EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
It said, “Complete negotiations,” which would imply that negotiations have already started with Baffinland for a development partnership agreement.
Could we get an update as to what’s happening with that in terms of his department?
The specific project that he is talking about, the Baffinland Mary River project, we haven’t received a letter of intent to start negotiating on a development partnership agreement.
As a government, we intend to wait until after the Inuit Impact and Benefits Agreement has been completed.
Just as an update, I know the minister had talked about the Mary River project and how it was going, I believe, in his Minister’s Statement, about going back to the drawing board for the environmental assessment. I believe that Baffinland was going to provide information to NIRB as of June 25, 2013.
Will there be work completed by Baffinland in this fiscal year?
Mr. Chairman, it’s up to the proponents to determine how fast they’re going to try and complete their revamped EIS.
As a government, we do participate in reviews through the regulatory process.
From what I understand, yes, they’re trying to move forward as quickly as possible for this summer, but that depends on the will of the proponents themselves.
I know that in one of the replies to questions I asked, the minister said that before the DPA could be started, the IIBA had to be completed. Is there a tentative date as to when that was going to be completed? I thought it was already signed and completed.
We’re not privy to that information.
It’s between the proponent and the regional Inuit association.
In terms of negotiating a development partnership agreement, I’m sure the minister will be able to answer this: who is involved with that thing? If we’re specifically talking about Baffinland, there will be representatives from his department and obviously representatives from Baffinland, but will community involvement be there as well?
As far as I know, there are six communities that are being affected. Will representatives from each of those communities be involved during those negotiations?
Mr. Chairman, the negotiations are led by Economic Development and Transportation, but there other departments that are involved through the sustainable development advisory group and through the socio-economic monitoring committees that we do have out there within the three regional centres, we do make an effort to make sure that they’re included.
That way, they have all the information from the communities that are affected. We try and use all the information as much as possible.
In terms of community involvement, how are communities involved in putting forward their ideas and views as to what should be included in the development partnership agreement?
We do have a development partnership agreement policy within the government and there are five or six principles that are included within the policy. Of course, we try to maintain that all of these principles do have to be met with the proponent. Two or three of those principles, I can say it from the top of my head, of course, are benefits to the community, training, infrastructure development, and so forth.
It’s one of the criteria to negotiating a development partnership agreement with a proponent. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I understand how there are different parts in terms of education and working towards mine training and heavy equipment operation, but specifically, how are community members consulted on what they feel should be part of it as well?
With the development partnership agreements protocol that we do have within the government policy, we include community meetings to use that as information.
We involve the communities that are affected and, of course, I indicated earlier that the socio-economic monitoring committees are also used within the regions.
On page 163 in the department’s business plan for 2013-14, it talks about  ”Refine and expand the GN’s Environmental Assessment responsibilities, including implementation of a capacity-building initiative.”
I was wondering if the minister could explain if his department would be involved in that or if this is a combined effort with the Department of Environment.
There are six departments involved, not just the departments of Economic Development and Transportation and Environment. The justice and health departments are involved throughout the regulatory process and whoever is going through this process on a proponent where official interveners were mandated by legislation to carry out the function of reviewing any kind of development. Of course, through NIRB, that’s mining development.
Mr. Chairman, the member is well aware that during the question period yesterday that there are some increases into the budget to build up our capacity. The member is well aware that there are a lot of projects out there that have to go through the NIRB process to become more efficient. We did include some more positions for building up our capacity to provide an efficient regulatory process when reviewing developments in Nunavut.
So simply put, it is to help GN employees understand and be able to put assessments under the NIRB process to be able to put in meaningful… . The NIRB website is like a monster for websites for databases, so it’s actually building up the capacity to be able to respond to these requests.
I indicated that there are more projects that do have to go through the regulatory process and we want more efficient participation on the government’s side.
We do have six departments that do participate under the sustainable development advisory group.
As the member is well aware, we’re trying to become more efficient and more proactive throughout the process.
On page 163, one of the department’s priorities for 2013-14 is to “Participate in and contribute to federal Strategic Environmental Assessment for Baffin Bay/Davis Strait.” With those two large bodies of water, what type of strategic environmental assessment are they doing?
Is this for oil exploration or is it for fish and levels of population for turbot or is it encompassing everything?
With your permission, I would like to bring a witness in to respond to that question in detail.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Taptuna. Does the committee agree to bring in another witness?
Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort a witness out and bring another witness in.
Thank you, Sergeant-at-Arms. (interpretation ends) Minister Taptuna, for the record, (interpretation) please introduce your witness.
This is Pauloosie Suvega, Associate Deputy Minister for Economic Development and Transportation.
Welcome, Mr. Suvega. (interpretation ends) Can I ask Mr. Elliott to ask his question again?
The question was from page 163 of the department’s business plan and it’s for one of the priorities for 2013-14. The question was the priority is to “Participate in and contribute to federal Strategic Environmental Assessment for Baffin Bay/Davis Strait.”
I’ll have the associate deputy minister respond to that question in detail.
Mr. Suvega: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Parts of the initiatives that are starting to be undertaken throughout the north include things like seismic testing or proposed seismic testing. Part of the partnerships that we have, such as with the federal government, include trying to look at things like resources that are under the sea, seabed mapping, and also marine or fish type resources as well. So this is in partnership with some of the federal agencies to look at things like undersea resources.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Suvega.
In terms of working with the federal government, how is the department involved in this in terms of what benefit would it be? I thought, in terms of resources, we have land resources or Inuit owned land, which the benefits would go to NTI or one of the regional Inuit associations. Even land resources are federal resources anyway.
So what would we benefit from partnering with this type of a project? My understanding is that offshore, if there are mines or oil, we wouldn’t have access to that as well. So what does the Government of Nunavut benefit by participating in this?
With your permission, I’ll have the associate deputy minister respond to that.
As the number of activities and interest started to increase within the north, specifically in the last few years, on offshore development and activities, a number of concerns started to come forward specifically from communities that are adjacent to these resources.
We have become very active participants in these as of late. We played largely liaison roles between the communities and the regional Inuit associations and also with the land claims organizations. So it is partnership and we do try and emphasize that quite a bit to the federal bodies that may not know as much about the Nunavut landscape as our government departments do.
In terms of reporting back to the Legislative Assembly on how this priority is going to be met or evaluated, how do you plan to report back to the House on this particular priority?
I’ll have Mr. Suvega respond to that question in detail.
Chairman: Mr. Suvega.
As the number of activities starts to increase and if a formal application starts to be put forward through, say for example, the National Energy Board for things like offshore oil, seismic testing, then we would go through those regulatory processes as active interveners. We would also work very actively with partners like the Inuit organizations and communities at every stage. We do try and educate people who aren’t familiar with those processes.
Some of them do take a bit of time. Some are measured in years in terms of the regulatory process. We would be able to communicate the statuses of each of those stages, but they do take a bit of time.
So what is the Government of Nunavut’s Department of Economic Development and Transportation’s position on oil and gas exploration or development off of Nunavut’s waters?
As a department, we do not necessarily have a position. As a government, we abide by the regulatory processes and the legislated mandate.
As a government, we do not necessarily tell the proponents that we’re either pro or con for certain types of development. We abide by the legislation that we’re under.
I think I would like to request to report progress. I think we have reached our limit for today.
I believe you moved a motion to report progress.
I will now once again report progress to the Speaker.
We will continue with the minister and his officials at the witness table tomorrow.
Just a reminder that the Standing Committee on Legislation meets tomorrow morning at 8:30 in the Tuktu Room.
In accordance with the authority granted to me by Motion 44 – 3(3), this House stands adjourned until Thursday, March 14, at 10:00 a.m.
>>House adjourned at 20:01 Appendix – March 13, 2013
kNK5 moZos3=x
Nunavut Maligaliurvia
Assemblée législative du Nunavut
Return to Written Question
Asked by: Alan Rumbolt, MLA (Hudson Bay)
Asked of: Hon. Lorne Kusugak
Minister of Community and Government Services
Number: 023-3(3)
Date: February 28, 2013
Subject: Annual Fuel Purchases by the Government of Nunavut
Expressing the data in the same format as that which the Government of Nunavut provided in the Return to Written Question 3-3(2), what quantities of fuel were purchased and delivered in 2012?
2,195,620
512,381
1,320,959
4,235,921
721,139
154,342
434,469
2,992,564
612,698
1,013,745
124,904
177,672
1,571,009
293,666
539,091
5,277,164
545,192
1,183,190
28,947,740
5,971,380
28,211,009
8,487,274
2,057,899
288,490
1,907,823
613,859
211,252
4,909,872
981,843
442,649
3,937,373
651,351
968,411
1.899,723
508,752
301,117
3,989,159
364,498
1,576,760
71,043,262
12,011,924
38,079,016
4,386,084
992,820
1,862,175
7,771,292
1,469,069
1,655,195
324,070
133,623
2,878,378
353,948
647,060
10,042,517
2,192,566
10,617,700
4,818,641
3,869,361
648,873
135,647
374,669
3,416,014
1,164,607
254,064
38,717,520
6,610.079
14,680,774
4,662,271
1,173,500
2,519,399
2,633,427
3,929,478
540,348
1,068,122
3,603,495
869,596
636,619
2,073,456
363,986
793,793
17,782,127
2,947,430
5,017,933
127,542,909
21,569,433
57,777,723
6,128,377
3,058,978
1,626,352
Emergency tank
184,622
943,968
n.b.increased
1,519,571.0
n.b.decreased
3,076,650.0
Response: Petroleum Products Division
Airlifts - 2012
Volume (litres)
112,451
201,331
20,472
34,054
Thursday, March 14, 2013
Pages 4077 – 4162
Opening Prayer 4077
Ministers’ Statements 4077
Members’ Statements 4080
Reports of Standing and Special Committees on Bills and Other Matters 4099
Tabling of Documents 4099
Notices of Motions 4100
Notices of Motions for First Reading of Bills 4100
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters 4101
Report of the Committee of the Whole 4161
Third Reading of Bills 4161
Revert to Item 15: Notices of Motions for First Reading of Bills 4161
Orders of the Day 4162
Thursday, March 14, 2013 4077
261 – 3(3): Polar Bear – CITES Vote (Arreak) 4077
262 – 3(3): Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and Cultural Immersion Day Directives (Ell) 4078
263 – 3(3): Celebrating French Language in Nunavut: Les Rendez-vous de la Francophonie 2013 (Arreak) 4079
264 – 3(3): Changes to Nunavut’s Public Housing Rent Scale (Taptuna) 4079
437 – 3(3): Repulse Bay Housing Needs (Ningark) 4080
438 – 3(3): Nutrition Month (Elliott) 4081
439 – 3(3): Homelessness across Nunavut (Ugyuk) 4082
440 – 3(3): Potential for Polar Bear Up-listing under CITES (Curley) 4082
568 – 3(3): Repulse Bay Housing Needs (Ningark) 4084
569 – 3(3): Addressing Homelessness across Nunavut (Ugyuk) 4085
570 – 3(3): Remedies for the Abuse of Income Support (Oshutapik) 4087
571 – 3(3): Search and Rescue in Nunavut (Ningeongan) 4089
572 – 3(3): Location of Jet A-1 Fuel Drums in Grise Fiord (Elliott) 4092
573 – 3(3): Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and Cultural Immersion Day (Enook) 4093
574 – 3(3): Status of Cape Dorset Sewage Lagoon (Schell) 4095
575 – 3(3): AREVA’s Draft Environmental Impact Statement (Aupaluktuq) 4096
Committee Report 025 – 3(3): Bill 54, An Act to Amend the Income Tax Act (Ningeongan) 4099
Committee Report 026 – 3(3): Bill 56, Write-off of Assets Act, No. 1, 2011-2012 (Ningeongan) 4099
336 – 3(3): Correspondence Regarding Repulse Bay Housing Needs (Ningark) 4099
337 – 3(3): 2013-2016 Business Plan of the Office of the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut (Speaker) 4100
338 – 3(3): 2013-2016 Business Plan of the Office of the Languages Commissioner of Nunavut (Speaker) 4100
046 – 3(3): Extended Adjournment – Notice 4100
Bill 52 – An Act to Amend the Nunavut Teachers Association Act – Notice 4100
Bill 57 – Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2013 – Notice 4100
Bill 58 – Public Service Act – Notice 4100
Bill 59 – Collaboration for Poverty Reduction Act – Notice 4101
Bill 60 – An Act Respecting the Nunavut Law Foundation – Notice 4101
Bill 50 – An Act to Amend the Nunavut Elections Act – Consideration in Committee 4102
Bill 49 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2013-2014 – Economic Development and Transportation – Consideration in Committee 4108
Bill 49 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2013-2014 – Nunavut Arctic College – Consideration in Committee 4130
Bill 49 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2013-2014 – Nunavut Housing Corporation – Consideration in Committee 4150
Bill 50 – An Act to Amend the Nunavut Elections Act – Third Reading 4161
Before we proceed with today’s sitting, I would like to ask Mr. Curley to lead us off in a prayer, please.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Curley. (interpretation ends) Moving on in our orders of the day.
Minister’s Statement 261 – 3(3): Polar Bear – CITES Vote (Arreak)
Good morning to my constituents in Qikiqtarjuaq and Clyde River and all Nunavummiut.
Mr. Speaker, as all members have now heard, our extensive efforts over the past months have yielded very positive results.
The United States’ proposal to ban trade in polar bear parts was once again defeated at the recent meeting of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) in Bangkok, Thailand.
The United States and some alleged “environmental” organizations are calling this decision a defeat for polar bear conservation.
All that was defeated was an attempt by the United States to manipulate the CITES process and force the up-listing of a species that does not meet the listing criteria.
They tried to use their international influence to force other nations to support their misguided efforts, but clearly the nations of the world recognized this and did not stand for it.
Rather than a defeat for polar bear conservation, this was a victory for the integrity of CITES.
Mr. Speaker, polar bears remain an abundant, well-managed species that are not threatened by trade.
Future concerns with polar bears relate to predicted reductions in the quantity and quality of sea ice habitat as a potential result of climate change.
It is unfortunate that the United States decided to distract the world’s attention from the real issue of climate change by pointing the finger at Inuit harvesting.
In Nunavut, harvesting has always been part of the wildlife management equation.
For Inuit, harvesting is a central part of our cultural identity and our ability to provide for ourselves and our families, and we will continue to sustainably harvest polar bears.
Thanks to the results of this vote, we will also continue to be able to benefit from the sale of the by-products of those bears.
I would like to recognize the efforts of the Government of Canada, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, the World Wildlife Fund, and the many others who contributed their time, efforts, knowledge, and resources to inform and educate the nations of the world of the truth about our successful wildlife co-management system.
I would also like to thank MLA Tagak Curley for accompanying me to Thailand and for speaking so eloquently during our intervention opposing the up-listing.
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Nunavut and all of our partners in wildlife co-management will continue to work together to ensure the sustainable management of polar bears.
Looking into the future, we will continue to build on our successful collaborative co-management system, working toward a shared vision of sustainable polar bear populations for future generations.
Minister’s Statement 262 – 3(3): Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and Cultural Immersion Day Directives (Ell)
I say “good morning” to the people of Iqaluit West.
Mr. Speaker, as Minister of the Department of Human Resources, it is a great pleasure for me to rise today to announce the implementation of the new Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and Cultural Immersion Day directives.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, the Tamapta Mandate began with Inuit societal values as the guiding principles.
The values reflect the words of advice from our elders who learned these values from their elders before them.
We have always been committed to follow these principles in our efforts to make our government and the programs and services we offer more responsive to the people we serve.
(interpretation) Mr. Speaker, in 2011, staff from our department met with Inuit representative organizations and groups to identify their priorities and how we could best meet their needs.
Overwhelmingly expressed was their desire to create a workplace that reflected Inuit culture and Inuit societal values.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, in cooperation, we worked with Culture and Heritage to develop two new directives.
Extensive consultation was done through Tuttarviit and interdepartmentally to ensure the directives would seamlessly integrate with our operations across the GN.
The Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit directive gives direction and examples on how to apply the Inuit societal values in everyday work situations.
This includes encouraging your team members to grow to their greatest potential and know the value of their contribution to the public service.
The values also speak to ensuring meetings produce results through the respectful inclusion of the contribution of all present.
Cultural immersion days, referred through our history of governance as IQ days, are given definition through a new directive. Cultural immersion days provide an opportunity to learn and practise Inuit culture and societal values. Cultural immersion days are important opportunities for cross-cultural sharing.
Stronger teams can be achieved and new knowledge obtained.
The elders provide the stories to the natural experience of living where harmony with the land is achieved. We will continue to implement and embrace Inuit societal values and Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit in the workplace. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Minister’s Statement 263 – 3(3): Celebrating French Language in Nunavut: Les Rendez-vous de la Francophonie 2013 (Arreak)
From March 8 to 24, 9.5 million francophones and francophiles from across Canada will celebrate French language and culture as part of the 15th edition of Rendez-vous de la Francophonie under the theme “La Joie de Vivre,” or something like that.
In Iqaluit, l’Association des francophones du Nunavut (the Francophone Association) was awarded nearly $49,958 to host a series of cultural and artistic community events over the next 17 days.
The Department of Culture and Heritage is a proud partner of this year’s programming as part of our overall mandate to support the vitality of the French language community of Nunavut. Oui, oui, je vis ma francophonie au Nunavut! Merci Monsieur le Présidente.
Speaker: Beinvenue Monsieur Minister.
Felicitación!
Minister’s Statement 264 – 3(3): Changes to Nunavut’s Public Housing Rent Scale (Taptuna)
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to bring to your attention the recently announced changes to Nunavut’s public housing rent scale.
Mr. Speaker, as mandated under Tamapta and designed to support the goals of poverty reduction, changes to the Public Housing program reduce disincentives to work and will increase the self-reliance and well-being of Nunavummiut.
Mr. Speaker, the changes to the public housing rent scale are the result of community consultations, including the poverty reduction round tables, undertaken in collaboration with the Government of Nunavut and Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated.
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to highlight some of these fundamental changes.
Under the new public housing rent scale, rent calculations will be based solely on the income of two primary leaseholders and on income brackets similar to that of the federal income tax structure.
Though many of Nunavummiut will see their rent decrease, annual rent increases among higher income public housing tenants will be limited to 25 percent of the new rent assessed until the rent assessed total is reached.
This will allow rent increases to take effect over several years and will be less of a financial burden to our tenants.
These changes will allow for fairer calculation of rents for tenants and make the administration of the Public Housing program more manageable for our local housing organizations.
Further, they will create economic spin-offs to the community and reduce the social burden, as tenants can accumulate wealth and advance in their field of employment. Rather than being a disincentive to work, this will become an enabler.
Mr. Speaker, the Nunavut Housing Corporation will ensure a smooth transition to the new rent scale that will come into effect in the fall of this year and fit with the established annual rent assessment cycle.
This will allow for an appropriate amount of time to inform tenants, update the rent scale software, and to ensure adequate training for local housing organizations and Nunavut Housing Corporation District staff.
Mr. Speaker, the long-term result of these changes is one where there is greater workforce participation, reduced reliance on Government of Nunavut social programs, such as income support, resulting in lowered costs to the Government of Nunavut and greater economic prosperity and social well-being of our people in Nunavut.
Member’s Statement 437 – 3(3): Repulse Bay Housing Needs (Ningark)
I would like to thank Steve Mapsalak and Saata Kidlapik.
I was given a Member’s Statement to read in the House for today in regard to Repulse Bay housing needs. I rise this morning to speak briefly about housing needs in Repulse Bay.