EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I have heard that the ministers have travelled to other provinces and that one of the ministers had gone down to Ottawa to play golf travelling from headquarters down to Ontario. These have to be known by Nunavummiut because they are paying for it. I believe this has to be transparent.
Some Hon. Member: Hear, hear.
I just would like to remind you that there was a request for a recorded vote. (interpretation ends) A recorded vote was requested. (interpretation ends) All those in favour, please stand and then sit down when I have called your name.
And, Mr. Kattuk.
All those opposed, please sit down while I call your name.
In favour of the motion, 16; opposed, 0; abstained, 1.
Bill 27 – An Act to Amend the Land Titles Act – First Reading
It’s from the Department of Justice.
(interpretation ends) I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Nanulik, that Bill 27, An Act to Amend the Land Titles Act, be read for the first time. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The motion is carried and Bill 27 has had its first reading.
Before we proceed with Committee of the Whole with Mr. Barnabas in the Chair, we’ll take a 20-minute break.
>>House recessed at 15:43 and Committee resumed at 16:11
Chairman (Mr. Barnabas): Welcome back, Members.
In Committee of the Whole, we have the following items to deal with: Bill 23, Bill 24, and Bill 25.
We would like to continue with Bill 23 and commence the review of the Main Estimates of the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs. If time permits, we would proceed to the Department of Culture, Language, Elders, and Youth.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Kattuk. (interpretation ends) Are we in agreement that we first deal with the Main Estimates for the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs?
Bill 23 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2008-2009 – Consideration in Committee – Executive & Intergovernmental Affairs
I would like to ask Premier Paul Okalik of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs to make his opening comments.
I am pleased to appear before the Committee of the Whole to discuss the 2008-09 Main Estimates and Business Plan of the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs (EIA).
EIA has the smallest departmental budget in the Government of Nunavut (GN). This budget permits us to accomplish the goals and objectives committed to in Pinasuaqtavut 2004-09 and to advance Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit across all sectors of the government.
For 2008-09, EIA has been allocated $11.2 million in operations and maintenance expenditures, as compared to $10.9 million for the previous year, an increase of $295,000.
Compared to the 2007-08 main estimates, there are only two changes: a $145,000 increase to fund the implementation of the Ikummatiit Energy Strategy; and a $150,000 increase to create a new decentralized position in our Statistical Division to support the GN’s Mining Strategy.
As a territory dependent and reliant on fossil fuels, we are subject to volatile world oil prices each year.
Over the next year, the Energy Secretariat, in coordination and input from the public and GN departments and agencies, will carry out important implementation on the Ikummatiit Energy Strategy that will focus on assessing alternative energy sources best suited for Nunavut and using our current energy more prudently.
The results will be a stronger and more efficiently managed energy system, and a reduction in our energy consumption, thus meeting one of the key objectives of Pinasuaqtavut 2004-09.
The new position with the Statistical Division will allow us to assess and monitor activities relating to mineral development. This year, the focus will be to established baseline socio-economic data, such as employment rates and income levels in communities.
It will provide us with a snapshot of communities before development. As mineral development continues, this will allow us to monitor the benefits and impacts and guide our programs to maximize benefits to your communities and constituents.
Mr. Chairman, in this, the last year of Pinasuaqtavut 2004-09 mandate, I expect to continue building our successes over the past several years. I welcome questions and comments from my fellow MLAs.
Do you have witnesses you would like to bring to the table? Mr. Okalik.
Chairman (interpretation): Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort Premier Okalik’s officials to the witness table.
For the record, Premier Okalik, please introduce your officials.
To my left, as you know my Deputy Minister, David Omilgoitok, and to my right, we have seconded him from the Department of Finance, Scott Marriott, who provides assistance to us.
I would like to ask the Chair of the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Accountability if he has any opening comments.
Mr. Tootoo: Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman: Please proceed, Mr. Tootoo.
I am very happy to be able to deliver the opening comments today for the Government Operations and Accountability Committee.
Our committee has scrutinized the proposed 2008-09 Main Estimates and Business Plan for the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs, and as I indicated, I am very happy to be able to provide the committee’s comments.
The standing committee notes that the department’s proposed 2008-09 budget of $11,240,000 is slightly less than the budget that was approved for 2007-08.
The department’s budget has increased approximately 45 percent from its initial allocation of $7,734,000 in 1999-2000.
Mr. Chairman, this is the fifth and final set of main estimates and departmental business plans to be considered by the Members of the Second Legislative Assembly. A number of concerns have been raised by the standing committee during prior years’ reviews of the department’s main estimates and business plans.
I would like to take a moment to note progress and performance in these areas.
In a number of respects, the government’s performance in meeting its statutory tabling requirements has improved since the first few years of GN’s existence.
EIA has an important role to play in enforcing discipline in this area with respect to departmental and Crown agency tabling requirements.
The standing committee continues to urge ministers to formally table in the House all policies that are approved by the Executive Council under the signature of the Premier as head of the executive branch of government.
The act of formally tabling such items in the Legislative Assembly in a timely fashion serves to recognize the fundamental principle of this government’s accountability to the legislature.
The regular tabling of new and revised GN policies also provides ministers with the opportunity to make formal statements in the House on the merits of such policies for the benefit of all members and the listening public.
Mr. Chairman, one of our collective goals announced at the 2004 Arviat Caucus Retreat at the beginning of our mandate was to explore overarching legislation to govern the accountability of public bodies across the territory. Issues of transparency and disclosure need to be a part of this initiative.
An important issue that continues to need to be addressed is a system for the registration of lobbyists.
In a number of Canadian jurisdictions, the government regulates the registration of paid lobbyists.
This is to help ensure that there is no secrecy when it comes to the public knowing who is acting on behalf of private interests. Generally, a public registry exists that clearly indicates who is lobbying on behalf of whom. This transparency is important when it comes to the public’s ability to know who is attempting to make representations to government decision makers, and on what subjects.
The 2006-07 Annual Report of the Integrity Commissioner to the Legislative Assembly, which was tabled in the House on May 29, 2007, noted that “the value of lobbyist registration, introduced by other jurisdictions, might be considered.”
However, we continue to lack such a system in Nunavut, despite the standing committee’s repeated calls for its establishment. To date, the government has not provided clear and compelling justifications for its apparent reluctance to introduce reform in this area.
Mr. Chairman, transparency and accountability must be more than a mere catchphrase. It must be a set of values which guide us as a public government.
Thanks in part to recommendations made by the standing committee, the Government of Nunavut has improved and expanded the range of information that it makes available to the public through tabling in the Legislative Assembly.
Members are pleased that the annual reports on government-wide grants and contributions expenditures, contracting, procurement and leasing activities, and bonus and travel expenditures are now being tabled in the House, although the timelines of these tablings has been inconsistent.
Mr. Chairman, the standing committee has publicly noted on a number of occasions that the bottom line is this: members of the public have the right to know, in detail, where their tax dollars are being spent. Making detailed information public on a regular basis also serves as an effective deterrent against wasteful spending and abuse of process.
Mr. Chairman, the Government of Nunavut’s obligations and activities with respect to the territory’s Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act are coordinated by the department. The standing committee notes that the government has been working to develop a privacy impact assessment process for GN departments and public bodies.
The standing committee recognizes that a degree of progress has been made to act on recommendations made by the Information and Privacy Commissioner and the committee itself. The standing committee looks forward to continuing its work in this area, and notes that it has held three public hearings since the beginning of the Second Assembly on the annual reports of the Information and Privacy Commissioner to the Legislative Assembly.
Members have been pleased with the Government of Nunavut’s ongoing work with the Northwest Territories and the Yukon on tri-territorial priorities, as illustrated by the renewal of the Northern Cooperation Accord and the 2007 release of the joint document titled, A Northern Vision: A Stronger North and a Better Canada.
Mr. Chairman, in December of 2005, the Government of Nunavut announced the appointment of a Chief Negotiator for devolution negotiations with the federal government. A new Devolution Division was subsequently added to the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs. In June of 2007, the Mayer Report was submitted to the Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs.
The report recommended a “go slow” approach to devolution.
The 2007-08 Business Plan for the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs indicated that the GN had a goal of achieving an Agreement-in-Principle on devolution by December 31, 2007 and a Devolution Final Agreement by December 31, 2008.
However, the 2008-09 departmental business plan has a revised target of achieving an Agreement-in-Principle on devolution by December 31, 2008 and a Devolution Final Agreement by December 31, 2010.
The department’s 2008-09 business plan also indicates that “the federal government … has not secured a negotiation mandate and negotiations have not yet begun.”
The standing committee continues to believe that it is important for our government to come to the devolution negotiation table with credibility and confidence.
Our capacity to achieve a significant transfer of responsibilities will be strengthened if we can clearly and convincingly demonstrate to Ottawa that we are successfully and responsibly managing our own affairs.
It is important that our government act on recommendations made by this standing committee and the Auditor General to strengthen the government’s financial management structures and practices.
Mr. Chairman, the standing committee has encouraged the Premier and his ministers to account more frequently and formally to the House on their activities and achievements at the numerous federal-provincial-territorial meetings at which they participate.
The standing committee has noted that ministers have been more proactive during the past year with respect to tabling reports on their intergovernmental initiatives and activities. The committee looks forward to the continuation of this practice.
On August 10, 2007, the federal government announced a number of sovereignty-related investments in the High Arctic, including a docking and refuelling facility in Nanisivik.
During the fall 2007 sitting of the Legislative Assembly, a number of members raised concerns in the House with respect to reports in the news media concerning the possible use of unmanned aerial drones by the Department of National Defence to patrol the arctic.
While the standing committee welcomes federal infrastructure investments in the arctic and supports the vigorous assertion of Canadian sovereignty, it is important that the human dimension of sovereignty not be neglected.
The Government of Nunavut should work to act as a bridge between the federal government and local communities that will be most impacted by new federal initiatives in order to open lines of dialogue and help maximize local awareness of employment and training opportunities.
The standing committee continues to support a positive working relationship between the Government of Nunavut and NTI, while encouraging the government to be significantly more candid with MLAs and the general public concerning the rationale for its own position in areas where the two parties may have honest disagreements on specific issues.
The standing committee also expects the Legislative Assembly and the public to be kept informed of the status of NTI’s lawsuit against the federal government in light of recent developments that may result in the GN being dragged into the dispute.
The standing committee has noted that the GN’s Deputy Ministers’ Committee on Environment, Economy and Land is responsible for “coordinating GN participation and representation in resource development planning activity in the territory, as well as initiatives to improve the regulatory system related to land management.”
The department’s budget for this program area is increasing from $367,000 in 2007-08 to $581,000 in 2008-09.
The Department of Economic Development and Transportation has been involved in efforts to streamline the regulatory environment in Nunavut in relation to natural resource extraction and development.
The standing committee supports regulatory reform initiatives that support the development of our economy and create employment, training and business opportunities for our constituents and our communities.
Mr. Chairman, the department is responsible for the overall implementation and monitoring of the GN’s decentralization initiative.
According to the department’s recent business plans, a total of 459 GN positions have been decentralized.
The business plans also indicate that the government “is looking at various issues that are impeding the filling of decentralized positions and is planning an annual Decentralization Planning and Reporting meeting for 2008 to provide an update on the status of decentralization in Nunavut.”
A number of reports of the Auditor General and this standing committee have recommended that the GN review aspects of its decentralized financial management structure. The standing committee’s recent public hearings concerning the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation and the impact that its decentralized location has had on its operations have clearly highlighted the need for the government to realistically re-evaluate specific decentralization decisions that have not proven successful.
Mr. Chairman, the department’s 2006-07 business plan reflected the creation of a new Energy Secretariat in the Intergovernmental Affairs branch of the department. The proposed budget for EIA’s Energy Secretariat has been increased to $424,000 for 2008-09.
The secretariat’s size has increased from two PYs. Its main priority for 2008-09 is to “implement the Ikummatiit Energy Strategy through a coordinated approach with affected departments and agencies.”
On November 1, 2007, the provisions in the Qulliq Energy Corporation Act providing for the creation of an Affordable Energy Fund came into force. This fund is to be managed by the Department of Finance.
The standing committee looks forward to closely scrutinizing the way in which this fund is managed.
It is important that the government continues to examine ways to improve the coordination of energy-related functions and responsibilities across the government. For example, while the Department of Finance administers the Nunavut Electricity Subsidy Program, the Department of Education manages the Seniors Fuel Subsidy Program. In fact, a majority of Cabinet Ministers have some form of energy-related responsibility in their portfolios.
Mr. Chairman, the final theme that I wish to address is performance measurement.
The standing committee was pleased to have worked well with the minister in scrutinizing and approving Nunavut’s new Statistics Act, and is pleased that the first annual report required under the legislation has been tabled in the Legislative Assembly.
The department’s 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 business plans have all indicated that a priority for the coming fiscal year is to establish a GN performance measurement system. The 2008-09 business plan also indicates that an evaluation framework has been developed to guide evaluations of GN programs.
One specific goal of the department in 2007-08 was to “measure the effectiveness of government-wide initiatives aimed at reducing the number of suicides in the territory.”
The 2008-09 business plan indicates that a priority for the coming year will be to “implement action areas of the Suicide Intervention and Prevention Strategy.”
An important step in this process is the clear designation of which minister is actually responsible for coordinating the government’s suicide prevention strategy. This is an issue that has been raised publicly in the House.
The standing committee continues to advocate for performance measurements that look at actual results and outcomes, not just activities and outputs.
For example, one of the stated priorities of the Department of Education in 2005-06 was to “undertake the development of initiatives to address drop-out rates.”
However, it remains unclear as to whether its activities and expenditures have actually had any measurable success in reducing drop-out rates.
Individual members may have their own concerns and comments to make as we proceed.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Tootoo. (interpretation ends) Before we proceed, I would like to remind members of the following: according to Rule 77(1), you have ten minutes to speak, and according to Rule 77(2), subject to the discretion of the Chair, a member may speak more than once to a matter under discussion but not until every member wishing to speak has spoken.
I don’t have any names for general comments.
(interpretation) At this time, we are on page B-4. (interpretation ends) Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $2,356,000.
On this page, the monies slated for resource development planning activity and land management is at $367,000 for 2007-08 and is increased to $581,000 in 2008-09.
It’s on page B-4.
My question is: what is the increase going to be used for? With regards to trying to conserve money, I’ll just use an example.
Economic Development and Transportation also deals with streamlining the conservation of funds with regards to mining and economic development.
If he’s referring to B-6, I can respond to it once we get to that page. I don’t see anything on B-4 for what he’s referring to.
Mr. Arvaluk, could you elaborate your question. We are on B-4 under Directorate.
Could you rephrase your question, please, Mr. Arvaluk.
Mr. Arvaluk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation) I believe we were on (interpretation ends) the GN’s Deputy Ministers Committee on Economy, Environment and Land is responsible for coordinating “GN participation and representation in resource development and planning activity in the territory, as well as initiatives to improve the regulatory system related to land management.”
The department’s budget for this program area increased from $367,000 in 2007-08 to $581,000 in 2008-09. I thought it was in the Directorate.
My question was what will these additional resources be used for and what is the status of efforts to streamline the regulatory environment in Nunavut in relation to natural resource extraction and development that our Chairman was talking about.
Are you referring to the opening comments that were made by the Premier?
Mr. Arvaluk (interpretation): No.
My question is under B-4, Directorate.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): I apologize, Mr. Chairman, but I’ll respond to this under B-6. It’s in regard to the assistants for the Deputy Ministers of Economy, Environment and Land who will be assisting with reviews of land issues.
Under B-6, we will see a corresponding slight increase in Compensation and Benefits.
That is slated for the employees so that there is uniformity in the government departments for governmental responses in regard to reviewing mining exploration activities and development reviews. This is more for our Planning and Evaluation Division and that is what we have in place for this fiscal year.
Mr. Arvaluk, maybe if you clarify your question, I will give the Premier an opportunity to respond.
I’m not sure if the minister and I are in the same subject, but I’ll get back to him. If it’s in B-6 that it shows, so be it, but if it’s in B-4, I’ll get back to him then. (interpretation) I’m done for now.
Mr. Curley: Thank you. (interpretation) I would also like to ask a question under B-4 and it’s in regard to the policies.
The standing committee, on more than one occasion, has asked the Premier about possibly setting up a rule or a policy in regard to the registration of lobbyists. I think that we should also include the previous deputy ministers. When they leave the government, they get contracts and become consultants.
Has the Premier considered setting up a policy and possibly put in a number of months or a year so that the deputy ministers won’t be able to bid on contracts? We also see more and more lobbyists who are contracted by the Nunavut Government.
Have you considered this issue?
The issue of lobbyists has been brought up more than once in this House.
As a small territory, we all know, or we usually know, what everyone is doing. (interpretation ends) I think my colleague for Cambridge Bay was pretty succinct in outlining that what happens in Nunavut is probably pretty commonly known.
It’s difficult to try and set up a Registry with the limited resources that we do have. So if we had an unlimited pool, it would be fairly easy to set one up and copy the few jurisdictions that do have lobby registries.
(interpretation) I will look into the issue and see how it’s used in the other jurisdictions. We’ll also have to look at the financial resources. At this time, we don’t have the resources to set up such a system.
I heard two questions and the other one was in regard to former deputy ministers who become consultants for the Government of Nunavut. They can only bid on contracts when their term has ended for over a year.
That is the policy that we have.
Mr. Curley: Thank you. (interpretation) I would like to thank the Premier for responding to my question.
I don’t think a year has passed whereby I noticed a contract and I’m not going to state the department, but a former deputy minister had already been awarded with contract work very shortly after departing.
I think that it will be a year this spring since the deputy minister left the position, so we’ll have to look into the management of those types of contracts.
As the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Accountability we have, on more than one occasion, asked about the expenditures and discussed the Nunavut Government lobbyists down in Ottawa. It seems to be the opposite, since we are lobbying the federal government and we are not from the private sector, where lobbyists usually are used.