EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
My question is for the Minister responsible for Community and Government Services. But before I ask my question I want to acknowledge the fact she is a new minister in her portfolio and these questions that I am asking are dealing with issues inherited by her and her department.
Mr. Speaker, earlier I talked about correspondence the minister wrote to me regarding Inuit employment levels for the Kivalliq Health Centre Project.
In that letter she indicated there will be a monetary penalty as per the relevant clauses and the NNI Policy.
I would like to ask the minister if indeed that penalty has been established.
Speaker (interpretation): Minister responsible for Community and Government Services, Ms. Brown.
Hon. Levinia Brown (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I would also like to thank my colleague for asking those questions.
The correspondence was written and we’re going to be using a new policy.
(interpretation ends) I’m glad the new policy gives us more clout. The old policy didn’t have that much in the way of penalties.
I just want to get, the minister had indicated that the penalty has been implemented.
I’m just wondering if she can indicate if it’s been collected and how much it was.
We just started working on this recently over the summer and to date I haven’t been advised whether the penalty has been paid.
I know in my correspondence to the minister responsible at the time, and the response that I got indicated that was, my correspondence was requesting what the Inuit employment levels were for that particular contract.
I’m just wondering if the minister, as she indicated in her letter, she said they didn’t meet their 32 percent content.
Can she indicate what the percentage levels were?
The member is correct in saying that the contract specified that the contractor was to achieve 32 percent Inuit labour during the construction.
The contractor achieved 25.71 percent.
I know that was one of the pivotal decisions or, not decisions, but causes for switching from a public tender to a negotiated contract from the government’s point of view. It was to increase Inuit employment levels, and that was a main stipulation behind the decision on this contract.
Mr. Speaker, I’m just wondering if I could ask the minister, I’ve heard that the company in question, Stanley Clark, had actually asked to have that section of the contract waived.
I’m just wondering if she could indicate if her department ever did receive any request from the contractor to waive that clause in the contract.
The new policy states that penalties will be calculated at two percent of the total billable content of the contract for each one percent of the amount by which employment does not meet the mandatory requirement.
(interpretation) And also, I will take this question as notice at this time.
Question 012 – 2(3): Dry Cargo Re-Supply Survey (Netser)
Earlier this year, the Government of Nunavut commissioned a private consulting firm to conduct a satisfaction survey on the dry cargo re-supply. In October public meetings were held in Rankin Inlet and Iqaluit.
Rankin Inlet is part of my constituency. My question for the minister is, have the results of this survey been provided to her office yet?
No, it has not been. We’re expecting it to be completed by the end of December, beginning of January.
For those of us in Rankin Inlet, we usually get our supplies from Montreal and it’s creating havoc in our community.
The prices of the goods are more expensive.
If you’re ordering lumber and renovation supplies, it is more expensive. Everything has gone up since we started receiving goods and supplies from Montreal.
We’re from the Keewatin.
I’m not sure why the representatives didn’t go to our communities to consult about the re-supply by ship.
Question 013 – 2(3): Funding Support for School Information Technology Position (Curley)
This summer we sent correspondence from the District Education Authority Chair in regard to computer technology.
All the students in Nunavut have to take training or education through the internet or on a computer.
We have these computers in our school and they have more computers than the Assembly itself.
They don’t have any technicians and they don’t have anybody to teach the students how to use the computers.
My question is; the school wanted to create a full-time position to do the IT job; why is it that there was no money set aside for this position?
The member raises a very expedient question, and the question involves the changing workplace that we see ourselves in, in Nunavut. Ten years ago we didn’t need IT specialists in most of our communities and indeed in the schools.
Mr. Speaker, we certainly didn’t need them to help people get on line and so on within the classroom. That has changed.
Mr. Speaker, this past spring we did create over 80 new positions and placed them in our schools, which I think was well welcomed by all schools across Nunavut.
They did not include dedicated IT people or computer people as the member has talked about and that is something that we are reviewing as a department Mr. Speaker, to see where there are opportunities to bring these types of positions in line with some of the work that we’re doing with the new school funding formula that we’re still working on.
I appreciate the minister’s support for increased support to teachers and District Education Authorities in all the regions of the north.
It is a welcomed fact that they need all the resources they can get, but I’m asking the minister once again, why is it not the priority of the minister to provide support, technology support as we live in the computer age now, so that the school kids can have a dedicated service individual that they can rely on instead of asking teachers to do volunteer support for the technologies in those communities. Particularly in places like Rankin Inlet.
I can’t argue with the member, Mr. Speaker.
The member is correct; these positions are needed in all of our schools.
In many instances, Mr. Speaker, if the school is fortunate to have someone who is computer literate and is able to work on the IT aspects of computers, then that’s the very best.  In most cases that isn’t the case.
With the limited funding that we had available last year Mr. Speaker, in the budget, I was able to put 80 contract positions within our schools; counsellors, teachers, special needs. I wasn’t able to fund the IT positions that the member is talking about.
Hopefully, Mr. Speaker, in the next round of budget consultations, we’ll be able to find those extra dollars for those full-time, indeterminate positions.
At the same time, Mr. Speaker, we are looking within our budget to see if there are opportunities to fund some of these IT positions that the member is talking about.
Certainly, we get the drift with the minister’s response to how he will eventually find funds to fund the IT support for the schools, but my question remains to the minister, why is it not a priority?
I would like to urge the minister, and indicate to you, that you don’t need to consult with the community to provide essential services, like technology support, to schools. The computers are already there.
Many of them are not operational due to the fact that they don’t have a specialist to deal with them.
The kids cannot rely on your consultation whether or not to provide funding or find individuals. They need it now.
Why not now Mr. Minister?
Hon. Ed. Picco: Mr. Speaker, if I had the opportunity and the magic powers to be able to snap my fingers and do it right now I would.
Mr. Speaker, we created over 80 new positions within that budget framework and as the member knows, within the framework of budgeted positions, let’s say I was able to do this.
We have 42 schools across Nunavut in 25 communities; every school needs an IT specialist.
Let’s say I could hire 10 at a cost of about 80 thousand salary, and if I can’t find that person within the community, I would have to find housing for them. We’re talking about a cost of about probably over 1 million.
I don’t have those monies within my budget.
So I’m getting a feeling from the member that he is going to support me and bring forward these types of opportunities whether it be in a supplemental appropriation in the House or other extra monies to the budget for the Department of Education.
I can’t stand here Mr. Speaker, and make a commitment to the people of Nunavut and to the House that I’ll be able to facilitate new positions when I don’t have a budget for them.
They are a priority of the Department of Education, but first it was important for us to try to increase our teachers, lower the PTR amount, provide those counselling services, and so on.
And that’s what we’ve done the first go around in that budget and I would hope to be able to improve on that in the next budget round.
This is the first time that I’ve heard the minister say that he doesn’t have a magic wand because normally you try convincing the members that you can almost walk up to the moon to achieve what you want to achieve in Nunavut.
Having said that Mr. Speaker, I want to ask the minister once again: why is it not the priority to have the computer specialists required to service individual students in Nunavut as they rely and they need to keep up-to-date with the changes in the technological world?
Therefore, I will definitely commit myself to supporting you because there are contingency funds in your department.
Why not use them now?
Only three months, August, September, October and now it’s November into the fiscal year.
The budget was just passed this past spring. Any contingency funds are based and prorated on the amount of money that is expended on a monthly and a go forward basis of the department.
So it would be without the framework and the expediency and the ability of the minister within the Financial Administration Act to be able to access funds to do these positions right now because they’re not even on the organization chart.
So Mr. Speaker, IT Program people are available in a lot of our communities. We also contract from Public Works, Community and Government Services, other departments of the government, who actually go in and facilitate computer help within our communities.
But I do agree with the member that there needs to be an opportunity to bring forward IT positions and that is something that we are working on. So, hopefully Mr. Speaker over the next several weeks we will be able to identify extra dollars and to be able to bring on these positions and I appreciate the member’s comments about the magic wand and to be able to step up to heaven.
Mr. Speaker, sometimes we need divine intervention. Mr. Speaker, this is one of those times.
Question 014 – 2(3): Nunavut’s Annual Growth Rate (Peterson)
In his fiscal update Mr. Speaker, the minister said that the Formula Financing Agreement is inadequate and yet it was only signed last year. In it, the annual growth increases were projected at three and a half percent. My question for the minister is: what is Nunavut’s annual growth rate?
Hon. David Simailak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My apologies to the member, I didn’t fully comprehend his question; if he can repeat his question.
Speaker (interpretation): If the member can clarify his question.
I will try to clarify my question. The last Formula Financing Agreement that was signed, I think was last year.
It projected annual growth increases of 3.5 percent. Now, the Minister is saying in his fiscal update that this is inadequate. Last year it seemed adequate and this year it is inadequate.
The government formed an Expert Panel. My question is: if 3.5 percent is inadequate, what is Nunavut’s current annual growth rate?
Hon. David Simailak: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I know in the previous years before the new arrangement was finalized for Nunavut in the old Northwest Territories days we used to get up to six- and seven-percent increases every year in our Territorial Formula Financing with Ottawa. And that used to be barely adequate for the Northwest Territories at the time.
But energy costs have sky rocketed in the last couple of years. So it something that is very hard to manage right now that would be the 3.5 percent annual increase that we get from Ottawa.
Mr. Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the minister for that response. So there is need of a six- to seven-percent annual increase.
I’m not sure why we are signing a 3.5 percent agreement last year. I am a little concerned. If our growth continues to be seven percent and the Expert Panel is going to make recommendations as the minister is quoted in here that the Government of Canada will respond in an appropriate manner.
I am not sure what that means.
My question is: what is the potential effect on Nunavut if the feds don’t respond to the recommendations of the two panels in an appropriate manner while our annual growth rate remains at seven percent, fully 3.5 percent above what we are getting now?
Hon. David Simailak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The 3.5 percent that I am talking about is also for the provincial governments and that is the agreement that it will increase 3.5 percent not just for Nunavut but for all of the provinces in Canada.
The two panels identified during the Premiers’ conference, at this time they are doing consultations.
We are expecting that it will benefit Nunavut, especially for the Arctic because the funding that we are getting is inadequate, especially for the three territories, for Nunavut, the Northwest Territories, and the Yukon.
Cooperatively, we are looking at how we can deal with this and the Premiers of those territories have indicated that they are working on this.
At this time there are two groups that are doing the consultation so we are awaiting their findings, especially for the north.
I will be meeting with the federal minister in regard to this if there is no federal election.
I thank the minister for his answer. I am not familiar with how this will work. They travel around the north and down south and they listen to people, but then they make recommendations in Ottawa.
Whether the people in Ottawa are listening, it is hard to tell. We could be in serious financial shape if they aren’t listening in Ottawa and the ministers meetings are unsuccessful.
In the interim my question to the minister is: is the Government of Nunavut considering any cuts to programs and services, or anything else in the short or long term to balance the budget to stay within our growth rate?
Hon. David Simailak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The question he is posing I haven’t really thought about, but looking at the funding that we have, we are doing what we can to make sure that we have enough money.
At this time I cannot say what it will be.
If we didn’t have any other resources then we might have dip into it, but at this time I can’t say at all how it will be.
At this time I cannot really give him a definite answer.
Mr. Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the minister again for that answer and ask that he continue to update us as we must continue to manage our finances prudently so I am trusting that the minister will do that.
The minister has indicated also in his fiscal update that he met with the federal minister and requested help from him. He asked the federal government to help with the rising cost of energy for Nunavut.
I am wondering if the minister could share with us what Minister Goodale, the federal Minister of Finance, told the minister in response to his request for help for Nunavut.
The last time I met with the federal Minister of Finance I told him how this has affected the North in regard to the increases.
He was quite concerned and quite understanding.
He was going to get more information and reply.
I then met with him again and once more raised those concerns.
To date he has not responded.
So at this time I cannot say what will happen, but he was very interested and he was asking questions as to how we are dealing with this and the funding that would be used for Canadian provinces and territories.
We gave him our concerns and he was quite understanding, but at this time, like I said, he has not responded and hopefully he will respond very soon.
Question 015 – 2(3): Update on the Food Mail Program (Barnabas)
Mr. Barnabas (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a question for the Premier.
Yesterday during Members’ Statements I talked about the high cost of groceries in my constituency, especially in the smaller communities.
The cost of living is so high. I understand the Food Mail Program is set by the federal government.
I do know the food mail people met with the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs.
They have been meeting with them since last year and Minister Kilabuk has written to the Federal Minister Andrew Scott and he cc’d the letter.
My question is: what response have you received to date from the federal government in regard to this Food Mail Program?
It has an impact in all of our communities and we have been lobbying the federal government to improve the Food Mail Program so that we can benefit all the communities of Nunavut; for the Kitikmeot and in the Kivalliq as well, not just the High Arctic.
So I have written another letter to ask him to look into this again because the program isn’t reducing the costs of groceries enough.
I have sent my letter and I have not received a response. However, I do know the Auditor General is now reviewing this, auditing this program.
I think the cost of fuel has increased also.
I will be asking this in English, Mr. Speaker.
(interpretation ends) In response to a report by the Auditor General on the food mail issue, INAC is in the process of reviewing the Churchill point of entry for Kivalliq.
Is the Minister aware of any plans on the part of INAC to review the point of entry to the Baffin?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wrote a letter to him in September and I was in support of the Kivalliq review and I was pleased to see the Kivalliq being reviewed but we do need to be reviewed in the Baffin as well.
Some of the groceries that arrive up here are rotten by the time they get here and I have asked them to review the cost of groceries in the smaller communities because the smaller communities don’t benefit from the food mail program.
I can table that correspondence in the House asking the minister to look into the various programs. I will table it tomorrow.
One of the factors of the high price of all goods is the high cost of shipping.
Can the minister tell us today what progress his department has made in implementing a Transportation Strategy to help address this issue?
We don’t have the full responsibility.
We are trying to work with the federal government continually and ask them to rectify the situation because this program should apply to everyone’s benefit and help reduce the cost of groceries for nutritional food.
It should be utilized to its fullest extent to make sure the cost of groceries is reduced in all of our communities.
The Arctic Cooperatives had written a joint letter to various members of the legislature in regard to reducing the price of groceries.
INAC wanted to increase the pilot programs to reduce the cost of nutritional food.
Perhaps our government is working cooperatively to make sure that we reduce the cost of groceries. Are they talking with their Ottawa counterparts?
Yes, we will continue to work on this issue until it is resolved.
I wrote a letter a couple of months ago to the minister responsible for that to make sure that we work on it and to make sure that we make progress.
I am just waiting for a response from the federal minister.
Question 016 – 2(3): Core Funding for Illisaqsivik Society (Arreak)
Last February I made a statement in the House about the Illisaqsivik Society’s great work in Clyde River.
I identified how their work benefits the residents of the community of Clyde River.
I asked the minister at that time if they could provide core operations funding for them.
I received a response last May that they cannot provide that funding.
(interpretation ends) I would like to ask the current Minister of Health and Social Services whether she would reconsider providing core funding for the Illisaqsivik Society.
Speaker (interpretation): The Minister of Health and Social Services, Ms. Aglukkaq.
I will look at the file and see what’s occurred since the last letter that was sent to the member.
If it warrants core funding, I will look at that.
As it is right now, nothing has changed; so at the moment, no.
The former minister indicated that she would direct her officials to ensure that the Illisaqsivik Society had adequate funding to allow for the continued delivery of its programs and services to the people of Clyde River.
Can the minister provide an update on what has been done in response to that direction?
I will have to talk to my staff to see where that particular research is. One of the things that I should note is that in providing core funding to any agency in a community, that core funding has to be in line with the Department of Health and Social Services core programs; which are outlined in the main estimates of the department.
If those programs are part of the Department of Health and Social Services listed programs as per the main estimates, I will certainly consider that. As it is right now, from what I understand, the programs that are being delivered by this centre were not in the Health and Social Services core programs.
Question 017 – 2(3): Fuel Supply in Arviat (Alagalak)
I am not sure if you are aware that we have experienced some difficulties in Arviat in June, in July and also in the month of August.  We ran out of fuel twice just when the summer was coming up.
The fuel caches were depleted and they had to pump fuel and put it into one tank trying to make sure there was fuel for the power house generators, the contractors delivering water and also for other services the vehicles had to work. I would like to ask the minister if she is aware of this currently.
I heard a bit about it because Arviat went through a difficult period at that time and they were giving me correspondence as it was developing. As the situation was developing I knew about it.
This was a very big problem. Even the power house required fuel and they had to get leftover fuel to make sure there was enough fuel in their tank. I heard that it had to be pumped out of another tank.
I am not sure that was the case but that is what I heard. They went to all the other tanks and pumped out their fuel. All the housing that was being constructed, it seems it was being neglected.
I want to hear from the minister in response to this. I know that the community this fall especially is going to be using more fuel than before.
We are a bit scared that we might have another shortage of fuel for this year. Have you directed your officials to make sure we don’t experience this again?
I would like to thank my colleague for asking me that question.
I know that we have growth in all the Nunavut communities and the impact is felt when we run out of fuel in the communities. This has been in our plans. We try to work on them all at the same time within our funding restraints and we have been woken up with this situation.
Last summer, my officials were working closely with Arviat residents. I will ask my officials again because this is very important. The staff call to make sure that I am aware of these things.
It is good to hear that the minister is dealing with this, but one thing that we had a problem with is we couldn’t find out where the ship was and we were happy at the end that we were going to get a re-supply.
We just experienced the same thing again 30 days before there was a re-supply ship that came to fill up the tanks. Before the 30 days were up, again, we started running out of fuel. I just wondered if the minister really understood what I was trying to say.
Yes, this message was relayed to me, but I’m sorry that the re-supply did not have enough fuel for the member’s community and we would not like to experience the same thing for that community.