EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
But from what I understand the issue around providing assistance to unilingual elders and around escorts has also been addressed and we are putting forth a recommendation that unilingual elders going to boarding homes or traveling have the appropriate medical escort.
Question 083 – 2(3): Changes to the Down Payment Assistance Program (Tootoo)
Mr. Speaker, last week the minister did a statement announcing some changes or enhancements to the Nunavut Down Payment Assistance Program.
The most part of that is directed towards residents in Rankin Inlet, Cambridge Bay and all other communities except for Iqaluit. These communities are going to see increases in the amount of funding that they will be able to receive under the program.
Mr. Speaker, I know from experience that Iqaluit is probably the most expensive place in Nunavut right now to buy or build a home and I know that for some people that high cost is a deterrent from them being able to come up with a down payment and a deterrent for them to enter into homeownership and being stuck in staff housing or other rented accommodations.
I am just wondering if the minister can explain if looking at increasing the amounts for Iqaluit is something that they looked at.
Speaker (interpretation): Minister responsible for Nunavut Housing Corporation, Mr. Akesuk.
We are currently working on the down payments.
We saw a lot of construction around here in Iqaluit; I think this is the fastest growing community.
That’s one of the reasons why we haven’t made any increases.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. Your first supplementary, Mr. Tootoo.
There’s a lot of construction going on here in the city and it’s the fastest growing community, but Iqaluit is the capital and there are a lot of people moving here. There are a lot of employment opportunities.
What I have seen in the new subdivisions that are being developed, for the most part, generally you are seeing rental units go up and also, families with dual incomes, the majority of whom come from outside of the community.
There are a lot of people within the community that are from here that don’t enjoy the same dual income levels as other families here, causing a large gap.
I know of people who wanted to, but have not been able to, come up with the down payment because of the high cost.
Will the minister commit to looking at addressing that issue and coming forward with some kind of a proposal to look at deciding whether the amounts for Iqaluit should be increased or not?
I could look into the issue because, of course, we want to treat everybody fairly and to properly represent all of the residents of Nunavut.
There are quite a number of us who would like to build our own homes or to buy homes.
We could look into the issue.
I guess my follow-up question to the minister is: how soon does he anticipate that he would be able to report back to the Members of the House on that?
Hopefully we can review it in the upcoming year.
Before any changes are made to our budget, we will review it.
Would the minister be able to commit to bring forward some recommendations for members or an update for members to hear during the first session after Christmas?
I think it’s more important how our budget is being done in the next capital budget. And again, I think we will have to look to see if we could do it as early as February or March, but then again, I think we will have a better idea of how much money we spend on the Nunavut Downpayment Assistance program.
I think we will have a better idea in the new capital budget costs.
Question 084 – 2(3): Financial Support for Adult Basic Education Students (Peterson)
Some Adult Basic Education students in Cambridge Bay are struggling to make ends meet. Many are single mothers. They are apparently ineligible for FANS.
I am sure this is probably the same across Nunavut. Adult Basic Education is the first step for many individuals to upgrade their skills so that they can begin further education for future employment.
My question for the minister is, what consideration has the department given to expanding support for adult basic education programs across the territory?
The FANS Program mainly has been put in place to deal with issues for post-secondary students, within Nunavut, or students that are taking courses in the south.
In this case, in some instances, depending on the student’s situation, the majority of our students taking Adult Basic Education are on Income Support.
They may be in a better position taking Income Support depending on the family situation, of course, instead of going onto the FANS Program.
The FANS Program is there for students who take a diploma program, a degree program, and so on. In most cases Adult Basic Education programs are of a short duration and are of a certificate nature. Because of that, most of the students involved in the ABE Program would not be eligible for FANS.
Has the minister or the department set up access to funding for all of those that are interested in taking an Adult Basic Education program, and not just those on Income Support? If not, why has this not been done?
Again the FANS Program is in place for post-secondary school students. In the case of short-term programs, like ABE, and I taught ABE programs for several years, they can range anywhere between three and six months in duration.
There isn’t a mechanism right now within the FANS regulations to be able fit short-term students to have an uptake on the program depending, again, on the individual’s circumstances.
That is something that we are looking into at the department to see if there is an opportunity within the FANS Program to allow for more flexibility.
I’m glad to hear that he is talking about flexibility.
We have been talking many times in the House about education, that it is the key to the future for Nunavummiut, and these ABE students are no different than other Nunavummiut.
Many of the students are encouraged by talks that we have in the House about all the opportunities that we have out there.
However, these are adult students, and they are returning to school in their adult years. A number of these individuals have issues of self-esteem, which could be further complicated by other sources.
My question for the minister is: can he tell us what kinds of counselling services or tutoring are provided to the ABE students across Nunavut?
In all of our communities, our Community Learning Centres are base funded for adult basic education programs.
When we say ABE programs we are talking about basic literacy programs. They could also include a combination of life skills programs that would be delivered in each community.
At that same time we do have adult educators in the communities, with which you are involved. You’re right at the very centre of delivering the ABE programs within that particular community. They also provide that type of counselling.
We also have, as the member knows, career counsellors within the Department of Education, that also provide some of that assistance.
Can the minister commit to a review before March 31, 2006, of all the programs and services available to assist the ABE students to stay in school and continue their education?
If I heard the member correctly, he was asking for a complete inventory list of all the programs and services offered through ABE programming through Nunavut Arctic College.
Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, all of our adult education centres are based funded to deliver adult basic learning and indeed ABE and curriculum and resources are available at each centre.
So I think we will be able to comply with the Member’s request and have that available to the Member.
Oral Questions. Member for Rankin Inlet North, Mr. Curley.
Question 085 – 2(3): 50 Percent of Education Budget to Iqaluit (Curley)
Mr. Curley (interpretation): Good afternoon. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
My question is for the Minister perhaps for Nunavut.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, we should all remember that when Nunavut was in the process of being created there was a general consensus that we did not want to create simply another Yellowknife.
Mr. Speaker, I believe that is where we are heading right now.
Every dollar in capital spending that we are going to incur this year, 50 percent of the funds are allocated for Iqaluit.
For the population, 25 percent I mean for a population of 20 percent of Nunavummiut.
And I believe that is not fair for Nunavummiut.
With all due respect to the minister, he said during the Leadership Review originally that he would be fair to Nunavummiut.
Out of the Department of Education spending for 2006-07, $9.7 million is set aside for Iqaluit projects.
This is almost 50 percent of the departments’ planned spending for the coming year.
Why has the minister not been treating Nunavummiut in other communities outside of Iqaluit as priorities?
I’ll approach the question in a frank and serious manner by suggesting and saying to the member in answer to the question that the school replacements or renovations or indeed new school capital replacements that we had a discussion on Thursday and we will continue that debate today with our capital budget.
The schools are replaced or renovated based on criteria.
I believe we are the only department in government that actually have a criteria based on the age of the facility, based on the utilization of the facility and so on.
We just completed a brand new school in Baker Lake that cost millions of dollars. We just concluded a new school in Arviat, which cost millions of dollars.
Those schools were at very high rating. Mr. Speaker, we are planning a new school in Gjoa Haven where the utilization is 132 percent.
We are working on the Peter Pitseolak School in Cape Dorset at 115 percent.
We are working on the school in Sanikiluaq, which is at 115 percent.
All those schools are on their way and they are not in Iqaluit.
Mr. Speaker, the capital budget in Iqaluit was high in the last couple of years. A school burned down and we had to replace that school at a cost of over $10 million.
The Inukshuk High School Mr. Speaker is one of the oldest schools, which we discussed on Thursday, in Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, the Aqsarniit School again was over utilized and indeed was supposed to be set up for a six, seven, eight classroom and Mr. Speaker, it is too small. You can’t get a number of students in there based on population increases.
Mr. Speaker, many of the projects that are in the budget are on-going projects. Before I became the Minister of Education, the former Minister of Education was the Member from Iqaluit.
So Mr. Speaker, I hope that clarifies why the money is being spent and is not being spent based on some form of partnership.
Mr. Curley: Mr. Speaker, I believe the Minister attempts to clarify exactly for here in Iqaluit and it does not mention how many new schools have been built in Iqaluit during the last five years.
If I recall, I believe there are three schools that have been built since 1999 or thereabout.
It is fair if he compares with apples and apples and not mix it up with some other figure.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to also remind the minister of all the capital expenditures that we spent last year, in excess of $100 million, 41 percent of these projects were allocated for the City of Iqaluit.
So, we’re not just talking about this discrepancy with the distribution of funds during the last few years.
It is very obvious the minister has now pretty well abdicated his responsibilities to treat other communities outside of the City of Iqaluit as demonstrated by the capital projects.
I would like to ask the minister, will he rethink in the next coming year, the equitable distribution of capital dollars to ensure that Nunavummiut receive fair distribution of capital expenditures?
For clarification and for clarity, the member has just suggested that...how many new schools were built in Iqaluit in the last 10 years.
In the last five years, thank you for your clarification.
Mr. Speaker, there was a new Francophone school built in Iqaluit, paid for by the federal government.
Mr. Speaker, there was a new Joamie School built because the other burned down.
Mr. Speaker, there was an Aqsarniit Ilinniarvik, built by the federal government under the incremental infrastructure money.
And, Mr. Speaker, on top of that, I just explained that in the last year, we just finished a brand new school in Baker Lake, several million dollars. I was with the member from Arviat where we opened a beautiful facility in Arviat, and, Mr. Speaker, as I said; we’ve got ongoing projects for example, in Gjoa Haven.
So, for the member to suggest that somehow the minister has manipulated the money out of a particular regard for Iqaluit, I don’t think that is a fair statement and I look forward to being able to maybe give some more clarification during the Committee of the Whole briefing.
Again, Mr. Speaker, a lot of the projects that are in the budget were ongoing budgets from last year.
They are not new projects that I just started as minister in the last year when I became the Minister of Education.
Maybe the member could find these projects that I started as the minister, and said, “here they are”, because I became the minister and I’m representing Iqaluit.
Mr. Speaker, what I have tried to do, and I think the members realize in all sincerity and honesty is that I’ve tried to represent as a minister, when I was a minister for whatever department, or portfolio that I had, Nunavut, equally.
I understand the minister’s attempt to justify why he’s such a good minister for Nunavummiut, when in fact, 50 percent of the department’s total planned spending for the coming year is allocated for one town, one city, another Yellowknife, and he is not convincing Nunavummiut why 50 percent...
A Member: Point of order.
Speaker (interpretation): Mr. Tootoo, what is your point of order?
Mr. Speaker, the member is implying favouritism on the allocation of projects, how the Department of Education, for which the minister is responsible, is from Iqaluit, started those projects.
You cannot, under our rules, make implications for unsubstantiated things. So, it’s on that basis Mr. Speaker, that I take offence to the member’s comments.
Maybe he didn’t get the answer, he didn’t get it.
Maybe we should draw the member a picture and he’ll get it.
These projects started, as the minister indicated before, and he had nothing to do with it.
If he’s implying that impartiality of where a minister is from contributed to these projects; that is not correct Mr. Speaker.
So, I think he is implying false pretences to what is being said, and those kinds of comments should not be allowed and are not allowed under the rules of this House.
Maybe Mr. Speaker, the member should take the answers home and read the Hansard. He got a very good explanation on Friday. So, I don’t see what his line of questioning is and I made my point of order.
So, I ask if you could rule on it.
Speaker (interpretation): We are under Oral Questions. Can we have order in the House?
We will take a short break and I will rule on the point of order.
We will take a break for a few minutes.
>>House recessed at 14:42 and resumed at 15:04
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Members.
I wish to advise members that I have had the opportunity to consider the point of order raised by the Member for Iqaluit Centre in relation to the line of oral questioning posed by the Member for Rankin Inlet North to the Minister of Education.
It is my view that there is no point of order. While there may be a dispute between members on the appropriateness of government policy, the language used by the member posing the question did not breach our rules.
Nonetheless, I would always encourage all members to exercise care in their language and refrain from comments that could be misinterpreted.
The Member for Rankin Inlet North has the floor.
Going back to the Orders of the Day. Under Oral Questions. Mr. Curley.
My question for the minister continues. It is a fact that even if the minister confused the numbers with respect the 2006-07, $9.7 million is for Iqaluit projects; this represents 50 percent of the department’s total planned spending for this coming year.
I would like the minister to indicate to Nunavummiut, and to this House, why this is such a fair distribution of dollars, in spite of the other needs are, 80 percent of the population being outside of Iqaluit.
I would like the minister to assure that this practise will not continue, as we do have other communities that have urgent project requirements.
First of all, thank you very much for your ruling. Second of all, to the member’s question. I’m not taking his questioning personally.
I’ll try to explain the facts. The facts are as follows. In that budget we are talking about, which we’ll have an opportunity to talk about in the committee of the whole later today, the member fails to mention some of the other projects that are going to occur in that budget.
I’ll just give you an example.
We have a brand new school, with several millions of dollars, plans moving forward in Cape Dorset; Cape Dorset is not in Iqaluit.
We also have a project going forward in Gjoa Haven of several millions of dollars. Mr. Speaker, Gjoa Haven is not in Iqaluit.
Mr. Speaker, we also have a major renovation proceeding now in Coral Harbour. Mr. Speaker, Coral Harbour is not in Iqaluit.
To defend the capital budget, let me put it this way Mr. Speaker, the members in the House last year voted and approved the capital budget of the Department of Education, which included the projects that we see here; which includes the ongoing projects.
The member cannot demonstrate where the Minister of Education has put a specific Iqaluit project in the budget.
The member asked me earlier about in the last five years how many brand new schools were built in Iqaluit. Actually, I stand to be corrected, I said that there were three, and I was wrong, indeed, since the year 2000, there has only been one school built in Iqaluit, actually completed, and that was the new Joamie School that was replaced because of the fire.
The other two schools were built, but they were federal infrastructure money; the Aqsarniit School, and indeed, the Francophone School.
The reason Mr. Speaker, for the extra money, for the Iqaluit projects, again, he is amalgamating the different projects; there are monies there for Nunavut Arctic College because our students need accommodations. We’re out on the private marketplace right now, renting over 30 units; some of them aren’t the very best.
So we need to be able to move forward to build our own student accommodations; which is something that has been in the capital plans for a long time and the renovations to Inukshuk High School, which seems to be an issue.
As I said earlier Mr. Speaker, we do have a list and members can be provided a copy. I know a lot of members have received copies of it because of a request made by the standing committee.
We are the only department in the government, I believe, that has that type of criteria list, and the reason why we have it is because of what happened in Cambridge Bay a few years ago when a lot of money went into that school there, and the House, at that time, which is not a very long time ago, because we have only been the government since 1999, in the last five years, changed the criteria and the Department of Education came forward and said replacement of facilities should be based on three major criteria; which included occupancy, and usage, age, and the quality of the building.
That is the process that we are using.
So in that case Mr. Speaker, I hope that helps not only answer it logistically, but also administratively and financially why the projects are presented as they are.
Mr. Curley: Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the minister attempting to justify why 50 percent of the capital dollars is fair for Nunavummiut outside the City of Iqaluit.
Mr. Speaker, I indicated to the minister that there is a perception out there and the minister must take it serious that we are building on another Yellowknife-based headquarters and it was the intent of the public Nunavummiut when they voted for capital when the new ministers were appointed that we favour one community at the expense of the others.
So, I want to ask the minister again: will the minister consider adopting a system that would appear to be more equitable and fair for the Nunavummiut rather than attempting to justify spending for one city?
The minister did not explain that there was roughly $5 million GN money spent last year on the Aqsarniit School to extend that school. That was a purchase from last year.
So, again, I urge the minister to explain, for Nunavummiut, that he will make it more equitable and fair for the people of Nunavut.
Government goes, usually, on five-year plans when we are doing the capital planning process. In the Department of Education, we actually did a 20-year forecast; the only department, I believe, that has substantiated for capital projects to come forward. Mr. Speaker, those include community learning centres, new schools, and additions to upgrade our infrastructure.
Mr. Speaker, the member said to me: the minister has not justified the expenditure. I have justified them to the basis of credibility that you could, in this context, Mr. Speaker, by saying that the challenge of the veracity of the statements is incorrect.
The schools are based on need, they are based on the status of the school itself, and they are based on the occupancy of the school, what the utilization is. That list is in place.
However Mr. Speaker, during the Committee of the Whole debate on the capital budget of Education, if the members have motions or recommendations to bring forward on the budget Mr. Speaker, to help us plan that process, Mr. Speaker, then that’s something that we will do.
But Mr. Speaker, there has been a fair and equitable distribution of the budget, and indeed, the issues that the member talks about of this budget, was the monies that were spent last year, for example, on Aqsarniit were approved in the budget last year by all of the Members in the House. The Minister of Education, being a member from Iqaluit, did not come up somehow miraculously, and create a special project for Iqaluit, that did not occur.
The member refers back to some of the other issues.
Mr. Speaker, as a minister for the Government of Nunavut, Mr. Speaker, I have tried and I think I have done the best job that I know how possible to prove, Mr. Speaker, that there hasn’t been a bias toward putting out projects, and as I explained, Gjoa Haven, Coral Harbour, Arviat, Baker Lake, Cape Dorset, all communities are either getting new schools or have gotten new schools over the past couple of years, I think demonstrates that.
Question 086 – 2(3): Workshop on Shamanism – Out of Order
I would like to direct my question to Minister Tapardjuk. He was going to find out about the teaching of shamanism.
Speaker (interpretation): Minister of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth, Minister Tapardjuk. You can’t raise that question because he already said that he was going to take the question as notice and get back to you.
Question 087 – 2(3): Reducing Income Support Payments to Former Residential School Students (Barnabas)
My question is for the Minister of Education, who is responsible for the Government of Nunavut’s Income Support Program.
Last week, it was announced that a comprehensive settlement agreement on residential schools has finally been achieved. There will be Inuit in Nunavut who will be entitled to compensation for the harm that they have suffered.
Mr. Speaker, many individuals who suffered at residential school have faced great difficulties in their lives ever since. Many have come to rely on programs like income support (interpretation) and they will not get this from bingo winnings.
(interpretation ends) My question for the minister is this: will Inuit who are receiving income support from the GN have their income support reduced if they receive a residential school settlement payment?
Over the last week or so, we have heard that there has been movement through the federal government to finally, and with some clarity, finally face up to the issue of the residential school program and indeed put together a financial compensation package for the residential school survivors.