EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
If they only had these facilities, young people would go to them instead of turning to crime and mischief.
A 20-year-old in the group said that he is still in school.
He mentioned the need for a movie theatre in Rankin Inlet or a place where the youth can hang out with their age group and not turn to crime and mischief.
I am very pleased to have received these letters and the fact that the youth feel they are able to voice their concerns to us.
Member for (interpretation ends) Rankin South and Whale Cove, Mr. Kusugak.
Member’s Statement 189 – 3(2): More Letters from Rankin Inlet Youth (Kusugak)
I would like to thank my colleague for Rankin North for bringing up the letters we received.
We both received copies of these letters from quite a few students.
I would like to express my appreciation for the following students for writing about their concerns: Ernest Akerolik Jr, Sheena Panikalliagjuaq, Jordan Alikamiq, Miranda Aupilardjuk, Steve Sandy, Dana Tatty, Janine Gordon, Jon Ayaruak Bruce, Wendy Kappi, Iris Tatty, and, Jamie Airut.
Mr. Speaker, these young people wrote about their concerns and needs of their community.
Some were already mentioned by Mr. Curley, but one of them wrote about his concern about unsightly graffiti on public buildings.
Some also wrote about the need for recreational facilities, as Mr. Curley mentioned.
It makes me happy to have received letters from the young people of Rankin Inlet.
I wish to thank them all for taking the time to voice their concerns and ideas on how we can make a healthier community of Rankin Inlet.
I welcome their input and want to assure them that we will certainly discuss their issues here at the Legislative Assembly.
I can assure the young people who wrote to me that I will respond to every single one of them.
Once I have drafted my personal replies, I will send them out.
Thank you for writing your letters and I encourage you to keep writing.
I wish to acknowledge one of my constituents.
Earlier, a statement was made in honour of Jamesie Mike.
I would like to recognize his daughter, who is following closely in her father’s footsteps of community service and volunteer work here in the community, Meeka Mike.
I would like to welcome her to the Gallery. Welcome.
I, too, would like to recognize an individual from my community who is in Iqaluit to attend and study in the NTEP program. Her name is Marianne Mike.
She is in Iqaluit to take her studies and she’s also a daughter-in-law of Jamesie Mike.
If there are no further recognitions, Item 6.
Before we proceed with Oral Questions, I would like to take this opportunity to encourage all Members to treat each other with respect and courtesy during their questions and answers and to avoid unnecessary personal comments.
As members are aware, question period in our Legislative Assembly is noted for the relatively high degree of civility and courtesy.
I would like us to maintain that reputation here in Nunavut.
Thank you. We will now proceed to Oral Questions.
There are none?
(interpretation ends) Member for South Baffin, Mr. Schell.
Question 297 – 3(2): Safety Issue with Telehandlers (Schell)
Last fall, in November, he had stated in the House that he was sending a letter off to Workers’ Compensation. It’s in regard to the safety issue with New Holland telehandlers.
I would like to ask the minister when he received a reply.
Speaker: Thank you, Schell.
It’s my understanding, Mr. Speaker, that we did receive the green light from the Workers’ Compensation and Safety Commission on our standard operating procedures earlier this year, I believe it was in February.
He had originally ordered five New Holland telehandlers.
I would like to know if any more New Holland telehandlers have been purchased.
Again if memory serves me correct, it’s a similar question the member asked last year.
I think I had indicated at the time that our initial request for quotations was for 22 units.
Earlier in the fall, the corporation ordered another 12 units to go into communities where these structural insulated panel units were going where that type of equipment didn’t exist already.
I believe, at the time, I had indicated that we would be utilizing that same request for quotations for any further units that were ordered.
In the latest paper here, they have asked for another 12 telehandlers to put a request in for proposals.
Can the minister tell me: are there 17 telehandlers purchased already and there are going to another 12?
I know that I discussed the issue with him earlier, noting his particular interest in telehandlers.
Mr. Speaker, as I informed the member earlier, once the Housing Corporation ordered five units last year, last fall or last summer, we ordered another 12 units, again based on that original request for quotations.
We were a little bit apprehensive and I again thank the member for raising the issue of running the units through the Workers’ Safety and Compensation Commission. As I indicated, we did get the green light from them on that for the use of those units.
Mr. Speaker, in late December, when the corporation finalized our lots throughout the communities, one issue that wasn’t thought of that came up as a result of finding out what lots that we were allocated in various municipalities, the issue came up that neither of the units that we would have looked at ordering and that we got prices on based on our request for quotations had a significant boom length required to be able to access the far side of a unit, from the front side to the back, to be able to lift the roof panels over.
We realized again in December that some of those lots would not be accessible from all four sides.
As a result of that, Mr. Speaker, the proposal that the member talked about was put out for an additional 12 units and part of that, Mr. Speaker, will include the credit for the 12 units that won’t suit our purposes now.
I remember bringing it up in the House more than once.
When I was referring to a Volkswagen and a Cadillac, I remember the hon. minister telling me, “Why buy a Cadillac when a Volkswagen will do?”
He also told me the only difference between the CAT and the New Holland was number one, it had an arctic oil package and the other difference was, he said, the CAT boom had a 42-foot boom and the New Holland boom was 31 feet, which is 11 feet less.
As he had said, I indicated earlier, we are looking at one-storey buildings.
I think the maximum need for the boom would be 20 feet to go out, unless someone would want to use it, if it was a little longer than that, to put a net across the river.
So my question is: why didn’t he look at the situation as to what they needed before they ordered all of these units?
The staff at the corporation tried to and always tries to anticipate everything that you can run into and unfortunately, Mr. Speaker, not everyone has a crystal ball and can determine what the circumstances that you’re going to face are.
As I pointed out, Mr. Speaker, the Volkswagen that he referred to being, I would assume, the New Holland unit that he referred to and the Cadillac being the CAT unit that he referred to, Mr. Speaker, as I indicated earlier, neither of those, even if we would have bought the CAT one, would provide the length that we need of the boom.
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, in order to get the roof panel over the peak and onto the backside, if we don’t have access from all four sides of the building, neither of those units would have the sufficient length boom to be able to perform that function to get it over the peak and down onto the other side.
My understanding, Mr. Speaker, is that a new request for proposals has been issued out there. Right now, the requirement is for, I believe, a 54-foot boom.
Question 298 – 3(2): Purchase of More Telehandlers (Okalik)
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I want to follow up on my colleague’s questions on the issue of telehandlers.
When this first came up, I asked the minister, “Are you sure that this farming equipment will work in our territory?”
And I asked the minister, “Just try a few first.
At least test it and see how it meets our expectations.”
And by the looks of it, he ordered 12 more without actually figuring out if they would work in our territory.
Can the minister explain what’s going to happen to those other 12 that they supposedly ordered on top of the five?
As I just indicated earlier to my colleague from South Baffin, the request for proposals includes what the credit would be for those additional units.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) From what I can understand from the minister, they have already paid for the 12 that are out there already somewhere in the docks somewhere down south, the farming equipment. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
It’s my understanding that the delivery date for those 12 units is June 1, that they will be arriving. I don’t remember if it’s either the supplier or the docks, but as I had indicated, the request for proposals that’s gone out there will require a credit amount for those units.
So we’re going to resell those units or get a credit for the value of those units against the new ones.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) From what I can understand, the minister is saying that they’re somehow going to be resold, the $162,000 worth of farming equipment each, 12 of them.
They will be sold and that money will be used to try and get new equipment that will actually work in the territory. Is that what I’m getting?
First, I want to clarify. That piece of equipment, again the original New Holland telehandlers, was utilized in the demonstration project that was done by Illamar this fall. It did work.
That unit, based on our standard operating procedures to perform the work, would have been able to perform the work had we been able to have access to all four sides of a unit on a lot.
Again, as I indicated, once we finalized our lots and the location for the lots in late December, we realized that there were some lots that we weren’t going to be able to access from all four sides.
Again, that posed a problem not only to the New Holland ones that we had but also to the CAT ones that we would have bought if we would have went with those products at that time as well.
So either way, neither of these pieces of equipment that we looked at last year, based on the information that we knew at the time and what we know now, would not have been able to do that.
So yes, we are going to resell those equipment and we will get a credit towards the new equipment for those 12 units.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) At $162,000 each, that’s about $2 million worth of farming equipment.
So we hope to resell that farming equipment and get the best deal that we can get.
Hopefully they sell at the same price and get the actual equipment that would work in our territory.
So that’s what I’m hearing from the minister when we pleaded with him, “Test it first before you actually buy too much so that we can make sure they work.”
So is that what I’m getting from the minister is that they hope to resell this equipment at the same price so that we don’t lose out?
Is that what I’m getting from the minister?
Again I would just like to clarify that that unit did work and would have worked.
In most cases, except for cases where, when we realized after that we got the lot allocations for the municipalities, we wouldn’t be able to gain access to all four sides of the house, I just want to clarify that that piece of equipment would have worked in Nunavut and would work in most cases.
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated, part of the request for proposals will be for proponents to indicate a credit towards those 12 pieces of equipment. What the value of that credit will be right now, I can’t tell you but I would be more than happy, once it’s all said and done, decided, and we finalize that, to inform the member of what it was, if he wishes.
Question 299 – 3(2): Doing Business with the Government of Nunavut (Aupaluktuq)
My questions are for the Minister of Community and Government Services, the Hon. Lorne Kusugak.
The minister’s department has worked with ED&T to produce and has a useful guide for doing business with the Government of Nunavut.
It provides important information for doing business and individuals who may be thinking of submitting bids on Government of Nunavut tenders and requests for proposals.
I think that it’s also important for the government to also provide training and information workshops in the smaller communities, especially for new companies and entrepreneurs.
Can the minister indicate whether these kinds of courses and workshops will be offered in the coming year in Baker Lake and other communities?
Hon. Lorne Kusugak (interpretation): Thank you for your question.
This is a good question, “What types of training and information workshops does our department provide?”
Unfortunately, I do not have that information on hand at this time. I will get that information and pass it along to the member.
I know that we provide such training programs and workshops which are set up through various funding programs.
I will look for that information and get back to the member.
I want to thank the hon. minister for that response as well as the comment.
As we all know, experience builds success.
I note from reviewing the government’s annual contracting reports that some companies are consistently successful in winning government contracts and tenders.
However, I think that we also need to help first-time entrepreneurs get used to the complex system of government procurement.
My question to the hon. minister is: what kinds of assistance does the Government of Nunavut provide to new companies, especially those that are Inuit owned, to guide them through the process of bidding on government tenders and submitting proposals in response to requests for proposals?
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Kusugak.
It is true that some entrepreneurs who are just starting out would like opportunities to put their bids in for RFPs and other tenders in general, whether it’s plumbing or administration.
Bidding on government contracts is a daunting, complex process, especially for those whose mother tongue is not English.
We are always looking at ways on how to open up the bidding process for smaller and medium-sized businesses and individuals.
As I stated to the member, I will get the information on what kind of training and information workshops there are for entrepreneurs who want to bid on government contracts and the type of assistance we provide in filling out all of the necessary forms. I will look into that and get back to the member.
Mr. Aupaluktuq (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker and the hon. minister for his excellent response.
It’s obvious that most of my constituents in Baker Lake, especially elders, who have their own businesses have little or no idea on how to go about filling out bidding forms without assistance.
They purchase capital items out of their own pockets and also have to pay for the less expensive materials to conduct their businesses.
Many, if not all, of them are always looking for assistance that they can get and bidding for government contracts is one of them.
These Inuit businesses would like their training and knowledge needs addressed as their requests for assistance in these matters indicate.
I am pleased to hear that the minister is listening to those concerns as his response indicates to me.
He also stated that this matter is under review and that they are looking at ways to support these individuals more. I fully support the effort to assist individual businesses, and I look forward to conveying these issues and concerns to the minister.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for his commitment to conduct a review.
I didn’t hear a question, but I leave it at your discretion to respond, Minister Kusugak.
Indeed, we will be conducting a review to determine what changes are needed, working closely with the community of Baker Lake and other communities in Nunavut.
There are various stakeholders that we can enlist to assist in this venture.
We will work closely with everyone to resolve the challenges businesses face in this area. I am committed to working with these bodies and individuals as well as my colleagues who have to deal with these types of issues. It is only through teamwork that we can make some progress on this issue.
Member for Quttiktuq… no?
Question 300 – 3(2): Decentralized Positions in Pangnirtung (Komoartok)
Today, I would like to direct this question to the government leader, (interpretation ends) Hon. Eva Aariak.
(interpretation) Back when it was first proposed to decentralize the Nunavut government functions, the idea was to decentralize these jobs to communities outside the capital. The government at the time determined which positions would go to decentralized communities.
Pangnirtung was allocated 71 full-time positions and I believe that all of those positions were eventually moved there.
My question to the Premier is whether the number of jobs that were slated for Pangnirtung is still set at 71 positions.
This number, of course, is based on prior promises made to us at the time of decentralization.
Speaker: Thank you. Premier of Nunavut, Hon. Eva Aariak.
I also thank my colleague for asking that question.
I will look into the matter that he just raised to ascertain whether 71 positions is still the correct number.
I thank the Premier for her promise to look into the matter.
Be that as it may, if the review is to reduce or transfer out some of positions originally promised to Pangnirtung, we would like to be kept informed about it.
We were promised a certain number of positions to be decentralized to our community.
If the decentralized positions are to be reduced or transferred back to Iqaluit, we would like to see them replaced because we already have existing office space and staff housing.
Another matter that I would like to refer to is with respect to the number of positions that were never filled. We were informed during the standing committee review of the Department of Health and Social Services that the number of unfilled positions stands at 300.
Thus, the three positions that have already been transferred back to Iqaluit from my community represent less than 1 percent of the unfilled positions.
I believe that it is possible to replace the positions that were recalled with others to avoid any loss of jobs in my community.
I would like to request that this matter be reviewed, especially in light of the fact that our community was promised 71 positions that would be transferred. In my opinion, the government should not be recalling positions without consulting and negotiating with my community.
I urge the Premier to keep the promises that were made to our community.
I fully expect that she will convey this information to her cabinet prior to the completion of our current session. I want to thank her for promising to look into the matter.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Komoartok. Premier of Nunavut, Ms. Aariak.
I don’t believe I heard a question.
I’ll get back to the member.
Question 301 – 3(2): Length of Booms on New Telehandlers (Schell)
My question is to the Hon. Minister of Housing.
I’m going back to June 9 in Oral Questions here, where I asked him a question and he responded to me about these telehandlers.
“Mr. Speaker, the Housing Corporation, in looking at what we needed to deliver this year, is doing five different types of building that are coming up on sealift for different building types and one of them is the two-storey townhouse.
We had determined and had the approval from CMHC that these were allowable expenses under the trust program,” to purchase these telehandlers.
Mr. Speaker, if it’s a two-storey townhouse, that’s up to 20-something feet, then you got to go to the roof. Even if you get all of the way around the building, how can the minister say that the 30-foot boom would be large enough for it?
That’s from the ground up. If you’re reaching out with a 30-foot boom, the maximum you are going to get is 20 feet.
So I just don’t understand.
Who did the analyzing on these units to come and say that if you can get around this two-storey building, you can reach the top of the roof?
I don’t think it’s possible. If the minister could maybe answer that.
Those units that were being done already, the lots that we got finalized for the units for this coming year that the SIP panel units are going on is where the problem was identified.
As I had indicated, Mr. Speaker, those panels, I believe they’re about 400 lbs each and in order to set them in place, you need access to be able the lift of panel and get it over the peak of the unit where you don’t have access from all four sides.
That’s something that we wouldn’t have even with either pieces of these equipment.
With the townhouses and the other units, he said they just go straight up and there are sheets of plywood that you take off, you’re not lifting a whole panel over to the other side, which is the difference.
Hopefully that clarifies it for the member.
With the two-storey building, you’re just putting the stuff up to the edge of the roof and taking it off, if required, but with the structural insulated panel units, those panels actually have a requirement, if you don’t have access from the far side, to be able to lift the entire panel over to the far side of the unit over the peak.
For the housing minister’s information, these units haven’t been built yet, especially not in Cape Dorset, and you have a bit of a crawl space.
Even to get to the bottom of a two-storey townhouse, you need approximately 25 feet and this boom’s maximum, if you can get right up close, is going to be around 20 to 22 feet because it’s measured from the back of the boom, not from the front.
You can’t even lift to the edge of the roof in order to do it, so I would like to know how they came up and determined it.
This is what he said, one of the reasons they’re buying these is for the two-storey townhouses. So I would like him to explain to me how he could even lift to the bottom of that roof with the New Holland telehandler.
I don’t profess to be the expert or have the knowledge that the member does on this type of equipment.
I was assured by my staff that those units would be able to perform those duties.
I will commit to the member to get the inch-by-inch measurements as to how they came up with those conclusions and provide it to him if the member so wishes.
In regard to these telehandlers, he was trying to tell me that he didn’t get a ruling from Workers’ Compensation until February some time and yet, he ordered 12 new ones in the fall. Can he explain to me why he would have ordered 12 new ones before he got a ruling from Workers’ Compensation?
That was the final ruling that we got from them. There was an ongoing dialogue with them throughout the whole process.
They didn’t anticipate any problems, but it takes time for it to go through the ‘final and get formalized’ process.
We knew long before December when we got our final ruling from them that they would be able to conform to the standard operating procedures that we provided for them.
I just find it hard to believe that you would go ahead and order 12 units before you got the final okay from Workers’ Compensation.
I think it’s very irresponsible doing that and as we find out now, I realize they came with the right ruling.
But now, we’ve got 12 units that we have to take and trade.
I can just about guarantee you that they’re not going to get the full return on the trade-in. Who’s going to take those units and trade?
I realize that they’re probably great out on the farm for stacking hay and stuff, but I don’t think they’re all that great in a construction site.
That was just a comment, but I’ll let the minister have more say on that.
As I pointed out earlier, based on the demonstration that was held at our marshalling this summer, getting the units done, and based on standard operating procedures, four of these units could have done the job.