EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Part I is the interpretation and general provisions of Bill 26, which includes definitions, notice, and application of the bill related to the Government of Nunavut.
Part II of the bill is general matters concerning securities and other financial assets within 11 subdivisions.
Part III of the bill relates to rights of purchasers against issuers.
Part IV is the transfer of certificated and un-certificated securities with three subdivisions.
Part V is in relation to registration, while
Part VI is about securities entitlements.
Mr. Okalik: Merci Monsieur le Président.
As Chair of the Standing Committee on Legislation, I am pleased to make some brief opening comments as we begin consideration of Bill 26, Securities Transfer Act.
The standing committee recognizes that this bill has been introduced in order for Nunavut to join other provinces and territories in enacting a piece of legislation that brings the law up to date with current practices in the securities trading industry.
The Securities Transfer Act will serve to reduce legal uncertainties that have persisted since the 1990s, when the securities industry experienced rapid growth through computerized trading.
This type of legislation has already been enacted in nearly every other province and territory and is based on model legislation that was recommended by the Uniform Law Conference of Canada in 2004.
This legislation will serve to reduce legal risks across jurisdictions and in order to do so effectively, experts in the field have argued for the importance of uniform legislation across different jurisdictions.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my opening comments. The standing committee recommends the passage of Bill 26 to all members.
Merci Monsieur le Président.
We will now proceed to the clause-by-clause review of Bill 26.
Bill 26, Securities Transfer Act.
Chairman: Clause 13. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 14. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 15. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 16. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 17. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 18. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 19. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 20. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 21. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 22. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 23. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 32. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 33. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 34. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 35. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 36. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 37. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 38. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 39. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 40. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 41. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 42. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 43. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 44. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 45. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 46. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 47. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 48. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 49. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 50. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 51. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 52. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 53. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 54. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 55. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 56. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 57. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 58. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 59. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 60. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 61. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 62. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 63. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 64. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 65. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 66. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 67. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 68. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 69. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 70. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 71. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 72. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 73. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 74. Agreed?
Chairman: Clause 75.
Chairman: Clause 76.
Chairman: Clause 77.
Chairman: Clause 78.
Chairman: Clause 79.
Chairman: Clause 80.
Chairman: Clause 81.
Chairman: Clause 82.
Chairman: Clause 83.
Chairman: Clause 84.
Chairman: Clause 85.
Chairman: Clause 86.
Chairman: Clause 87.
Chairman: Clause 88.
Chairman: Clause 89.
Chairman: Clause 90.
Chairman: Clause 91.
Chairman: Clause 92.
Chairman: Clause 93.
Chairman: Clause 94.
Chairman: Clause 95.
Chairman: Clause 96.
Chairman: Clause 97.
Chairman: Clause 98.
Chairman: Clause 99.
Chairman: Clause 100.
Chairman: Clause 101.
Chairman: Clause 102.
Chairman: Clause 103.
Chairman: Do members agree that pursuant to Rule 62(2) that Bill 26 can immediately be placed on the orders of the day for third reading?
I thank the standing committee for their scrutiny of this bill and their input into the bill.
I thank my officials for their hard work in updating it and bringing us to current with other jurisdictions.
Bill 36 – Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2010, No. 2 – Consideration in Committee
We will be proceeding to Bill 36.
Are you going to have the same witnesses?
Hon. Keith Peterson: I can let Mr. Arki head back to the office.
Thank you, Mr. Arki.
Chairman: Sergeant-at-Arms, escort the witness out, please.
We will proceed with Bill 36.
I would now like to ask Minister Peterson to proceed with his opening remarks.
I am pleased to present the Miscellaneous Statues Amendment Act, 2010, No. 2.
Mr. Chairman, this bill corrects inconsistencies and errors in certain Acts of Nunavut and corrects references relating to the Northwest Territories.
Mr. Okalik: We have no issues with this bill as it brings our statutes up to date and removes those other references to the Northwest Territories when we are actually Nunavut now after 11 years.
So we expect speedy passage of this bill so that our statutes meet our current living standards in our territory. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I don’t have any other members here for general comments.
We will now proceed to the clause-by-clause review of Bill 36 starting with page 1. Bill 36, Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, 2010, No. 2.
Chairman: Go to Schedule A on page 8.
Some Members: Agreed.  Chairman: Clause 2.
Chairman: Go back to Schedule B on page 8.
Chairman: Go back to page 1. Clause 3.
Chairman: Go to Schedule C on page 9.
Schedule C. Agreed?
Chairman: Go to Schedule D on page 9.
Schedule D. Agreed?
Chairman: Go to Schedule E on page 10. Schedule E. Agreed?
Actually, Schedule E is on more pages, 10, 11, 12, 13, and part of 14, just to correct that.
Chairman: Go to Schedule F on page 14.
Schedule F. Agreed?
It’s actually on 14 and 15, sorry.
Chairman: Go to Schedule G on page 15.
Schedule G. Agreed?
Chairman: Go to Schedule H on page 16. Schedule H. Schedule I. Agreed? H, sorry, I’m going ahead of you.
Schedule H. Agreed?
Chairman: Go to clause 15.
Chairman: Now you go to Schedule I on page 16.
I guess it carries on to 17. Schedule I. Agreed?
Chairman: Go to Schedule J on page 18.
Schedule J. Agreed?
Chairman: Go to Schedule K on page 18.
Schedule K. Agreed?
Chairman: Go to Schedule L on page 18.
Schedule L. Agreed?
Chairman: Go to Schedule M on page 19. Schedule M. Agreed?
Chairman: Go to Schedule N on page 19.
Schedule N. Agreed?
Chairman: Do members agree to Bill 36 as a whole?
Chairman: Do members agree that pursuant to Rule 62(2) that Bill 36 can immediately be placed on the orders of the day for third reading?
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Peterson. Do you have any closing comments?
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank the standing committee for the hard work they did on this legislation.
My officials in my department are always pleased to work with the standing committee in a cooperative way.
It’s important that we pass and update legislation that reflects our status as a new territory 11 years in.
I would like to thank my staff back in the Department of Justice for all of their hard work in preparing and drafting all of this. It’s important that we do it right and do it properly. They are the folks who know how to do it, so I would like to thank them.
I would like to thank my officials who appeared with me today, Susan Hardy, Richard Paton, and Louis Arki.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister, for appearing in front of the House here.
Would the Sergeant-at-Arms please escort the minister and the witness out.
We will take a five-minute break before going back to tabled documents.
>>Committee recessed at 17:05 and resumed at 17:20
Chairman (Mr. Okalik)(interpretation): Thank you for coming back. Good afternoon.
We will move on to Tabled Document 13 – 3(2), Return to Written Question 2 – 3(1).
We now have the minister and his officials here.
Tabled Document 013 – 3(2): Return to Written Question 2 – 3(1) NHC Contracting and Hiring Activities – Consideration in Committee
I am here today to meet with Members of the Committee of the Whole to discuss the Nunavut Housing Corporation’s response to a written question that wonderful day last spring in March relating to its procurement and contract activity reports.
The question related to contracting and leasing activities from 2006-07 and 2008-09.
Although the content of this question relates to a period well before my time, my officials and I will do our best to answer to the best of our abilities.
The witnesses that will be joining me at the table are Alain Barriault, the President of the Nunavut Housing Corporation, and Lori Kimball, the Executive Director and Chief Financial Officer for the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
During the 2010 winter session of the Legislative Assembly, questions arose relating to possible connections between former employees and existing contracts.
At that time, I advised that the Nunavut Housing Corporation was in the process of preparing disclosure requirements for all contracts.
This disclosure agreement requires venders to disclose any association with current or past employees or contractors.
I am pleased to announce that this has now been reviewed by legal counsel and has been implemented as part of the new tenders being issued this year.
In addition, the Nunavut Housing Corporation has also verified that existing employees are aware of the requirements to disclose any outside affiliations they may have.
We are committed to ensuring that all vendor relations are conducted in accordance with principles of being open and transparent.
That concludes my opening comments, Mr. Chairman, and I look forward to questions.
Would you like to bring any officials to the witness table?
Hon. Hunter Tootoo: Yes, I would.
While he is escorting the officials to the witness table, I would like to remind you of the following: according to Rule 77(1), you have 10 minutes to speak, and according 77(2), subject to the discretion of the Chair, a member may speak more than once to a matter under discussion but not until everyone wishing to speak has spoken.
Thank you for escorting the officials in, Sergeant-at-Arms.
Minister Tootoo, please introduce your officials.
To my right is Alain Barriault, the President for the Nunavut Housing Corporation, and to my left is Ms. Lori Kimball, the Executive Director and Chief Financial Officer for the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Welcome all of you.
Do my colleagues have any general comments to the opening comments?
It seems that no one has their hand up.
We will now review the documents in front of us.
Let us go to the tabled documents.
The Government of Nunavut’s annual reports on departmental procurement and contracting activities for the 2008-09 fiscal year were tabled in the Legislative Assembly on December 7, 2009.
In your response to the written question that was asked on March 19, 2009, you indicated that the 2008-09 annual contracting and procurement reports for the Nunavut Housing Corporation are not yet available.
When will you table the corporation’s 2008-09 and 2009-2010 annual reports on its contracting and procurement activities?
As the members are aware, there have been some competing priorities within the Housing Corporation.
We were hoping that we should be able to table the 2008-09 report in the fall. Hopefully by the winter sitting, we will be able to table the 2009-2010 report.
Are the delays any part of the issue now with the $60 million shortfall in the $200 million trust fund?
Chairman (interpretation): Mr. Schell, we are dealing with tabled documents.
We are not going to deal with issues that are not within the tabled documents.
Mr. Schell, I can give you an opportunity to rephrase your question.
Mr. Schell: No problem.
We will go back to the tabled document. There was a report for the NHC contracting report which ended on March 21, 2007. The written question was asked of the member on March 19 and he tabled it on June 4, 2009.
My question is if you go through the tabled document on the contracts in regard to the labour for a lot of these five-plexes, it is quite obvious that there is anywhere from $30,000 to $75,000 per unit of over-expenditures on it.  My question for the minister is this was tabled on June 4 and when he made a statement in the beginning of April, he stated that there were no warning signs prior to that.
To me, I would think that would be a warning sign going back as far as when it was tabled. Can the minister explain why it took him nearly 10 months to realize that they were overspending on their labour contracts?
I am not sure that deals specifically with this document.
As I had indicated, the way that it was reported was on an expenditure basis of a snapshot for a year. It did not give previous years and it did not forecast future years.
Until all of those three pieces were put together, that is when the extent of the over-expenditure was realized.
The Nunavut Housing Corporation’s 2007-08 annual contracting report indicates that the total value of all major construction and material supply contracts entered into during the fiscal year was approximately $53.4 million. Approximately 44 percent of these contracts were awarded through public tenders.
Approximately what percentage of major construction and material supply contracts were awarded through public tenders and what percentage were awarded on a sole source basis in the 2008-09 and 2009-2010 fiscal years?
I just want to confirm if the member is asking for the year-end March 31, 2008.
Chairman: Mr. Schell.
No, 2009-2010.
As I previously indicated, those reports aren’t complete yet and I hope to be able to answer questions on the first ones, on the 2008-09, in the winter session after they’re tabled and probably the sitting after that for the following year.
The Nunavut Housing Corporation’s 2007-08 annual contracting report indicates that the corporation awarded a $255,872 contract to the Morrisburg Building Centre for the purchase of various materials.
What materials were actually purchased and why was this contract awarded on a sole source basis?
Can the member point out what page of the report that is on so that I know exactly where to find it?
Chairman: Yes, Minister Tootoo.
Mr. Schell: Sorry about that.
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Schell. Okay, Minister Tootoo and his officials.
I believe that was the Housing Trust resupply. It was the last one, in my guess, that probably had to do with the stuff that missed the boat that year. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
This is also on page 12.
The Nunavut Housing Corporation’s 2007-08 annual contracting report indicates that the corporation awarded a $783,549 contract to a company named Roxul Insulation for the purchase of insulation. Why was this contract awarded on a sole source basis?
I think this is a sole source contract with Roxul Insulation. With that type of insulation, it was the only producer of that insulation.
So a proposal was put in by the Housing Corporation and the corporation got approval to enter into a sole source contract for that as they were the only manufacturer of that type of insulation.
Do we know where this supplier is?
Hon. Hunter Tootoo: It’s in Ontario.
Mr. Arvaluk, do you have a question? Mr. Arvaluk.
Mr. Arvaluk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes.
Why do we need only that type of insulation? How does it differ from the other insulation that we had before?
I think that insulation was of higher R-value, which is why it was selected to be able to have better insulated walls throughout wherever that insulation was going.
A follow-up, Mr. Schell.
This is on the page also here.
The Nunavut Housing Corporation’s 2007-08 annual contracting report indicates that the corporation awarded a $1,795,000 contract to a company named Equinox for the purchase of tanks.
Why was this contract awarded on a sole source basis?
Equinox manufactures, I believe, low-profile water and sewage tanks. They’re the only manufacturer, I believe, of that type of tank, so that’s why they’re sole sourced and they’re based out of, I believe, Winnipeg, Manitoba.
Do you have a question to follow up, Mr. Arvaluk?
How do you determine from the Housing Corporation that, for example, Roxul Insulation was one and now Equinox is another one that only has that kind, nothing else in Canada?
How do you determine that?
You must have asked for requests for proposals all over the place in order to determine that’s the only kind that we have in Canada. How do you determine to find that out?
The question is: how do you know and how do you decide on these decisions?
I understood the member’s question.
Mr. Chairman, they’re the only manufacturer of that particular product. According to the contracting guidelines of the government, if there is only one supplier, you’re allowed to get permission to enter into a sole source agreement.
Mr. Chairman, one of the other reasons that the corporation went, at that time, I believe, directly to the manufacturers was to be able to get a better price on the materials; buying it straight from the manufacturer rather than going through one or two different middlemen along the way. So it’s a better deal getting it right from the manufacturer.
So in other words, you’re trying to tell me that they’re the only manufacturer of septic tanks of that type in Canada?
I have just been informed and my understanding is that they were at the time.
This also on page 12. The Nunavut Housing Corporation’s 2007-08 annual contracting report indicates that the corporation awarded a $1,623,000 contract to a company named Triodetic for the purchase of space frame foundations.
Again this is a case where we’re dealing straight with the manufacturer.
I am sure that some members have seen what they dubbed the space frame foundation in their communities for the five-plexes that these are the manufacturers of that space frame foundation.
The Nunavut Housing Corporation’s 2007-08 annual contracting report indicates that the corporation awarded a $3,309,000 contract to Illamar Marshalling of Ontario for marshalling services.
This contract was awarded through a public tender.
As of today, what is the status of the Nunavut Housing Corporation’s contract with Illamar Marshalling and has it been renewed for the 2010-11 and 2011-12 fiscal years?
That contract expires December 31 of this year.
Over the past year, many questions and concerns have been raised by MLAs regarding the corporation’s acquisition of telehandler units.
How many telehandler units were purchased in the 2007-08, 2008-09, and 2009-2010 fiscal years?
Information on that will be in the next tabled documents on our contracting reports. It’s not included in these reports.
I wanted to go back to some of the questions that Mr. Schell was asking. He said 2007-08 is what we’re dealing with now; 2008-09 will be the fall; 2009-2010 will be the winter. That’s for tabling, right?
I guess my question is… there are two of them. The first one is: are you guys going over the books now and have they been looked at? They just are not ready to be tabled yet?
In terms of contracting and overspending and stuff like that, are they ready to go or you just don’t have that information?
Hon. Hunter Tootoo: Mr. Chairman, my understanding right now is that we put out calls to the districts to provide that information to us and it is being compiled right now and being submitted from our district offices to our headquarters office to be compiled and put together.
I think that sort of answers my next questions in terms of what causes the delays in producing and tabling these annual reports.
I think the slippage has been, if we look at this year, conflicting time and priorities for the individuals involved in putting that information together. We’re crossing our fingers to try and make sure that we have them done on a timelier basis from now on.
With the exercise we just went through in terms of finding the $60 million, by not having this information compiled, it will not in any way lead to overspending for the 2008-09 and the 2009-2010 dollar figures in terms of where contracts went and where money was owing and where money is still owing.
These reports deal with the contracts from previous years.
So after a year is complete, then these reports are put together.
So it has nothing to do with the forecast, it is all ‘looking back’ numbers, compiled from throughout the year.
I think the whole process that we went through, and between me and the Minister of Finance, is put measures in place to ensure that the monitoring of expenditures is going on a current basis right now. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman: I have been informed that we are due for a dinner break for the time being, so I will use my discretion and request that we break until 6:30. (interpretation) Thank you.
>>Committee recessed at 17:43 and resumed at 18:28
I just want to inform members that Ms. Kimball had a personal issue that came up that she had to take care of. I and Mr. Barriault are still here and we have all of the information, but there’s only one person flipping through looking for stuff.
So it just might take a little longer to get to the information, but we do have it.
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Tootoo. Mr. Rumbolt.
From reviewing the written question, I was trying to compare prices with the cost of building the units and I was trying to compare it by regions.
I just picked out the five-plexes, for example, and I only did my math on paper, so I don’t know if it’s exact. It seems that the Baffin region is able to build these five-plexes at a lower cost than the Kivalliq region.
From my calculations, it’s about $125,000 cheaper to build in the Baffin.
Can the minister explain why it’s like that?
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Rumbolt. Mr. Tootoo.
I’ll ask Mr. Barriault to respond to that.
Mr. Barriault.
Mr. Barriault: Yes, Mr. Chairman, there definitely is some price variations from region to region. Trying to explain them gets a little complicated at times, but there were a variety of community delivery methods and that was one of the factors that affected pricing. So in some cases, there was public tendering.
In other cases, there was LHO build. In other cases, there were negotiated contracts with local contractors.
As well, there are variations from region to region in terms of the pricing that was received from different contractors.
Going forward, that was one of the reasons why we did centralized tenders for the new monies coming forward is to try to get some better control as to where the costing is.
One of the biggest factors definitely is the tendering method whether it’s a tender, a negotiated contract, or an LHO delivery.
There are some factors from region to region as well in terms of cost of accommodations, travel to communities, and so on that all factor into it as well.
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Barriault. Mr. Okalik.
Mr. Okalik: I’m sorry; I thought you were asking for Mr. Rumbolt.
Was it me? I’m sorry. I hope my apology is accepted, following our Act.
My first question is in regard to the minister’s opening comments and it’s in relation to the requirement for releasing any connection with past employees and for future contracts to reflect that.
I would like to ask the minister: will this also apply to existing contracts that go past today for the future that already exist but are multi-year contracts?
Will they be required to show who and how the past employees got involved with these companies that the Housing Corporation is contracting with?
As I indicated in my comments, this is something that is being implemented.
Any new contract going forward, we can’t go and arbitrarily make changes to existing contracts that are in place.
If we could, we probably would, but it’s something that we can’t do.
So I’m told, I think, if my understanding is correct, but in any new contracts going forward, those clauses will be in there.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Could the minister explain who signed off on the Illamar contract, which Housing Corporation official?