EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Sometimes medical travel clients are arriving in Winnipeg well after midnight. Some even miss appointments due to airline slowness. It is directly related to having only one airline.
Can the minister look at fixing this problem to make it better for people going south on medical travel?
I want my fellow member and all of you to know and be aware that I have directed my staff to explore ways to improve any parts of the medical travel system and those on contract to us.
The system has to adapt for the better where identified.
I have wanted an open dialogue for improvements to happen and an atmosphere of openness.
This is not finished and we will see how things are improving over time.
My last question has been answered, but I will ask whether the minister can comment as to the upcoming renewal of these contracts for medical travel patients. When does this process start?
The agreement was affirmed last year, it is going to end in August this year, and we have an option to renew it for another year.
After talking to the airlines, we will explain what is going to happen, but before the contract actually expires, I can’t really get into what is going to happen.
We would have to talk with the airlines first and we know that the prices will increase. Those are some of the things we will have to consider as a government.
Question 437 – 4(2): Office of the Fire Marshal (Enook)
Good afternoon to the people of Pond Inlet and fellow residents of Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Community and Government Services, whose department is responsible for the Office of the Fire Marshal.
As the minister is aware, one of the government’s assistant fire marshal positions is located in Pond Inlet. Last summer, the minister advised me that the department was in the process of recruiting for the position.
Can the minister update me today on the status of filling the assistant fire marshal position in Pond Inlet? Have you hired someone yet?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. People of Chesterfield Inlet, Rankin Inlet, and Nunavut, as well as my colleagues, it is great that I am able to come back.
When you miss one day, it seems like you are missing a lot.
In regard to the question, there is a job advertisement out there, but we haven’t hired anyone yet.
The correspondence I received from the minister about this issue arrived on August 26 of last year.
It states that this position is currently under competition at this time. The letter states that and I received this in August 26 of last summer.
Your response just now was that the process to hire the person is still underway, if I understood your response.
Can the minister explain why it has been taking so long to fill this vital position?
The Office of the Fire Marshal has vacancies in their division and they are undermanned. The vacant position the member is referring to is in Pond Inlet and we face the same situation in Rankin Inlet.
They tried to revamp the job description. However, as per my earlier response, the advertisements are out in the public realm. If applicants will be submitting their resumés, we hope to have this completed in a faster manner.
That is added to our list of expectations.
Nonetheless, I want to ask this question. The 2013 annual report of the Office of the Fire Marshal was tabled in the Legislative Assembly on October 22, 2014.
The report indicated that here were a total of 16 fires in Pond Inlet.
This illustrates the importance of training particularly for our volunteer fire departments.
I would like to ask the minister if he can indicate when a general level firefighting course will next be offered in Pond Inlet.
Every year, we try to hold that kind of course during spring and summer.
People from the communities, some of whom are fire chiefs and some who are regular firefighters, would be sent out for training.
For example, if they go to a course in Iqaluit, the ones who took that course would, in turn, train their fellow firefighters in their communities.
However, if firefighters in other communities specifically request for training courses, we can take that into consideration.
Question 438 – 4(2): Coral Harbour’s Municipal Garages (Mapsalak)
Mr. Mapsalak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you for recognizing me again.
It is important that municipal vehicles are stored and maintained properly to ensure the delivery of essential services.
That being said, Coral Harbour’s parking garages are extremely overcrowded and there is no room to house some of their equipment.
When it is extremely cold outside, it is especially hard on that equipment.
Can the minister indicate, as it is obvious Nunavummiut watch the proceedings, how his department is assisting the municipalities to address this issue and provide more support for hamlets to get extra garage space?
Indeed, I can only reiterate my usual response, although I don’t like repeating it.
Nonetheless, the communities have to submit a request through the process.
When they use the capital planning process to identify their needs, there is an alternative. When our departmental officials visit the communities, they can also look at these issues.
I will ask this question in English. (interpretation ends) Coral Harbour’s 2011 sustainability plan recommends that this issue be addressed in the long term by constructing a new five-bay parking garage in the community.
Will the minister commit to allocating funds under of the government’s capital budget for the construction of a new parking garage in Coral Harbour?
Once we receive a request from a community, it goes into the Nunavut community sustainability committee. Based on the recommendation of that committee, then we would consider funding for a project. (interpretation) Thank you.
It looks like this plan had been looked at and it was left behind. I go there and I see it myself. Some of their vehicles have to be outside because the garage is so full.
Can the minister indicate to the hamlet in the near future that he will direct his staff to look into the matter?
The Nunavut sustainability committee will look into that and after they do the work, I will inform the House.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. Oral Questions. Member for Iqaluit-Tasiluk, Mr. Hickes.
Question 439 – 4(2): Building Canada Fund Committee Membership (Hickes)
I have some follow-up questions to the Minister of Community and Government Services from some questions that I had asked on Monday.
Mr. Speaker, I was asking some questions regarding the Building Canada Fund and going over the Blues, I would like to get some further clarification and maybe a little bit more detail on some of the questions I had asked then.
In one of the responses when I was asking about how the department ranks and prioritizes infrastructure projects that are submitted under the New Building Canada Fund, he had mentioned that there is a committee of departmental staff and members from outside the department.
I was wondering if the minister would be able to elaborate a little on the membership of that committee.
As I mentioned previously, the Interdepartmental Committee on Capital Planning reviews a list of projects that fall under the Building Canada Fund eligibility criteria listing.
All the projects are ranked and prioritized based on the GN’s approved ranking criteria. I’ll just give you a few examples of what these are.
For example, health and safety is rated at 40 percent; program and services at 35 percent; and sustainability and economic factors at 25 percent.
The allocation of funding is based on highest points scored during the evaluation process. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The minister answered a portion of my second question, but I would like to go back to my first question, please, and if the minister would be able to tell me who is on the committee from departmental staff and again, like I said, from members outside of the department.
Who and how many make up that committee?
I do have that information.
The committee is made up of five members from the Interdepartmental Committee on Capital Planning, two representatives from Community and Government Services, two representatives from Finance, and one representative from Education.
Those are the ones that I can list off at this point. (interpretation) Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, within the criteria that the minister just spoke to with the different percentages, in his response on Monday, he said that all departments have submitted a list of projects for consideration in the New Building Canada Fund and that these projects have been ranked and prioritized.
Now that I’m aware of what criteria and rating that the ranking gets, one of the questions I have is that the submissions come from different government departments. I was wondering how the department involves local organizations and municipalities when determining projects that are going to be submitted under the New Building Canada Fund.
I’m not sure if I’m going to be able to properly respond to that question.
I’m assuming he is asking about projects submitted outside of the government, for example, let’s say, from an Inuit organization.
We assume that whoever submits those projects for consideration already have a committee or working group anyway to determine which projects they want to submit.
We take that at face value that they have been approved by that committee or that group. (interpretation) Thank you.
Question 440 – 4(2): Visitation of Children in Care (Shooyook)
Mr. Speaker, I have an understanding about parents whose children have been apprehended by social services.
In cases of abuse occurring in the household, the child is sent out to another community.
This can lead to stressful situations for the parents, who want to see their apprehended children in the other community.
What types of support services are available for those families with apprehended children?
Hon. Jeannie Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also thank my colleague for asking about this issue.
If they have gone through the court system where the family receives conditions that have to be followed, then those conditions apply.
However, if the apprehended child is receiving treatment or other services through the system, then the parents have visitation rights with their child where they can visit twice in one year.
Mr. Shooyook (interpretation): Thank you for responding to my question.
I still have another question to ask.
The reason I speak to this issue is to gain a clear understanding of this wording used to define a household.
Sometimes the adolescents ranging from age 13 to 16 are the victims of abuse within their homes, and it is a very difficult situation when the abuse is discovered.
The example of a court case where the abuser is held in remand or not allowed to see the victim, in most cases, they are sent out to another community.
This is the current practice, which is why I ask if support services are provided.
If the lawyers and the court system that is used up here to deal with these cases have set conditions, our department has to acquiesce to the conditions since these are legal conditions that have to be followed, although we provide the services.
The conditions are all different and we can’t ask for a generic condition, but we can only follow the conditions and that is the only way we can provide assistance.
I am thankful for the clear and understandable response.
Instances like these are very difficult to experience, such as the condition to keep the child out of the community for a year.
There is a case here and the parent requested my assistance to pay for their ticket to visit their child.
This occurred during our last session and I paid for the parent’s ticket to visit their child.
At that time, I hadn’t requested any information about services available to the parents, but I do understand the services are available now. The parent wanted to have his airfare paid again, but I didn’t comply with that request.
That is why I wanted to ask about whether or not services are provided to parents in those situations. Your response was very clear, leading to my understanding of the issue, so I thank you for that.
Question 441 – 4(2): Building Canada Fund Priorities (Hickes)
I would like to, for one, clarify the response that I got from the Minister of Community and Government Services on the last one and continue on with a similar but different line of questioning.
When municipalities get together and submit a list of priorities of infrastructure projects and they submit it to the Department of Community and Government Services and then different government departments submit their list of infrastructure requests to the Department of Community and Government Services, how are those projects amalgamated and go through the ranking process in a weighting?
Are the municipal organizations and the Inuit organizations at the same level as departmental requests or is there a separation? How is that ranking accomplished?
From my understanding, when the requests are given to our department, we treat them all the same.
When a list of projects is submitted to the Department of Community and Government Services and it falls under the New Building Canada Fund allocation or submission criteria is the word I was looking for, how then is it decided on which of those projects are actually going to be submitted to the federal government on an application for funding basis?
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) When the committees are determining on the ranking here, I previously mentioned some of the criteria that are used, and also most importantly is that this committee will determine on the most needs assessment as well. (interpretation) Thank you.
With the infrastructure needs in Nunavut, I don’t envy that job of deciding what is the highest of priorities.
I’m just going to go specifically to the portion of the community that I represent here in Iqaluit.
The other day, I had asked the minister to provide a list of projects in Iqaluit that have been submitted for funding under the Building Canada Fund.
In the response, he stated that there were a number of projects being reviewed by the federal government and he wasn’t able to provide me with the level of detail at that time.
I was wondering, since that question on Monday, if the minister has been able to get a list of the projects that have been applied for specifically for Iqaluit and the nature of those projects.
Hon. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) With respect to his specific question to the application from the City of Iqaluit, again I cannot give that information at this point because, as I mentioned earlier, we are still waiting for approval from the federal government on all of these projects.
Until such time as I have that approval, I’m unable to provide that information at this point. (interpretation) Thank you.
Tabled Document 116 – 4(2): Public Service Code of Values and Ethics (Peterson)
I am pleased to table the Nunavut Public Service Code of Values and Ethics. I encourage all Government of Nunavut and public agency employees to read them.
Bill 21 – An Act to Amend the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act, the Legislative Assembly Retiring Allowances Act and the Supplementary Retiring Allowances Act – Notice
I give notice that on Friday, March 13, 2015, I will move that Bill 21, An Act to Amend the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act, the Legislative Assembly Retiring Allowances Act and the Supplementary Retiring Allowances Act, be read for the first time.
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters. Bills 14, 15, 16, and 18 with Mr. Enook in the Chair.
>>House recessed at 15:04 and Committee resumed at 15:41
In Committee of the Whole, we have the following items to deal with: Bills 14, 15, 16, and Bill 18.
We wish to continue with the review of the 2015-16 Main Estimates of the Department of Economic Development and Transportation, followed by Nunavut Arctic College, followed by the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs and, if time permits, the Department of Environment.
Are we in agreement that we first deal with the main estimates for the Department of Economic Development and Transportation?
Chairman (interpretation): Are you in agreement that the Hon. Minister’s officials can go to the witness table?
Minister Ell, for the record, please introduce your witnesses.
To my right is the Deputy Minister of Economic Development, Pauloosie Suvega, and to my left is Jim Stevens, Assistant Deputy Minister of Transportation.
Mr. Suvega and Mr. Stevens, welcome to the Chamber.
We left off on page K-5.
Are there any questions to that page?
Mr. Akoak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Hon. Minister, staff, all members, and Nunavummiutat.
My first question is: when you are promoting tourism, how do you promote tourism?
Do you go to each community of Nunavut or are you just sending flyers to each community and promoting it that way?
That would be my first question.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Akoak.
The Department of Economic Development works closely with Nunavut Tourism regarding their goals, Sivumut Abluqta, and the Tunngasaiji strategy.
Nunavut Tourism would like to deal with that so that they can make plans for the future.
There are many aspects to the plan and work outlined.
Due to this, some of the funds we are requesting and if you want to question it, it will show what Nunavut Tourism is doing for Nunavut in all aspects of tourism.
It involves phone and computer or even going to communities to train following the plans set for us.
In your opening statement yesterday, you said that the increase of contributions to tourism and culture total up to $3.8 million, an addition from last year from $1.8 million.
You said that you just promote tourism by telephone and stuff like that. Do you not send people to each community to educate or to set up something for tourism into the communities?
I think there are miscommunications maybe through interpretation.
I did say that depending on whether it’s staff from Nunavut Tourism or staff from Economic Development, we do travel to communities to either facilitate training for the industry or assist in providing visitor information and services, as well as marketing Nunavut as a tourist destination, along with other things on the telephone, Internet, video links, and what have you.
With the increase in funding, will we now be sending people into the communities more often?
The increase in funding is to do several things. It is to undertake the priorities that are identified in the Nunavut tourism strategy to help them build capacity and strengthen that industry.
As members know, tourism has been a difficult time for them in Canada, with GDP revenues that have fallen while tourism in other countries has increased. The Nunavut tourism industry has had a similar impact.
Nunavut Tourism has not had an increase in the last four years and this increase in funding would allow for Nunavut Tourism to hire a training coordinator position that would work directly with operators and communities to identify training needs and major gaps in training available to determine available funding sources that they could access.
They would help the tourism industry identify other sources of funding other than government that they could access, such as the regional Inuit organizations or IIBAs that are set with mining companies, and work with them for their desired training needs.
They would also hire a conference and meeting recruiter that would attract meetings and conferences to communities throughout Nunavut by preparing an inventory of each of the communities’ accommodations and meeting spaces. They would not do the conferencing, but they would try to provide ways in which those conferences, meetings, and retreats can go to more or all the Nunavut communities.
The funding would also undertake enhanced development activities, including a broad-based awareness campaign focusing on Nunavut, its many unique attributes, products, and services, and providing assistance to Nunavut operators to develop their tourism product line and packages.
You can do that in one of two ways: having a group from the tourist industry go to a specific location or with staff and other members going to them. It depends on the situation and the topic.
Does the Government of Nunavut have a strategy on how to link the tourism industry towards the Franklin find for Gjoa Haven?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Minister Ell.
I’ll ask my Deputy Minister, Mr. Suvega, to respond to that question.
Mr. Suvega: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. With the recent discovery, it is critical that we have conversations with many of the jurisdictional partners; federal departments, agencies, Inuit organizations, the community, the tourism industry, of course as well, to plan and prepare in going forward.
We are aware that Parks Canada and other federal departments will be going in and assessing the site itself further, but we need to have much more comprehensive discussions with these various agencies on how we best go forward to plan and mitigate how some of these impacts might be.
More importantly, we would also like to hear from the community on what they wish to see, what they want to see, and how they would feel about it.
I was just going to ask if you’re going to be in contact with the hamlet. Also, is this funding from CanNor and how will the funding be linked with the Franklin tourism program or industry?
The joint funding is meant to address a lot of tourism-related activities.
Some of them may be directed towards this, but not in its entirety. Some of them will be directed towards this activity and there are a variety of other things that we’re trying to go after with this joint funding.
I welcome the minister and her officials.
I have some questions on the food distribution program.
It states that $1,868,000 is geared toward this program.
Was the entire budget of the program spent last year?
The entire budget was not spent.
Further, if the minister can elaborate on how many proposals the department receives for this amount listed here at $1,868,000. Has her department had to decline any proposals?
The response I am providing only references parts of the question related to the expenditures. I will use an example from the budget for fiscal year 2013-14.
There was a new community freezer in Kugaaruk with a total cost of approximately $206,400.
Igloolik also received a new community freezer with a total cost of $391,486. For Rankin Inlet’s request for a community freezer, the feasibility study ended up costing $24,010.
As to the amounts not expended, perhaps my deputy minister can provide that level of detail.
If you are able to elaborate on the details, Mr. Suvega.
Based on the information we have on the proposals, there haven’t been any denials.
Nonetheless, there are many communities that have identified the need, but they haven’t been able to forward their proposals to our department.
I also thank the official for answering that question.
In looking at the departmental business plan for 2015-18, the department identifies that the Country Food Distribution Program has been operating smoothly within Nunavut.
Perhaps you could provide a breakdown of the communities that benefited from this fund. Can this information be provided to us, Mr. Chairman?
I also thank my colleague for asking about that issue.
Perhaps through your role as the Chairman, we can provide that information at a later date once the report has been compiled. We can’t provide it now, but once the information is ready, we can provide it to the members.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. We will expect that information when it’s ready.
Mr. Joanasie (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Indeed, we will welcome that information that the minister will provide as it will assist us to understand the issues.
Another question relates to whether or not this issue has been taken into consideration in light of the Baffin Island caribou moratorium. As an example, I wonder if this can be your first priority in the Baffin region communities to provide funding to procure country foods.
Can the department take this idea into consideration?