EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Does that mean that was like 225 thousand dollars in carryovers?
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk: I will forward that question to Ms. Allen.
Ms. Allen.
Ms. Allen: Yes, the grants and contributions in the budget last year, there was a tourism equipment booth replacement at the same level for $25 thousand that we have in this year’s budget.
We also had four other projects.
Two of them were building upgrades with Nunavut Development Corporation, those totalled $150 thousand dollars, and the Nunavut Archives last year was classified as a contribution for $75 thousand dollars.
So the total of $250 thousand dollars for five projects was from last year.
When you respond, try and speak slower so that the interpreters can keep up with you.
Mr. Tootoo: I will try Mr. Chairperson.
I don’t know, in your opening comments for the $200 thousand for the study, I think it was for equipment, but you indicated with the funding 250 thousand last year was for Nunavut Development Corporation upgrade projects.
I’m just wondering why they determined that they don’t need that funding this year?
Last year there were contributions and they’re not contributions this year but they will be used for funding.
One of my questions I guess is, in his opening comments he talked about, I think it was $200 thousand for five upgrades or something for the Cambridge Bay plant, meat and fish plant.
And in response, $ 250 thousand, last year there was a number of projects that were for upgrades, I think it was upgrades for NDC subsidiaries I would guess.
I was wondering if where, if you know, there’s no requirement for upgrades to be done this year.
I hope it’s allocated somewhere else.
I guess that’s what I’m looking for, an answer to that.
I would like to welcome my colleague, Mr. McLean.
I will now let Minister Akesuk respond.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk: Thank you, in this fiscal year, 2002-2003, Nunavut Development Corporation engaged the Rankin Inlet office of Ferguson Simek and Clark to oversee the assessment of the physical condition of the Cambridge Bay Meat and Fish Plant.
The study will be completed by September 30 to determine whether a major repair or retrofit or a new plant may be required.
The study completed this year, 2002-2003, will indicate the directions of our department here for the fiscal year 2003-2004.
So it’s whether to repair or retrofit or build a new plant for the next fiscal year.
Mr. Tootoo do you have any further questions?
I’m just wondering, I gathered the minister’s response for that other thing and this amount in the grants and contributions, there was a project last year for upgrades to NDC subsidiaries.
I would assume that they are NDC projects.
Was there not a requirement for them this year or is it somewhere off in the desert?
I guess, again, that’s again what I’m asking.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): Ms. Allen will respond to the question.
Chairperson (interpretation): Ms. Allen.
Ms. Allen: Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The $200 thousand that we put into this year’s capital plan was considered as a departmental capital project as opposed to a Nunavut Development Corporation contribution, a capital project.
It’s something the department was undertaking for that Meat and Fish Plant as opposed to directing it through the corporation as a contribution.
So that’s the difference between the contribution funds.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Ms. Allen.
Are you finished, Mr. Tootoo?
My question is piggy backing on my colleague Mr. Tootoo.
We’re no stranger to the Nunavut Development Corporation.
Right now I reside more with the community that benefits from the Nunavut Development Corporation being in my community and the number of people that it employs and they put out a very good product which I try to wear as much as possible and other members in this House wear the ties, t-shirts, etc., etc.
But over the last three and a half years, in our Standing Committee we made it very, very clear and in this House we’ve made it very clear that we want the Nunavut Development Corporation to take a more proactive role in the non-decentralized communities. I’m talking about places like Pelly Bay, Spence Bay, Hall Beach, Chesterfield Inlet, Repulse Bay, Coral Harbour, Clyde River, Broughton Island, and Arctic Bay. It isn’t because we were not concerned.
We were concerned because the other communities felt that because of decentralization they didn’t really benefit much from it.
We asked and we asked and we asked, like three and a half, four years in a row we asked the Nunavut Development Corporation to take a more active role in trying to help the economy in these smaller communities. Because of lot of them are resource based and economically based and you did your Minister’s statement on fisheries development and you know the fishing industry needs to take off in Nunavut and there are great discoveries all year round in Kugluktuk.
My question to the minister today on this preamble is, has anybody from the Nunavut Development Corporation ever brought this forward or was the Board of Directors ever asked?
There are two questions here.
Were they ever asked for input on broadening their mandate to the smaller communities?
That’s the first part of the question.
Were they ever asked by your department?
We’ve said it in this house numerous times.
Has anybody ever brought it to them and asked them?
Yes, we’ve met with them.
When we go to Rankin Inlet we meet with the chairperson and their staff and the board.
We’ve discussed and met with the board to make sure that the smaller communities are given more support and I remember the community of Sanikiluaq where there is a high interest of the Sanikiluaq residents in carving and also baskets, there is a great interest in marketing baskets and also Kimmirut; they’ve already received more support, Mr. Chairman, perhaps your community too, that’s where they purchase carvings.
Using the Department of Sustainable Development’s limited resources, we try to give support to all the communities of Nunavut and we’ve also relayed this information to the board of Nunavut Development Corporation. Also we try to get representation from various communities because each individual has expertise in their area.
We have representatives from large centres and smaller communities, that way they’re discussing things to make sure that they have representation from everyone.
I’m going to press you Olayuk until I get the answer I want or Minister Akesuk.
Will you commit to this House?
You know, there have been announcements here last week or the week before when Minister Nault and all the, that meeting they had here.
I think the Federal Government at the time announced that there are a few million dollars available for some kind of Economic Development Plan for business development and things like that.
Maybe we’re too new. Maybe we’re too new, the board of directors of the Nunavut Development Corporation are too new.
But would it be possible for somebody to sit down with them and ask them for their advice?
Maybe the department should oversee a long term strategy?
I don’t think that we’re going to build ten meat and fish plants over the next two years in every community that wants one.
You have to have some kind of plan in place before you open up these subsidiaries.
The Nunavut Development Corporation, is it our mandate; are we going to watch it go down the drain, are we going to support it, you know.
We seem to be like touching it but not really, you know what I mean, developing it. I think where you have buildings and communities I don’t think we should be threatened by developing smaller communities and if they are having something like that made in Sanikiluaq, I’ve seen those baskets, it might not take a lot to make a little bit happen in a community.
But what I am saying is there some way you guys can get together with the Nunavut Development Corporation in your department and do a long term strategy for the non-decentralised communities, to see if they actually need support in those communities for what they are good at.
Will you commit that to this House?
Yes, when I became the Minister for the Department of Sustainable Development I had committed to make sure that we worked on the non-decentralised communities in regards to your question.
I will want to work with the board very closely and ask them questions about how the Nunavut Government with our limited resources can spread the resources equally to the communities. I will meet and discuss this matter with NDC to the best of my ability, with our limited resources.
I get your message loud and clear; I know you have limited resources. I guess if you had an extra $3 or 4 million dollars, along that line for capital and the Nunavut Development Corporation, then it would probably be easier on you.
Like I say, it’s not the lack of trying, Minister Akesuk, it’s that we’ve been asking for it to happen in these communities and I know money is getting harder to find.
Are we working with our federal counterparts in INAC to maybe look for some outside capital funding to assist some of these smaller communities?
Using the Nunavut Arts and Crafts Association as an example, we contribute some money to this agency and then they look for outside dollars.
They usually have a budget and we give them our support and we’ve been having some discussions on how economic development can be boosted for Nunavut and how we can put additional dollars in the economic sector.
We’re going to keep working with our federal counterparts to get outside monies to supplement on what we give.
We have an ongoing dialog with our federal counterparts and at every opportunity we seek support from federal ministers and I have meetings with them on duty travel and usually what we do is when we do meet with the federal ministers we tell them about Nunavut needs and wishes.
I visited Pangnirtung twice in the last year.
I was actually amazed at what they do in that small decrepit, falling down old plant.
It needs, you know, the product that comes out of there, is the best one in North America.
I was walking through the plant with the manager and he was telling me what they actually do in there with such a little plant.
Things have a way of wearing out after a while and I am hoping that you are looking after that plant when they need some minor upgrade there.
I am not saying that if you get any capital, to put it all in there, but it needs help.
It needs help, I do know that.
Like I say, that is just the beginning of a great thing there.
I really have to commend the people of Pangnirtung for their hard work and with what they are producing there.
You know, with the arts and crafts there, they are world-renowned.
That is why I am pushing you on this issue.
I hate to use that phrase that I use all the time.
The more outside dollars we attract, the better it is for Nunavut.
Being an ex-businessman, I look at attracting outside dollars and sometimes we are not good at that; we kind of wait for it to come from the Federal Government all the time.
I want you to be a little bit more aggressive in trying to help these smaller communities in setting up something.
I know that you only have limited capital.
If we had 10 or 15 million dollars in your Department there, we could do wonderful things in a lot of those communities.
Maybe we have to find out how to be innovative and how to borrow money.
We are starting to set up in the municipalities, corporations, business development corporations and things like that.
Maybe that is the way of looking at Community Government and Transportation to help sustainable set up some kind of whatever industry.
So that is just what I am saying in regards to the Nunavut Development Corporation.
I Chair that Standing Committee and all I get is one line.
I don’t know if that is being sent down to you from FMB; it would be nice to know if there was a wish list from the Nunavut Development Corporation, so we could have some input on it.
As MLA’s we cannot spend money, but we could make recommendations.
I am encouraging you. I know that you are probably tired of hearing me say that.
It is really just a statement, Mr. Chairman, on that topic.
I will have questions later.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): I did not hear a question.
Mr. Arvaluk (interpretation): I thought that we were on 11-9.
If we are going page by page, while we are on this page, I will bring it up later.
I am sure that you are getting a little tired of hearing the same issue brought up by me.
We get approximately $22 million dollars for Social Assistance O&M. We all know that if we look at the $700 million dollars we have the day to day expenses and some for the O&M.
We know that there are Capital Projects for the three hospitals that will be built in the three regions and that will be very expensive.
Within this $22 million dollars, we give Social Assistance.
They are healthy and they are able and willing to work, they want to enter the educational institutions.
If there is work available they are able to work.
Is it not possible to talk with your colleagues and see if we are expending money here for the Department of Sustainable Development Capital and then in a few years, this $22 million dollars can be decreased, and we can have a savings in there?
Or if we start to house the Arctic College students properly, then that 22 million dollars will start shrinking.
I have been trying to send this message for the last three years and same thing the NWT Government couldn’t understand that either.
Mr. Chairman, what I would like to ask is are you going to be able to have discussions with the ministers so that we can decrease the social assistance money and increase the dollars that are going to education or Arctic College and if you look at the connection between illnesses and sicknesses and being on social assistance, there is a connection there.
You have to talk to the ministers.
If we do this, we can decrease the number of social service recipients.
We are trying to set up some programs within Department of Sustainable Development and there is the Economic Development Agreement that could, if it was existing, it could be making things a lot easier.
I will have meetings with my colleagues and I’m sure that they understand exactly what the problems are in Nunavut.
Going back to Mr. McLean’s comments, possibly what we can do is get the Nunavut Development Corporation's wish list and I can start a dialogue with the rest of the ministers.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): Usually what we do is give some ideas that the minister can consider. 11-6, I think I believe we’re on 11-6.
There is a typo in the Inuktitut and again there was an error in the Minister of Education’s department.
Is it possible for the Minister to make sure that these typos are corrected before the end of this session?
This typo is noted.
Chairperson (interpretation): Was that a yes?
Tourism exhibit needs replacement.
I would like to make a few comments.
First of all, because of course Nunavut is very new and just a couple of years old, I don’t blame anyone, but the Minister of Sustainable Development has a very important job and goes down to the States and is questioned about what Nunavut has to offer.
I am sure that you have heard it but there have been questions; Nunavut is not approachable, it is frozen.
What does the cold Arctic have?
Is it possible to go there?
Since the creation of Nunavut, where did the Eskimos go?
What did the Inuit do with the Eskimos?
Some of them ask that once Nunavut gets a little older, and once they get adequate housing, they will come and see Nunavut.
Those are the kinds of comments that we hear from Americans.
We are a little more visible at the International level, but then there is this question of what happened to the Eskimos since we became Inuit.
They think that we are just new people who have just settled in this part of the country.
We have done some marketing but what can we do to market ourselves, to market Nunavut, and to promote Nunavut, in order to attract tourists?
How can we rectify this problem?
How can we promote Nunavut and the people?
We know that we are in the Capital Estimates, but I will just proceed with this.
We try to promote Nunavut at the International level.
There are the Trade Missions that we go to, and we participate with the Canadian delegation.
We promote and market Nunavut.
We are doing as much as we can and we do know that there are other innovative approaches that we can take.
We are doing to the best that we can and we promote tourism and visitors to Nunavut.
We have Nunavut Travel that is available at the International level.
We also use the film Atanarjuat, the Fast Runner to promote the Inuit culture.
We use those tools to promote Nunavut and the people at the International level.
We will look at other ways in order to promote Nunavut.
Mr. Irqittuq, Taima?
On our page. I have a question.
The tourism exhibit and booth replacement; I don’t understand the Inuktitut replacement portion of it.
The way it is written.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): There are differences in dialects.
Just to give a little explanation.
It is for the booth replacements and tourism exhibits.
This falls under tourism.
These are visual effects that we use when we are promoting Nunavut at the International level.
On 11-6.
Sustainable Development, Detail of Capital, Headquarters’ Region, Total Headquarters’ Region, $25 thousand.
Chairperson (interpretation) Turning the page.
Sustainable Development, Detail of Capital, Headquarters Region.
In this page and other pages, perhaps the Capital Estimates for 2003/2004, we’ve been talking about these things for the last three years now.
Perhaps you can get some lessons from somebody, perhaps take a course and learn to explain exactly what those things are that you’re going to be used for.
For instance, tangible assets, 511010. Equipment Replacement Parts, $75 thousand dollars.
(interpretation ends) Can you write down exactly what it is next time?
In the other lines that you have, what it’s going to be used for.
For example, tangible assets, 500246, Nunavut Art Bank. $75 thousand dollars.
What are you going to do with Nunavut Art Bank?
Are you saying that you are going to give Nunavut Art Bank $75 thousand dollars to buy art from carvers in the communities?
If so, why don’t you write that down so that we can review the Capital Estimates with more clarity?
The only reason I ask is why are the figures there without the exact projects identified?
The explanations on these Capital Estimates at that time, at the beginning, we have those explanations at the beginning.
So, that is why we have those explanations such as tangible assets, 500246 under that item near the Nunavut Art Bank.
We’re trying to find out what kinds of art we have in Nunavut that we’re doing an inventory on the arts in Nunavut.
So, that’s what it’s going to be used for; to find out what we can do before they get lost and write them down in the inventory.
We will be working with the elders and the Heritage Council.
Mr. Arvaluk: Maybe we should get back to the substantiation sheet.
Maybe when we are doing the final, I don’t know anything on the Capital Items for Finance Minister but we waste a lot of time asking for clarifications because of the jargons or the titles that are there.
We really don’t know for example, visitor’s centres for 511014 of $200 thousand each floor.
When you’re looking at that, we don’t know what they’re doing at visitor’s centres, centres because I think we’re supposed to know what we are reading.
And we also have to know what we are approving.
What is it they are being used for?
We wouldn’t require a different book, on the side on the next page explains that what they are doing with $200 thousand, and $254 thousand and from $2 thousand to $528 thousand.
Rather than the minister having to explain every line, not taking up a lot of time, time of the committee of the whole time when we can be debating on more informed issues from you know, of the capital and we’re not really debating, Mr. Chairman, we’re asking questions what do you know, what the title is trying to say.
I looked at the appendices for Sustainable Development, even the appendices is not clear, except it’s numbered all the way to 2008 but the wordings are still exactly the same.
But that doesn’t really substantiate anything.
And for the, yes, I understand what the, where the member is coming from because he’s concerned about wanting to know what every dollar that is being spent and he wants to be able to have a better explanation of each line.
And we will try better, we will try to do better next time so we can understand, so the members can understand what the budget is being used for and we will do a better explanation so we can have a shorter committee of the whole session when we’re dealing with the capital estimates.
So and the explanations are more clear from the department of sustainable development.
Yes, I realize, I know that it has to be done that way because it just says visitor’s centres.
What are you going to do with the visitor’s centres in the amount of $200 thousand; we would like to know exactly how it’s going to be used.
It could mean anything, as Mr. Arvaluk states.
In the opening statement, my opening statement, I explained what the $200 thousand was going to be used for in Iqaluit and other communities and to purchase for the Katinnilik Visitor’s Centre in Kimmirut exhibit display and remaining funds will be allocated to visitors’ centres, when the need arises.
Mr. Arvaluk: The Grise Fiord wildlife office/garage $575 thousand, is this new or is there a need for renovations because it doesn’t say here.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): Yes, thank you, Mr. Chairman. It’s going to be a new wildlife office and a garage in Grise Fiord.
I was going to say the same thing, that being talked about the table already.
I know we’re going through the 2003/2004 but when you start going through the 2004 up to 2008 you going to spend another 520 thousand dollars, if it’s going to be the same thing going into business centres projects.
Maybe I might get a better picture from you, if you already, okay you are spending $200 thousand dollars now, and last year you spent $254 thousand.
Now in 2004/2008 are they the extension of the project that you mentioned in your statement?
Maybe if you could clarify that so that I have a picture that I can see of what you are doing down the road.
Perhaps if I could, next time when I’m up here before the committee like Mr. Arvaluk said, there should be a better explanation of the projects being funded and we will provide a better explanation of the detail of the capital next time we’re here for the committee.
Especially Nunavut various, that’s the only area I’m worried about, otherwise in our communities you have more details.
Again you mentioned the $200 thousand dollars was allocated for visitor’s centres projects, promoting tourism in regions.
Is that $520 thousand for the same things that you mentioned in your statements, or is it new parts that you’re thinking of down the road?
That was my question I guess for now.
But like you said in the future, you’ll provide more detailed information, when you’re doing your next capital.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk: For the Visitors Centres it’s ongoing upgrades for the coming years.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Minister Akesuk.
Mr. Havioyak: I just missed the response there so can you repeat your answer.
I’m sorry I missed your response.
There’s a lot of Visitors Centres that have to be renovated, that’s what we are dealing with.
So that’s what it’s budgeted for, to upgrade the Visitors Centres and next time around, when we’re up here before the committee we will provide more detailed explanation.
Before we start the page by page, I would like to recognize two young people that are in the Gallery, because it’s cold out there so they must be here to warm up.
The Minister just stated that last year we had a budget of $254 thousand; this year we are completing the Visitors’ Centre in Iqaluit for $200 thousand, if I heard that right.
Can he verify that so that I could ask my follow-up question?
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): This is for the Nunavut regions, for the Visitors’ Centres, and it is for all the communities of Nunavut.