EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I think one of the other things that were mentioned is that we need to do and we are looking at ways to get more information out to the parents.
One of the suggestions that were made to me at that meeting earlier this week by one of the DEA chairs was, once the attendance policies are developed by the local district education authorities that are provided to the regional school operations, that we would share those.
I would be happy to share those with the government offices in every community so that the parents who are working see exactly what the community policy is and are reminded on a more regular basis, “This is what it is. So please ensure or check that your child is in school.”
So there have been some collaborative work and ways with the DEAs, and we looked at working with other departments to try and help curb this situation.
Speaker: Thank you, Minister. Your first supplementary, Ms. Ugyuk.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) The Department of Education has introduced a number of programs to encourage students to stay in school, such as the Young Parents Stay Learning Program that the minister spoke about yesterday.
Can the minister describe what role attendance plays in determining whether or not a student will be promoted to the next grade level after the completion of a school year?
I can’t get into the exact details of that, but I’m sure that there are standard requirements for any student to be able to move forward in the education system, from one grade to another, and the need for curriculum that needs to be learned and that’s taught and learned at certain standards to be able to move forward.
As far as the exact weight that is applied to attendance as far as whether or not someone moves forward, I don’t have that particular information, but I would be more than happy to get my departmental officials to provide it to me and I would be more than happy to provide that to the member.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) It is important that a consistent system be used to record and measure attendance in all schools and across all regions in Nunavut.
Can the minister advise this House as to when his department will have completed its new student information system and what the timelines are for its implementation?
I will get the exact dates of exactly the work that has been taking place to progress.
I know it’s something that has taken some time to develop and implement.
I totally agree with the member, and I think that’s one of the things that’s outlined with the new Education Act is that the policies in regard to attendance or something that are important, we have been working with the local DEAs in each community to develop those policies.
The department has held workshops in assisting and helping to draft those policies with the district education authorities in each of the regions.
As far as exactly when that system will be running, I will again provide that information to the member.
I know it’s something that there’s work in progress and moving forward on them.
As far as the exact date as to when we hope to have that implemented completely, it’s something… as I said, there is a lot of consultation back and forth, not only within the department but the regional school operations and each of the communities’ DEA organizations. I’ll get that information and provide it to the member.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Yes, we feel for the children. (interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, attendance rates for the 2009-2010 academic year were not available when the response to my written question was prepared.
A quarter of a year has gone by since then and we are now close to 2011.
Are the 2009-2010 attendance rates for Nunavut’s schools now available and, if they are, would the minister commit to tabling them at the earliest opportunity?
(interpretation)Thank you.
The member thinks like me. I asked that same question, where are they and when will they be ready.
They will be ready soon and as soon as they are available, I will provide them to the member.
Question 459 – 3(2): Problems with Annual Sealift (Ningeongan)
Mr. Ningeongan: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation) Prior to my question, I would like to say “good morning” to Chesterfield Inlet and Coral Harbour residents, as well as all Nunavummiut.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Community and Government Services.
Earlier this month, I attended the meeting of Kivalliq mayors in Rankin Inlet.
One of the issues that were discussed during these meetings was the problems that our region has been facing this year with its sealift services from NTCL.
On June 8 of this year, the minister tabled the government’s most recent annual report on the dry cargo resupply program.
The report states that “the Kivalliq region receives GN contract service by NTCL out of Churchill and out of Montreal by NSSI.”
I should mention that Coral Harbour has been particularly frustrated, as NTCL has cancelled its service to the community for the last two sealift seasons.
In light of the problems that our region has been facing, is the government reviewing its current arrangements for the annual dry cargo resupply in the Kivalliq?
We were able to attend the Kivalliq mayors meeting and the meeting proceeded smoothly.
With regard to the barges in the Keewatin, they were delayed significantly and when they conducted a safety inspection on the tugs that were supposed to pull the barges, they noted that there were problems and safety issues.
They said that the boat was not seaworthy. It caused a two-month delay for the cargo arriving to the Kivalliq.
That has impacted a lot of communities.
It had delayed a lot of materials that were supposed to arrive for constructing new units. It has impacted a lot of our operations.
It has increased costs.
Units that would have been covered over are just starting to get the materials delivered to the communities.
Our officials are looking at the issue and we want to ensure that this situation does not occur again, where a tug is considered not seaworthy. We will be discussing the matter with the company as we do not want to see another lengthy delay in next year’s sealift.
I have also personally noted in the Kivalliq region and in the communities that would have received the barges that there were a lot of problems caused due to the lengthy delay this summer and fall. It’s impacted a lot of projects. The service has been horrendous.
Using Chesterfield Inlet’s sewage lagoon as an example, it was supposed to be constructed and worked on this summer and a couple of other projects have been delayed due to this shipping fiasco.
I know that the minister has spoken to it, but I also want to raise a question again. Will his department conduct a thorough review to ensure that whatever problems that caused this issue are rectified and to identify which projects that would have been completed have been delayed due to this shipping issue?
Our officials are very concerned about this, not just our departmental staff but the whole government structure which has been impacted in our region by this shipping issue.
Even private businesses and small companies that would have expected their barge had to start shipping some of the materials by airfreight. It’s really impacted a lot of residents, especially small business owners who incurred extra expenses because of an issue that the government is not responsible for. It has impacted CGS and other various departments.
This is unacceptable, especially for private businesses.
If they were to look after this particular barge and they followed the schedule, even if their food is less okay… but when they’re delayed a couple of months, that really impacts the communities and all of the projects. We have heard all of the issues and concerns that have been expressed to us.
My departmental staff will conduct a thorough review, and we will outline what projects have been delayed and what projects will now have to be deferred. We will look into the issue you have raised in your question. I cannot state at this time what day we will have completed this review.
However, this concern that you are unhappy with is something that is causing us consternation as well and we will look into it.
I want the minister to note that I’m unhappier than you because my community hasn’t even received a barge yet.
As you stated, yes, indeed, the small business owners are impacted as well as individuals who were expecting sealift. They are very unhappy with NTCL and barge hasn’t arrived into some of the communities yet.
Whenever a contract is agreed to, the contractor has to monitor the contract to ensure that they are following the contract or the conditions.
So I want to remind the minister that the contractor is not fulfilling their services and that they have to be looking at offering this contract to another shipping company.
Perhaps that is something that his department can look at because of the large impact it has had in the Kivalliq. There are a lot of private businesses and individuals who have been impacted. Can you perhaps look at a better service provider for the contract in the Kivalliq region?
With regard to the contract the member referred to, there is usually a clause.
At least last year, they fulfilled their contract and this year, although they have had a lot of problems with the shipping season, we are unsure what plans they have or what corrections they have made to ensure that this does not occur again.
I know that my departmental staff will be asking those kinds of questions. We will conduct a review as to how we can make improvements in this for the next shipping season.
It’s sometimes very hard to accept these now because they are beyond our control, but we are looking at other alternatives to try to resolve this issue.
We will conduct a very thorough review because we do not want to experience the same problem again.
If it seems that these problems will resurface, then I will ensure that I inform the House and the members prior to the shipping season and I will inform them as to what direction we will take.
The minister just stated last year that it proceeded smoothly.
As I stated earlier, Coral Harbour never even received a barge last year and I wanted to ensure that the minister noted that.
Now I would like to ask my last question to the minister.
With regard to this contract, what is the status of the contract to date? How far does the contract run? I would like to find out how long NTCL has the contract for.
Hon. Lorne Kusugak (interpretation): According what I understand and have heard, there was a plan to extend the contract for another year.
We can do so as there is a provision in there. If that will stop, I’ll let them know, but based on my understanding, we can extend it for one more year.
Question 460 – 3(2): Government Response to Motion Calling for a Comprehensive Performance Audit of the Qulliq Energy Corporation (Okalik)
I want to direct a question to our Premier.
The Minister responsible for the Qulliq Energy Corporation stated that they will be having a general rate review, so I would like to ask a question to the Premier.
Mr. Speaker, in our session on March 22, 2010, all of the members agreed that they would ask the Auditor General to review the QEC, both their fiscal procedures as well as the contracting protocols, and to see whether their employment was proceeding effectively. I’ll raise a question to the Premier based on that.
I believe last year in June, I asked whether our government had requested the Auditor General to conduct an audit of the QEC.
We were told by our Premier that she did not know and she tasked another minister to look into it.
However, I want to raise that question again today. Has our government requested the Auditor General to conduct an audit on the QEC based on the regular members’ recommendations so that they can look into the operations of the QEC?
I believe the last question was (interpretation ends) whether I have asked for an audit of the Qulliq Energy Corporation. (interpretation) I’m not sure whether he asked for an audit or whether he recommended an audit.
Can he confirm that or clarify it?
She wants you to clarify your question, Mr. Okalik.
Yes, I raised this question previously to the Premier. In this House, the Premier provides the government direction and the regular members requested that the Auditor General conduct an audit on the operations of the Qulliq Energy Corporation.
Has the Premier asked the Auditor General to conduct this audit, yes or no?
With regard to this issue, it’s being handled by QEC and the Minister responsible for QEC can better respond to that.
Speaker (interpretation): Minister responsible for the Qulliq Energy Corporation, (interpretation ends) Hon. Lorne Kusugak.
Perhaps the member for Iqaluit West can rephrase his question so that I can understand what he’s talking about.
It seems like we’re just expending the minutes and I may need a new day in order to get the response I want.
I tried to raise this question to the Premier because she is directing the government and that’s why I raised the question to the Premier initially.
In our legislature, all members agreed that they wanted the Auditor General to conduct an audit on the general operations of the Qulliq Energy Corporation.
What is the status of this audit request?
Have they been requested to conduct an audit on the QEC operational issue, yes or no?
Minister responsible for the Qulliq Energy Corporation, Hon. Lorne Kusugak.
I regret that he had to ask another question.
I will conduct research into the responses required for his question and I will take it as notice.
Question 461 – 3(2): Status of New Power Plan for Cape Dorset (Schell)
My question is for the Hon. Minister of Qulliq Energy, Lorne Kusugak.
I would like to know the status of the new power plant that was announced to be built four years ago in Cape Dorset.
The issues relating to the power plant location and land for the desired location of the power plant is still under discussion, Mr. Speaker.
The power plant replacement has been talked about for over 20 years.
Mr. Speaker, I don’t think Christopher Columbus has anything to do with the construction, but possibly his son did. It’s old and in dire need of replacement.
I’m afraid the same situation could happen as what happened in Rankin Inlet last year.
So I encourage the minister to replace the power plant much sooner than later.
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.
I hope that the legal dispute that’s happening with the Municipality of Rankin Inlet and the ownership of the buildings and the lot issues can be resolved expeditiously so that the work can begin on the power plant in Cape Dorset. I agree with the member, and I hope that he can work with the municipality to ensure that the land issue could be resolved quickly so that we don’t have power issues in Cape Dorset for too much longer.
I think you were referring to Cape Dorset; you had mentioned Rankin Inlet in your power plant replacement.
I realize there are some land issues, but I can guarantee the minister one thing that it’s not my issue; it’s the hamlet that has the issue with it.
So I just want to correct him on that, that I realize the hamlet has an issue with certain things on the land there. Hopefully it will get rectified here shortly.
If the member misunderstood me, I did say that the hamlet has issues with the land relating to the issue.
We hope that that will be resolved quickly so that we could begin the work to build the power plant in Cape Dorset.
It’s just legal matters that are holding us up at this point. Once those are solved, we can take a step forward. Hopefully that will be resolved in the not too distant future before the second coming of Christopher Columbus.
Question 462 – 3(2): Qanukkanniq Recommendations on Education (Ugyuk)
I say “good morning” to the people of Nattilik.
It’s just a little past nine over there. I am sending my regards.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Education; I’m not done with you yet this morning.
Mr. Speaker, almost exactly one year ago, the Qanukkanniq GN Report Card was presented to the Government of Nunavut.
The first nine recommendations of that report addressed the status of education in Nunavut’s schools.
Recommendation #5 of the report recommended the following: “Benchmark the content of made-in-Nunavut curriculum against other jurisdictions to ensure that educational standards in Nunavut are comparable in quality to other jurisdictions.”
Can the minister advise this House on what steps have been taken to address this recommendation and, specifically, what steps have been taken to benchmark grade 12 graduation standards against other jurisdictions?
Hon. Hunter Tootoo: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I again thank the member for that question.
It’s another question I was asked when I was discussing with the DEA coalition and the DEA members.
I think, by the member asking the question, this reinforces how important an issue that is all across the territory.
Mr. Speaker, the department is preparing to pilot what will become its territorial-wide grade 12 social studies assessment tool.
This project assessment will consist with the beliefs about student assessment articulated in the foundation document with Nunavut’s newly developed comprehensive assessment strategy.
They intend them to be fair, more valid measures of ways of measuring student knowledge and skills than the Alberta grade 12 standardized tests for social studies exams that were there in the past.
Once this project assessment is done, I would be more than happy to share the results of that with the member.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) The concern that Nunavut’s grade 12 diploma does not meet the same standards as grade 12 diplomas from other jurisdictions has been raised by parents, students, and some of my colleagues in this House.
Can the minister provide an update on what specific measures have been taken to address this concern directly?
I think the member has indicated that there is a different standard and level of education.
She is quite correct, that is something that I myself have raised concerns about in the past and I have heard, right from day one, that those are concerns that have been raised or I have heard other members in this House raise those concerns.
Mr. Speaker, if they are checking in and asking that same question to the department, then, I think, again that’s the same question that I faced earlier this week. I would like to thank those individuals who asked me that question up there for preparing me for this.
It’s good practise and hopefully I can give the same answer here today.
Mr. Speaker, one of the issues is not so much the different level of standards, but as far as one of the things that we are seeing as a result of having the varied levels and areas is that a lot of it has to deal with the courses that the individuals are taking.
Mr. Speaker, there are three different levels of English and math that students could take.
There is the higher academic one, the middle one, and then the lower one.
Mr. Speaker, one of the things that the department is doing is I had the pleasure, as a parent, in finding out first hand this fall, when I went to the high school here with my daughter who was just going into grade 10, where they called all of the parents of the students going into the high school system to a meeting at the school. The principal and the educators were there and they explained exactly what the difference was if you took the 10, 20, or 30, or whatever the numbers of the different levels of courses, and what you would get.
Let’s say if a student wanted to move into a university-level program, it’s these level courses that you need to take.
I found that that experience… I mean, it’s the first time that I have been through that as a parent and I thought that was great.
So those are some of the things that are being done out there and hopefully that’s going to be implemented more throughout the territory in the schools and the communities so that the students and the parents understand the ramifications of the choices in the courses that they do take and what they can achieve with those courses.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) Recommendation #9 of the Qanukkanniq Report stated, “Develop anti-truancy and anti-drop-out campaigns, and eliminate social promotion.”
There is a concern that some students graduate from grade 12 simply because they go to school and attend regularly. Socially promoting a student through to grade 12 will only set them up for disappointment in the future.
How do the minister and his department address the issue of social promotion, especially as it affects graduation rates?
Again, that’s great, another question I had practise with earlier this week.
Also, Mr. Speaker, I thank the member because that’s an issue that I used to raise here when I was sitting on that side of the House.
Mr. Speaker, one of the things is that the department does not support social promotion or retention.
Under the new Education Act, Mr. Speaker, the whole emphasis is on continuous progress, so we’re looking to try to keep students to continue learning at their pace.
So I think that’s the important thing that they are trying to… . I think there are studies that have been done to show that neither moving someone along when they’re not ready or retaining individuals behind a year don’t help that individual out at all.
We’re looking at innovative ways to be able to try and meet the needs of the individual students with the individual learning plans so that there is a continuous progress in their learning.
That’s one of the things that the department is working on to be able to hopefully… that would be something to find ways to attract and retain these students in the system and also to get them to continually keep learning so that they are always learning something and hopefully keep their interest in the school.
Some of the program enhancements that are done in the schools have included things like IT workshops, on-the-land programming, artists in school, and other special interest areas they look at trying to adapt some of these individual learning plans towards the individual student’s needs.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) Over the summer, the Minister of Education kindly provided Members of the Legislative Assembly with copies of his department’s consultation documents relating to the proposed Inclusive Education Regulations to accompany the new Education Act.
One of the main criticisms of inclusive education is that it supports social promotion.
Can the minister describe what kind of input has been provided by stakeholders on this issue and what consideration has been given to changing the proposed regulations as a result of that input?
One of the things that I think initially with the development of these regulations are hoping that it would be something that could be done quickly to be able to try and move forward on the implementation of the new Education Act.
Mr. Speaker, I think the department, as a result of some of this feedback, has realized that, in the development of these regulations, in order to do a good job at it, they have regulations that everybody, the department, the stakeholders, the DEAs, and the communities are comfortable with what’s being put forward in the regulations. That is something that the department is now saying, “This is something that is actually going to take us two to three years to complete.” So there is continued dialogue back and forth on these regulation developments with the department, with the Coalition of Nunavut DEAs, and with the DEAs themselves in the communities.
There’s a continual back and forth, and I cannot remember if it’s the second or third phase of reviews that’s gone on so far. So there is continued back and forth feedback as revisions are made based on the feedback received from the stakeholders.
Once those provisions are made, they are sent back to the stakeholders for further review. It’s either the second or third round that they’re going through right now.