EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
If you look back through the substantiation sheets here, it appears, for whatever reason, the Minister of Education seems to think it’s for, if there’s a feeling out there that for what he said the reasons why this is happening.
It doesn’t matter what reason it’s happening for, but to me, it’s apparent that the standards and criteria that are used to prioritize projects in the department or any department by this government, weren’t followed.
The minister herself said over and over again that it’s based on need.
She couldn’t even provide accurate information on the age of the facilities.
She said that they were 23 years old and 20 years old. Repulse Bay is 26 years old, not 23 years old.
Arctic Bay is 24 years old, not 23 years old. The only ones she got right was the Taloyoak centre.
And, that’s right from their substantiation sheets that they provided us in here.
If decisions were made based on misinformation like that and it became evident that the standards and criteria for whatever reason weren’t followed, then it gives the perception of unfairness out there for whomever. As a Member of the Assembly, I always believe in things being done fairly. I’ve said that over and over for years.
We have a standards and criteria there for everybody to be followed, and then if those are followed, then you don’t problems.
When they’re not followed, people lose confidence.
From the responses I got and other responses that other members got, I think it’s evident that those standards and criteria weren’t followed in prioritizing these projects.
We have a six year older facility and a four year older facility that get deferred at the direction of FMB, not the direction of the House. FMB asked the Cabinet Ministers, not the members on this side of the House.
We’ve got no say in that.
The department’s capital plan is brought forward by the minister to the Financial Management Board for approval.
Also, the fact that the department gets advice, suggestions, and recommendations from the Department of Community and Government Services, but at the end of the day, it’s the department that makes the decisions as to which one it prioritizes, or which projects they’re prioritizing, not Community and Government Services.
It’s easier to point the finger somewhere else. It’s always easier to do that.
Just from this, I can’t support this because I believe from what I’ve heard that due process wasn’t followed, that the standards and criteria that the government is supposed to follow in prioritizing projects didn’t happen here. And, for that reason, I’ll be supporting the motion.
I, too, have a very hard time to be convinced that there was hard evidence to make a switcheroo with Repulse Bay and Taloyoak in the five-year capital plan.
That has not been explained very well.
It’s difficult for me to determine properly, for example, if Taloyoak design stage, like Repulse Bay was like that, and the Department of Health decided to build one in Repulse Bay first, instead of Taloyoak, are we still going to have the same problem?
I cannot be convinced that there was hard evidence to switch those two five-year capital plans.
Therefore, I will be voting in favour of the motion.
When we were listening to the questions being answered back and forth for a few days, what I said the other day, I just want to remind everybody that 1999 was the year it had been deferred, and now, it has been deferred again for the capital plans.
I’ve never seen any funds allocated for the health centre in Repulse Bay.
From the year 1999, there are no new projects.
There have been delays after delays every year.
The Second Legislative Assembly has not changed.
They kept saying that they’re going to bring new funding from the capital estimates every year, and then they decrease the amount.
This is the case today.
The health centre in Repulse Bay is put in for 2010-11. I don’t know if it’s going to go ahead again.
Although they say that they are going to go ahead with it, it changes the next year. Although it has been approved by the Legislative Assembly, they decrease the amount even before the year is over, or is not put in the project.
If you are going to continue to take away some of the projects in the five-year capital plan, and we keep expecting for them to go ahead; what Mr. Curley said earlier for the Kivalliq region, for next year they have zero dollars from Health and Social Services; I don’t know if we’re going to get anything in the years to come.
For that reason, I’m going to vote in favour of the motion.
As we’ve been discussing this for five days and saying the same thing, I think, over and over, and having to recap from what happened in 1999 and previous government decisions, it’s been very frustrating for me to try and get this process through.
As the Minister of Health and Social Services, I put projects before this House by project basis only, and if not, it’s because it’s by communities. It’s not on that basis.
I’m not happy that that is implied by my colleagues in this House that the reason why Taloyoak is ahead of Repulse Bay is because of me. There was no switch in Taloyoak over Repulse Bay.
Both Taloyoak and Repulse Bay entered the books in 1999. I don’t make this stuff up. It’s right before you, it’s debated in the House, and it’s still in the books.
Unfortunately, Taloyoak and Repulse Bay capital projects were put on hold to accommodate all of the new facilities; Rankin Inlet, Cambridge Bay, the $64 million project in Iqaluit, Pond Inlet, Igloolik, and Pangnirtung.
They were put on hold to accommodate those facilities.
I’m just as frustrated as the Member from Repulse Bay. I share his concern and the initiatives that we had put forth as a department was to finish what we started in 1999.
Things change in five years, in seven years, so we change with time; standards change, health inspectors’ reports change.
Just because we made a decision in 1999 and all of these things change we’re going to just sit on it? No.
We evolve with time, we change with time.
If there’s a fire in the Rankin Inlet Health Facility, we have to respond, which we just did in Cambridge Bay.
Right now, if we were to face that, we would have to evolve and address that.
We had a situation in Sanikiluaq, so we borrowed more money from Taloyoak for Sanikiluaq. We did a number of those.
We borrowed money to fix the facility in Kugluktuk, we borrowed money to fix the Health and Social Services Office in Igloolik, and right now, we’re using minor capital to renovate the old health facility in Rankin Inlet that burnt down.
So to accommodate for that, we had to move out of there to an unfinished facility to deliver services. We changed, well, because we made a decision and it’s not done, we don’t move? We had to respond.
Right now, we’re renovating the Rankin Inlet facility so that we can develop a community wellness centre out of that facility.
There is a capital project going on in that community right now. In the Kivalliq, it’s Repulse Bay, and it’s in the design stage.
The member knows very well that every single year, new money is approved.
Projects that don’t require new money are not before you and money is allocated based on need, based on technical assessments, and that the experts are from CGS.
We don’t have the capacity in the Department of Health to do electrical inspections to decide on what a boiler it should be, what size boiler it should be, plumbing, structural stuff; we don’t have that capacity, nor do we in this House.
We are not technicians, engineers, or electricians in this House to be making decisions on that basis.
We rely on the experts of CGS staff to do that. I rely on their expertise to put forth recommendations to my department and I act on that. I’m not an expert, I’m not a plumber, I’m not an engineer; I’m none of that and neither are you.
That’s how we’re making decisions today and trying to move forward in this House. We’re making technical assessments...
Chairman: There’s Point of Order. To the Point of Order. Mr. Curley
Mr. Curley: Mr. Chairman, my Point of Order is really quite clear. Any member speaking should be speaking to the Chair and I have been specifically referred to as you.
I’m not sure the Rules allow her to specifically point at any member when speaking on a point.
So I believe you should use your discretion to advise the minister that she should be addressing you instead.
Please refer to members. Do not use words such as “you.”
The Speaker cautioned you on this matter on November 1.
I guess, in closing, what I will say is that the department works very hard to meet the priorities of this government and we’ve completed major projects for the last two years.
Rosemary, our capital planner, has a tough job of trying to balance all of that and I think she has done a wonderful job.
We have brand new facilities in all three regions in various communities and all that to date has happened following due process.
All of the facilities you see in Pond Inlet, Pangnirtung, Igloolik, here, Rankin Inlet, Chesterfield Inlet, Arviat, and Cambridge Bay; that was all done using the same process we are following today.
And, that’s in partnership with Community and Government Services technical team.
So nothing has changed in that way. So I have every confidence in their recommendations on every project. We don’t have the expertise, nor the capacity in Health.
The due process was followed for every project.
It’s unfortunate that there are so many delays for those two projects. I know people in Naujaat are frustrated.
I know people in Taloyoak are frustrated. They have waited a long time for their new facilities and today we are trying to cancel one of them.
Where is the fairness in that distribution of projects based on needs by region, based on needs and technical assessments from CGS?
So the process was followed by the department to date, and I want to commend the staff as well as CGS for that support and without their support, we wouldn’t be here today.
In terms of what’s in the regions, we try to allocate the funding based on the funding we have and the targets we have been given.
It’s not necessarily divided by three by three regions. It doesn’t work that way. We don’t divide by three regions.
The Kivalliq this year, as an example, has doubled in capital projects, not necessarily with health, other departments, as an example, new jail, new residential college residents, a trades school...
Chairman: To the motion, please.
There is a Point of Order.
Mr. Curley: The Point of Order is that the record clearly shows, Mr. Chairman, that the minister is not correct when dealing with the CGS capital funds as an argument.
That should not be the case.
The record is really quite clear that the capital estimates allocated through CGS, Kivalliq amounts are only 19 percent, 28 percent for Kitikmeot, and 39 percent for the Baffin region.
So the minister is completely out of order in trying to give you the impression, Mr. Chairman, that we are getting our share of capital funds.
So I would appreciate that you rule her out of order in referencing CGS capital items.
Chairman: To the Point of Order.
The member is incorrect in his facts. The capital projects for the Keewatin region for fiscal year 2008-09 shows that 2008-09, there’s $21 million being allocated to that region which is an increase of 21 percent from prior year’s.
That’s what I was making reference to just for the clarification.
In closing, I want to say, again, due process was followed by the staff in this project, and that’s all.
On October 26, the Speaker delivered a ruling. Such applies to the Point of Order just raised here. There’s a difference of opinions.
There have been vigorous questions and responses. Disagreements between members over how to interpret information are to be expected and permitted as long as members do not allege that other members are being untruthful.
I find there is no Point of Order.
Minister Aglukkaq, are you finished with your comments?
I guess, in closing, I will not be supporting this motion to delete a project for the Kitikmeot region.
I listened to the debate around the table and the comments that I had made previously.
We stated that we wanted to have an open and accountable government, and to work on behalf o the people of Nunavut. We wanted to be an open government.
We were told that we are still following the 1999 decisions. We were also told that the five-year capital plan doesn’t apply and that we shouldn’t be working on them.
I don’t know which way to decide.
I also heard about people pointing fingers at other departments like Community and Government Services for example.
We are looking at the capital projects for Health and Social Services for this year and we’re looking at their proposed capital estimates.
We hear that we don’t have in-house technical people.
Maybe we should be saying, “This is what we do in our department,” instead of saying, “I’m not doing this and that.”
We are elected to do this type of work.
When the elected representatives in the communities look at the five-year capital plan, they are becoming more and more concerned because they don’t believe it anymore.
They don’t believe that the proposed projects in the five-year capital plan are going to become a reality and they don’t have the confidence anymore. I think it’s up to the government to make sure that the five-year capital plan is applied.
The people out there look at the five-year capital plan and don’t believe in it.
In closing, I will be supporting the motion.
Even though we’re getting hungry, we still have to work.
(interpretation ends) Just for clarification, Mr. Chairman, on page H-6, where we’ve been for the last five or six days on the portion that was passed, (interpretation) the Nunavut Headquarters Region, we keep hearing that there’s nothing for Keewatin, but it states, in Nunavut, it’s in the Headquarters Region, Nunavut Various.
There is an indication that there is nothing for Keewatin.
Of the $1 million that was approved by this House, up to $300,000 is for use in the health centres in the Keewatin if renovations are needed.
If I misunderstood, maybe the Clerk or somebody can clarify if Keewatin is included under Nunavut Various.
Chairman: I’m sorry, Minister Netser, you cannot question during the debate on the motion.
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I wasn’t going to say anything but all we are hearing is about regions.
We all represent Nunavut. If we keep saying that we have different regions, it’s getting tiring. We’re supposed to represent the whole of Nunavut.
It’s starting to sound like a broken record.
We should be aiming at trying to complete projects and go along.
I wasn’t going to say anything but that’s all I hear from both sides; people saying regions, regions, so I don’t want to hear it again.
We should look at the communities that require the most help.
We brought this out by working together and to try to utilize the funding that we have when there are so many projects that we have to do.
That’s what we were doing. We were not keeping anything from or in favour of others.
We were trying to allocate funds based on needs.
We hear that it is not up-to-date yet and we’ll definitely look at those areas maybe within a year or in the future in the plans.
I just wanted to bring that out. I wasn’t going to say anything originally but I’m getting so tired of people saying from region, region, region, and I don’t want to hear that again.
The way I understood this motion is that this $200,000 was for the Taloyoak Health Centre; and from what I’ve heard over the last five days and seeing that capital plan for Taloyoak was renovated, renovated, and renovated.
So this motion is saying let’s take off $200,000 and put it somewhere else, or for another community who needs a better facility.
So, Mr. Chairman, I encourage all members to support this motion.
Mr. Barnabas, you have the last reply. Go ahead.
Mr. Barnabas (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don’t really care which way it goes.
I understand that we approve funding. Our constituents want us to vote wisely for that funding.
I felt confident that Arctic Bay was in the five-year capital plan and it is no longer in there.
How can I trust the government, especially when they keep deferring Repulse Bay? There is $820,000, which is for the Contingency Fund.
For that reason, I urge all the ministers and all the members to support the motion so we can have an open government.
All those opposed, please raise your hand.
Committee Motion 010 – 2(4): Bill 16 – Repulse Bay Health Centre Replacement Be Moved Forward (Barnabas)
I have another motion.
(interpretation ends) I move that this committee recommend that the Repulse Bay Health Centre Replacement Project be moved forward in the department’s five-year capital plan to begin construction in 2009-10, in recognition of the fact that although the five-year capital plan contained in the Government of Nunavut’s 2003-04 capital estimates indicated that the project would be completed in 2007-08, it has consistently been delayed.
All those in favour, raise your hand. Those opposed, please raise your hand. Those abstained, please raise your hand.
Committee Motion 011 – 2(4): Bill 16 – Arctic Bay Health Centre Replacement Be Moved Forward (Barnabas)
I have another motion on the floor. I move that this committee recommend that the Arctic Bay Health Centre Replacement Project be moved forward in the Government of Nunavut’s five-year capital plan, in recognition of the unacceptable fact that while the Legislative Assembly voted to approve $15,000 for the start of this important project in the 2005-06 Capital Estimates of the Department of Health and Social Services, it has been subject to a number of delays and has now dropped off the five-year plan.
Chairman: Do all members have a copy of the motion?
All those in favour of the motion, raise your hand. Thank you.
All those opposed, raise your hand. All those abstaining, please raise your hand.
Is the minister going to go to her...
Chairman (Mr. Arreak): Okay, we’ll continue.
I guess we’re saving the best for last for the capital plan this year.
I welcome the minister and her officials officially to the COW.
My question is on the Kitikmeot region.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to get an explanation from the minister on exactly what the status is of the Kitikmeot Medical Boarding Home that was a project that was planned to start construction in Cambridge Bay this year. I see from the five-year capital plan, it’s been pushed out to the year 2011-12; if the minister could explain that to me.
The Kitikmeot Boarding Home tender of construction closed for May and the budget or the proposed project bid was higher than the project budget. And at this point in time, it has been deferred in that project until they can identify additional funding.
Having said that, the department recently put forth its proposals and future plans for boarding homes to Health Canada.
As stated in the past, boarding home operations and costs are covered, normally through that process as well.
So we’re hoping that we would be able to acquire some funding for all the boarding homes in Nunavut.
As you will recall the, ‘Closer to Home’ Strategy, where we’re supposed to build regional health facilities and part of the process was boarding homes. Currently, the patients from the Kitikmeot have to fly to Yellowknife or fly to Edmonton for treatment.
Now, because that facility isn’t fully operational, I understand that the patients, when they do come to Cambridge Bay, they have to billeted or put up in hotels.
I’m not sure that all patients are capable of being treated or looked after properly in a billeted home or a hotel.
So I’m wondering if the minister could explain to me, until that boarding home is constructed, how patients who come into Cambridge Bay will receive the proper care and attention if they’re staying in a billeted home or a hotel.
As we move towards expanding services for our facilities in the regions, in time, we also push to have the boarding homes established to provide that service to residents that have to travel to the regional centres for treatment.
If there is no boarding home, the patients would have to stay in hotels and/or be billeted until such time we’re able to catch up with construction of boarding homes.
Having said that, there has been some additional work that has been required for the Cambridge Bay facility due to the fire, and we needed to find extra money, about $2.2 million to fix up the regional health facility, which has delayed some movement on services that we’re trying to provide in that region down the road.
So we’re still working towards trying to get the boarding homes in place.
Health Canada has been consulted and they have reviewed our plans for boarding homes across the territory and our future needs. They have that information to go forward.
So until such time those facilities are constructed and we start the services for regional medical services, patients will have to stay in hotels and/or boarding with other people.
The facility in Cambridge Bay that the Department of Health and Social Services is considering to renovate is an older building.
It’s an older hostel; it was for the kids who came in from the Bathurst Inlet and Bay Chimo. It’s a two-storey facility.
But, in listening to the comments from my colleagues in the last couple of weeks and in particular, the last few days, about renovating projects versus constructing new projects, it occurred to me that, perhaps, it should be taken into consideration that we may require a new facility as opposed to renovating this facility.
I’m wondering if the Department of Community and Government Services has looked into that potential there and is advising the Department of Health and Social Services that it may be better to construct a new facility rather than renovate the facility.
The reason I asked that question, Mr. Chairman, over the last couple of fiscal years prior to this bid, there were delays because Community and Government Services had to make changes to the plans to accommodate an elevator and some other building codes.
So I’m just getting a little bit worried now, that as we go forward, perhaps, that building is not going to be suitable and that’s going to push that entire project back even further in the capital plan.
I’m wondering, Mr. Chairman, if the minister or her officials can explain the process they’re using to ensure that the Kitikmeot Medical Boarding Home is a project that will be getting built and will be suitable for the purposes intended.
We don’t a quorum right now, so we’ll take a short break.
Coffee has been served in the Nanuq and Tuktu rooms.
>>Committee recessed at 18:22 and resumed at 19:05
Chairman: I’ll call the committee meeting back to order.
I believe Mr. Peterson asked a question and now, the minister had time to think it over. Minister Aglukkaq.
I’m going to ask the deputy minister to respond to that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Campbell (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) As the minister has indicated, we do have a proposal that we’ve been discussing with Health Canada regarding the boarding home requirements for Nunavut.
We do have, in our proposal for them, an indication that we’ll be looking at a number of communities for boarding home requirements. One of them is Cambridge Bay.
Right now, the preliminary indications we’ve got from our staff is the planned expansion for Cambridge Bay for a 20 to 25-bed facility at some point in time.
We are trying to negotiate an arrangement with Health Canada to allow for us to either have somebody put in the bid for both the facility, as well as the O&M of the boarding home in the Kitikmeot.
Those discussions are still preceding and we will continue to retain the funds that are identified in the capital plan for the Kitikmeot in the meantime.
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Campbell. Mr. Peterson.
Mr. Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the minister and Mr. Campbell for that answer.
I’m a little concerned, the project was to go ahead this year in the current fiscal year, 2007-08, and we pushed it out to 2011-12. That’s four fiscal years.
Is there any particular reason why you pushed it back four fiscal years for the construction work to begin?