EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I do remember in a committee meeting when we brought the issue up that if the hamlet wanted to eliminate the MLOs, if they were still going to be able to keep the money and at that time, the answer was yes.
I’m assuming these four communities that have made the decision to get rid of the MLOs assumed that they could keep the money. So my suggestion is if the Premier could write to all four of these communities that rejected their MLOs and to everybody else and explain to them that if they eliminate their MLOs, they lose the money because I don’t think they understood.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Schell. I didn’t hear a question but just a suggestion to the department. Madam Premier.
I thank you for your suggestion and we will look at it.
Again I have maybe a couple of questions on the MLO positions.
Mr. Weber mentioned that one of the functions of the GLO was going to be the issuing of driver’s licences.
One of the biggest issues in the communities right now is driver’s licences and obtaining them. It’s not the municipalities’ fault.
It’s not the employees’ fault. It’s the process of getting a driver’s licence in a community and right now, it’s taking up to a year. I know people who are still waiting since May of last year and still don’t have their driver’s licence or their ID cards.
With the introduction of this GLO position, how do you anticipate that it’s going to improve the process of obtaining a driver’s licence?
Thank you for your question. The position will be under the Nunavut government. All of the resources and equipment will be made available to the position.
They can also refer their questions about licences to the GLO.
Since they will be our employee, I think they will be able to get faster access to information. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Madam Premier. Mr. Rumbolt.
The biggest issue with the driver’s licence is getting the photo from the municipality to Iqaluit for verification that the photo is actually good.
If it’s not good, they use the mail system in order to return the disc back to the community so a new picture can be taken. Will the GLO be able to take the picture in the community and send it electronically to Iqaluit so that the process can be sped up?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) That is a very good suggestion, and we are always looking for best possible efficient means of doing our business with our communities and the government.
I’m sure the department responsible for the issuing of licences and perhaps the GLO position can work something out to make sure that… .
I think the department responsible is already looking into improving and speeding that up anyway, but that is a very good issue to deal with as well with the GLO. (interpretation) Thank you.
I did present this same question or one of my colleagues, I’m not sure if it was me or one of my colleagues, to the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation.
I think he said that he was hoping, when the GLO position was introduced, that we would be able to send the files electronically, which would hopefully speed up this process.
So I would encourage the two departments to look into doing this.
I didn’t hear a question, but if you would like to respond, Madam Premier.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I will commit to do that. (interpretation) Thank you.
Mr. Rumbolt, is that it?
I want to go back to some of the questions that Ms. Ugyuk was asking in terms of internal waters and international waters.
I think one of the things that Ms. Ugyuk was getting at was the fact that Intergovernmental Affairs, your department, works with the federal government on sort of promoting whether the Northwest Passage is considered international waters or whether it’s considered internal waters.
One of the things that we were curious to find out is: what is your department doing to promote the fact that it is internal waters within Canada in your discussions with the federal government at the table when you’re talking to Minister Duncan or the Prime Minister?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I think that devolution is so important to us because it is in the protocol to discuss those things.
Canada asserts its Canadian waters.
I mean it’s something that is very important for our government, for me, to speak to our counterparts with Government of Canada and it would certainly be part of the devolution protocol. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Elliott, just to remind you, we’re going to talk about devolution on page B-11, so you can refer your questions to that time.
I could, but still again I’m confused because I’m not actually talking about devolution, I’m talking about the minister’s department going to the federal government under Intergovernmental Affairs and talking to other agencies or federal bodies or even circumpolar issues.
That’s not all based on devolution.
To me, that’s something separate in terms of what the Government of Nunavut and her department does on a day-to-day basis.
So I still would like an answer as to whether this is something that the Premier and her department does. Maybe not specifically the Premier but within her department, do they talk about this in terms of discussions when they’re dealing with the federal government?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Certainly, and devolution is a way that Canada can exercise its sovereignty in the Arctic.
That’s why I mentioned devolution. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My light wasn’t coming on. I guess then at the other… .
Again getting back to the idea of internal waters and international waters, I know there was a delegation from Greenland here and the Premier from Greenland was here as well. When the delegation came back in February from Greenland, I had a discussion with them. It was comforting to know that they, and they being the delegation from Greenland, said that they support Nunavut and Canada’s claim that it is internal waters.
I’m just wondering: is there some type of agreement between your department and Greenland with the talks that you have been having in terms of a shared directional statement on that fact, that we as the Government of Nunavut and them as Greenland recognized that this is internal waters?
I think one of the things that the Government of Canada is doing, in the reading and research I have done, is trying in every way to show sovereignty and the fact that it’s internal waters by the activity of DND and the military exercises that go on, and a lot of this stuff that we see happening in the High Arctic is part of that.
It would be nice to see the Government of Nunavut working alongside with another country as well.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I don’t know the level of discussions between Canada and Greenland in regard to that, but this is certainly something Greenland and Canada agree with, the fact that the shared waters are important and has direct connections to both sides.
I will continue to illustrate to our government that it is important and we should be taking part in those discussions.
The governments between Greenland and Canada, I know it’s their role to discuss those, but we also have a responsibility as the Government of Nunavut to portray our position to Canada, which is in line with, I think, what the Greenland delegation discussed when they were here. (interpretation) I hope that was understandable.
I wanted to shift and ask questions now back about the GLOs.
Originally, about a year ago, we approved a budget and there was some controversy over whether approving or not approving it. $2 million was given to your department to hire 15 people and we were led to believe that by this time this year, 15 Government of Nunavut employees would be in 15 communities across the territory.
At this point, there are zero Government of Nunavut employees across the territory. First, I would like to know how many people have actually been hired under the GLO mandate for the $2 million.
This year, we will use $319,000 for the GLO positions.
We now have a director of GLO and (interpretation ends) three supervisors for the three regions are almost completed in staffing.
One is in a staffing process and the other two are not yet on strength.
The director of GLO is very actively working with staffing the non-decentralized communities first before we take on the decentralized communities. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Again it was asked before, but I don’t think it was actually totally clarified.
I know, through the Speaker, last year we had requested a number of times the job description for the GLO.
Is the job description for the GLO now complete and will we be getting a copy?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Yes, the job description for GLOs is complete. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
One of the other things that you had said when you were answering some of the other MLAs’ questions was special regulations or special exceptions for different communities.
I’m just wondering: what are some of the special exceptions or regulations for communities?
In terms of Grise Fiord being a smaller community, is one of the special exceptions the fact that it’s a half-time position instead of a full-time position?
I don’t really work on every detail of completion. (interpretation ends) As far as I understand, Grise Fiord has one full-time position. All of the positions are full-time positions.
Again changing the subject, I was curious to find out in terms of… . I guess this is the wrong area to ask the question. With all of the information that has been flying around and the announcement from yesterday with Minister Duncan and our MP, is this the department or the area that you deal with Nutrition North, that committee that was set up to monitor and watch the program?
I am happy to say that the federal government is listening to Nunavummiut.
The committee that you just mentioned will be working on this program. This Nutrition North Canada Program is very important to Nunavummiut.
There was a press release yesterday that it will stay in place until 2012. Eventually things will start to change after that time.
In terms of that committee, one of the things that I was wondering: what’s the actual mandate of that committee? Is it a broader mandate for the whole entire committee or has it just specifically been set up to react to what has happened with Nutrition North Canada?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) The Government of Nunavut established the Niqittiavak Committee to monitor the implementation of the program and that committee will remain in place to coordinate input into the federal government’s program as it develops.
So it’s mainly to monitor the program. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Again you said to provide input. Who does it provide input to? Is it providing input to the federal government, to Minister Duncan’s office for specific changes, or is it the advisory board that it provides input to?
Who exactly does it provide input to?
I tabled a document yesterday for the members, actually it was an application form, I loath saying that in Inuktitut, “to fill out,” but it was a form to fill out related to the local prices in the retail stores in the communities.
The forms will be sent to the Niqittiavak Committee for review via the minister’s office. These price lists will be sent to Minister Duncan’s office and there is also a federal government advisory board that will review these price lists.
In regard to the GLO positions, you had said the job description was completed and you’re excited about hiring people.
When exactly will the GLOs be hired or when do you see them starting work in the communities?
I know, again, when we talked about it last year, there was an emphasis on training as well. So if you could possibly give us a start date for these jobs.
I think it was yesterday or the day before that I sent you a copy of the job descriptions, so I’m sure you have received or will receive a copy.
The start date of these GLOs will vary by community. The staffing process is slow and the applicants will fill out the applications for the job.
We will have to do some screening and interviews.
(interpretation ends) It depends on the staffing process and we are hoping to have the staffing process completed by the fall. Around September is our target, but again it’s entirely dependent upon the staffing process that will take place.
Again, it also depends on the number of applicants and all that. (interpretation) Thank you.
We’re on Intergovernmental Affairs. $5,730,000.
Mr. Ningark (interpretation): At this time, I have only one question. At the initial stage of this process, I’ll be monitoring in regard to the GLO position.
We keep telling our young people to stay in school and complete their education so that they could get a good job and they still can’t find jobs even though they have completed or graduated from grade 12.
The qualification for the GLO position is a completion of grade 12.
Are you going to be following that job description? It dropped to my desk.
In the application forms, it will define as to what qualifications that they would require and experience.
Once the job advertisements are set out, it will be included in there.
Yes, I have a job description in front of me.
What I have looks like a GLO job description.
Some grade 12 graduates can’t find jobs and when they’re not hired, they end up giving up and thinking that grade school is not important when they are not followed. Are you going to be following the qualifications, such as a grade 12 graduation, for the GLO?
The staffing officers and the directors will be following the job descriptions as to what kind of qualifications, experience, or education these positions will require. They will be included in the job advertisements.
We’re on page B-9. (interpretation ends) Intergovernmental Affairs. $5,730,000. (interpretation) Do you agree?
Aboriginal and Circumpolar Affairs. Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs on page B-10. $488,000.
On page 25 of the business plan for the priorities, it’s the sixth bullet down where it talks about continuing the partnership with NTI and renew the GN-NTI protocol.
I was wondering if the Premier could update on how that’s going and how that’s working out.
We are working closely with Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated.
For many months, we have been available to sign the agreement, which is almost complete.
Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated executive members have changed in the last election, so the executive members are now settling in.
We expect to sign the agreement in the near future on our working relationship.
We are on (interpretation ends) Aboriginal and Circumpolar Affairs. $488,000. (interpretation) Do you agree?
B-11. Devolution. $1,516,000.
In terms of devolution, I know a lot of members have made comments so far and I have asked questions in the House. I think one of the things in one of the questions that I had asked about is what the federal government has said as to why they’re not moving forward on devolution. It was capacity.
I just wondered if the Premier could expand on what is meant by capacity.
Is it capacity within our Government of Nunavut to properly implement programs or is the capacity in other respects? So if she could expand on that.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) We both need to address our capacity issues, including the Government of Canada.
In the devolution negotiation protocol that was signed between the three parties, which includes NTI, the Government of Nunavut, and the Government of Canada, it stated in there that the capacity issue will be addressed in parallel to the negotiations. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Elliott: Again, one of the reasons she also mentioned was the three partners, being the federal government, NTI, and the Government of Nunavut… .
Is part of the reason the federal government is being hesitant because of the lawsuit that is currently before the courts regarding NTI and the federal government and the inability to implement the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement?
Does that have any affect on what is happening in terms of the negotiations you are having with devolution?
In regard to the lawsuit of NTI, the Government of Nunavut is not part of that lawsuit and this has no impact on the devolution process.
Mr. Elliott: So the only issue that’s holding us back for starting to move forward on devolution is capacity within the Government of Nunavut and capacity within the federal government.
If that’s the case, could you explain what specific capacity issues we have?
If we’re not going to move forward and we don’t know what the capacity issues are, we don’t know what to work on. So is it capacity issues like what were brought forward in the Auditor General’s report for the Department of Human Resources to fill positions and carry out functions of the government or is it the Auditor General’s report talking about finance and not financially managing programs properly? What specific reasons are being given in terms of capacity?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) We don’t have an issue with capacity.
We feel that we are ready to start the negotiation process between Nunavut and the Government of Canada. NTI supports us in that that we are ready to start the process because it’s not going to happen overnight, it’s going to take many years.
It has taken many years for our other territories to come to a final agreement with their devolution.
In fact, with the Northwest Territories, they just signed the agreement in principle and it took them almost 10 years. With the Yukon, it was several years as well.
So we feel that we are ready.
It’s the Government of Canada that is stalling and I don’t have a full understanding of what their issues are, but one thing that they have indicated is the capacity issue. They may have other issues that they are not communicating with us. I don’t know, but as far as the Government of Nunavut and NTI is concerned, we are ready to negotiate. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Elliott: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You had said that in terms of the Government of Nunavut’s opinion about the federal government and capacity issues. What did you mean by that?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) The number of employees. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Elliott: So the federal government should have more federal employees in the territory performing functions of the federal government at this time.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Again, it’s come down to the administration of the lands.
The federal government feels that the number of employees to administer the lands needs to be increased and this is something that again I will mention.
In the protocol agreement that we signed, it is stated that the capacity issue will be addressed alongside or in parallel with the negotiations. So I don’t know what exactly… .
I take it as a stalling tactic on their part, but as I said, I feel that it is important to at least start the process of negotiating with Canada. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Again, the reason why I’m asking the question is because we see the department growing and we want to see the division doubling within the next four years. We’re being asked to approve almost $300,000 more.
As a regular member, I don’t see this issue moving forward in the sense that how you can move forward on devolution talks and a devolution agreement when the federal government doesn’t even have and hasn’t had for the last two years anyone named in the position as a negotiator.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Back in 2003, at the time that the devolution protocol was signed by the three parties, obviously the Government of Canada felt that they do indeed want to move forward with that. Otherwise, they wouldn’t have signed the devolution negotiation protocol. So the intent is there.
Within the last year, the federal government is saying that they are willing to move forward with the non-fiscal phase of a negotiation. It’s a good sign.
In fact, when I was meeting with Minister Duncan, he asked, “Do we have the right representative?”
I feel that they are. We did have an agreement between Minister Duncan and me to keep the dialogue, to keep discussing that, so I feel that we have moved forward.
In terms of number of people who would be engaged in employment within the Government of Nunavut, we are graduating more and more grade 12 students who are going on further to post-secondary school, which is a good sign. So if the trend is that way for the coming years, let’s say for the next ten years, I feel that our capacity situation will greatly improve. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The protocol that you were talking about between NTI and the federal government, does that expire or does the protocol just keep going and going? So it could be like 15 to 20 years that you’re working towards this mandate.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I don’t recall the expiration date; I’m going to have to double-check on that for him. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Again if the Premier could explain to me how her department can move forward on devolution file if the federal government is not setting up a negotiator or someone to even talk to or negotiate with.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Although the negotiations have not started, Canada cannot delay on this. We have our employees who are busy doing some research work and preparing for the commencement of negotiations.
We cannot go into negotiations without being prepared, so there is a lot of preparation that is happening right now with our staff. We just have to keep the pressure on and continue our preparation on the assumption that the negotiations will begin shortly.
So there’s a lot of preparation work to be done and we need to be prepared at the time that all three parties are ready to negotiate. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you Madam Premier.
Committee Motion 001 – 3(3): Deletion of $297,000 from the 2011-12 Main Estimates of the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs (Elliott)
I guess I’m not convinced, so I move that $297,000 be deleted from the Devolution Branch from the 2011-12 Main Estimates of the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) The motion is in order.
Before we proceed with the debate on the motion, I have a few comments to make as to the procedures. (interpretation) All members have the right to speak to the motion for a total of 20 minutes. The mover of the motion will speak first and has the right to the last reply. Mr. Elliott, you were the mover of the motion.
Again I don’t think, in terms of devolution, I agree with the idea that we do need to move forward. I agree with the fact that we need to work with the federal government to work on the file of devolution and continue to build on that relationship with the federal government to work towards the devolution agreement.
At this time, though, it seems like the department is continuing to grow and we don’t seem to get the answers that we need.
If it’s just the capacity and if the federal government is not naming a chief negotiator, I don’t see how we can continue to support and continue to increase the funding.
That’s why my motion is looking at no increase so the department can maintain and keep operating the way it has over the last couple of years with the same amount of money that it has been operating with over the last couple of years.