EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
But it has to be the Legislative Assembly as a Whole.
I believe in the fall of 2006 that we want to do a mid-term review and the Executive Members of Nunavut so that we would like to give more opportunity to the Regular Members to make sure they can go to the Cabinet whether you are Inuk, French, whether you are a teacher or young person.
We want to show Nunavummiut that the Ministers or the Executive Members that they are doing their jobs so that is why I am requesting support from all the Members.
I will allow the seconder, Mr. Tootoo, to make his comments to the motion.
I am very pleased to have to speak in support of this motion today.
As a returning member yourself, you recall that the Assembly that the mid-term review was held in the fall of 2001 was a very successful event.
It afforded members of the House the opportunity to concentrate in a much focussed way on the progresses that had been achieved at that point in time.
I would like to state for the record that in developing the wording of this motion that both the mover and I deliberated at some length on it’s tone and focus.
I believe that the motion before genuinely draws on the strengths of our system and focuses on the positive.
A degree of reflection and scrutiny is healthy for any system.
What sets our system apart from many others is the way in which we have the opportunity to provide a formal, public means of doing so.
Mr. Speaker, I have heard the argument advanced that such initiatives as the one under consideration today, are unnecessary and redundant as the Assembly has the ability to remove any Minister from office at any time, as was demonstrated just a few years ago.
However, I believe that this exercise will provide for an important mile stone in the Second Assembly to measure progress and plan for the future.
We have set an ambitious agenda for ourselves.
Our Arviat Caucus Retreat set the foundation, the Throne Speech and the subsequent releases of the government’s strategic plan.
Mr. Speaker, when I say that the Ministers, whom we selected to disparage their responsibilities, should be looking forward to the opportunity to account at length and in detail on their success. I am being quite serious.
Indeed, I am quite confident that any ambitious Minister will relish the opportunity to shine in the spot light and to help advance, articulate, and amplify the ambitious agenda of action that we have set together.
Mr. Barnabas, you have 20 minutes.  Mr. Barnabas: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I would like to take this opportunity to speak briefly in support of this motion today.
I agree that what has been said by the mover and seconder of this motion, I see that this motion is being very positive as it will help to demonstrate to our public that we are serious about accountable government.
On a final note Mr. Speaker, I greatly look forward to my good friend’s, the member for Iqaluit East, wording in support of this motion.
I am certain that he will recall the perfect clarity that the energy that he put into mid-term reviews during the past when both sat together at the same side of the House.
I am very pleased that my colleagues moved and seconded this motion.
I am in full support of this motion.
I believe that this motion continues to build on the commitment that we’ve all made as politicians when we took our oaths to an open and accountable and transparent government and that the motion should be supported by all Members of the Legislative Assembly and Ministers.
I feel that this process gives our public a chance to talk through us with ministers about their performance.
I know that that’s particularly so in the Kitikmeot where we only have one Minister to represent us.
Mr. Speaker, in most organizations, performance appraisal is viewed as a positive and constructive process.
I firmly believe that this process that we’re proposing by this motion will be very good for Nunavut.
To the motion just briefly, this motion doesn’t hurt anyone in reading the motion and hearing the motion.
I believe that it’s a positive move because we have to work closely together and we need to awaken.
It seems like this motion is to awaken us, it doesn’t state that we need to change the Cabinet Members of Nunavut.
It doesn’t state that.
Our constituencies in Nunavut are very proud of all of the Members of the Legislature and it shows the constituents that we are very vibrant and that we are very attentive to the public needs because we represent them.
We have to be good examples and good role models and this will show the positive side, and I am sure that we will have to pass through until our term is up.
This motion is very positive.
The public eyes are all upon us.
I believe this is very good and look into that using Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, and then look back and make it, that way we can move forward.
For that reason, I am in support of this motion because it doesn’t hurt anyone.
I don’t believe this motion will hurt anyone.
I don’t believe that we will need to ask any Cabinet Members, but this is a very good learning stage during the Second Legislature of Nunavut.
I believe there’s a great opportunity for learning.
We have very good healthy debates and we have very open working relationships.
I believe that this motion will show positiveness to the public out there and I expect all the members to support it.
I too, am in support of the motion, the mover of the motion and the seconder of the motion.
I believe that Members of the Legislature have to look around to make sure that we represent our constituencies instead of moving forward without looking at our constituents.
We have to pay close attention and reflect the ideas and the needs of our constituents.
I am in support of this motion because we, at times, have to pay close attention to our constituents because they voted us to represent them.
We want to represent our constituents adequately and build the trust from there.
I have no other names on my list, any other comments from the mover?
I would like to thank the members who made their comments and I would like to ask you, Mr. Speaker that we would like to have a recorded vote.
We will have a recorded vote as was requested by the mover.
Those in favour will stand up.
When I say your names please be seated, Mr. Curley, Mr. Arreak, Mr. Kilabuk, Mr. Tapardjuk, Mr. Akesuk, Ms. Aglukkaq, Mr. Okalik, Ms. Brown, Mr. Picco, Mr. Simailak, Mr. Netser, Mr. Mapsalak, Mr. Alagalak, Mr. Peterson, Mr. Kattuk, Mr. Tootoo, Mr. Evyagotailak, and Mr. Barnabas.
Going back to the orders of the day. Item 18. First Reading of Bills.
Bill 13 – An Act to Amend the Wills Act – First Reading
Bill 14 – Miscellaneous Statute Amendment Act – First Reading
I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Baker Lake that Bill 13, an Act to Amend the Wills Act, be read for the first time.
Speaker (interpretation): Those in favor.
Speaker (interpretation): Those opposed.
Bill 13 has had First Reading.
Hon. Paul Okalik: Thank you, again Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the Honorable Member for Nattilik that Bill 14, a Miscellaneous Statute Amendment Act, be read for the first time.
Speaker (interpretation): Opposed.
Bill 13 – An Act to Amend the Wills Act – Second Reading
Bill 14 – Miscellaneous Statute Amendment Act– Second Reading
I request consent of this assembly to waive the one day rule notice requirement to allow the Second Reading of Bill 13, an Act to Amend the Wills Act.
Speaker (interpretation): Mr. Okalik would like consent to waive Bill 6-2 (1) for the second reading of Bill 13, any nays.
There was one nay.
I move, seconded by the Honorable Member for Pangnirtung that Bill 13, an Act to Amend the Wills Act, be read for the second time.
Mr. Speaker, this bill amends the Wills Act to ease the formal requirements for making a will and to allow court to accept a will that expresses a testator’s intention even if that will does not comply with the formal requirements.
The bill also changes references to the Northwest Territories so that the act will refer to Nunavut.
Bill 13 has had second reading and can now be referred to the Committee.
I request consent of this Assembly to wave the one day requirement to allow the second reading of Bill 14 of the Miscellaneous Statues Amendment Act.
Speaker (interpretation): The member would like to waive Rule 6-2(1) for the second reading of Bill 14.
I hear no nays.
Go ahead Mr. Okalik.
I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Rankin Inlet South/Whale Cove that Bill 14, Miscellaneous Statues Act, be read for the second time.
This Bill corrects any consistencies and errors in the Acts of Nunavut and it also re-names the three public bodies whose names have not been previously changed, so that they refer to Nunavut.
Finally this Bill updates 10 Acts to change references that relate to Northwest Territories to refer instead to Nunavut.
Bill 14 is in order.
Speaker (interpretation): The motion is carried.
Bill 14 has had second reading and will be referred to the Committee.
Consideration of Committee of the Whole and Other Matters: Tabled Document 52-2(2); Return to Oral Question 84-2(2); Bill 8, Appropriation and Operations and Maintenance Act 2005-2006.
Mr. Evyagotailak will be in the Chair.
>>House recessed at 15:28 and resumed at 16:00
In Committee of the Whole, we have the following items to deal with: Tabled Document 52–2(2) and Bill 8.
We wish to continue with the review of Bill 8 to continue with the Department of Education commence with the Student Loan Funds on G-13 of the Main Estimates book.
I also would like to thank the Minister of Education for his full and fairness of his commitment, for tabling the Executive Summary of the external review of Nunavut Arctic College.
Members look forward to returning to the adult learning and post-secondary services budget item at the appropriate time, with the minister in the witness chair.
Chairman: Are we in agreement?
I would like to ask Minister Picco to go to the witness table.
For the record Minister Picco, please introduce your staff.
Hon. Ed Picco: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, with me on my immediate right is Ms. Pam Hine, the Deputy Minister of the Department of Education.
On my immediate left is Janice Hobbes, who is the Director of Finance, acting Comptroller for the Department of Education.
We go on to G-13 in your Main Estimates book.
Student Loan Funds.
I don’t know if it’s on the line item, the question that I tried to pose, so I am seeking clarification that the students who are outside of Nunavut, at times when they are in debt.
I was wondering if the department provides any additional support.
The way the Financial Assistance for Nunavut Students or FANS works is, there are different components of the program.
Each individual student applies and that is assessed based on the application process.
That’s how the money is allocated.
When they have reached the maximum with FANS, even when they are in debt, you don’t give them additional supporting funds?
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Barnabas. Minister Picco.
When students attend post-secondary institutions it depends on if they are taking post-secondary through FANS, whether it’s in the south, or whether it’s in Nunavut, and the different conditions applies with the programs that are available.
My colleague, Mr. Netser, what he had tabled, the Nunavut students are facing challenges because I know that they are going into debt.
Would your department consider how to remedy this situation?
Mr. Chairman, the last changes to the program were made in 2002, and the department would be prepared to review the financial assistance for Nunavut students.
Mr. Chairman, I’m sure the Minister will recall last year there were a number of concerns raised by non-beneficiary students that they were not getting adequate or the same type of funding as beneficiary students.
I’m just wondering, in light of those concerns that were raised, what has the Minister or his department done to address some of those concerns?
If the member recalls, I joined that debate in the House last year, the premier strongly pointed out at that time that the whole process for financial assistance for Nunavut students is to provide a benefit so that our students can attend post-secondary institutions.
Under the land claims, we do give extra incentive or access to Nunavut beneficiaries.
The last increases to those amounts as I said was in the year 2002.
Mr. Chairman, I’m just wondering, in light of when that whole issue that was raised, is there any thought at looking at raising the other assistance that other students get?
That will be part of the review that we do on Financial Assistance for Nunavut Students that we just talked about earlier.
I know he alluded to that review.
When exactly does he plan on finishing that review and having that Final Report from that review to look at any recommendations and implementations from that?
Mr. Chairman, the last review was done on the program in 2002.
At that time, there were some changes that were made based on the review that had occurred.
The department is also, as the member is aware, moving on several different fronts, several different areas.
I would hope that we would be in a position before next budget cycle to have a review completed on some of the issues that have been raised by FANS for the internal process of the department.
I know that the next budget cycle for us is this time next year.
That would be too late for a lot of students that are going to school in the fall.
Is there any chance that the Minister could find a way to have anything done and ready for this coming fall so that the students attending post-secondary school would be able to see the impact of these changes for their coming school year?
That is something that we can look at.
Will all the ministers going to look at it, or will he look at it closely and get back to the members through correspondence as soon as possible?
Yes, I commit to the member that we will look at the issues around it closely and try to expedite that process.
Any questions to G-13?
I would like to ask the minister if he could update us on the recent federal government’s $5 billion contribution for Early Childhood and Daycares.
Since the federal government had made that announcement perhaps the minister attended the meeting.
Can you tell us how much we can benefit from that announcement?
It was in the Throne Speech of the federal government, if you can update us.
Similar to our process, the federal minister raised his budget last week.
The budget hasn’t been passed yet by the House of Commons.
So those processes have to go forward and the money has not been allocated.
I anticipate that this Friday at 3:30, I will have a teleconference with Mr. Ken Dryden, the Minister responsible, to bring forward our feeling that the amount that will be allocated to Nunavut is not acceptable.
We have been working with the Minister responsible, Mr. Dryden, with some of the other jurisdictions.
The allocation of $5 billion is a little bit less because there have been some monies cut off the top over the five year period for First Nations.
When I extrapolate the number for the Government of Nunavut, it brings us to about a $1 million a year, a little bit less.
We are not very happy with that amount.
Yes, if the amount is a bit too small, can the minister tell us as a Nunavut minister, what amount would be adequate for Nunavut?
Did you make an application to the federal government as to the amount?
Who and when are you going to use this funding in Nunavut?
I promised my colleagues that I would try to keep my answers short today so I am working on it.
Mr. Chairman, the amount of money that the federal government has allocated for this National Childcare Program is well welcomed across the country.
We have worked with the smaller jurisdictions; the Northwest Territories, the Yukon, Nunavut as well as Prince Edward Island, to lobby the federal government to have a base or funding floor put in place, because the per capital funding amount as I just explained, out of a billion we get a million, doesn’t quite suit our situation.
We asked for a floor of $5 million and then on top of that we would get the extra $1 million.
That is the discussion that we had with Mr. Dryden, the discussions that I had with him at our meeting two weeks ago.
He will be following that up with a teleconference with me.
I think it is Friday afternoon as I said, that I think it is 3:30, we have scheduled that now.
Again, I will be raising the issue that we need some type of funding floor there to accommodate the all-encompassing National Childcare Program that the federal government would like to do.
Questions to G-13. Go to G-14.
Career and Early Childhood Service.
G-14, G-15, G-16.
I know under the Grants and Contributions, under the Early Childhood Programs or Daycare Contribution for Healthy Children’s Initiatives, I was wondering the same.
I know the Minister has indicated in the past that there is an ever growing demand for requirements for daycare and daycare spaces within Nunavut.
I know if something that one may say is a critical state in Iqaluit where there are more people in the waiting list to get into a daycare than there are daycare spaces available.
I guess my question to the Minister is you know with that in mind and I am sure if that is the case here in Iqaluit that it is the same situation in many of the communities in Nunavut.
What is the department doing and why are they not seeing an increase in these areas?
In the last couple of years Government of Nunavut along with the Aboriginal Head Start Program with the federal government have increased a number of daycare spaces working with member daycares.
I believe there are over a 1,000 daycare spaces available in Nunavut itself.
As I said earlier 10 months ago, when I became Mr. Minister as at that time I suggested when new schools are being planned they would include in them dedicated space for a daycare centre to elevate some of the O&M cost that we see right now for daycares across Nunavut.
They have worked on this with specific initiatives, new initiatives that the department to address aside from looking at future spaces when the opportunity existed in new government facilities come on.
What else have they looked at to address the ever increasing need for daycare spaces in Nunavut?
The first thing for the creation with daycare space, you’ve got to have space to have a daycare to have a licensed daycare.
The initiatives that we have taken with our new facilities, infrastructure building that built by the government is a good direction.
That is part of the on-going discussion and debate that we are having with the federal partner.
What they are calling the National Childcare Program which is important for us to get an increase in the base, not just basing the allocation based by per capita.
I didn’t ask to speak for all over the place, but specifically here in Iqaluit. Has the department received any requests from organizations or groups for assistance or funding to establish facilities here in Iqaluit and other communities?
Any organization that puts together a business plan and brings forward as a group to open a license daycare, then they are eligible for funding through the Department of Education with O&M support.
We also the government, is in a position to license the facility.
We have staff that actually visit the facility and make sure it is up to code and make sure necessary procedures work with the Board.
So, we have provided a lot of logistic support to member daycares that have that set up.
Mr. Chairman, it’s nice that they and I’m sure that the groups very much appreciate the logistical and administrative support are getting set up but I think if you ask anyone of them, they need money to get a facility opened.
I was wondering if the department has come forth with any funding to help these organizations specifically.
There are daycares in 23 out of 25 communities in Nunavut. I think that’s part of the good news story.
No one has even been turned away from the government because there was no money to help support them.
What happens is, there is again a funding formula in place that helps support them on the operations and maintenance costs.
It is very expensive to operate daycares not just in Nunavut but across the country and that’s why you see fundraisers and a lot of things happening at daycares.
It’s not a profit making program in many respects or regards and that’s why most operations are not for profit.
So if there’s a group that wants to bring forward a plan to open up a daycare, then we help provide subsidies, we help provide costs, we help with them working on the logistics as I said earlier, and the administrative needs of that member daycare.
The Minister alluded to a formula that is used in the allocation of those dollars.
I think that as Minister of Education, and his comments on the formula used for funding our schools, there are probably some concerns with regards to formula use for funding daycares in the O&M.
I know over the last few years, there have been increases in insurance, in power, in fuel.
All these things have a direct impact on these facilities.
Has there been any increase in the formula?
Any kind of indexing built on or is it the same formula that’s been applied for ever.
Mr. Chairman, the funding arrangement that is in place to fund child care spaces is based on the number of licensed spaces in the daycare.
That is factored in with the actual attendance of the students and then again it is based on the age of the students.
There is also a basic grant that is available on the primary side of the daycare.
We have not increased those amounts to my knowledge in the past year, or year and a half or so.
Before that, I’m not actually aware if there were actual increases in that.
So I’ve asked the staff again to just review allocations.
The amounts again that are available, again if a daycare is set up, we have monies available to help fund them and there are also subsidies that have kicked in to help parents.
For example, in this region, Kakivak has a program in place.
Maybe if the Minister is not aware, if he could look into it and inform members when the last time there was any increases made to the formula.
If it has been a number of years, we’ve all seen what happens when things don’t change for a long time with rates, like the Power Corporation.
It has been a considerable amount of time, would the Minister consider looking at increasing the formula on how those funds are distributed as well?
Hon. Ed Picco: Yes, part of that would be handled or facilitated through the federal program that we’ve just talked about earlier, through the national childcare program that the federal government has announced.
Part of that is the reason why we have asked for funding to flow into it to help us access those types of funds.
We will review the total allocations especially on the operations and maintenance side, and to see if there’s any, when the last time changes were made, and make that information available.
I appreciate that and maybe I can get a commitment from the minister if our part, because things haven’t changed a lot over a great length of time.
If he could commit to bring forward some amendments or change as to the point of the increase, that’s our share of the funding to the daycare facilities across Nunavut.
Again, we are trying to do a measured response by review, and we are doing a lot of reviews under the costs of it, and the programs and service under the department including, as we have talked about before, the K-12 School Funding Formula, issues around the College, and other things within the department.
They have introduced some new programs like the Young Parents’ Initiative.
It attempts to alleviate where a parent who is under the age of 18, who before wasn’t eligible for any type of program, to help them with daycare fees.
So we have actually brought that forward as a new program in the budget.
I know it has been well welcomed by the members.
So I would commit to the members that we will review again to find out when the last increases were, and then to see what the need is, as were with our member daycares across Nunavut.
I don’t know about member daycares across Nunavut.