EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
One of the mechanisms that we do have to use is payroll taxes, which we have been availing ourselves of over the years.
The minister just flowed right into my next supplementary question here.
Can the minister provide the House today with a rough approximation of how much revenue has been raised by the Government of Nunavut in corporate income taxes paid directly by mining companies over the past five years?
I can’t provide that level of detail right now.
The government’s annual set of Fiscal and Economic Indicators also indicated, and again I quote, “As the sector continues to develop we expect the firms in Nunavut that support mining (construction, logistics, transportation, etc.). will generate higher profits and tax revenues.”
Can the minister indicate whether he is presently considering making changes in his 2016 budget to the corporate income tax rates paid by companies operating in Nunavut?
Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, the Government of Nunavut, all departments and territorial corporations are currently working on our budget projections and have been working on them for several months and we will continue working on them.
I assure the member that we will be taking a close look at all the taxes that we collect from our various tax programs to see what taxes we will be getting from corporate taxes, payroll taxes, personal taxes, tobacco taxes, fuel taxes, and all other kinds of taxes. I can assure Mr. Mikkungwak that we’re working on all of those areas.
Question 059 – 4(3): Baffin Island Caribou (Enook)
My questions will be based on the Blues for Friday, October 23.
I know the Blues are not the final Hansard, but I will base my questions on page 21 of the Inuktitut version.
We are all aware that in Nunavut, in the Baffin region, we have had problems with caribou hunting and there’s a caribou moratorium. We would all like to know what the future holds for that.
In regard to a question a member asked on page 24 in English and on page 21 in Inuktitut Blues, Mr. Hickes had asked a question regarding the caribou moratorium or caribou harvesting.
Let me read the response. Minister Mike responded by saying, and I quote, “We have been working on wildlife legislation in regard to caribou on Baffin Island.”
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask the minister: what is that trying to say?
I don’t really remember Mr. Hickes’ question in detail. I didn’t re-read the Hansard and I don’t remember exactly what the question was. Therefore, I don’t remember the response I had given.
I believe what I was trying to say was that the caribou moratorium was initiated before the new Wildlife Act or regulations were enacted.
After the new regulations or legislation was enacted on July 1, for the first time in Nunavut, we started enacting and using the new wildlife legislation.
At the time when I announced the caribou moratorium on January 1, we were using the old Nunavut legislation. I believe that at that time, I was trying to allude to the Nunavut legislation, the new Wildlife Act.
However, I can’t really recall in detail what question was posed and I apologize.
Perhaps I’ll ask it from a different angle.
In the Baffin region, we have 250 TAH for caribou.
My question is: once the 250 TAH has been depleted, what occurs after that?
Is there going to be another moratorium on caribou?
The Nunavut Wildlife Management Board held hearings in regard to Qikiqtaaluk wildlife and they consulted with the Baffin region people in March. We work with other co-management partners in wildlife. They considered 250 tags for the total allowable harvest of caribou.
That was the recommendation made by the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board. They didn’t state if they will make any more tags available, but the total allowable harvest was 250 for male caribou.
Once the tags have been depleted, if there was no change in the decision, the new fiscal year begins on July 1 and then at the end of the fiscal year, there will be another 250 tags available at that time.
So we’re all on the same page and so we will all have the same understanding, once the 250 caribou tags have been depleted, if there’s no other decision made prior to July 1, we will no longer be able to harvest caribou.
Who is going to make a decision?
As I stated earlier when there was a question posed in regard to caribou management, since last month, we have been doing a study or survey and once we get the results, we will have a better idea.
They’re going to analyze the survey results.
Once we finish analyzing the survey or report, they can make a decision prior to July 1.
Question 060 – 4(3): Baffin Island Caribou (Shooyook)
Mr. Shooyook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for allowing me to ask another question.
I believe today is the Minister of Environment’s day, so I would like to direct my question to him.
Though I understood Mr. Enook’s questions, I do have an additional question on the same topic.
I understood what the minister said. I know that we are only are allowed to harvest male caribou.
Why did they set that rule? Elders were not considered when they made that decision and I am not very pleased about that because we harvest the caribou and we like to have caribou that the elders crave.
Who made the decision to harvest only male caribou, and why is it that we only harvest male caribou? Does the department believe that when we harvest female caribou, their population would start declining?
Hon. Johnny Mike (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also thank my colleague for asking that question.
As I stated before, during the hearings of the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board on Qikiqtaaluk caribou, the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board invited the knowledge-holders of caribou, which are elders. They were invited to the caribou management hearing.
The HTOs of the Baffin region and the RWO of Qikiqtaaluk were invited. Government officials were also invited as well as representatives from NTI. They all went to the NWMB hearing.
I believe and I trust that the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board followed the comments or the submissions that were made by the other parties because they recommended that they only harvest male caribou.
That’s how the decision came to have an all-male TAH of 250 caribou.
The recommendation was made to my department from the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board through the hearing process. I believe that the figure and the decision came out through that process.
Mr. Shooyook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the minister for his good response.
I have a “but.”
Although I understand it was based on the people who made the recommendation or decision, according to Inuit traditional knowledge, we shouldn’t be overly concerned in regard to caribou management in the Baffin region.
Prior to me being born, there were no caribou for the first 15 years of my life.
There were no caribou in Nunavut and we didn’t eat caribou meat for all those years.
There’s one thing as a government that we should take note of. I have seen old female caribou.
They have very good meat, but now during the mating season, they start losing their fat and the meat will not taste as good.
The old female caribou will be nice and fat, and they are very delicious.
Sometimes they’re so old they have very good antlers, like the bull caribou.
For that reason, what I would like to see is when the TAH of the 250 caribou have been depleted, perhaps include the harvest of dry cow caribou and put a TAH on that so that we can provide good food for the elderly who crave it, or get them to actually harvest calves.
Would we be able to harvest those kinds of caribou before the moratorium is lifted?
Thank you for explaining that, my colleague.
From my late father, I have heard about the previous caribou moratoriums. They were told in those years not to harvest females.
That was before I was born, obviously.
We have heard that from many years ago.
Today, when we work under agreements, the Nunavut government cannot make rules for animals on its own now.
We can say and do all sorts of things, but then we have all these agreements, including the land claims agreement, that we have to adhere to.
As a government, we are no longer able to do things on our own as to what kind of caribou should be harvested.
That’s because of the land claims agreement that was agreed to by Inuit.
There was a hearing this past winter in March, and obviously Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit about caribou and wildlife was considered and applied.
There were people who went to the hearing and spoke, and what they said was considered. There were elders there that went to speak.
Let us be more aware that in your own communities, whenever there is going to be a hearing scheduled or a consultation on Wildlife Regulations, I want to hear about it.
With concerns from the communities, it is NWMB that is supposed to be one of the first groups to be notified when there’s a concern about wildlife, and that’s in the land claims agreement.
Because of that, that’s the way it is and that’s why I am saying that.
I totally understand what the member is saying. However, as a government, we cannot make our own decisions now when it comes to that kind of issue.
Mr. Shooyook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you very much.
As a government, we try to work very hard for the people that we represent, but then there is the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board and we have to follow their decisions too.
Let’s consider this very carefully in the future.
I am not concerned about the depletion of caribou at all.
They’re not going to be depleted.
I can even say that on this issue, animals fall from heaven when we’re in these kinds of situations.
Let’s take good care of the issue and while you’re the minister, make sure you think about and consider the people’s concerns. If things need to be fixed, involve the people of Nunavut and facilitate it as the minister.
I would like to ask to go back to Item 5 before I ask my question.
Speaker (interpretation): The member is asking… .
I’m sorry. Due to the extension of question period and the lack of time, I have to turn you down.
Question 061 – 4(3): Baffin Island Caribou (Keyootak)
Part of the question I wanted to ask was already posed, but this aspect was not asked and I’m directing it to the Minister of Environment.
We’re talking about caribou management today and the comments that were made about caribou are understandable. I would like to ask the minister: how many of the 250 tags taken for the male caribou that were supposed to be harvested have been harvested?
The last notice I was given was that 61 caribou have been harvested to date and they were mostly harvested in South Baffin.
Of the 61 caribou that have been harvested, how many were male caribou and how many of them were female and calves?
Are the caribou that have been harvested all male?
From what I know from my office, it’s only 61. That’s the only number. There’s no indication of other sexes other than male.
I expect them all to be male.
People out there are listening.
Many of them are very interested in hearing about the caribou that are being harvested. We have been told that we’re only allowed to kill the males. The people listening right now and watching on TV are really interested in hearing how many males have been harvested.
Can’t you give us that information at this time?
Our wildlife co-management partners, the Qikiqtaaluk Wildlife Board and the community HTOs, allocated the 250 tags and nine communities can get 30 and one community can get 10.
It’s taken care of inside the communities and also by QWB and they are keeping track of the caribou that are being harvested. The communities hold the tags and only one community has 10 tags while the others have 30.
It is being handled by QWB and once I have newer information, I will be able to inform the House.
Question 062 – 4(3): Status of Hospital Board of Management Review (Angnakak)
Mr. Speaker, as the minister will recall, almost exactly one year ago, the Minister of Health committed to undertaking a review of the merits and benefits, logistical, administrative, and financial aspects of a board of management for the Qikiqtani General Hospital.
That review was to have been completed by the fall of 2015.
Will the minister be tabling the results of that review during the current fall 2015 sitting?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) Yes, I believe that study has occurred and that we will be moving forward with some of the recommendations and reviewing the options of the study.
I appreciate my colleague’s efforts in this area and I look forward to introducing that in the near future. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Ms. Angnakak: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the minister. That is a wonderful response to hear.
I’m very glad to hear that and I think we all look forward to seeing that report.
Mr. Speaker, I have spoken at length in this House regarding the importance of improving quality of care for those receiving medical services in Nunavut.
Can the minister update this House on how his department works towards assessing, evaluating, and improving the quality of care at the Qikiqtani General Hospital?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I believe there is a body that is established to accredit hospitals and they did a study not long ago.
I’m very pleased to see that they gave us wonderful marks on how we’re doing at the Qikiqtani General Hospital.
I hope I can share those findings and I look forward to more good work in this area with a new body that hopefully we will establish through the motion.
I also want to acknowledge that it’s not just here that we have to look after. We have to look after the well-being of all health facilities in our territory, so we’re progressing in that direction.
I look forward to more good work with my colleagues in this field. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Question 063 – 4(3): Status of Nunavut-wide Strategy on the Responsible Use of Alcohol (Mikkungwak)
I asked questions last week to the Minister of Health concerning the status of addiction services in Nunavut.
On Friday of last week, the Department of Finance issued a request for proposals to develop a “Nunavut-Wide Strategy on the Responsible Use of Alcohol.”
The department of Finance’s RFP indicates that its purpose is to, and I quote, “develop and implement a multi-year strategy to help raise awareness and educate Nunavummiut on the  socially responsible use of alcohol.”
Mr. Speaker, the RFP also indicates that the Department of Health is, and again I quote, “in the process of rolling out an extensive alcohol- related campaign.”
Can the minister clearly explain what the different roles and responsibilities are of the Department of Finance and the Department of Health in this area?
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) The Hon. Minister of Health, Mr. Okalik. (interpretation) I apologize. (interpretation ends) Finance, Mr. Peterson.
I’m not very up to date on checking RFPs. On Friday afternoon, I was in a meeting for about three hours myself.
I think I was with Mr. Mikkungwak actually.
Mr. Speaker, the RFP is expected to close on November 20. Of course, the Department of Finance is responsible for the Nunavut Liquor Commission and our focus will be on the program of social responsibility.
I can’t talk now.
I was in a meeting this morning for three hours, so I’m losing my words here.
Socially responsible drinking, that’s what our focus will be. Our programs will be in that area. The Department of Health, of course, will be looking into areas of addictions and the treatment of people who have problems with alcohol.
Mr. Mikkungwak (interpretation): Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) The RFP also indicates that the government’s new strategy will, and I quote, “need to include ways to engage and strengthen the role and mandate of the Alcohol Education Committees currently operating in 14 Nunavut communities.”
As the minister will recall, I asked him detailed questions earlier this year at our House sitting of March 3 concerning the support provided to alcohol education committees.
At that time, the minister publicly stated that he was, and I quote, “considering providing funds to alcohol education committees in the new year.”
Can the minister tell us today what funding is currently provided by his department to alcohol education committees?
Mr. Speaker, of course, I don’t remember every detail of every answer that I was ever asked in every sitting of every day in the last eight years.
I will have to tell Mr. Mikkungwak that I don’t specifically recall what I said that day.
I do recall meeting with the chairs and some of the members of the alcohol education committees on Friday afternoon out in the foyer here.
I was hoping that they could come and I could introduce them in the sitting and the valuable work that they do. Mr. Speaker, they were here to talk about how they can support their communities and work the Department of Finance and the Nunavut Liquor Commission to raise awareness of being socially responsible for the use of alcohol.
Mr. Speaker, we currently support them with materials and bringing them in for meetings. Our Nunavut Liquor Commission supports them from Rankin Inlet. We are still considering providing them with some funding to assist them locally.
I do recall saying that to Mr. Mikkungwak and that’s still our intention.
I was referencing his document, but at the same time, my supplementary question was referencing the Nunavut Hansard of Tuesday, March 3, 2015.
The stated purpose of the department’s RFP is to promote the “socially responsible use of alcohol.”
As the minister is very much aware, some of Nunavut's communities allow unrestricted access to alcohol, some communities restrict access to alcohol, and some communities prohibit the use of alcohol altogether.
From the perspective of the government, is prohibition of alcohol an effective way of addressing the harm caused by substance abuse?
Hon. Keith Peterson: Mr. Speaker, we always have respected the wishes of the communities and that’s why, when we receive petitions from the communities to hold plebiscites, whether it would be restricted or controlled or open, we respect the local decisions.
Of course, we need 20 signatures on a petition and then it comes to cabinet.
Our Nunavut Liquor Commission and Nunavut Elections work with the local community to develop the question and then they have an advance poll and a vote on specified days.
Whatever the outcome is, to my knowledge, we have not gone against the wishes of the community. For the foreseeable future, that’s the way we will continue to operate.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. Members will note that the time for question period has expired.
Before we continue, I would like to go back to Item 5.
Speaker (interpretation): The Member for Uqqummiut is asking to go back to Item 5. Are there any nays?
At this time, I would like to recognize visitors in the gallery. My son-in-law, Aimo Kooneeloosie, was involved when I recognized Joanasie Kooneeloosie and family on the assistance they provided during a crisis. I would like to recognize him while he is here.
Item 13. (interpretation) Tabling of Documents.
Tabled Document 017 – 4(3): Nunavut Housing Corporation’s Proposed New Construction List for 2016-2017 (Kuksuk)
Hon. George Kuksuk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am pleased to table the Nunavut Housing Corporation’s proposed new construction list for 2016-17.
Tabled Document 018 – 4(3): Photograph of Chesterfield Inlet Air Terminal Building (Sammurtok, T)
Mr. Tom Sammurtok: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
During Thursday’s proceedings of the Committee of the Whole, I committed to tabling photographs of Chesterfield Inlet’s current air terminal building.
As I have noted on a number of occasions, the ATB is in urgent need of replacement. I encourage all members to review these photographs with care. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Notices of Motions. (interpretation) I’m sorry. (interpretation ends) That was Item 14.
Bills 1, 2, 3, and 6 and Tabled Documents 107 – 4(2) and 149 – 4(2) with Mr. Mikkungwak in the Chair.
>>House recessed at 16:05 and Committee resumed at 16:33
Chairman (Mr. Mikkungwak) (interpretation): Good day, residents of Baker Lake and Nunavut.
I will now call the committee meeting to order. (interpretation ends) In Committee of the Whole, we have the following items to deal with: Bills 1, 2, 3, and Tabled Document 107 – 4(2), and Tabled Document 149 – 4(2).
We wish to continue with Bill 3 and the review of the Nunavut Housing Corporation, followed by the Department of Community and Government Services.
Chairman: Are we in agreement that we first deal with the Nunavut Housing Corporation, followed by Community and Government Services?
I would now like to ask the Minister of the Nunavut Housing Corporation if he has officials that he would like to appear before the committee.
Hon. George Kuksuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good afternoon.
Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) For the record, minister, please introduce your officials.
To my left is Steven Hooey, Chief Operating Officer for the Nunavut Housing Corporation, and to my right is the president of the corporation, Ms. Lori Kimball.
Welcome to the House, Ms. Kimball and Mr. Hooey.
We are on Nunavut Housing Corporation. Branch Summary.
L-3. (interpretation) Following the names on my list, Mr. Akoak.
He has completed his question.
Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) Following the list of names, Mr. Rumbolt.
Before I ask a question, I would like to give credit where credit is due.
When I did my opening comments, we expressed concern about the Nunavut Housing Corporation’s plan to consolidate the $4 million in funding for homeownership programs into one line item in the budget. On October 21, a letter was given to us stating that the Nunavut Housing Corporation has decided that they will no longer make this adjustment and continue with the percentage across the territory.
I just wanted to recognize the officials for making that adjustment.
My first question is more of a clarification question. From reading the Hansard from Friday, Mr. Akoak asked a question in regard to where public housing and staff housing was going to be situated for the 2016-17 budget. In the minister’s response, he stated several communities for public housing and several for staff housing.
It’s not quite the same as the document that was provided to us. For public housing, he did state the right communities, according to the document we have. I’m wondering if he can state for the record exactly which communities will be getting staff housing under this budget.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much, Mr. Rumbolt. (interpretation ends) Hon. Minister of the Nunavut Housing Corporation, Mr. Kuksuk.
The following communities that are identified to allocate staff housing units for 2016-17 are as follows: we have Arctic Bay, five units; Gjoa Haven, five units; Coral Harbour, three units; Hall Beach, four units; Igloolik, five units; Kugaaruk, five units; Kugluktuk, five units; Naujaat, seven units; Resolute Bay, two units; and Sanikiluaq, two units.
Mr. Rumbolt: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the minister for his clarification and it matches the document that was provided to us.
There has been a lot of talk about land acquisition for units throughout the territory.
I’m wondering if the minister can confirm today that land has been acquired for all this construction for the 2016-17 fiscal year.
Yes, all have been confirmed except for the four communities.
I’m sorry if I missed it, but he said “except for the four communities.”
If he said, “except for the four communities,” which communities is he referring to?
Chairman: Thank you. (interpretation) Please identify those four communities.
Hon. George Kuksuk: Myself, I’m not sure which communities they are, but Mr. Hooey has a list of which communities, so I will get him to answer that question.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. Mr. Hooey.
Mr. Hooey: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for the question as well.
We have confirmed land in the vast majority of communities on the list. There are a couple of communities where we are still waiting for a confirmation of which lots they are going to be.