik. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Could the Premier indicate or tell us: since you announced this requirement in June 2006, are you aware of or do you know of any deputy ministers or senior officials in the government that have quit their jobs as a direct result of being required to learn Inuktitut?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I think the press has been quite active on one particular deputy that left for one of those reasons.
Other than that, all of the deputies have been very supportive of our efforts and have been very encouraged by trying to learn Inuktitut, not just on their own but with additional help from families and friends. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Can the Premier indicate or explain exactly how much time the deputy ministers or these presidents of Crown agencies are allowed each week to attend the courses?
Is it during work hours, or is it evenings, or is it weekends?
I’m just trying to get a sense of how much time they’re allowed to dedicate to learn the language.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I believe it’s around one and a half to three hours per week during working hours, but they’re also given assignments outside of those hours. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The question was standardizing Inuktitut, but in the Kitikmeot, the dialect is Inuinnaqtun. Is there a requirement for your senior officials to learn the dialect from western Nunavut?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) The common dialect is the Baffin right now, but we’re not preventing other dialects from being used within our government; we encouraged it. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
When you’re recruiting senior officials for the government at the deputy minister level and president level, are they made aware that there’s a language requirement to learn a language before they accept the position?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Peterson. Premier Okalik.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) As I usually hire them, I let them know of our expectations. They’re always very encouraging and I appreciate their openness and their efforts to learn our language. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
A former assistant deputy minister I spoke to left recently. He was quite interested in learning the language but the problem he had was finding the time.
Second of all, there wasn’t an opportunity for him to learn because he was based in a community outside of Iqaluit where they didn’t have the contract as you had outlined earlier, so it made it difficult for him, but he certainly was interested in learning.
So if you have ADMs and deputy ministers, and I guess it’s mainly ADMs, but if the ADMs aren’t specifically located in Iqaluit where this opportunity is to learn the language, how do you help those other ADMs that are located in, say, Rankin Inlet or Cambridge Bay to learn the language?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Our focus has been at the deputy levels, but as I said, it has trickled down to other positions. Unfortunately, for now, it’s primarily in Iqaluit offices.
I’ll take this as good notice that, perhaps, we could do more outside of Iqaluit, so I appreciate the member’s comments. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Premier indicated earlier in answer to Mr. Evyagotailak that it was trickling down to the other employees to learn the language if they want to advance in the government.
Could you explain the policy in that regard? If people want to move up into senior levels, how do you make opportunities available to learn Inuktitut or Inuinnaqtun?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I know that quite a few ADMs that don’t know Inuktitut have also taken the initiative of learning through the courses. I appreciate their interest and I encourage it all throughout the territory and I encourage it not just within our government.
I know the firm that we use is getting other employees from other sectors that are learning Inuktitut. So that’s a very positive sign that our efforts are trickling not just within our government but outside.
So I encourage it and want to see more of it. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I’m not arguing that it’s a good idea and I would like to see more of it. I’m sure there are many employees across Nunavut who would like to learn and be given an opportunity to learn. The problem is, is there aren’t those opportunities; you don’t have qualified instructors, you don’t have courses, you don’t have standardized training, and you don’t have proficiency tests.
So a lot of people are learning on their own but they may not necessarily be learning the proper way. So when they’re trying to advance in the government, it may be difficult for them when they get to a certain level where they should be proficient and they learn that they’re not.
I’m wondering if the minister could indicate how the government would address that issue if they want to have a public service that is proficient in the Inuktitut or Inuinnaqtun language that is standardized; they’re proficient and they’re not just picking up bits and pieces here and there that may not help them in their jobs or advance in their careers.
Hon. Paul Okalik: I appreciate my colleague’s comments very much because the goal was to make sure that they learn and they learn effectively.
We have been using a very good firm in doing that.
I also take my colleague’s comments very seriously that we should offer it more throughout Nunavut.
So I’m going to take his advice and see how we can apply it throughout the territory and make it work so that we have, hopefully, a bilingual or a trilingual workforce in Nunavut. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I appreciate the Premier for making that commitment.
It just occurred to me; an interesting thought there. So while all of your deputy ministers get to together and they’re all proficient at level one, two, or three, do they all converse with each other in Inuktitut at meetings?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Currently, we have seven Inuit deputies out of 10 and they converse in Inuktitut when they have their deputy ministers’ meetings.
The primary language is Inuktitut.
Translators are provided for now, but as I said, my own deputy is at the final stages and I told him this week that I will expect my briefings to be in Inuktitut henceforth. (interpretation)Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Could the Premier tell the House what the cost of that training has been to date?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) It was cost shared with departments that were providing students to the course.
The largest cost was developing the materials. I believe the total was around $210,000 but the teaching materials are produced now, so that cost will be absorbed throughout. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the Premier for that information.
Are those materials the property of the Government of Nunavut now and available to use for training future deputy ministers, ADMs, and possibly other staff in the Government of Nunavut?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Yes, and we still need teachers, so we utilize the same firm for teaching our employees. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
We are on (interpretation ends) Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
I would like to welcome the minister’s officials.
I have just a couple of quick questions for the minister.
I’m just wondering, under the Executive or Directorate, has there been an increase in PYs, and if there is, in what capacity?