EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
For example, in trying to balance out in the services section of the government, Public Works, etc., and the programs, like Education, Culture, Language, Elders & Youth, which you have inherited, well the services which you have inherited from the GNWT.
My question is what are your plans to priorize what is to be reviewed from the government so that programs that are going into the communities can increase on the financial side.
First of all, Mr. Chairman, there is no priority of one department versus another.
I think I want to make it clear that it is comprehensive, when a decision is made, it will be all government departments, all programs.
As members know, we are doing this for two purposes.
First of all, internally with the GN to get an inventory of all our programs and try to identify if there can be an analysis of those programs, if there are specific gaps or shortfalls that might have to be addressed.
Secondly, it is part of also the review process with the federal Department of Finance.
As members know we have a commitment from Minister Martin, and this is one of the exercises that we will undertake that will be combined with that process.
So in short, to answer the member’s question, no there is no specific program that is going to be prioritized in respect of review.
It will be comprehensive government-wide.
It is difficult several times to try to ask the overall government operations to the Premier or to the Minister of Finance, especially when we are dealing with the Finance & Administration budget.
Because it specifically deals with the Finance & Administration department.
I wonder if this is the right department to ask questions pertaining to how the budget allocations can be made to different departments.
The part that the minister can answer.
I guess without judging or prejudicing the individual departments, what would be the best method or approach in reviewing all the departments one by one, that are administered or managed by the Finance Department.
Will there be a mechanism in place especially for the Committees of the Legislative Assembly, to have a frank discussion as to what should be important to Nunavummiut and to the communities versus what is important to the government's function as an administrative body.
I don't know if I am clear.
But something along that line.
Mr. Chairman, the member is right in that perspective.
That is why I was saying that once we finalize the process I want to bring in all the regular MLAs and advise them as to what we are planning and get some feedback.
Because what it comes down to in the end, the end result of the program review financial expenditure review, the end result may require that there be some serious decisions made.
In respect to that if we feel that some departments, some programs that are a priority of government aren't being adequately resourced there may be some shifts in other areas that are going to impact existing programs.
We said this right from the start.
We want to make sure that when that decision is made that we have as much input as possible before implementing any of these of changes.
So that I think is what we see as the end part of the cycle but first of all I would like to make sure we as a government and we as members are comfortable in the direction we are proceeding and have their involvement to get us through to the end decisions.
Will that include for example those that have a benefit or potential benefit for economic development for tourism etc.
I guess what I am saying is there are some services by the government, or funded through the government for example income support is one of them.
That is fairly significant dollars that are distributed to the people who need it.
That can be turned to something more productive.
In Nunavut for example tourism or economic development or the infrastructure development like access roads.
That can economically benefit that community as a result of the construction of that access road.
That would reduce the dependency on income support.
Will these be included as part of the review.
Mr. Chairman, yes it will be.
From the perspective of we are going to try to review and assess all existing programs and there will be recommendations on the latter part of the exercise which may as I indicated earlier, may substantially change how we are delivering our programs or looking at alternative services delivery methods.
So, yes from that perspective.
I shortchanged myself by admitting one of my last questions that I was to ask.
Would you also consider recognizing recreational facilities in the community as part of the social programs.
That and also the income support program in non-decentralized communities for the youth that we are always trying to find a way because we don't have direct control of our children’s upbringing.
Because I spend between 9-4 in the school and sometimes they are doing something else in the community that I don't know about at the best of times.
Will the recreational facilities and Internet programs and anything that the community enjoys now as an activity or a leisure activity that has a positive impact, how will you consider that as a part of the review under the social programs.
Yes, again to that Mr. Chairman, that as I indicated will be in the latter part of the overall review.
That’s where more of the program policy review aspect comes into play with the Department of the Executive & Intergovernmental Affairs.
We are trying to match up priorities versus programs and make recommendations, as I indicated earlier, if there are changes that are required.
Chairperson (interpretation): We are still on page 3-8.
I apologize, I am on the wrong item.
Mr. Chairman, under here there is an increase in the fees and payments and I am just wondering if that is something new or if that is something that has been transferred over from another area.
If you could explain where that came from.
Mr. Chairman, this is a direct amount in respect to litigation costs in the equal pay process, our involvement in funding legal representation for the process.
Mr. Chairman, I also note on the same page that the compensation and benefits have increased on there.
I am just wondering if they have added more positions to this section in this department.
Are they new positions or are they positions that have transferred from other positions.
Mr. Chairman, this is a result of the department’s re-organization.
It is for, actually for the Chief Informatics Officer position.
In the restructuring, we have that position reporting to the Deputy Minister so it was placed in the Directorate.
Mr. Chairman, for that increase was there just that one position.
Is that what the minister has indicated.
Mr. Chairman, it isn’t that specific to just that, that’s the largest component of it.
There’s also as a result of the re-organization there were some adjustments made in the levels of staffing, the classification levels, where there were some existing staff in the Directorate.
There is also of course some of the support, some of the office administrative support for the Chief Informatics Officer as well.
Mr. Chairman, maybe I would just ask how many PYs are in this or how many positions are in this division.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: We are just adding it.
Six positions Mr. Chairman.
Do you wish to continue.
We are on Finance & Administration, branch summary.
Total expenditures, 2 million 726 thousand dollars.
Fiscal management.
Total operations and maintenance, 13 million 755 thousand dollars.
On the compensation and benefits, maybe I will ask for further clarification on that.
First of all I would like to clarify from the previous question on directorate, there are actually 7 positions, not 6.
I would like to clarify that for the record.
Sorry about that we missed one individual.
For this one Mr. Chairman, it is primarily a result of the risk management section that was contracted back to services, to the GNWT that we assumed those responsibilities back and this is where it rests within the department.
Ms. Williams: On the same page, contract services.
The increase is very large.
Can I have an explanation on that one.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: That would be for the Nunavut Construction Corporation for the leases for the commercial properties and with the unique arrangement that was entered into it flows directly into a separate bank account for the Nunavut Construction Corporation.
Under travel and transportation, 182 thousand.
It has been increased from last year.
Just some clarification, does that money go towards all of Nunavut, or just towards that department.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: That would be for positions that would be under the Fiscal Management branch of this department Mr. Chairman.
For the Department of Finance staff.
Mr. Chairman, it is for the Baffin Fiscal Management section.
The other question, under contract services, 9 million 623 thousand.
Last year it was 6 million 333 thousand.
There is a huge increase, the year before that it was only 85 thousand.
It increases annually by a huge amount.
Could he explain why there is such a huge increase annually.
Mr. Chairman, it is as a result as I indicated earlier of us assuming the lease responsibilities for the Nunavut Construction Corporation for commercial office buildings as they came on line and were approved and the Government of Nunavut took occupancy.
Has he just stated that it’s Finance and Administration that is leasing the buildings.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: The Government of Nunavut is leasing it.
It is just the way that it is structured instead of going through Public Works.
Where normally we pay out the leases, because of the unique arrangement that we've made prior to April 1st 1999, the agreement was the Government of Canada would just direct deposit this amount into the bank account designated by the Government of Nunavut and the payments would go right back out to the Nunavut Construction Corporation.
Chairperson (interpretation): It is about 12 o'clock.
It is just about lunchtime and as soon as Mr. Iqaqrialu is done, we will be going for lunch.
Do I understand that this amount will be increasing annually.
Mr. Chairman, no.
This is now all the buildings under this arrangement that are occupied.
So it is 9 million 372 thousand 437 dollars for the annual rents for these facilities.
So there isn't the expectation that they'll increase unless there are adjustments made in the leasing arrangements in the future.
Before I go onto the next member.
We will be taking a break.
Lunch is being served in the Tuktu room.
We will be back in 45 minutes.
>> Committee recessed at 11.57 a.m. and resumed at 12.50 p.m.
Chairperson (interpretation): I hope you had a good lunch, thank you for returning.
I think Mr. Iqaqrialu was finished his questions.
My other question.
I was done but I have a question on another item.
Under fees and payments it was 2 million 417 thousand and it now 1 million 532 thousand.
I am wondering why it would be like this.
Chairperson (interpretation): We are on page 3-7.
Mr. Chairman, that’s because of the changes in the insurance premiums for the Government of Nunavut.
We sponsor self-insurance for a large portion of it, so our premiums have dropped from 2 million dollars to 700 thousand dollars in that respect.
But by the same token, Mr. Speaker, we also are starting to build a contingency fund because we are going to self-insure for the ten million dollars, for the first 10 million dollars in any major loss.
I apologize to the minister, I used his first name and I apologize.
I understand his response, but when you talk about insurance, can you explain more clearly what you meant.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Mr. Chairman, this is the insurance premium for our buildings.
Basically, as I had indicated, the premiums have dropped from 2 million to 700 thousand dollars as a result of us basically raising our deductible limit to 10 million dollars.
Mr. Iqaqrialu (interpretation): So does that mean because it is less than what is was before, if there was damage done in one of the buildings, would there be a problem paying for things such as that.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Mr. Chairman, what is means is basically because we have a 10 million dollar self-coverage, the first 10 million dollars would be our responsibility.
But having said that, we are starting to build up an insurance reserve fund for those unfortunate times when we may require it.
So if we were to have our insurance reserve fund not up to the 10 million dollar limit that we would want, in case of a loss, then we would obviously have to find the necessary funds through a supplementary appropriation or a special warrant depending on the circumstances.
Just to get more clarification, if that money wasn’t spent all year and there was no need of spending it, what would happen to that money.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Well, it would be a reserve fund Mr. Chairman.
So it would stay there, always allocated and designated for an insurance mishap.
So if it weren’t to be used it would just stay there and get larger and larger on an annual basis.
Mr. Iqaqrialu (interpretation): If it was not spent, would you just leave it at that or would you add more money into the fund.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Well Mr. Chairman, we would leave it in there and every year there would be an additional allocation to that reserve fund.
Hopefully that would be the case where we wouldn't require it because of a loss.
In that case, the fund would grow on an annual basis.
The next person on my list is Mr. Havioyak.
The question that I had in mind was answered.
Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that I am relieved I guess to hear the minister as he answered earlier to the question on the leases.
Is that it now.
On these leases.
All government offices and the Assembly building.
I am wondering what the length of time is on those leases.
Mr. Chairman, they are all 20-year leases.
On those leases, I don't imagine or is the rate fixed for the full 20 years or does it get flexible.
How is that negotiated.
Mr. Chairman, I am not certain because some leases have annual, sorry periodic adjustments based on refinancing rates and that.
I am not exactly sure in the instance of these NCC leases about what adjustment factors there are in there for the base rent.
I can certainly find out that information Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I believe the minister indicated before like the unique circumstances that we face with these leases, is that basically this amount is a flow through number that is provided from the federal government and I am just wondering is everything that we pay in leases for these purposes.
Do all the dollars come from the federal government or is there a matching fee.
Does the Government of Nunavut have to kick in any as well.
Mr. Chairman, the member does bring in a good point.
If there were adjustments made or required as a result of the lease arrangement, because of the unique circumstances surrounding the adjustments being made by the federal government the money would still come from them.
The end result would be that there would be no additional cost to the Government of Nunavut directly if there were adjustments made.
It would be from the federal contribution to the Government of Nunavut and to the Nunavut Construction Corporation from that perspective.
Also does the Government of Nunavut have to kick in anything on top of what the federal government gives us or is it all these leases are solely covered completely by the federal government.
Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding that these leases because as I indicated earlier with the unique structure, our government basically acts as an intermediary between the federal government and the NCC for receipt of the payment on these leases.
So what if, based on these financing or anything like that are there any additional costs incurred, is it the Government of Nunavut that negotiates with the landlord or would it be the federal government that would do that. Basically, as the minister has indicated, the leases are with the federal government.
Mr. Chairman, we don’t anticipate that there would be, but I mean in that case, obviously our Public Works Department would be involved due to the fact that we are managing the leases right now.
Mr. Chairman, at the end of these 20-year leases will the Government of Nunavut have any ownership in these buildings or will they still be owned by the landlord.
No, they will continue to be owned by the Nunavut Construction Corporation.
Mr. Chairman, I don’t know what the terms of the agreement that we have with the federal government is, if we are going to be potentially leasing these facilities will the federal government be perpetually funding them as well.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Mr. Chairman, right now the arrangement is for the 20 years of the existing leases.
I would take it that our Government of Nunavut position would be obviously that we would expect that there would be ongoing support from the federal government, since they entered into them originally on behalf of the Government of Nunavut.
I don’t have any other names on my list.
We are on page 3-7.
Total operations and maintenance, 13 million 755 thousand.
Total expenditures, 13 million 755 thousand.
We will move on to page 3-8.
Informatics planning and system development.
Total operations and maintenance, 4 million 654 thousand.
Mr. Chairman, under contract services, 3 million 893 thousand.
Last year it was 7 million 412 thousand.
I just want to know what the reason is for last year’s smaller figure.
There has been a significant decrease in this item as a result of a lot of the programs being developed over the course of the current year.
So there has been more of a focus of the programs being shifted over to Public Works in their budget for the operations and maintenance side of those things, Mr. Chairman.
It states under contract services in Inuktitut, I just wondered whether you are contracting less.
Is that why the amount has decreased.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, that is correct for the information technology systems development.
Chairperson (interpretation): Anything else. Havioyak.
Mr. Chairman, this 3.8 million and roughly 2.9 million.
What types of contracts is that for.
Is that for contracting technical support for the programs that we have in place.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: They are mainly for systems development, Mr. Chairman.
For systems development, I know that I mentioned in my opening comments, that for the first three years now since the inception of the Nunavut Government, we have spent a total of 57 million dollars on informatics.
I am just wondering, like our leases, is this something that we are going to see continue to grow in expenditures, or are we looking at now having our systems developed and in place and these numbers drop off.
If I could get an indication from the minister what we will see there.
I guess the reason I make that comment is almost every time we have looked at a supplementary appropriation there has always been a large amount in there for informatics, I am just wondering if and when we will ever see an end to this.
I think the fact that we have produced this budget is trying to show that we are trying to focus on trying to manage some of the information management programming, whether it is on the development side or on the operations and maintenance side with Public Works, more efficiently.
I would say that it is hard to judge or gauge the need, because as you know if you wanted to spend, you could develop the most elaborate systems on any program that you want, and of course there is the associated operating and maintenance costs after that.
Given that technology is changing so quickly, there are always new demands and new needs in that area.
But I would say to the member and to the members, as you know, and I have said it in the past when the supplementary appropriations have come forward, that we are as a government are trying to put more control and more planning around the information technology area.
The fact that we have two of our senior Deputy Ministers co-ordinating the steering committee, Mr. Vardy and Mr. Mrazek, shows really where the ministerial support and direction is in trying to move on trying to plan out the information planning and implementation and make it more effective Mr. Chairman.
I know that technology is something that is always changing, and there is always something buy it today and tomorrow you have something better out on the market.
But given the size, if you look at it, there is probably private sectors and corporations out there that are larger than this government, I am just wondering are we looking at ensuring that we have what we need, do we need to have state of the art systems and programs in place that are being developed.
What mechanisms are being put in place to ensure that we don’t get more than what we need.
I know that any one who is a salesperson always wants to tell you that their job is to sell you as much as they can.
We’ve already spent 57 million dollars on information technology and systems development.
I was wondering what system have we got out of this and which ones are we still looking at getting.
Mr. Chairman, we are trying to make it simple certainly to make it easier to operate and having a system that is capable of doing what we want it to do.
I guess I can use the example of when we first took office we were moving towards a combined payroll and human resources system, as members know and we thought that was too elaborate of a system for us.
There were concerns about implementation.
So we went to a separate payroll system as members know through ADP.
But by the same token when we did that we lost the capabilities of the Human Resource tracking system.
There were questions that were raised about that.
Now we are trying to pick up that aspect of it and adding that back onto the payroll system to make sure that we have adequate information on the Human Resources side so we can make effective decisions on tracking and monitoring of our personal. That would be an example of that.
What I am trying to say Mr. Chairman, is you can have two extremes having a system that is too elaborate for our needs and by the same token you may be able to have one that is too simplistic and not be able to provide all the information that you want.
So I think there is a balance there and I think we are trying to and we have taken steps to address that through the establishment of the IT Steering Committee, and the Implementation Committee and FMB itself is still is the one that puts final approval through as far as what system to go forward or not to go forward with Mr. Chairman.
I know that it is always a challenge when you start with something new to try and get what you need and sometimes you don't realize what you need until after someone asks you for it.
On the IT spending and the contract services. If it is system development are there any dollars looking at training and developing this type of technical expertise that we need in this area to have it local people that we are hiring and getting to do this work for us.
Or is it all going to contractors and system developers in the south.
There is a small component of the contract services for finance specific training but the bulk of training dollars for the Information Technology support has been the most popular budget on the operations and maintenance side.
Chairperson (interpretation): Any more Mr. Tootoo.
Finance and Administration. Branch summary.
Informatics planning and system development. Total operations and maintenance, 4 million 654 thousand.
Total expenditures, 4 million 654 thousand dollars.
Turning to page 3-9. Finance & Administration, branch summary.
Controllership and regional financial services.
Total operations and maintenance, 17 million 820 thousand.
Under grants and contributions, last year there was 3 million 900 thousand.
But in 2001-2002 there is an amount of 4 million 750 thousand.
Could you give me an example of the grants and contributions given out.
What kinds of grants and contributions do you give out.
Mr. Chairman, this is to reflect the additional demands on the power support program.
If I could get more clarification.
There is also something to do with utilities and there is no figure under utilities.
Which departments are given grants and contributions.
That is under the information there.