EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Not having a form of committee to specifically focus its energies in addressing concerns of Crown agencies, I think, would be irresponsible. Here we’re trying to be proactive in addressing concerns raised about Crown agencies.
We are on page C-5, under Directorate.
Total, operations and maintenance is $2,797,000.
Fiscal management, in the finance branch summary. “Total, operations… .”
Under this… . I imagine any tax stuff that’s being looked at by the government is done here.
One thing that I’m quite interested in today is in a response to a written question that was on the payroll tax.
One knows that since the creation of Nunavut, Nunavut has basically been a haven for consultants and contractors doing work for the government.
It was quite surprising to see that they are not affected by the payroll tax.
Has there been any thought in there about including these consultants that are self-employed, working as consultants, on contract with the government? Where even the written response to the question today indicated that they didn’t pay the payroll tax.
So, is there any way that we can look at capturing that in the tax? They take a lot of money out of here.
In terms of that written question that was tabled in the House today, the information he is referring to is correct.
Mr. Tootoo: I know it’s correct.
It was tabled today.
I was just referring to it.
Is there any thought of looking at making some amendments or something to the payroll tax so that we can capture those guys?
Everyone else is paying the one percent payroll tax, but these guys that are making upwards of $500 a day are paying nothing into that.
So, could there be a commitment to look at a way to try and capture those individuals within the payroll tax system so that they pay their fair share too, just like everyone else?
Chairman: Mrs. Minister.
That’s an excellent suggestion and we will look into it.
Considering that they’ve gotten away all this time, I’d look at making theirs two percent or something like that.
Chairman: Just a comment.
I’ll ask the reverse of that.
That tax was set in place many years ago to tax fly-in fly-out mining folks from down south. It was set in place by Northwest Territories to try and capture some taxes. We all got caught.
They’d throw a big net and tax us all so we are all paying payroll taxes, despite the fact that all of us are living up here with a very high cost of living.
I’m wondering if the minister would consider lifting the payroll tax on the people that are being paid the minimum wage. That would certainly go a long way to help them pay the high cost of food and utilities that we have in place here in Nunavut.
We can look into that as well.
I am glad to hear the minister say she will look into it.
Could I add some ammunition to the argument that they should look into it seriously: last week, we heard there is $23 million for income support to help people purchase food, basic living necessities in Nunavut. Then we have heard discussions on food banks.
There is a desperate need for the people making minimum wage or less to get support from our government to meet their daily basic needs.
Chairman: That sounds like a comment, unless you want to answer it, Ms. Minister.
There is actually a tax credit for individuals at a certain pay level.
So, I will let the member be aware, I will seriously look into it as I stated earlier.
In the last Assembly, we made some changes to our corporate tax rate structure that, now, I believe we are… . At the time we were tied for low tax rates for corporate businesses in Canada.
With the Northwest Territories, I think they followed in line with us on that.
I note that the government is anticipating correcting to move all of those into a low corporate income tax this year.
I am just wondering if that is the direct result of more businesses setting up and operating in Nunavut, relocating to be here to take advantage of those low tax levels.
Just for members’ information as well, there is a two-year delay before we can actually get the information related to those taxes filed, to really get a feel for how and what impact that has had in Nunavut.
The reporting takes some time.
Is the government going to announce to corporate taxpayers that if they have properly paid taxes here in Nunavut, that they are now going to be receiving an additional break with the cut of the education tax on there? Will that have an impact on the number, the corporate tax collection?
Will that impact the number as a result of that education tax cut, because corporate businesses throughout the territory pay a considerable amount of that.
So, I am just wondering if that $2 million, or the money that they are collecting on certain income taxes, would be affected by that latest additional break to them?
In terms of the reduction, we are sitting down with them now to deal with these education components.
That was announced through a budget address, with information in terms of how members paying into that are informed.
That will be normal process. So, I will check to see if people are receiving information by letter or through the newspaper or whatever.
In terms of corporate tax: corporations, as they grow and develop, will also pay more into the corporate tax, if that makes any sense.
I guess the minister is saying that it will not have an impact on the tax collection.
Hon. Leona Aglukkaq: To start with, probably, very minimal.
Another thing I am sure would fall under Directorate is something that I mentioned in my opening comments as well: the government was looking at making some changes to its capital planning process.
I would like to ask the minister what specific changes… .
I know we are going to be looking at the capital budgets in the fall; I would just like to ask what changes have been made to that process they are looking at.
We are looking at a new capital planning process, but that is still in the works. We would like to have more of an opportunity to consult with members of the House on the process.
At the same time, we need to also get input from the municipalities as to how they will contribute as well to that process.
So, that is still in the works; it is not finalized.
We are looking at probably not this year, but next year, to have that new process in place, but are recognizing that we need to consult further, just on that process alone, before finalizing it.
I just want to confirm: the minister has indicated that they will be seeking input from the regular members and also from the municipalities.
I think the last process that we had there had very limited input from regular members and none from the municipalities, the last time around.
So, it would be, I am sure, very well received by everyone involved to go back to the old method of consulting with the communities and the members in the development of the capital budgeting process and of their priorities.
Chairman: That was just a comment.
Do you want to add to that?
Hon. Leona Aglukkaq: Thank you, Mr. Chairman I think it is just as an information item, an important one in that it is important to get the input from the municipalities: I believe the Minister of Housing and of Community and Government Services had also stated that there is a need to consult the communities. We will do that, as well as the with regular members, on that process.
(Interpretation ends.) We are under fiscal management.
Financial branch summary.
Total, operations and maintenance is $3,250,000.
C-7.
“Internal audit services:” $888,000.
Does the department have an internal audit policy that it goes by?
If it does, could the minister provide that? I don’t need it right now, but would she be willing to provide that to members?
And as Mr. Picco would say, expeditiously.
We have that and we will have it translated and tabled in the House.
I understand that there are about 36 audits that took place in 2003-04.
I’d just like to ask the minister what specific problem areas were found and what’s been done to try and address some of those areas of concern.
Given that in the context of the Internal Audit Division, basically the role there is to help departments stay in line before they get too far out and run into problems when the real auditors come along.
Chairman: Is that a comment or a question?
Please, Ms. Minister.
I’m going to ask the deputy minister to outline some of the internal findings and the Internal Audit Services branch.
Chairman: Go ahead, Mr. Vardy.
As the member pointed out there were 36 audits done across Government of Nunavut departments last year.
Some of the audits were focused on financial controls in departments.
Something like, cash handling procedures, making sure that the proper signing authorities were in place and being followed.
Some of the audits were broader, dealing with safety concerns.
We audit not only on the financial side but anything to safeguard the government assets.
Some of the work that we did was to assist the departments in their management activities.
There is a big service component to audit.
Some of the weaknesses that were found are reflected in the Auditor General’s report.
The nature of Internal Audit is that the external auditors pay close attention to what goes on there; they get copies of all of our audit reports.
If we do an audit and find out that there is misuse of overtime in a particular area, that report gets picked up by the external auditors, and they tend to carry a bit more clout when they table their reports at the Legislature.
Overall, there’s improvement of financial controls in the system but there are still some weaknesses.
There are some inconsistencies in the interpretation of rules across departments.
Sometimes there are inconsistencies with regions, so we’re working now with the Corporate Services Division in all departments.
We are also starting to work with our regional finance offices to get a bigger presence in the regions.
Member Hunter Tootoo pointed out earlier that the budget for Internal Audits was going down.
That’s not exactly the case: what we’ve done is move two positions, two senior accounting positions from government accounting into audit, but those positions get reflected in the reinstated numbers for last year, so we adjusted last year’s base to reflect the transfer of positions.
There is a lot of work we have to do in Internal Audit, One of the areas we have to move into is Internal Audit assisting the Crown corporations, because they don’t have internal audit capacity as pointed out by the OAG.
We’ve already started working with the Business Credit Corporation, and we are talking to the Power Corporation about that.
We have an internal audit committee that is comprised of five deputy ministers, including myself, and we have the president of Qulliq Energy on as one of the audit members.
I’m just wondering if… . I know they used be called corporate control officers, a very exciting job that I used to do.
I can tell you that it was very exciting. I lasted about a year on it; it was a long year.
One of the things that was looked at, something that I hear today, this year, now, from suppliers and contractors to the government, is according to the Financial Administration Act they were required to be paid in a certain amount of time.
That used to be one of the things that was looked at.
Is that still something that is looked at? If so, has it been identified as a problem, because it seems to me like a lot of people that I talk to keep waiting and waiting, waiting to get paid from the government for services or supplies.
I’m just wondering if that is something that is still looked at, and has it been identified as a problem area.
Chairman (interpretation): I’m sure it has been a problem area.
Mr. Vardy is going to answer that.
Yes, it is an area of concern, but not as big as a concern as it was in our early years. Right now most departments are very responsible for the payment of their own invoices.
It doesn’t come to the attention of Finance as frequently as in the past.
But, it is a legitimate target area for internal audit, and I note your concerns.
One of the other things that I recall is the authority, under the Financial Administration Act, that allows the department’s Internal Audit Division to go into any of the government departments. But, there is restrictive accessibility or authority for places like Nunavut Arctic College. I know because I tried to go in there once and they kicked me out.
Like I say, they weren’t required to to have that under the legislation.
So, are they looking at making changes to the legislation to be able to better authorize that division?
Are they able to go into places like the college and the Crown corporations to do reviews?
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Vardy or Ms. Aglukkaq.
Through the Crown Agency Council we are also looking at providing support.
In light of the concerns that have been raised, there is an informal arrangement in place to provide the support to, let’s say, the Power Corporation on a regular basis.
We do have to continue to respect the fact that these agencies operate under a separate legislation and report to a board, but to be proactive in light of some of the concerns that have been placed with the Crown Agency Council and direction of the Department of Finance.
That is informal relationship that provides the board of Power Corporation… .
Could the minister confirm if there are 7 PYs working in the Internal Audit Service?
7 PYs.
I’m wondering, are they all in Iqaluit or are they distributed throughout the three regions?
There are 7 PYs in that division and they are all located here.
Mr. Peterson: Could the minister explain how they are assigned work in the regions.
How would they be called out to do work? Is there a regular rotation to go through the other two regions, or do they just audit departments here in Iqaluit?
The audits are done on rotation, not just in the regions.
We have decentralized communities as well so, it is based on that.
In the last little while a lot has been focused on Iqaluit where the headquarters’ operations are.
Mr. Peterson: Mr. Vardy mentioned what the internal auditors do.
It seems fairly comprehensive. Do they also audit year-end spending by departments, in other words, the last month?
Sometimes you see a lot of heavy spending in the last month of a fiscal year.
I am just wondering if the auditors audit departments for any significant increases in spending in that month.
I am going to ask the deputy minister to respond to that.
The responsibility for monitoring expenditures in departments rests with the Expenditure Management Division.
We monitor expenditures at the end of the year, and often, backed up by the Financial Management Board, we try to manage expenditures at the end of the year so there are not too many big spending sprees.
We are on C-7.
Finance branch summary.
Internal Audit Services. Total, operations and maintenance is $888,000.
Moving on to C-8.
Finance branch summary. Financial operations.
Total, operations and maintenance, is $10,992,000.
On this, is the budget for applications included in this area?
I just want to get a confirmation on that.
Yes, they are the same.
I just want to get an explanation on why that budget for application for support is increased 320 percent, I am just wondering if that is a one-time thing or get an explanation for that.
Chairman: Please, explain.
I will read out the explanation for that because it is quite lengthy.
I will ask the deputy to respond to that.
Chairman: You see the lengthy… . There it is.
Could you ask that privately?
Please, Mr. Vardy.
I will give a shorter response.
That section covers all of the financial systems in the financial management area, including the free-balance system, which is our main system, and also our payroll and human resources systems; Personality 2000 is the name of that system.
What we are trying to do is to have a fully automated system that is more user-friendly for departments to use and will provide better quality reports for users.
Chairman: Thank you for that lengthy response.
It is good to see that human resources has got personality.
On that note, that is one thing, that human resources program that we have been talking about.
Is this one going to work?
The last one, the last couple of tries, our human resources payroll system kind of went down the tube.
So, I am just wondering if we are sure this one is going to work.
Maybe you should go to school for personality.
We are confident this system will work.
The system that the member was referring to is Peoplesoft.
When we initially set up the government, the system was a bit too large and too expensive for our needs.
Then, we contracted out payroll service for the last five years.
Now, we want to have our full automated system in Nunavut.
We are confident it will work.
I’ve got 2.2 million, I guess, a little over 2.2 million… . How much of that is for the actual software licences and how much of that is basically consultants or contractors that come up?
I’ve sat on the plane with people before that are coming up here working on IT stuff that are technical people, and they are contracted under the licence or the program or something like that.
Does the minister have any indication of how much of it is out and how much of that is for the actual software and how much of that is going out to contracts or consulting fees to go along with the programs?
In terms of the details of the separation on that, I don’t have that information here in front of us. I can commit to providing that to the member.
Chairman: Thank you. That’s it?
I don’t have any more names. Mr. Evyagotailak? We’re on C-8.
Financial branch summary. Financial operations. Total, operations and maintenance, is $10,992,000.
Moving on to C-9. Centrally administered funds from the Finance branch summary. Mr. Curley.
I would like more clarification. I will introduce my question.
The questions that we asked about the fuel and power subsidy… . Which one does it fall under? We would like to get a better understanding.
Without its fuel rider… . When it’s said, even though it seems to be a fuel rider, if we are going to have a vote on this we have to have a good understanding of the meaning. It seems that we have two different understandings here.
We have to understand equally exactly what it is in the business plan. When we see it, under page C-22, under the business plan, under the estimates: “Grants and contributions,” it should be a million. Is a power subsidy in the business plan?
Is that what it is, Ms. Minister?
I agree with the member in that this has been a bit confusing. Even trying to address some of the questions during question period has been a bit confusing because there’s a lot of linkages to other departments, such as the fuel subsidy.
But, the word that’s missing under C-10 is the word subsidy.
So, in terms of what’s outlined in the business plan on C-22, that’s more of an accurate explanation of that, generally.
Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Minister.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): So, the power subsidy by the consumers that is administered by the Department of Finance: $4.750 million last year.
It is going to be $15 million if we agree with the power subsidy. They have to be applied to for the annual spending by the government through the Department of Finance.
So, it has gone up to more than $10 million?
It is going to be $15 million according to the business plans.
Hon. Leona Aglukkaq: I am just cross-referencing between the two documents.
In the main estimates, section C-10 provides a power subsidy and that is available per domestic and commercial power subsidies to consumers.
I tried to address that this morning amongst the other questions related to this subject. The power subsidy sets the rate to be charged on the first 700 kilowatt hours of electrical consumption per month and is subsidized at 15.22 percent, and that is from the $10 million.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): There are two in the main estimates.
That first one, the Qulliq Energy Corporation Fuel Stabilization Rider, and the other one, is domestic and commercial power subsidies. It is also $4 million and it is with Qulliq Energy Corporation; it took the place of that certain funding.
The fuel subsidy will be in the amount of $10 million. As the Auditor General stated, March 31… . It is going to have losses of $15 million and it seems that it is still going to be short $11 million.
Under C-10, Qulliq Energy Corporation, who are we going to be receiving the extra $11 million from, on the report on page 33; who is going to cover this?
I just need to take a moment to look for the $11 million that he references in the Auditor General’s report.
Could the member please explain from which page in the Auditor General’s report he references the $11 million?
Mr. Curley (interpretation): It is on page 33, item 136, the bottom one.
Item 136 on page 33 does not make reference to $11 million.
Mr. Curley: I will try help you out a bit.
The Auditor General indicated in that report that Qulliq Energy Corporation, or Power Corporation… . The total loss it will likely reach is $14 million as of March 31, 2004.
When you read the presentation in the budget allocation estimates, it appears Finance is trying to cover the losses, if you total the figures.
But if that is not the case, then I would wonder, then, where is the rest of the losses that NPC will incur or have incurred.
How will they be covered, because you have now converted at least that additional $10 million for fuel subsidies.
I believe that it is separate from an allocation to cover the losses.
So, that is where we get confused.
They appear to be addressing the losses at the same time they are calling it a subsidy.
So, we need, I believe, before we vote on this item, much more clearer information presented so that we are not confused about whether or not the losses that have been incurred as of March 31 have been addressed in total.
Or, whether the power subsidies for consumers have been increased, or whether the expected losses for the coming year are somewhat offset as well, in these allocations.
It is not clear at all in my view.
Hon. Leona Aglukkaq: Mr. Chairman, I agree that it is somewhat confusing.
The word subsidy is not there.
The $10 million is being proposed in lieu of the fuel rider.
The Premier had mentioned earlier in the House that the cost will go to QEC; there will be no change in the rates to the consumers for this fiscal year.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): I’m going back to the business plan on page C-22 to be very clear: power subsidy.
I believe that is the one that we inherited from the federal government and the Northwest Territories government.
And while the roots are documented, I take it at face value that the previous $4,750,000 Power Subsidy Program is now increased by at least almost $11,000,000. It is now raised to $15,000,000, according to the business plan.
So, could the minister clarify whether or not the item on the business plan on page G-22 is accurate or wrong.
The G-22 page that describes the power subsidy… . There is a figure there: the figure $15 million includes both the power subsidy outlined on G-10, and it also includes the Qulliq Energy Corporation fuel stabilization rider subsidy that is also identified under C-10.
In the business plan, they are just combined as an explanation of that funding, but the $5 million subsidy remains at $5 million, and last year it was $4,750,000. So, the $10 million is separate from that.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): But that is not on page C-22 of the document.
I don’t know which document she is reading now, because it changed. However the question is raised.
I’m going to read the particular statement outlined in the description of the power subsidy.
It clearly states here, the “power subsidy provides equitable power rates throughout Nunavut to private residential customers to encourage private home ownership, and to small commercial enterprises to support the development of northern businesses.”
For the total of $15 million.
So, we’ve got to be honest with your Nunavut listeners.
Is that an accurate description of a $15 million item on business?
I had responded to that question earlier. The C-22 power subsidy described on that page is the two items that are outlined in the main estimates before the House under C-10: power subsidies for $5 million and the QEC stabilization rider subsidy of $10 million.