EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Members agree with the Maligarnit Qimmirrujiit Commissioners’ view that there is presently much room for improvement in how this service is made available and delivered to the residents of Nunavut.
Committee members encourage the Department of Health and Social Services to carefully review the recommendations in Maligarnit Qimmirrujiit First Report specifically as they relate to the current administration of the Vital Statistics Act.
The third area of concern relates to the implementation of Bill 9.
The Committee understands that if Bill 9 were implemented, one position would be transferred from the Department of Justice to the Vital Statistics section of the Department of Health and Social Services.
But this will not be sufficient to make the system operational.
In order to deliver the change of name service at the community level, staff such as social workers or nurses will require training to take on this task on top of their existing workloads.
Where other agencies such as Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated or Regional Inuit Organizations may agree to provide community level support in this process, they too will require training and resources.
The Committee is concerned that the Department of Health and Social Services does not have resources to spare at this time to take on this process.
The Department of Health and Social Services already faces the struggle of delivering mandated services within its allocated budget.
It is for this reason that Committee Members are of the view that without the certainty of additional funding being allocated, adopting Bill 9 at this time could cause additional strain on the Department of Health and Social Services.
Based on the Committee’s review of the content of submissions received, Members do not feel that that they can support Bill 9 in its current form.
While the Committee recognizes that we are all impatient for made-in-Nunavut changes that will truly reflect the needs and aspirations of Nunavummiut, Members feel that it would be preferable to make changes in the most comprehensive manner possible, rather than settling for short-term fixes on a piecemeal basis.
The Committee supports the idea of simplifying the process for people wishing to change their name.
The Committee recommends that the process for correcting erroneous identity-related information as well as the change of name process, be consolidated under a single piece of legislation under the authority of the Registrar of Vital Statistics.
The Committee further recommends that the process for verifying related documentation be more flexible and that application forms be simplified so that all personal identity details can be recorded on one single form.
The Committee recommends that Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit be incorporated into the legislation, such as giving people the ability to register their names in Inuktitut syllabics as well as in English (Roman) orthography.
The Committee recommends that any new legislation be accompanied by an extensive public information campaign to fully inform Nunavut residents of the system to change names and make corrections to their identity information.
The Committee recommends that the Government support an increase in budget allocation for the Department of Health and Social Services to be able to implement the new identity legislation when it comes forward.
The Committee recommends that the Department of Health and Social Services improve the administration of the current process for correcting errors in birth certificates (such as birth date, gender, spelling of names) as provided for under the Vital Statistics Act.
The Committee recommends that the Government co-operate with organizations such as NTI or Regional Inuit Organizations to support individuals in getting their names changed on documentation originating in other jurisdictions.
The Committee recommends that the Government co-operate with those in other jurisdictions, especially in the NWT, Manitoba, Ontario and Quebec, where many Nunavut residents are born, to consider waiving fees relating to the correction of errors in names.
The Committee recommends that the Department of Health and Social Services give further consideration to the issue of repatriating records of individuals who were born in what is now Nunavut from the NWT.
The Committee understands that this would be an irregular process between jurisdictions, however, Members are of the view that with adequate political energy and motivation, the Government could succeed.
For the reasons outlined above, Members of the Standing Committee on Health and Education do not support the adoption of Bill 9 - Change of Name Act 2001.
The Committee feels that the Bill should be permitted to fall off the order paper.
Members applaud the initiative of the Department of Health and Social Services in making this first attempt and suggest that the Department consider the above recommendations and work to introduce a new statute.
The Committee looks forward to reviewing a new and improved Bill in the near future.
Before we continue with item 12, I would just like to recognize one of my constituents, a new constituent of mine from Arviat.
David Akoak, who is the new Vice-President for the Housing Corporation, which is located in Arviat.
Tabled Document 043 - 1(5): WCB Annual Reports 1999 and 2000
I wish to table the following documents. Workers' Compensation Board Annual Report 1999/2000, 2000/2001.
Tabled Document 044 - 1(5): Legislative Assembly Retiring Allowances Fund
Tabled Document 045 - 1(5): Incremental Costs - Cambridge Bay Sitting May 2001
Members I have some documents that I wish to table.
I wish to table the audited financial statements of the Legislative Assembly Retiring Allowance Fund.
I would also like to table the incremental costs incurred by the Legislative Assembly specific to the May 2001 Cambridge Bay sitting.
Bill 12 Appropriation Act No. 1, 2002/2003, Bill 13, Supplementary Appropriation Act, No. 2, 2001/2002.
Minster's Statement 96 - 1(5), Ulaajuk School - The First of Many to Come.
The Committee of the Whole will have Mr. Iqaqrialu in the Chair.
Chairperson (Mr. Iqaqrialu) (interpretation): Thank you. I haven't seen you since last year as the Chairperson of Committee of the Whole and I am glad to be back.
I would now like to call the committee meeting to order.
We have the following items to deal with, Bill 12, Appropriation Act 1, Bill 13, Supplementary Appropriation Act 2 and Minister's Statement 96 - 1(5).
The committee would like to start with Bill 12. Capital Estimates for the Housing Corporation for Nunavut, 2002/2003.
Once the Housing Corporation is done, we would like to start off with Public Works & Services capital estimates for 2002/2003.
Are we in agreement to deal with Bill 12, Appropriation Act 2002/2003.
Housing Corporation's capital estimates will be dealt with and then Public Works & Services.
Mr. McLean as the Chairperson of the Standing Committee on Community Empowerment and Sustainable Development, would you proceed with your opening remarks.
Bill 12  - Appropriation Act No. 1, 2002/2003 – Consideration in Committee - Nunavut Housing Corporation
Mr. McLean: Ma'na Itsivautaq. As Chairman of the Standing Committee on Community Empowerment and Sustainable Development, I am pleased to be able to provide opening comments as we begin the review of the 2002-2003 capital estimates for the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Mr. Chairman, the Standing Committee had the opportunity in June to meet with the Minister responsible for the Nunavut Housing Corporation to review the draft 2002-2003 capital estimates.
The Standing Committee is pleased that housing remains a priority.
As the Minister of Finance stated in his fiscal update, housing accounts for over one quarter of planned capital expenditures.
However, regardless of current spending on public housing, it is clear that the housing situation in Nunavut remains in crisis.
Mr. Chairman, the Inuit Tapirisat of Canada recently released their Final Report of the Research and Consultation Project Concerning Inuit Housing Across Canada.
The report states that “the housing crisis has been widely cited as one of the key elements in the escalating levels of family violence, self-destructive acts, high school dropout rates, substance abuse, and overall decrease in physical health standards that have had such a devastating effect on Inuit communities.”
This echoes the Conference Board of Canada’s major report on Nunavut’s economy, which was tabled in this House in May.
It is clear that more must be done.
Given this situation, the Corporation’s work with NTI to present a united front in efforts to lobby the federal government is commendable, and the Committee would urge the corporation to continue with these efforts.
According to the Corporation’s own 2001-2002 business plan, the waiting list in August 2000 shows that 1,100 families are waiting for some form of housing assistance.
In addition, due to the number of youth between the ages of 14 and 18, the potential demand for housing will increase by approximately 260 homes per year over the next five years.
Increased funding is key to building much-needed public housing.
The Committee was pleased to see the Minister following recommendations to attend national conferences on housing and noted the Minister’s attendance at the Federal-Provincial-Territorial Meeting of Ministers responsible for Housing in London, Ontario, this August.
At that meeting, it was agreed that Ministers would work on an affordable housing program.
Mr. Chairman, the Committee was also noted that the Housing Corporation addressed concerns regarding the allocation of public housing by distributing new allocations more evenly. However, we remain concerned that this is the second year that will pass with some communities not seeing a single new public housing unit or retrofit.
As Members will recall, in the fiscal update, the Minister of Finance mentioned one-time funding. It is the suggestion of the Committee that the Nunavut Housing Corporation utilize one-time funding to build housing in those communities that have not seen any new construction for the last two years.
In addition, the Committee is looking forward to seeing plans for the program to provide public housing tenants the opportunity to purchase their units.
This program has definite potential but the Committee has identified a concern.
The possibility exists that those tenants who are capable of purchasing a public housing unit will get the most desirable units and those who are unable to purchase will end up in the least desirable units.
For this reason, the Committee is looking forward to reviewing this initiative prior to its introduction.
The Committee is also looking forward to seeing the final report on the Rent Scale Review.
As Members are aware, the GN has embarked on a government-wide program review.
The Committee hopes that worthwhile initiatives are not stalled until that review is complete.
Mr. Chairman, the Standing Committee would urge the Nunavut Housing Corporation to bring forward their new programs and projects in a timely fashion so that they can be implemented to improve the current housing situation in Nunavut.
That concludes my comments on the capital estimates of the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Individual Members may wish to raise questions or make comments.
The Minister Responsible for the Housing Corporation already made her opening comments.
You may go to the witness table with your officials.
Sergeant-At-Arms escort the officials in please.
Thank you, welcome to the witness table Madame Minister.
To my right Pam Hine is the President of the Nunavut Housing Corporation and to my left David Akoak the Vice-President.
Also to my left working on policy and finances, Chris D'Arcy.
Before we proceed with questions, do members have any general comments.
My general comments will be that we are going into our third fiscal year in housing and we haven't seen much of an increase in the budget for housing.
Every year, we seem to have a surplus in the government as a whole.
For some reason, the department that needs it most doesn't get much of a boost from the surplus.
To me that's a tragedy, because I think we are losing pace with the growth in Nunavut in regards to housing.
It is not because the minister's not concerned about it, I think she is very actively pursuing trying to get as many units built in Nunavut as she can.
I think her department is trying to be innovative in trying to bring units forward, whether they are leased from the private sector or she is getting into joint ventures.
The stats that we always seem to get is that we need 1,000 units or 2,000 units and it was nice to recently hear that the Inuit Tapirisat of Canada have brought it to the forefront also.
I am sure the minister will be working with ITC in trying to champion the cause for housing.
My concern is like I said earlier that we seem to be in a surplus situation and I recently did a tour of 13 communities in Nunavut under the Nunavut Tourism review and I made it a point to walk through the communities to look at the state of housing in the communities.
I did that as Chairperson of the Standing Committee. I noticed that a lot of the houses, through no fault of the local housing associations, are starting to deteriorate.
There are a lot of windows in older units that need to be replaced, the siding on them seems to be deteriorating and I know the local housing associations have to work with their budgeted expenses.
So my only comment on that is that I’m hoping at the end of this session, on this department that we'll make a motion to try to increase the minister’s budget in housing.
Maybe look at doing a retrofit program next summer, because like I said earlier I’m starting to see housing deteriorate and the retrofit program is a very successful program.
It seems to me when I was in one community there were four or five local people putting in windows and doors in one community and they were very happy about doing it. That updates all those older units and it’s much cheaper, and it doesn’t increase the O & M of the Housing Corporation overall. So that's just my opening comments and I’m hoping the Finance Minister will be a little bit more receptive in spending some more money on the Housing Corporation and I know that the finance Minister and the Housing Minister are saying well it’s a cabinet decision and there’s other priorities involved in the government.
But we said this from day one of April 1999 that housing is the number one priority in Nunavut and we as a government are we going to start recognising that we have to do more in our communities with housing.
So that’s my opening comments and I’m not reading from prepared text today, it's just that I’m hoping we’ll start looking at more units in Nunavut.
It doesn’t cost O & M to fix up units.
Those are my opening comments Mr. Chairman and I would like to ask some questions.
Questions. Mr. McLean.
I’ll ask this one question now and get it over with because it's been a question I’ve wanted to ask for a while. In our draft allocation of housing units in June, and I hate to refer to a draft allocation when the allocation we actually got was our main estimates.
How is the department going about the allocation of housing units.
In regards to building the houses and how they are allocated to the communities, this will be overviewed by Pam Hine, I’ll give the mic to Pam but what we usually look for is the number of houses in each community and how many individuals are living in each house.
We concentrate mostly and allocate houses to the communities where there is the most overcrowding.
We first look at how many houses are built in each community and see how many individuals are living per house, then we base the allocation on the most overcrowded communities.
(interpretation ends) I’m going to ask Pam to elaborate more on my comments.
I think it's a very fair process and I know the staff and housing managers have talked about allocation of units and it's an easy way that we tried to address the issue and it's very clean and fair across the territory. I’ll ask Pam to elaborate more on the allocation of units.
Ms. Hine: Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The minister actually gave a very good explanation and I am not sure how much I can elaborate on what she has already said.
We realize that there is need in all communities in Nunavut for housing. But to determine the communities in most need, we do look at the number of public housing units in that community and the number of tenants living in those public housing units.
We come up with a ratio, the number of people in units, to determine the amount of need. We use this method to help determine the overcrowding situation.
With that allocation we then allocate our units.
Any community that has more than four to eight people per unit, will receive four units.  Any community that has more than four to eight people per unit, will receive four units.
Any community that has more than three people per unit will receive two units and it continues going down that list until we basically run out of money.
I don’t think there’s much more that I can elaborate on the process of this department that Minister Thompson hasn't already stated.
Mr. Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Ms. Hine.
Mr. McLean: That’s a good answer.
I guess it’s based on numbers.
The other question I want to ask in regards to M & I retrofits.
A community may have enough houses and I don’t want to start talking about my community.
But the community may be lower on the list of housing needs than another community that’s at the top of the list.
And like I was saying earlier in my statements when I visited certain communities in Nunavut when I was doing my tourism consultations I noticed that there’s a large number of houses deteriorating that haven’t seen much M & I work.
And I come from a community that the reason the community does have a lot of housing units is because they were a little crafty years ago by not writing off units.
They were told once a unit lives its usual lifespan they could write it off.
So what’s happening in communities like mine now we’ve got about forty units that should have been written off and destroyed over the last ten years.
But through other various programs the Municipality and the Housing Corporation would be able to keep them sort of maintained to a liveable standard.
But I know these units now are past the stage in life where they’re liveable. Like they’re not much more than two-by-four walls and the windows are forty and fifty years old with single panes.
I have forty or fifty units in the community like that.
But they're on the block of housing that is in the numbers.
And my concern is that with the way that the M & I allocation is, that these units are not getting the attention they need.
And we know what happens when people live in units that are thirty or forty years old that haven’t been fixed up.
There are old doors and windows and stuff like that.
So, on the allocation of M & I dollars, is it based on the condition ratings for each community or is it based on the per capita of housing for the size of the community.
It’s based on the condition ratings of the community in consultation with the Local Housing Organizations.
It’s nice to see that’s been fairly done based on the condition rating of houses and things like that.
My next question is in regards to housing programs.
There’s a fifteen thousand dollar down payment program if somebody is wanting to buy an existing unit in a community and there’s twenty five thousand dollars available for somebody that wants to build a new unit.
And I don’t know how successful that has been.
Has the money that’s been allocated for this program been used up to date.
I know that this program has been successful.
I’ll ask Ms. Hine to give you the proper figures on that.
For this year we have approved twenty eight down payment assistance programs to purchase existing units and seven down payment assistant program applications to construct new buildings.
So it has been successful and there is some budget still remaining in that allocation.
How many units was the budget set for and did we use it and how much money is left of the program.
I made a gesture that I would like Ms. Hine to answer the question.
In our corporation we're block funded so the money that was set aside for homeownership, which is two million dollars a year, is used for all homeownership applications. We don’t put line by line items for each program because with homeownership it's very hard to actually try to predict the number of applications that we will receive for one program or another.
So the money is at the district level and at the district they co-ordinate to deliver the programs and we try to give priority. If it’s to buy a house, we try to give that priority and if it’s a number of applications that are actually looking for a renovation programs.
So it's a little different than a department but the 2 million dollars that is used for homeownership will be used for homeownership and we will try to help as many applicants as possible with those programs.
That’s 35 units through both programs that's an average, I am just throwing this out, 200 thousand dollars a unit so that’s, in 600 thousand dollars worth of grants generated 7 million dollars worth of homes, homeowner sales which I think is great. Like I say constant turnover of houses is not so good but bringing on 35 extra homeowners in Nunavut at 7 million dollars of sales is a good start.
Does the minister anticipate that if they raise the minimum level from 15 thousand to 25 thousand for purchasing an existing unit and say 40 thousand for building a new unit would she consider this if she can afford it.
I would consider that, we would have to go through the process of Cabinet Members and so on but I would certainly consider that.
I just have a few more questions, and I will give everybody else a chance.
On the thinking of the people living in public housing and then being able to purchase the unit, I see that as a good sign.
But then there’s the down side of it that people will try to buy the newer units and you know that will cause a deterioration in housing standards for the less fortunate people that can’t afford to buy a unit or don’t have the education to get the job, to be able to get into the job market to purchase the unit.
How’s this program going so far, could you update the committee on that.
I know the officials of my department have been talking about this with the LHO managers and the stakeholders and there have been people interested in buying the homes that they’ve been renting for years and years. That’s throwing the money out the window when you are renting, that’s sort of the attitude of some people.
It’s better to invest in a home that you have been staying in and we haven’t gotten to the final stages yet on this option, it’s just one of the options that I’ve been thinking about because it’s what the communities have been telling me. I know that two years ago, some communities were saying that it wouldn’t be a good idea if the government was to sell the units they were renting.
I don't believe the officials have finalized anything yet, we’re in the first stages of trying to come up with different ways of doing this program.
I can ask Pam to give us more details on the status of that.
I mean at this time it’s just one of the options to get more houses on the ground.
To get more houses into those communities if we were to sell those units.
So Mr. Chairman, if you will allow me I can pass the microphone to Ms. Hine.
This program.
We have done a lot of thinking on this program and we have the same concerns as the member has announced as well.
We don't want people buying units on speculation.
We don't want people re-allocating to the best unit in town in order to get the best deal.
And we have taken this into consideration.
One of the ideas we had in mind was to have a qualifier that you must live in a unit for a period of time before you could buy it.
We presented our overview of what this program would like to all the local housing organization managers that attended the meeting here in Iqaluit in October.
They actually had some concerns on that angle.