EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I thank the member for allowing me to expand a little bit upon some of the programs that the Embrace Life Council is putting forward and that the Government of Nunavut is supporting through our Quality of Life.
The specific program that I mentioned is based upon the Stewards of Children program, but it is made Nunavut-specific.
It talks about child sexual abuse prevention in partnership with Health, Voicefound, and other stakeholders. There is also a development in the process of a Nunavut-specific toolkit, specifically a written guide for survivors of suicide that is in consultation with Mental Health and Addictions and other partners.
With regard to in-community counselling that is available, it is provided through all of our communities through mental health workers.
If anyone feels a need to talk to a counsellor, whether they are considering suicide themselves or if they’re concerned about a loved one or in the aftermath of dealing with the repercussions of it, I encourage anybody, if they have any questions whatsoever, to contact our mental health workers in any community.
I appreciate his response in that people who are impacted immediately after suicide are at risk themselves, so we would like to provide as much support to them.
Moving on to my second question, I fully commend the department and the government in tripling their investment for ASIST. He indicated that “The workshops will now be provided free, with interpreters, to community organizations who request it.”
I would like him to clarify: will the department or the ASIST delivery program be expanded to communities that don’t request this service to them?
When we put forward programs such as this, we want to make sure that anybody who wants to access this type of training so that they can help deal with and recognize risk factors around them, I would again promote anybody or any organization to contact the Embrace Life Council or through my associate deputy minister’s office with the Quality of Life to put forward their requests and we will endeavour to accommodate everybody and anybody we can.
Mr. Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the minister for his response. I again appreciate that.
I guess if there’s a need that is identified, whether it’s not by the community, it might be identified by the government and it is needed in the community, whether it’s requested or not, I encourage the minister to pursue those options.
For my final question, the minister indicated that ASIST would be provided to all nursing students and I commend all teachers in Nunavut who have taken this training program as well.
Has the government identified any other frontline workers that will be needing ASIST training in the future?
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) The Hon. Minister responsible for the Prevention of Suicide, Mr. Hickes.
It’s a very good one.
It has been recognized in the past that frontline nurses, people working in the community health centres, teachers, and educators who interact with community members on a daily basis are an opportune target group to be able to provide this type of training for so that any recognition of any risk factors are available.
That being said, if the member or any member or any member of the public has ideas on how we can further roll out this type of training to make sure that as many frontline people or as many people who interact on a daily basis with members of our communities can take advantage of accessing this program, I would be open to hearing any and all ideas.
Question 514 – 4(3): Boarding Options in Rankin Inlet (Mikkungwak)
Mr. Speaker, last week when we were reviewing the 2017-18 Capital Estimates for the Department of Health, the minister indicated that building a boarding home in the community of Rankin Inlet for transient medical clients was not in his department’s capital planning cycle.
Can the minister provide an update on what kinds of contracted services are currently in place to ensure that medical clients have a place to stay in Rankin Inlet if their flights are delayed or if they have a long wait ‘til they can go home?
Hon. George Hickes: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the member for following up on his concerns that his constituents have raised with him.
When we did look at the feasibility of boarding homes in Rankin Inlet, Cambridge Bay was another regional centre that we have been looking at.
Health Canada is actually responsible for providing the medical travel assistance to beneficiaries that are referred for care outside their home community, although the Department of Health provides those services on behalf of Health Canada through an agreement. Any time we look at taking advantage of or utilizing boarding homes, we do have to go through Health Canada for increased funding and recognition of applicable rates.
That being said, with the Medical Travel Policy that we have in place right now, somebody would contact their medical travel contact or patient relations and we would find appropriate accommodations for somebody.
If their wait for the flight is longer than two hours, NHIB will cover meals and arrangements could be made for a day room or at a private billet.
To my knowledge, we currently don’t have any contracts with any specific entities as needs can arise and change on a daily basis.
We utilize mainly hotel services in Rankin Inlet specifically.
The last time we travelled home after Legislative Assembly business, I met several of my constituents in Rankin Inlet who were stranded due to weather and other considerations.
I ended up paying for their rooms while I slept on a friend’s couch.
Will the minister commit to looking into more boarding options to ensure that medical clients don’t get stranded and end up relying on others to get a place to sleep for the night?
The Department of Health is in continual discussions with Health Canada on NIHB coverage to make sure that our residents who have to seek medical treatment outside the territory are serviced appropriately.
Again I can commit that I will make sure that this topic gets on the agenda at the next meeting.
Mr. Mikkungwak: Mr. Speaker, there are facilities in Rankin Inlet, such as the Nanuq Lodge, which not only has a wheelchair accessible ramp but has wheelchair accessible rooms.
Will the minister consider entering into a multi-year standing offer agreement with the operators of such rooming facilities so that medical clients who are travelling always have a place to go?
I can’t speak to a specific piece of infrastructure, but what I can and have committed to is to raise this issue with Health Canada at our next discussion opportunity that we have, discussing coverage for NIHB medical travel patients.
At that time we will look at different options that may be available.
Question 515 – 4(3): Foster Parenting (Enook)
Mr. Speaker, last week I was asking questions to get clarification as to who is eligible to foster children that you can see in the Blues for October 31 in English on page 26, in the Inuktitut version on page 22.
Yesterday when the minister was being questioned by Mr. Mikkungwak, his response became obvious and he answered the same question I had asked before.
The first question I shall read is quoted from the Inuktitut Hansard on page 22, Monday, October 31.
Minister Mike stated in Inuktitut and part of it is written here and let me quote the response.
“For example, in Pond Inlet there was a child that was apprehended by Family Services.
They were taken care of by Family Services for a while before they could find a foster family outside the community because there were none available in the community. We have to make sure that the child is in a safe place.
They did that to make sure the child was kept in a safe place because there was no one available in the community.”
Firstly I want to ask this question, Mr. Speaker: when the Department of Family Services must care for a child, do they receive the same payment for the care of the child like foster care homes?
Yesterday when I responded to the question, I first want to explain that I was not prepared to make a response as I didn’t have the information readily available.
I subsequently took the question as notice, just for an example.
The result is that our social workers are now fully aware of this issue, especially the upper management officials in the Children and Family Services Division. They have provided a directive to their workers on the fact that they are not allowed to foster children.
Since they are public servants, there may be a conflict of interest. For that reason, we have provided this direction on the file.
For these reasons, social workers must place children in foster care because by law, they can’t care for the child themselves.
With respect to the payment issue for temporary care, I can’t answer that now if it would apply or not.
Another question I wish to ask is related to the example the minister provided and I will base my question on his response.
Furthermore, his response from the English version of the Blues for Monday, October 31, on page 26 was that if the child is Inuk, all efforts shall be undertaken to place them in an Inuit foster home.
Mr. Speaker, why was the decision made by a non-beneficiary social worker to care for that child when an Inuk social worker was available?
To provide some context, the social workers generally follow the regulatory processes, especially where a foster parent or home isn’t available in the communities.
When an available caretaker can’t be found, the social worker, regardless of whether they are Inuit or non-Inuit, must consider the child’s best interest, especially when housing them temporarily while they search for foster parents who will then care for this child they are placing into care.
With respect to his actual question related to being an Inuk social worker and the underlying reason, I will need to carefully review that matter due to its importance.
If a social worker is an Inuk and whether this is applicable to their duties or to another non-Inuk social worker, I should carefully conduct research on this prior to responding.
However, as per the minister’s response, which I quoted from the Blues, if a child is an Inuk, the priority should be placing them with Inuit foster families.
This seems counterproductive since the social worker ought to be familiar with the policy. It is a departmental policy that they use.
It seems as if no research is required since this is part of their documentation.
Now I will ask my last question.
With this being the language in the policy, I previously asked questions and was informed that in Pond Inlet, long-time foster homes and parents who have fostered many children were not even asked if they had room.
Why did the social worker care for the child when existing foster parents weren’t even asked about space?
With respect to his first question, I am glad that information is coming to light and I appreciate that as it was raised in other questions.
With regard to his first question, I responded to a question that was asked yesterday with the criteria needed to qualify as a foster parent so they can foster children once they get the certification.
A child would normally be placed in a foster home and this has been the preference by our workers.
When the child is to be placed in a foster home, they can also choose which foster home they would want to be placed in.
There are many factors that are included in this process and social workers follow the legislation pertinent to each case.
With respect to our practices, they are outlined in our regulations that Inuit cultural practices should be followed.
That is what I was referencing when I stated that in those cases, Inuit foster children should be placed with Inuit foster parents.
With respect to his supplementary question regarding foster parent lists for communities such as Pond Inlet, Arctic Bay, Pangnirtung, or anywhere foster parents are already responsible for fostering children, I will look into whether they are asked if they have space.
I understood the question he asked and I will have to look into it. I will commit to providing information to the member for Pond Inlet once I receive it via correspondence.
Tabled Document 203 – 4(3): MOU between Kitikmeot Community Futures Inc. and NBCC (Ell-Kanayuk)
Tabled Document 204 – 4(3): MOU between Atuqtuarvik Corporation and NBCC (Ell-Kanayuk)
Tabled Document 205 – 4(3): MOU between Baffin Business Development Corporation and NBCC (Ell-Kanayuk)
I am pleased to table the Memorandum of Understanding between (interpretation ends) Kitikmeot Futures Incorporated and the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation.
Mr. Speaker, I am also pleased to table the Memorandum of Understanding between the Atuqtuarvik Corporation and the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation.
Mr. Speaker, I am also pleased to table the Memorandum of Understanding between the Baffin Business Development Corporation and the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation.
Bills 20, 22, 23, and 24 with Mr. Enook in the Chair.
In accordance with the authority provided to me by Motion 20 – 4(3), the committee will stay in session until it reports itself out.
Good afternoon, Nunavummiut watching the televised proceedings and listening to the radio broadcast.
Mr. Chairman, we wish to continue with Bill 24 and commence with the review of the capital estimates for the Department of Justice, followed by the Department of Culture and Heritage.
If time permits, we will then proceed to the review of the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs, followed by the Legislative Assembly.
Bill 24 – Appropriation (Capital) Act, 2017-2018 – Justice – Consideration in Committee
We will be reviewing the capital estimates for the Department of Justice. Let me first ask Minister Peterson, do you have officials that you would like to bring to the witness table?
Yes, I have officials I would like at the witness table.
Minister Peterson would like to have officials with him at the witness table.
To my right is Deputy Minister William MacKay and to my left is Director of Corporate Services Ji Liu.
Welcome to the House, Mr. Liu and Mr. MacKay.
Hon. Keith Peterson: Mr. Chairman, I appear before the committee today to present the Department of Justice’s draft 2017-18 capital estimates. We are seeking approval of $1,512,000 for the Department of Justice’s capital expenditures for the 2017-18 fiscal year.
The department requests $812,000 in 2017-18 to put toward the Qikiqtani Correctional Healing Centre (QCHC) project.
The Qikiqtani Correctional Healing Centre project is planned expansions and remodel of the current Baffin Correctional Centre. The project is necessary to meet current and future corrections needs and to ensure a safe, modern facility for Nunavut offenders and correctional employees.
The Qikiqtani Correctional Healing Centre is a project submitted to the New Building Canada Fund. Under the Building Canada Fund guidelines, the Government of Canada funds 75 percent of a capital project and the territorial government funds the remaining 25 percent.
The requested funds are to meet the Government of Nunavut’s portion, 25 percent, of anticipated 2017-18 Qikiqtani Correctional Healing Centre project costs.
The Department of Justice is also requesting $700,000 for a number of important minor capital expenditures, including the replacement of four vehicles, the replacement of the flooring at the Nunavut Women’s Correctional Centre, the construction of a prefabricated garage at the Ilavut Centre in Kugluktuk, and the potential repair of some life safety systems at the Baffin Correctional Centre.
I will now take any questions from committee members.
Minister or I mean Mr. Joanasie.
I smile at you.
I am pleased to provide opening comments on behalf of the Standing Committee on Government Estimates and Operations concerning its review of the proposed 2017-18 Capital Estimates of the Department of Justice.
Members note that the department’s proposed capital budget for the 2017-18 fiscal year is $1,512,000.
The department’s capital budget for the 2016-17 fiscal year was $4.45 million.
Mr. Chairman, the department’s proposed 2017-18 capital estimates include $700,000 for its various small capital projects, which include a number of projects to upgrade and repair existing correctional facilities and to replace aging mobile equipment.
Mr. Chairman, in November of 2014 the Legislative Assembly approved $850,000 in capital funding for the department to undertake renovations at the Baffin Correctional Centre to address fire safety concerns at the facility.
The department has indicated that that this funding was used for an emergency mould remediation project at the Baffin Correctional Centre.
The standing committee recognizes that this emergency project was necessary to ensure the health and safety of inmates and employees of the Baffin Correctional Centre.
Mr. Chairman, the department’s proposed 2017-18 capital estimates include $812,000 for the design phase of its addition and renovations project at the Baffin Correctional Centre.
Members recognize that this project has been submitted for funding under the New Building Canada Plan. Members encourage the minister to provide regular updates on the status of this project.
Mr. Chairman, the department’s approved 2016-17 capital estimates included $1 million in funding for renovations to the Nunavut Justice Centre.
The department has indicated that it planned to undertake renovations at the Nunavut Justice Centre in two phases.
Members look forward to receiving regular updates on the status of this project.
On June 1, 2015 the Standing Committee on the Oversight of Government Operations and Public Accounts presented to the Legislative Assembly its report on its May 2015 hearings on the Auditor General of Canada’s 2015 report to the Legislative Assembly on corrections in Nunavut.
On October 29, 2015 the minister tabled the department’s formal response to the standing committee’s report titled, “Reviewing the 2015 Auditor General Report on Corrections in Nunavut.”
The standing committee applauds the department for the detailed information that it provided in its lengthy formal response.
Mr. Chairman, in its October 29, 2015 formal response, the department provided detailed information on its plans to address a number of code deficiencies and facility planning concerns that were raised in the standing committee’s report.
The department also committed to preparing its first annual report on correctional services in Nunavut for tabling in the Legislative Assembly during the current fall sitting.
Members look forward to reviewing this report.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my opening comments on the proposed 2017-18 Capital Estimates of the Department of Justice.
There being none, we will start with the page-by-page review beginning with page E-3.
It reads, Justice.
Your proposed 2017-18 capital estimates include $812,000 for the renovation project for the Qikiqtani Correctional Healing Centre, currently known as the Baffin Correctional Centre.
Information provided by your department indicates that this project will include significant renovations to the current Baffin Correctional Centre.
Can you indicate where your department plans to house the inmates that are currently placed in the facility during the construction phase of this project?
Before I go to Minister Peterson, please indicate if you have questions on a specific page so that your names can be added to the list.
The plan is to construct the two-storey maximum-security part of the project first and then we will move our inmates to that part, and then renovate the existing Baffin Correctional Centre phase.
Mr. Rumbolt: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. According to its five-year capital plan your department anticipates that it will allocate a total of $19 million in capital funding to the proposed renovation and addition project at the Baffin Correctional Centre for the next five years.
If approved, can you provide a timeline by which your department plans to begin and complete construction of this project?
Yes, we could provide the timeline.
I believe the current plan is to, just to give a rough idea, do the design in 2018 and then begin an RFP to award construction to begin in 2019, and completion some time in 2021.
Also information provided by your department indicates that the proposed renovation and addition project for the Baffin Correctional Centre would allow Nunavut to meet the requirements for 112 beds five years after construction and be expandable to meet the long-term needs of 127 beds in the year 2030.
Can you clarify how this project will be expandable to meet Nunavut’s long-term needs for 127 correctional beds?
The plan right now would be to add 56 maximum-security beds and that would be a portion of the two-storey phase, and then we would renovate the existing facility and that would provide 56 medium-security beds.
Built into the overall project would be the ability or capacity to add those extra beds with that.
That would be over the ensuing years, a decade, so it’s sort of like an ability to expand.
Your department’s proposed 2017-18 capital estimates include $812,000 for the renovation project at the Baffin Correctional Centre. Information provided by your department indicates that this project is eligible for third party funding under the New Building Canada Fund.
Your department also indicates that the business case for this project was sent to Infrastructure Canada on April 13.
I’m looking to see if you can confirm if this project has received final approval or funding under the New Building Canada Fund and, if so, has Infrastructure Canada committed to funding 75 percent of the project costs.
I just want to remind everyone not to speak too quickly in respect of the interpreters and so everyone will understand.
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and also so I could keep track of the questions.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank Ms. Angnakak for the question.
This has been a project that has been long in development. I believe it began in 2014 and then it came to the Financial Management Board.
It was one of the projects that we approved as a high priority project to submit to Infrastructure Canada.
They gave it a preliminary review.
They asked us earlier this year to send them the detailed business plan, which was a positive sign.
They have reviewed it. There was a visitor who came up or was in town a month or two ago who actually had an opportunity to sit with our officials and go over it, and I believe she took tour out there.
Currently we have positive indications that the project will receive approval.
We can’t state that it has been approved until the Treasury Board of Canada meets. Their schedule, I think, is November 24.
I don’t know what the process is there, but we’re hopeful that when they do review it, they will okay it.
When they review it on November 24, how long do you think you will have to wait before you find out if you got approval or not?
What is the usual process time-wise?
I don’t have details of when we would be notified, but I expect it to be within four to seven work days that we will be notified that it is approved.
I’m going on to something else.
In its October 29, 2015 response, your department indicated that security requires that inmates in a correctional facility must be separated into a number of categories, including remand, sentence, high-security, disciplinary protective segregation, mental health, and medical isolation.
Can you confirm if the renovations to the Baffin Correctional Centre will provide space for these types of separation of inmates?
Although I can answer the question, I’m going to ask if I can bring in another witness who has worked on this project almost daily since two or three years ago. I can bring another witness if that’s okay with you, Mr. Chairman.
The minister is asking for another staff member to come to the witness table. Do you agree?
Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the new witness to the table and escort the other witness out.
Minister Peterson, please introduce the new witness.
The new witness is Chris Stewart. He is the manager of capital and special projects.