EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
When community people operate their affairs properly they can sometimes have a surplus. Sometimes, especially if a community council is properly running the affairs of the community and if there is willingness on behalf of the people, we can make some forms of agreement and we can pay back some of their expenses.
This promotes community self-reliance.
When they want to take on their own projects.
We are not going to tell them but we are going to do the same with everyone else.
You look at the capabilities of the individual communities and then you can make your decisions from there.
This item under 550 thousand dollars is an allotment that we plan to return to the Hamlet of Arviat, which was monies used for the community hall expansion and it is only fifty-five percent of it already cost-shared by the hamlet themselves.
Mr. Tootoo: Thank you Mr Chairman.
I just want to make sure I heard the right thing from the minister.
The department would be willing to sit down with communities that do take the initiative to fundraise a portion of the project in their communities.
Give them the okay as long as they have shown the initiative to do some of the fundraising themselves.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Tootoo. Mr. Minister.
To some extent where the communities have shown the initiative to come forward and say, as was just shown in this community of Iqaluit to whom we are giving back 3 million 320 thousand dollars because they already have done the work, but they showed that they wanted to do the work this year and we would reimburse them.
We are not saying necessarily that this is just what we are going to do every time.
But if the community is willing to put up part of their own money then we would judge the proposal on its own merits.
Not just either never or all of them.
If we get proposals of this type then we will take a look at them then we will see what we can do.
Does the department have any criteria that it would use in evaluating these types of proposals so that communities that are interested in doing so, they need to know what types of things and conditions and criteria they have to meet in order to be considered.
Any proposal like that should be in the capital plan because it makes sense, common sense.
Chairperson (interpretation): At this time we on the Kivalliq Region.
Total Kivalliq Region.
General comments or questions, 2 million 42 thousand dollars.
Item carried.
Kitikmeot. Total Kitikmeot Region, 387 thousand and questions or comments.
Any questions or comments.
Chairperson (interpretation): Total contributions 1 million 267 thousand dollars.
Total capital expenditures, 12 million 14 thousand.
Page 7-10.
Community Government and Transportation, branch summary.
Detail of capital buildings and works.
Total Baffin region, 2 million 152 thousand dollars.
In favour.
Total Kivalliq Region, 40 thousand.
Kitikmeot Region.
Total Kitikmeot Region.
Total Kitikmeot Region 360 thousand dollars.
Total buildings and works, 2 million 552 thousand dollars.
Turn to page 7-11.
Branch summary, detail of capital.
Equipment acquisition, Baffin region. Total Baffin region, 380 thousand dollars.
Kivalliq Region. Total Kivalliq Region, 40 thousand.
Chairperson (interpretation): Kitikmeot Region.
Total Kitikmeot Region, 60 thousand dollars.
Chairperson (interpretation): Total equipment acquisition, 480 thousand dollars.
Chairperson (interpretation): Total Capital Expenditures, 3 million 32 thousand dollars.
Chairperson (interpretation): Under 7-12, Community Government and Transportation, Capital estimates, distribution of budget.
Capital estimates are done.
Under Community Government and Transportation.
Main estimates.
If you have the page ready. 7-5, we will start at 7-5.
Hon. Jack Anawak: Thank you Chairperson.
I just wanted to tell you that Mike Rafter will be with us for this section of O&M.
Page directorate, 7-5.
Do you all have it.
If you have any questions on 7-5.
Going backwards. 7-4, Community Government and Transportation, branch summary, Operation and Maintenance.
Total Operations and Maintenance, 12 million 250 thousand.
Chairperson (interpretation): Total expenditures, 12 million 250 thousand dollars.
Chairperson (interpretation): Page 7-7, Community Government and Transportation, branch summary, and the other page 7 – 8, Community Government & Transportation, community government, branch summary.
This is the total for, we are now on the main estimates.
Do you all have the page.
Main Estimates of Community Government & Transportation. 7 – 8, Community Government & Transportation, Main Estimates, community government, branch summary.
Mr. Chairman, in this area is the Municipal Operating Assistance Program.
Is this the funding that the hamlets get to operate.
Chairperson (interpretation): Questions or comments.
Mr. Chairman, I know that during the pre-budget consultations, in the communities that I visited municipal funding was one of the biggest issues that was raised.
I guess that it was probably raised in many other communities as well.
There is a very slight increase there, I was just wondering if that is something that is going up, we know that the communities are growing and the services that they need to provide the demand on them is growing as well.
So are they funded to meet those growing demands on them as well.
Right now there has not been any extra funding for any of the communities, or for the decentralized communities for forced growth.
Other communities we have not much more money going to them although they are growing.
So what I said earlier I will repeat and that is that we are planning to have a meeting with the Mayors and the Deputies when they are meeting at the Annual General Meeting of the Nunavut Association of Municipalities.
We would like to take a day or two to discuss financing, the formula for financing the communities.
To discuss, what we want to do is look at the whole financing procedures that we have and see whether we should change that.
We want to allow the communities to have more input into how the money is spent and all the priorities that the communities would like to discuss with us. So that even if the money doesn't necessarily grow as much as we would like it to, it would at least enable us to have a discussion to determine how we can make the system better to suit the community needs better.
Again, no the money is not enough but we would like to have a discussion on how we can make the system better suited to the communities.
Mr. Chairman, just I know there is a slight increase of about 104 thousand.
Maybe I can get an explanation as to why it increased in that amount.
When we were looking at working on the Main Estimates for 2000/2001, there was a small contingency in the MOAP area, in the previous budget and we simply rounded it to what was handed out.
The figure of 18 million 763 represents the allocation that was in the Main Estimates but didn't pick up a small amount for any communities that were having difficulty.
We have now reflected it in the allocation and we will distribute it on that basis.
Just another thing that I noted when we were reviewing the Housing budget.
There was an allocation to the local housing organizations of I believe of just over 600 thousand dollars to deal with the increased costs of fuel that we'll face as a result of the price increase that was announced in January.
Is there any allocation of that type for the municipalities.
I am sure that between the LHOs, the hamlets, and the municipalities they are the two largest users of fuel in the communities.
I am just wondering if there will be support for the hamlets and municipalities to deal with that unforeseen cost.
I went to the Financial Management Board earlier and was able to get an agreement for the department to get 200 thousand dollars for overall, it's a limited amount 200 thousand but that will be distributed to the Hamlet operations to offset the fuel price increase.
Mr. Chairman, I just wanted to ask if there is a way that we determine the amount or the financial impact of that increase on the municipalities if that was calculated.
You know, was it 200 thousand or what is the actual impact to the municipalities.
We used the formula that is applied at the present time.
We used three year averaging and for each community we looked at the impact on that community related to the increase in the fuel costs both for their diesel fuel and for their housing or their offices.
They have far fewer buildings than a local housing authority has.
As well as the fuel that they burn in their vehicles.
Yes, at the present time with that amount of dollars we can meet that forecasted need.
The other thing is that we when we do undertake the formula financing review this fiscal year we will be looking at changing this utilities formula given input from the communities so that it reflects a quicker change.
Right now it takes about three years for a change in the rates to catch up.
However, with this amount of money we can provide each municipality with additional dollars that will help offset the costs that we forecasted based on their three year averaging.
Under the water and sewer subsidy program.
I just wondered why in 1999 there was 5 million 239 thousand.
In Main Estimates of 2000/2001 there is only 4 million 785 thousand.
I wonder why there is a difference for this fiscal year over last year under the revised estimates.
When we were going through the first budget load for the new government in 1999/2000, with the assistance of the Department of Finance who did a lot of that work for us because we didn't have finance staff at the time.
There were a few areas where we found that there was a budget load that wasn't in the right area and we have been taking steps to change that through the process.
One of the areas that needed sorting out, was the transfer of dollars from our budget to the new Housing Corporation.
When all those figures were adjusted, you will see in some of the other figures that it may go down a bit, but it is because we gave out dollars to Housing or the budget load wasn't in the right category.
We are anticipating, again with the support of the Finance Department and having staff now, that once the budget is approved the figures will be in the right line items on the expense side of the budget.
Maybe the municipal governments are requesting lower funding now but looking at the whole of Nunavut, it is a big geography and I am just wondering if perhaps the hamlets have requested lower funding from previous years.
While we were preparing our financial budgets last year the Housing Corporation was still under our department.
It was under the Department of Community Government & Transportation.
For that reason we had to make some changes in the figures now that Housing Corporation is a stand-alone department.
The amount of money that we provide the hamlets has not decreased substantially although the funding is still under the Department of Community Government, we had to make some transfers to another department.
Although the amount that we supply to communities has not changed much.
Under Community Government & Transportation, community government, branch summary.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): Are we under 7 – 7.
Chairperson (interpretation): We are under 7 – 8.
Page 7 – 7 was already approved so we are on the next page, 7 – 8.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): I was going to ask a question under 7 – 7 but that is okay.
I will ask another question under 7 – 8.
The amount of money under water and sewage services subsidy program has decreased from last year's estimates.
The minister already explained the reasons why but if he wants to explain again, he may do so but he already explained the reasons.
Hon. Jack Anawak (interpretation): Yes, last year when we did our budgeting although the Main Estimates for 2001 has decreased, the reason why it has decreased is because we had Housing under our department, but the amount of money we provide to the communities hasn't changed.
We are still under community government.
If there are no further comments on this do you agree.
Chairperson (interpretation): Okay go back to the next page.
Community Government & Transportation, community government, branch summary.
Bottom of page 7 – 6.
My apologies, there is a slight difference it says 27 thousand 774.
It should have been 23 million 774 thousand.
I am sorry, we did not state 27 thousand 774.
This was already agreed to however it should have been 27 thousand 774.
I was just thinking that you stated the total grants and contributions.
Were you just going to mention that Mr. Chairman.
I think this is a slightly different figure and he just wanted to clarify the details.
If you can move to 7 – 6 then we can give the figures.
Page 7 – 6, under Community Government & Transportation, community government, branch summary.
Operations and maintenance, total operations and maintenance, 37 million 135 thousand.
Mr. Chairman, something just hit me looking at the compensation and benefits and I don't know if the minister explained, I know that the Housing function was in the department last year, and it is no longer within that department.
I noticed that area has increased, and I am just wondering if last year the department didn't budget to be fully staffed.
I am just wondering why, I know they have lost the Housing function that was in there.
It doesn't show up in all the rest, I am just wondering why it has increased.
I am just wondering if it was because of needing the budget to be fully staffed last year and they are going to have more staff this year.
Is there an increase in staff.
If the member looks at page 7 – 9 you will see that last year transportation was 3.449 million and it's down.
That's because we have reallocated dollars that showed up in transportation that were community government salary dollars.
The Housing dollars that were agreed to through the process between the two departments and the Financial Management Board those have been transferred.
Again that is simply having better staff levels now in finance and being able to work through and saying this is where those dollars should have been charged.
Total operations and maintenance, 37 million 135 thousand.
Chairperson (interpretation): Total Expenditures, 49 million 649 thousand.
Chairperson (interpretation): Go on to page 7 – 9.
Page 7 – 9.
Community Government & Transportation, transportation, branch summary.
Total operations and maintenance, 13 million 638 thousand.
Chairperson (interpretation): Total expenditures, 16 million 670 thousand.
Chairperson (interpretation): On to page 7 – 11.
Community Government & Transportation, distribution of budget.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): Why have the community aerodrome radio stations not changed from last year's revised estimates.
Hon. Jack Anawak (interpretation): I am sorry I did not get his question.
Presently this is recovered work, dollars that we recovered from NAV Canada and we are presently negotiating with NAV Canada increases for the CARS radio stations and we have had considerable input from community councils over increases that they are looking for.
Once those would be done and an agreement is entered into we would be reporting that through the Financial Management Board and looking for approval to adjust this.
This is totally recovered from NAV Canada, but we are presently engaged in negotiations with them to increase dollars values for community airport radios.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): Just below that item I just mentioned.
Minor works.
Why is there a decrease in this amount.
Have they almost completed this project.
These dollars are recovered from the Canadian Coast Guard and they have reduced their contribution to Nunavut.
Again, there will be, once we get a list of the projects that we are looking at, a letter going out to each of the Regional Superintendents asking them to consult with communities.
We will meet again with the Canadian Coast Guard with a list and we are looking at increasing this amount at least back up to the half million we had last year and signing a new vote 4 – 5 for a new recovery type agreement with them.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): Just below minor works, under item small boating safety awareness program.
Why don’t they increase these amounts within Nunavut.
Looking at this program, this has been received from the Federal Government, through negotiations and agreements.
If somebody requests funding from our department for that reason things have not changed over previous years and I think this amount will stay the same.
Although we are trying to find a way of increasing this budget, and I expect that we will get larger amounts in the near future.
We ourselves as the Government of Nunavut cannot increase this when we are getting a recovery from the Federal Government.
I still take it we are under page 7 – 11.
Yes we were going to 7 – 11 but we missed 7 – 10 and somebody raised a question under 7 – 10 so that is why we are under 7 – 10.
Do you have further comments Mr. McLean.
When we are on 7 – 11.
Any further comments on 7 – 10.
If there are none, then turn the page.
Apparently in English the copies are correctly numbered, just the Inuktitut pages are out of order.
You are looking for page 7 – 11 in your books and those with Inuktitut will have to go back to the page before page 11.
I will not be quoting the numbers here either.
I would like to ask a couple of questions.
Under distribution of budget.
Do you wish to respond.
Please proceed Mr. McLean.
We will both get it right here soon.
Under distribution of budget of operations & maintenance is there a figure in there for the Iqaluit capital airport of 2 million 517 thousand 617 dollars.
Mr. Ferris: Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.
This is the roll up and distribution of the cost to maintain and operate the Iqaluit airport we will be in that figure in that distribution.
Just let me check with the finance people because it may be under Directorate now.
The 22 million does not include the Iqaluit airport.
The dollars for the Iqaluit airport are included in the 17 million under total operations because that is now operating as a capital airport under Directorate.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Ferris.
This 2 million 715 thousand is that what is cost to run the airport.
Is that the actual cost to run the airport in Iqaluit a year.
Is that a tendered contract or is that handed over to the capital.
Mr. Ferris: There are two components in the airport operation.
There are Department staff that have salary and wages.
Some travel cost and there is a contract in place for the maintenance of the airport.
The maintenance contract includes the maintenance of all the heavy snow removal equipment that the Government owns.
So it is an operating contract and it is a maintenance contract to keep it maintained and to keep the airstrip ploughed and do maintenance on the buildings.
But there are also staff, an airport manager plus staff that are working there full-time.
So this airport in Iqaluit is operated differently from the other 25 airports in Nunavut.
Is it a different type of operation like I think the Municipalities run most of them.
So this is a different type of operation here at the airport in Iqaluit.
The airport operation in Iqaluit is a Government operation.
There was at maybe four years ago when Transport Canada was still involved.
Some discussion with the Town.
But because of the liability and the need to ensure the Town lost interest very quickly in operating this airport.
It is a major airport not part of the National airport system.
There is a very high level of security on it and that other operations that discourage the Municipal Corporation from getting involved being the airport authority.
This 2 million 500 odd thousand dollars is that totally funded by the Nunavut Government.
Or is there a Federal contribution involved in that Mr. Chairperson.
Mr. Ferris: Mr. Chairperson that 2.5 million would be funded by the Government of Nunavut.
There are some projects of a capital nature that are regulatory where we would get money from the Federal government.
But we also do get a sizeable amount of revenue that goes into the general fund.
There are landing fees that are charged.
A fee comes to the airport off the fuel taxes.
I am just looking at the figure to give it to you.
It is probably around 1 million dollars that we take in.
During this fiscal year we will be reviewing our weeks at the airport to look at whether we are getting adequate revenue.
What does the Town of Iqaluit receive.
Do they receive any taxes at that airport.
Are there any revenues from that airport.
Is it just they do not receive any compensation from that airport other than landing an airplane.
Two things happen.
This Government funds through the grants in lieu.
Those are taxes this Government pays and the Municipality of Iqaluit is the only tax base Municipality so they are receiving the grants in lieu of taxes on our property at the airport.
The Town has approached our Minister and the Minister has agreed.
We are looking at transferring all the commercial land that is out there and the leases go over to Town control.
So it fits under the Town by-laws and the revenue that we would be generating off those leases would be than generated by the Town.
We must maintain certain land at that airport but because of zoning requirements for aircraft clearance.
But other land out there the Town was concerned there was not enough controls in it. It was growing topsy tervy. So we are pursuing with them whether it is feasible to make a land transfer.
Then that would give them the revenue that is associated with it.
Any future developments at that airport. Like airport terminal buildings. One way extensions.
Apron upgrades and things like that. Do have an agreement with the Federal Government to provide any kind of funding for these upgrades.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. McLean. Mr. Ferris.
In terms of some of the capital projects. We will be in the able to get .95 cent dollars from the Federal Government.
They have already and met with us. We have an idea of those projects that would be applicable to under what is called Airport Capital Assistance Program. They do make those dollars available for any regulatory safety nature.
So when we are looking at a 10 million job to pay the runways or open up taxiway alpha. 95 cents on every dollar would come from the Federal Government. When it comes to the potential of a new terminal building.
That would be something that this Government would have to look at. There may or may not be a smaller amount of funding. We have been negotiating with them on the bases they put that terminal building on location.
Now it is causing zoning problems. However, it does not fit clearly under ACAP.
We are talking about a different formula on the terminal building if the Federal Government was to agree to place it and that would be somewhere in the neighbourhood of 50-50.
But that one we have not finalise as much as we have the ACAP arrangements.
That is good news that we receive 95 cents on every dollar.
I am sure I asked the Minister earlier in the session that there be an evaluation of all airstrips in Nunavut.
I hope that my runway needs to be resurfaced so the Municipality would have the opportunity to receive 95 percent of the funding.
I am sure we could scrap up 5 percent for a new resurfacing.
On that topic.
How much do you expect to receive from ACAP this year and where is it going.
Mr. Ferris: Mr. Chairperson it is not that the Minister and I would like the announce what we know what is going to be announced by the Federal Government.
But the Minister of Transport gets to announce it first.
I can say this much.
The first six projects we have filed have been approved.
The Minister had asked the MP to come and make that announcement this week. Because of the untimely death in Arviat, that has been delayed until she is available to come back.
There will be continued announcements as the applications process is completed and the Minister of Transport grants the approvals.
But those projects Mr. Chairperson I have mentioned when we report a committee by spread across Nunavut.
In fact, two of them are going to the MLA's region once the announcement is made.