EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I would like to take a few moments to review the provisions of Bill 33.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Chairman, as members will recall, the most recent annual report of the Integrity Commissioner contained a number of recommendations for amendments to the statute.
Bill 33 implements the board’s decisions in relation to these amendments, including such matters as the reimbursement of reasonable fees incurred by members in the establishment and administration of trusts.
Bill 33 also establishes new provisions in the legislation concerning the time period within which reviews of a member’s conduct by the Integrity Commissioner are to be undertaken.
These amendments provide for a formal process to be followed in respect to requests for extensions by the Integrity Commissioner.
I would note that the Integrity Commissioner’s annual reports to the Legislative Assembly must include an account of any request for an extension.
I would also note that the amendments ensure that members who may be involved in the Integrity Commissioner’s review are not placed in a position where they are making decisions on any request for a time extension.
Bill 33 also makes a number of housekeeping amendments to the legislation.
Speaker: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, I do.
Chairman (interpretation): Sergeant-at-Arms, escort the official in, please.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, for the record, please introduce your witness.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To my right is Mr. John Quirke, the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly.
Members have requested to proceed to the clause-by- clause review of the bill.
Chairman: Bill 33, An Act to Amend the Integrity Act. Clause 1. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 8. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 9. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 10. Agreed?
Chairman: Go to Schedule on page 3 and 4.
Do members agree to the Schedule?
Chairman: Clause 11. Agreed?
Chairman: Do members agree to Bill 33 as a whole?
Some Members: Agreed.  Chairman: Do members agree that pursuant to Rule 62(2) that Bill 33 can immediately be placed on the orders of the day for third reading?
I would like to thank the Speaker and his officials for being present to introduce Bill 33.
This bill will now be updated.
Mr. Chairman, if you can continue to Bill 34, we would appreciate it.
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation) I would like to ask if you have any opening comments for Bill 34.
Bill 34 – An Act to Amend the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act – Consideration in Committee
I am also very pleased to have the opportunity to appear today before the Committee of the Whole on the occasion of its consideration of Bill 34, An Act to Amend the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act.
I would like to take a few moments to review the provisions of Bill 34.
As members are aware, officers and employees of the Legislative Assembly are statutorily exempt from appearing as a witness before a court and from jury duty during sittings of the House and certain other designated periods of time. (interpretation ends) Mr. Chairman, this bill allows for the same exemption to be granted to other persons who perform essential services for the Legislative Assembly within the same clearly defined periods of time.
Bill 34 amends the Act to allow the Management and Services Board to establish the amount that may be recovered from members and ministers in certain circumstances, including failure to attend sittings of the House or meetings of its committees and caucuses without reasonable explanation.
The bill also provides for the tabling of reports on members’ absences. This amendment reflects the Legislative Assembly’s commitment to having clear mechanisms of accountability.
Bill 34 also amends the Act to provide for the tabling of an annual report on the additional allowances, expenses, and benefits that are provided to members of the Executive Council in addition to those that are paid to all members under the Act.
This amendment reflects the Legislative Assembly’s commitment to having clear mechanisms of transparency.
Bill 34 also makes a limited number of housekeeping amendments to the legislation, including the designation of an alternate ministerial member of the Management and Services Board.
Mr. Arvaluk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Excuse my gruff voice.
I would like to ask a question from his opening comments in regard to Bill 34, An Act to Amend the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act.
For example, if I don’t show up to committee meetings or during the session, the Management and Services Board can establish the amount that may be recovered from the members and the ministers because we have to be transparent as Members of the Legislative Assembly.
We all know that the three Clerks always pay attention to ensure that the regular members attend sittings of the House or meetings of its committees and caucuses.
How about the members of the Executive Council? How will the regular members know when the Management and Services Board have to deal with the ministers? Who is overseeing their attendance and the required deductions?
This has already been set where regular members’ attendance is marked. The members can show a medical certificate if they are absent due to medical reasons. The Management and Services Board has already seen members absent without cause.
For the Executive Council members, the Premier’s Office is responsible for marking their attendance and their reasons for absence.
I should remind the member that the members have requested that we proceed to the clause-by-clause review of the bill.
For that reason, Bill 34, An Act to Amend the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act.
I am not too sure if it’s under this clause and here I refer to section 70.01, subsection 1.
I don’t know if it’s included under this provision where the expenses and benefits are. The council may establish a policy for recovery of allowance, along with reimbursements of expenses and provisions of benefits to members.
The question I wish to ask is based on the Speaker’s response that for the Executive Council, the Premier’s Office is responsible for taking their attendance.
It’s not at the discretion of the Clerk and the Speaker, let’s say, if Mr. Arvaluk does not attend.
The Clerk already writes down as to who does not attend the session and they are not partial to anyone.
We have to be accountable and give our reasons and write it down.
The question that I want to enquire about is: what if the Premier directs her staff that they should not mark the attendance if the minister does not attend?
If staff cannot mark it down, will this be taken care of in some other way?
There are quite a few answers to your questions, so I’ll have the Clerk respond to the question, Mr. Chairman.
There are a couple of scenarios that are taken care of by the Clerk’s Office that would affect the ministers.
First of all, when it comes to meetings of the Full Caucus, we take attendance of everybody who was there. So if the minister is absent, we would note that and we would report that to the Management and Services Board with the explanation of why the minister wasn’t there at the meeting. So we have the information there.
We get the information during the sitting of the House. If the Premier or the House did announce that a minister is away on ministerial duties, we have that backup information to indicate to the board, “Yes, the minister was away, but he was away on ministerial duties, so no action has to be taken.”
However, when a Premier would hold a cabinet meeting and for some strange reason, let’s say, a minister decided not to show, it would be her prerogative, it would be up to her, if she wants to, if I may use the word, punish that minister by writing a letter to the chairman of the board or to my office saying, “Minister X was absent for four days. I want his ministerial indemnity to be recovered and then their expenses.”
So the initiative would have to come from the Premier’s Office.
Chairman: Now go to Schedule on page 4.
Chairman: Go back to page 3.
Chairman: Do members agree to Bill 34 as a whole?
Chairman: Do members agree that pursuant to Rule 62(2) that Bill 34 can immediately be placed on the orders of the day for third reading?
I would like to thank the Speaker and his official for being here. I would like to ask if you have any closing remarks at this time.
I don’t have much to say for closing remarks. Thank you for passing the amendments to this bill. These amendments are for transparency and accountability so that our constituents will have that knowledge.
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation) Sergeant-at-Arms, if you can escort the official out, please.
Thank you. (interpretation ends) I would now like to ask Minister Peterson of the Department of Finance to make his opening remarks.
Bill 28 – Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 1, 2010-2011 – Consideration in Committee
Bill 28, Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 1, 2010-2011, will appropriate $109,118,000 in additional capital monies for 2010-11.
These capital items include:
Departmental 2009-2010 capital carryovers;
Additional funding for the Nunavut Trades Training Centre project;
Accelerated funding for the Qikiqtarjuaq Inuksuit School addition;
Funding for an inventory tracking system for the Fur Pricing Program;
Additional funding to complete the Igloolik and Sanikiluaq arenas; and
The 2010-11 allocation under the federal Building Canada Fund.
The 2009-2010 departmental capital carryover request of $96.5 million represents an increase for the second year in a row and is $13.8 million higher than the prior year.
A total of 123 capital projects are being requested for carry forward to 2010-11.
This is 24 more than last year.
Human resource capacity and the requirement to appropriate 100 percent of Building Canada Fund projects upfront are contributing factors towards the increased capital carryovers.
In order to reduce capital carryovers, the government needs to be conservative with upcoming capital plans, thus allowing for the backlog of projects to be completed.
I am pleased to advise members that the Nunavut Trades Training Centre project is substantially complete. However, there is a funding shortfall in the project and an additional appropriation of $1,200,000 to the Department of Finance on behalf of the Nunavut Arctic College is required to complete the purchase of furniture, fixtures, and equipment.
The Qikiqtarjuaq Inuksuit School Addition project, which also includes a community learning centre for the Nunavut Arctic College, is progressing ahead of schedule.
As a result, an appropriation of $2,900,000 for the Department of Education is required in order to substantially complete the project this year.
Funding of $5,423,000 was included in 2011-12 through the five-year capital plan and will now be reduced as a result of this 2010-11 appropriation.
The Department of Environment is requesting $150,000 in new monies to acquire an improved inventory tracking system for the Fur Pricing Program that will allow inventory to be input at the community level to a central inventory database.
This is consistent with the government’s ongoing efforts to strengthen financial management.
The Department of Community and Government Services received cost shared funding in 2009-2010 from the Recreational Infrastructure Fund, a portion of which was allocated to installing concrete pads in the Sanikiluaq and Igloolik arenas.
Tenders have now closed on these projects and the department is requesting $1,380,000 of additional monies to complete these projects and expand the scope of work to include the installation of cooling devices to maintain the stability of the concrete pads.
A total of 11 projects have been identified for funding from the 2010-11 Building Canada Fund allocation.
An appropriation of $6,927,000 is being requested for the Government of Nunavut’s 25 percent cost share of the Building Canada Fund for both the Department of Community and Government Services in the amount of $4,977,000 and the Department of Economic Development and Transportation in the amount of $1,950,000.
Projects of the Department of Community and Government Services are primarily for water system infrastructure and the Department of Economic Development and Transportation projects are primarily for airport improvements in our communities.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister Peterson. Do you have witnesses that you would like to bring to the table?
Does the committee to bring in the witnesses?
For the record, Minister Peterson, please introduce your witnesses.
To my right is Deputy Minister Peter Ma and to my left is Director of Expenditure Management Jeff Chown.
On the first page, fourth bullet, “Funding for an inventory tracking system for the Fur Pricing Program,” looking at my community of Kugaaruk, I don’t think we have a full-time officer in the community.
Would this initiative require an additional PY where we don’t have a renewable resource officer in the community?
I thank Mr. Ningark for that question. Mr. Chairman, my answer would be no, I don’t think so.
Mr. Ningark: Understanding the reply, “I don’t think so,” could you elaborate on that response?
I don’t believe they need a new PY because this program that they are proposing is to buy a software program that we use to track the inventory.
So therefore, we will now proceed to the page-by-page review of the departmental estimates starting with page 4.
This is dealing with the Government of Nunavut’s 2010-11 Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) No. 1.
Office of the Legislative Assembly. Capital. Not Previously Authorized.
Assembly Operations. Total Assembly Operations. $1,092,000,.
Chairman: Total Department. Page 4. $1,092,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Page 5.
Finance. Capital. Not Previously Authorized: Centrally Administered Funds.
Total Centrally Administered Funds. $4,649,000.
Total Department. Not Previously Authorized. $4,649,000.
Mr. Arvaluk (interpretation): I’m not sure, Mr. Chairman, if it is on page 5, but I have a question on the government’s request of just over $2.2 million in capital carryovers for the new trades school in Rankin Inlet that will no longer be expended.
It also states that work on the facility will be done in October 2010.
What work remains to be done on this project? Are the funds allocated to this deferred?
How come it is not just removed? I’m not exactly sure how to phrase this question.
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank Mr. Arvaluk. For the [question], Mr. Chairman, I have the Minister for Nunavut Arctic College here.
I would like him to take that question. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister Peterson. Minister Shewchuk.
Hon. Daniel Shewchuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Everything with the status of Arctic College and the trade centre is on track. The project will be completed later this summer.
The only thing left to do with that project is to access and get the furniture in place. The trade school will be opening this fall in September.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister Shewchuk. Mr. Arvaluk.
Mr. Arvaluk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So the $2.2 million is for furniture.
If that’s what I heard, it’s very nice furniture.
It doesn’t include equipment like drill saws and anything like that. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank Mr. Arvaluk for that question. Item 1 at the top, $2,242,000, is a carryover of capital monies.
The furniture in Item 2 is $1,200,000.
Mr. Arvaluk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m really confused now.
Out of the $2,242,000 that is carried over for the trade school, $1.2 million of it is for furniture and the remainder is for tools and stuff like that?
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank Mr. Arvaluk for asking for clarification. No, the $2,242,000 is capital carryover monies to complete the construction of the building itself.
The $1.2 million is additional monies to purchase the furniture, a projected shortfall in the Nunavut Trade Centre project.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister Peterson. Mr. Arvaluk, thank you.
Mr. Elliott: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The $338,000 for the Nunavut Arctic College Iqaluit Student Residence; is that the new student residence up behind the college or is that the Old Residence out by the West 40?
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Elliott. Minister Peterson.
You will have to pardon my lack of knowledge of the location of all of the buildings in every town of Nunavut, particularly Iqaluit. I have been told that it’s the building up the hill. I’m not sure.
If you can give me a street number or something like that, it would help me.
Mr. Elliott: That was everything. Thank you.
For the Pond Inlet Community Learning Centre, $168,000, I guess if you go to Pond Inlet, you can use about $168,000 to build a road right in front of the new Arctic College because if you’re in a wheelchair, you cannot use the ramp.
From the ramp and the steps, the road is about three feet lower. I swear that you would have to jump down or jump up in order to attend that school that is already open.
Is that $168,000 carried over to build a road so that it becomes up to standard, to level it with a ramp?
I thank Mr. Arvaluk for asking the question.
I apologize if I’m not familiar with his issue.
The briefing note that I have in front of me is that it’s a carryover to be used to ensure that funding is in place to offset any warranty deficiency identified and anticipate as well any other expenses incurred in 2010-11.
I don’t know if that would include a ramp.
Mr. Arvaluk: The ramp is fine, Mr. Chairman. It’s just that you can’t reach it from the ground because they haven’t built a road, nothing.
You would have to use a ladder in order to get to the ramp and then finally use your wheelchair once you climbed the ladder.
I guess my question is: if that’s only for warranty, what monies are you going to use to comply with the standards and criteria?
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank Mr. Arvaluk for bringing that to our attention.
Yes, it is unusual. The ramp should match up with the road.
I could ask my colleague, Minister Shewchuk, if he wants to address that or take it as notice, but it is certainly a concern and I’ll ask Mr. Shewchuk to respond to it.
I would like to thank Mr. Arvaluk for pointing that out.
As he indicated to me, I think he’s going to take a picture and show me that. I would think that that’s a very important item to look at and we will look into that.
I think part of the warranty carryover is to address situations like that and maybe not so much as the cost because I think the contractors are responsible for ensuring that that ramp does serve a purpose and that the grade is built up to that ramp so that it’s accessible to people, but it’s definitely something that we will look into.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister Shewchuk. Thank you.
Going back to page 5. Total Department.
Not Previously Authorized. $4,649,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Page 6. Justice. Capital.
Directorate. Total Directorate. $110,000. Agreed?
Some of us MLAs got a little bit of a rap from the media when we turned down a special request for a $300,000 study for the correctional centre, the BCC, when we were trying to make it clear that they use CGS internal money or even from their staff to find out what needs to be done because something is very wrong with that centre.
So what you’re requesting under that $2.2 million carryover is for a men’s correctional centre in Rankin Inlet.
Is that going to delay the completion?
The completion date, I think, is September 2011.
What I would be interested in is if this project is currently on schedule and on budget. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Arvaluk. (interpretation) I don’t believe it is under the $110,000, but I will leave it at Minister Peterson’s discretion to respond to that.
I thank Mr. Arvaluk for asking that question.
I have been informed or advised and updated that as recently as a couple of weeks ago, the Rankin Inlet Correctional Centre is on budget and on time.
We are looking at late 2011, thereabouts, approximately.
Total Directorate. $110,000.
Chairman: Corrections. Total Corrections. $11,649,000.
Chairman: Total Department. Not Previously Authorized. $11,759,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Going to page 7. (interpretation ends) Culture, Language, Elders and Youth.
Total Directorate. $3,004,000.
Chairman: Culture and Heritage.
Minister Peterson, maybe if you want to clarify that now because we seem to have hit on something different.
I apologize, but we noted that our numbers aren’t matching up. Our revised version doesn’t include the $300,000.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): I apologize, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman (interpretation): We’re are on page 6. (interpretation ends) Total Corrections.
Justice. Capital. $11,349,000. (interpretation) I would like you to note that the $300,000 is not included in the total. So I would like to ask if you agree to the $11,349,000 that I just talked about.
(interpretation ends) Agreed?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Total Department.
Not Previously Authorized. $11,459,000.
That gave me a hot flash.
(interpretation ends) Culture, Language, Elders and Youth.
Total Culture and Heritage. $2,743,000.
Chairman: Total Department. Not Previously Authorized. $5,747,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Page 8. Education. Capital.
Are there any questions on page 8?
Totalling the amount is $9.79 million in capital carryovers for a number of capital projects for the Department of Education.
Are any of these projects currently behind schedule or any of them over budget? Is that the reasoning behind it?
I apologize for taking so long to answer. We’re just double-checking the briefing notes.
There is no indication in our briefing notes that these projects are behind schedule, although the Minister of Education is here.
If he wishes to comment, I would invite him to add some details if he needs to.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister Peterson. (interpretation) Minister Tapardjuk, would you like to comment on that?
All of these projects are currently on schedule except perhaps in Sanikiluaq.
What we discussed earlier about the Qikiqtarjuaq Inuksuit School is that it’s going to be completed sooner and it’s going to cost less.
In Cape Dorset, it is not behind, but there were some projects that were not included.
In February of this year, we finally found, after the session, that we had overlooked some things that were required in the school and we needed additional dollars to complete it.
We are going to be using what we are going to be saving from one project for the additional dollars required for the school in Cape Dorset.
They are still on schedule and ongoing, but there are also warranty issues and that is the reasoning behind it.
If there are any further questions, I will be available to respond.
I just covered everything as a whole, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister Tapardjuk. Are there any more questions on page 8? (interpretation) Thank you. (interpretation ends) Page 9.
Capital. Not Previously Authorized. Total Corporate Services. $12,864,000.
Not Previously Agreed. $12,864,000.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Page 10.
Directorate. Total Directorate. $14,930,000.
I want to ask the Hon. Minister Peterson if he can tell me offhand and perhaps this is a question for the Hon. Minister of Health and Social Services, but I am hoping the Hon. Minister Peterson might answer.
What are the criteria for a health centre replacement? Is it a 20-year or 25-year lifespan?
The reason I am asking is because Baker Lake is already meeting that criteria and it is far too elevated for a lot of the elders as well as people with handicaps getting to the health centre.
I remember last year in the House, I mentioned the difficulties that we are facing with the health centre.
Of course, Baker Lake is growing and we do need more permanent nurses, I would say.
Mr. Chairman, the direct question I want to ask Mr. Peterson is if he can tell me: what are the criteria for replacing health centres?
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Aupaluktuq. Mr. Peterson.