EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I personally feel that things are improving. I have seen the issues as an MLA. I have seen the reports.
As the minister, I see the reports and we’re improving. As the Department of Finance, we like to pride ourselves on accurate and timely information, and that’s happening.
There are a lot of hard-working people in the Department of Finance, the HR side, and in all the departments. They’re working their hardest to make the government a place to work.
I know, judging from the number of applications, that there were almost 13,000 applications for 433 jobs last year, so somebody wants to work for the Government of Nunavut.
Question 036 – 4(3): Oral Health Screening Program (Sammurtok)
Mr. A. Sammurtok: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, a few weeks ago, the Department of Health issued a public service announcement stating that an oral health screening program would be delivered in Iqaluit for infants and children from zero to eight years old.
I’m sure the minister will agree that infants and children in other Nunavut communities could also benefit from such a service.
Can the minister provide an update on when such an oral screening program will be held in other Nunavut communities such as Rankin Inlet?
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a pilot project to see how it’s going to run and we will study it carefully and we will spread it out if we can, if it’s going to benefit all Nunavummiut. We will study it further and I’m happy to say that we will try it out.
I have asked the minister and the former Minister of Health a number of times about the status of a full-time dentist in Rankin Inlet.
Can the minister provide an update on the current arrangements for full-time dental services in the community of Rankin Inlet?
I know this is not new. The dentists are independent and it’s up to them on what they do about the position.
I have met with the dentist who has been in Rankin Inlet to see if they can open a practice in Rankin Inlet.
We’re trying to provide any assistance we can on whether we will have a dentist in Rankin Inlet.
He says that he’s waiting on federal government assistance. If that can go ahead, they will want to open a practice in Rankin Inlet.
Since they are independent, I cannot really reply to that. They can provide a response themselves.
It is clear that good oral health is very important to establish in our early years.
Will the minister commit to ensuring that every community across Nunavut will receive oral health screening services for infants and children?
Yes, this is desirable. Once the children are taught proper dental hygiene and once they get proper education, they will want to protect their teeth more.
This is good for the future and it’s desirable. We are doing a pilot project and if it goes properly, then we will spread it out.
My colleagues, please note that the time for question period has expired.
Tabled Document 015 – 4(3): 2014-2015 Annual Report on the Operation of the Medical Care Plan (Okalik)
Tabled Document 016 – 4(3): Chief Medical Officer of Health’s 2014-2015 Tobacco Control Act Annual Report (Okalik)
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I have two documents to table today, firstly, the 2014-2015 Annual Report of the Operation of the Medical Care Plan; secondly, the Chief Medical Officer of Health’s 2014-2015 Tobacco Control Act Annual Report. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I have no more names on my list. Moving on with the orders of the day.
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters. Bills 1, 2, and 3 and Tabled Documents 107 – 4(2) and 149 – 4(2) with Mr. Mikkungwak in the Chair.
As we proceed to the Committee of the Whole, I ask that the members remain at their seats as we will start once we are ready.
Chairman (Mr. Mikkungwak) (interpretation): Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) I would like to call the committee meeting to order.
In Committee of the Whole, we have the following items to deal with: Bills 1, 2, and 3 and Tabled Documents 107 – 4(2) and 149 – 4(2).
We wish to continue with Bill 3 and the review of Economic Development and Transportation and, if time permits, the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Chairman: Are we in agreement that we first deal with Bill [3]?
Does the committee agree to let the minister’s staff go… ?
(interpretation) I’m sorry. (interpretation ends) Minister Ell-Kanayuk, do you have witnesses to appear before the committee?
I’ll have my Deputy Minister, Pauloosie Suvega, and Tanya Winmill, (interpretation ends) Director of Finance and Administration, (interpretation) join me at the witness table.
I know you have introduced your officials, but for the record, please introduce your witnesses.
To my left is Deputy Minister Pauloosie Suvega and to my right is Tanya Winmill, Director of Finance and Administration.
Yesterday, we were on (interpretation ends) Economic Development and Transportation. Branch Summary. Transportation.
K-3. (interpretation) Following my list of names, Mr. Joanasie.
Good afternoon, Minister Ell-Kanayuk and your officials. Welcome.
I know we alluded to it yesterday, but I just want to reiterate again in regard to the Department of Economic Development and Transportation’s 20-year capital needs assessment.
They were supposed to make that report and they were supposed to table it in the Legislative Assembly.
I just want to say that we would be interested in seeing the report. I asked the question during the last session in the spring in regard to that and I hear that it won’t be tabled. We expect to see the report tabled.
I would like to ask the minister, in June 2015, the Legislative Assembly approved $15,381,000 in capital carryovers for the department, including $1,385,000 for the project to relocate Pangnirtung’s airport.
CBC News has recently reported that the estimated cost for Pangnirtung’s new airport is between $175 million and $200 million.
Is this an accurate estimate?
For the Pangnirtung Airport relocation project, it’s not actually the estimated cost; they’re now studying how much it will actually cost. We’re just starting to do a study as to how much it will cost so that we can get an accurate estimate.
Also, on June 19, 2015, the Minister of Community and Government Services sent correspondence to all MLAs concerning the federal government’s New Building Canada Fund.
The correspondence indicated that local and regional airport projects are eligible for consideration.
Is your department preparing a submission to the federal Building Canada Fund with respect to Pangnirtung’s new airport or whether it’s going to the other communities? Will you be submitting your proposal to the federal government?
There are many applications that we have with the federal government, so maybe the member can elaborate further as to which application he is talking about, Mr. Chairman.
Please clarify your question, Mr. Joanasie.
Under the New Building Canada Fund, they provide funding and the correspondence indicated that the local and regional airports could be eligible for consideration.
I believe that they have to submit an application first. Therefore, my question to the Department of Economic Development and Transportation is in regard to the Building Canada Fund. Which application will you be making for which community?
Perhaps I can ask that my deputy minister respond to that question.
Only if the plans have been forwarded, but not necessarily in that manner, as only through collaboration with other departments can the future applications be submitted. (interpretation ends) We do work with other departments to prepare some of these capital submissions.
Any capital submissions that don’t end up in the Building Canada Fund applications, we do try and shift to other available pots of federal funding, such as the Airport Capital Assistance Program.
Mr. Joanasie (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) It kind of answers [my question], but I’m just trying to get at if there are certain projects that you will be submitting proposals to the Building Canada Fund. Have they identified specific projects to the Building Canada Fund?
At this time, we have not identified (interpretation ends) as of yet. (interpretation) We have not identified them yet.
I would like to thank the minister for visiting one of my constituency communities. I had the opportunity to go to Kimmirut in August this summer.
She also brought some of her staff to have a meeting with the hamlet council and they talked specifically about the Kimmirut Airport.
There was a study that was submitted and it’s in regard to the Kimmirut Airport. I’m very pleased that there was a study done on the Kimmirut Airport.
I would like to ask the minister what the status is on the Kimmirut Airport
At the time I was elected to the House, I was looking for previous reports that had been done on the Kimmirut Airport and I couldn’t find any documentation or studies that have been produced. I also had the Legislative Assembly library staff look for some of the documentation.
The government has been talking about the Kimmirut Airport, so I would like to know what kinds of plans they have for the airport in Kimmirut or possibly if they’re going to be making another application and to do an estimate on the costs.
There’s a need to move the airport in Kimmirut because there is no more land to extend it.
We did go see the condition of the airport.
We are currently working on how we can include it into the capital estimates. (interpretation ends) The department will ensure that the relocation of the Kimmirut Airport project receives full consideration under the GN capital plan.
This issue has been discussed since before Nunavut was created and it seems like we’re staring to get work underway and I’m starting to see studies that have been done and cost estimates.
Moving on to another subject, (interpretation ends) I wanted to also ask on a different topic.
In one of your department’s substantiation sheets for the Iqaluit International Airport Improvement Project, it says that “Prior to the commencement of procurement, the project team sought and received cabinet approval regarding the proposed strategy for complying with Article 24 of the Nunavut Land Claims and the approach taken focused around guaranteed minimum levels of Inuit labour during construction and operations with incentives for increasing levels of Inuit labour.”
How is this strategy currently being implemented, and what is the current level of Inuit employment with this project?
Inuit employment is at 10 percent. It has to be at 10 percent or over and we’re at the second phase of construction. We’re in the second year.
During the first year, from what I gathered, they exceeded the minimum level.
We are on (interpretation ends) Economic Development and Transportation. Branch Summary. Transportation.
K-3. (interpretation) Following the names on my list, Mr. Hickes.
As Mr. Joanasie was on the Iqaluit airport, I’ll continue with that line.
On the department’s substantiation sheet, and we’ve had some discussions and questions that I have raised in the past on a challenge regarding the land swap with the City of Iqaluit.
I’m just wondering if the minister can update us today on what the status of the two land swaps regarding this project is today.
It has not been completed yet.
Staff are still currently working with the city on that.
One of the concerns with one of those parcels of land is it was deemed a contaminated site by the previous land owner, the federal government.
Before a land swap can take place, I’m sure a full environmental clean-up will have to be undertaken.
At this time, there is no agreement in place for a clean-up.
As of today, what actions have been taken to enter into an agreement for the clean-up of this site?
Those details are still being worked out at this time and we will also have to be having discussions now with the new government.
At this time, I won’t bother asking what the estimated cost will be. I’m sure, with the negotiations, I’ll look forward to that information down the road.
I would like to go into the marine infrastructure side of the project.
My first question is something that’s not in the capital plan. Earlier this summer during the campaign period, the federal and territorial governments publicly announced support for two major marine infrastructure projects here in Nunavut, one in Pond Inlet and one here in Iqaluit.
Although the news release has indicated that the Government of Nunavut will be responsible for providing approximately $30 million for the two projects, neither project is referred to in the capital estimates or the current five-year capital plan.
Are we to assume that there will be a supplementary appropriation bill to be coming forward on these projects and, if so, when can we expect to see that?
We were very pleased to hear the commitment from the previous government and we will be working with the new government to ensure that these federal commitments will be honoured.
Once the contribution agreements are signed, which we’re currently working towards now, then after that we can do a supplementary.
I, too, am very pleased with those announcements that were made, especially the one here in Iqaluit. I think it’s long overdue and it’s something that I have been promoting since the day that I got elected, if not before that.
I would like to go into the small craft harbour budget. You’ve got half a million dollars allocated.
There was some information provided to a standing committee member recently stating that approximately $900,000 in proposals were submitted by communities during the 2014-15 fiscal year.
How many proposals from communities for funding under this capital contribution program has your department received to date in the 2015-16 fiscal year?
Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 16.
Mr. Hickes: I guess my first question with that is: is the City of Iqaluit one of those proposal-submitters?
As I’m sure the minister is more aware even than myself, the challenge of getting a boat in and out of the water here in Iqaluit, it almost seems like you need to take a lottery ticket to get your place in line to get your boat in or out to go with the tides.
I’m just wondering if the City of Iqaluit was one of the applicants to provide some type of a better ramp system or some other infrastructure that would enable more people to access the water at a time.
We would like to have proper docking facilities. The project in Iqaluit was about $40,000, but my department was responsible for it, not the city.
One of my colleagues just handed me some information while you were answering and I appreciate that, and I’m looking forward to seeing some work done.
We’re all aware of the community need across the territory on marine infrastructure. As we all know, half a million dollars, in the grand scheme of things, doesn’t go very far. Has there been any consideration by your department to increase this program to allow… .
Like you stated already, there are 16 applicants going forward. I think that’s probably over the amount that has been applied for now. Has there been any consideration to increase this budget line?
Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk: Yes, under the Community Transportation Initiative.
Under that initiative, are the criteria going to be the same as an application-based and, if the criteria are the same, why wasn’t it included in the same program?
Maybe I’m misunderstanding something.
Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m going to have the deputy minister elaborate on that question.
We have considered increases as we receive a number of applications.
It’s a hugely popular program and we are thankful that we were able to see increases in other transportation-related areas.
We just met with, for example, the Nunavut Association of Municipal Administrators this morning and went to sit down with them and with municipalities and further refine and develop, let’s say for example, guidelines on the access of the program to see if we can have areas of improvement. Some of the lines of questioning and suggestions we had was, “Can’t we increase the funding?”
Well, part of that would be dependent approvals we get in the House as part of the budget development process and part of it would be dependent on the types of applications we receive from municipalities and depending on what monies we have left available.
We have tried to be proactive and reach out with municipalities and work with them on their applications. At the end of the day, it’s not going to be enough money based on the types and amounts of applications coming in.
I thank Mr. Suvega for that response. It clarifies it for me.
We all know this is not an endless stream of money available, otherwise our jobs would be a lot easier and your job would be a lot easier.
I’m going to take a step back to the Iqaluit airport project and bring up an issue that I have been bringing up for a little over two years now with the passenger bridge situation.
I realize I have been asking questions to maybe not yourself as Minister of Economic Development and Transportation, but I’m sure your officials have made you aware.
I’m sure you’re very much aware, as I believe you’re also the minister responsible for Nunavut disabilities.
I don’t like using the word “assume,” but I’m aware of some correspondence that you have received from Nunavut disabilities societies and different groups and citizens out there regarding the importance of including a passenger bridge in this project.
As I have brought up the fact before, it’s not in the grand scope of a project of this nature, not that it’s an insubstantial amount, but it’s not a large amount to include.
I know it’s going to be framed in for possibly adding three passenger bridges, or jet walks, as I have been calling them.
I don’t understand the issue of why we can’t include starting off with one so that available aircraft that are coming up in a passenger configuration could be used, which may help passengers determine which aircraft they would be more comfortable flying in so that they can exit and enter airplanes with dignity.
I’m just wondering if there has been any more momentum on adding a passenger bridge to the airport project.
Hon. Monica Ell (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) All air carriers have a statutory responsibility to assist people in boarding and deplaning.
We attempted to engage the air carriers to facilitate a solution in the planning for this project and they opted to stay with the status quo, but we will remain willing to help facilitate for a solution.
While appreciate that, it seems like if a passenger bridge was available, the airlines wouldn’t have a choice but to use it on a demand from their clientele.
We have all been hearing numerous examples around this Chamber over the last couple days on the control that the airlines seem to be having over cargo and passenger services.
Here we are, restricting our own infrastructure on the request of a private company. I just don’t see the logic in that.
If we add that piece of infrastructure to this project and the airplanes are coming up in full passenger configuration, those flights would, through public demand, utilize that service, to me, whether they like it or not.
I would like to get the minister’s position on that.
The current design of the new international airport does include the possibility to put a new bridge there in the future if the air carriers decided at that time in the future to put one in.
I do thank the minister and I understand the position I’m kind of putting you in here.
At the same time, we all are very much aware of the increasing costs of construction and infrastructure.
The longer we wait, the more expensive this is going to be.
If I recall correctly, the numbers are around $750,000 to $1 million estimated to put one of these passenger bridges in, and I think that’s a small price to pay, in my opinion, out of the total amount being expended here to help our residents who do have mobility issues a continued sense of dignity.
That’s more of a comment. I don’t really have a question in there, but I’m hoping the minister will take this under consideration in her discussions in the control that these airlines seem to be continuously putting on Nunavummiut.
I didn’t hear a question; it’s just a comment, but Minister Ell-Kanayuk, you may respond to it.
I can say that we have had lengthy discussions with the air carriers on this topic and moving forward, we will have some more in the future, if needed to be done.
We could look at a passenger bridge or a passenger bridge model and possibly tax back or do a payment back from the airlines at some point down the road, if that was what had to be done.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) We are on Economic Development and Transportation. Branch Summary.
Transportation. K-3.
Following the list of names, Mr. T. Sammurtok.
Mr. Tom Sammurtok: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I only have a couple of questions to the minister.
As you know, I have written letters regarding the airport terminal building in Chesterfield Inlet.
Just recently this afternoon, I made a comment in my Member’s Statement about the Premier’s visit to Chesterfield Inlet. When the flight was called for them to leave, a couple of your staff got stuck in the terminal building because they couldn’t open the door, and these are actual freezer doors. You can just imagine it.
The weather was nice. It wasn’t cold, so the door wasn’t frozen.
However, that happens over the winter. These doors freeze and you just can’t open these things.
Anyway, my question is, I know in your letter to me, you indicated that the airport terminal building in Chesterfield Inlet is programmed into the 20-year capital plan.
However, I don’t think that terminal building is going to last any more than two or three years now.
I would suggest that your department take a serious look at the terminal building in Chesterfield Inlet.
I know there are other facilities just like that in the Kivalliq as well.
That is more of a comment than a question.
However, I also know that in your five-year capital plan, you’re planning to build a visitor centre in Rankin Inlet, which is a good news item as far as I’m concerned, and I know the community of Rankin Inlet and the Kivalliq are pleased about that.
However, I wonder, because in my conversation with some of my constituents in Rankin Inlet, there is a desire for them to also see some kind of a cultural heritage facility.
I’m wondering if you might be able to have a dialogue with your cabinet colleague as to whether this visitor centre can also house cultural and heritage items as well.
In regard to the air terminal building in Chesterfield Inlet, very many air terminal buildings in Nunavut are aged. The one in Chesterfield Inlet was built in 1984 and some of the other ones were built in the mid-1970s.
However, all of the air terminal buildings are being reviewed to see if we can replace them or renovate them.
We have started looking at the older terminals. As I stated yesterday, we consider safety first of all.
Right now, that is what we have to do because of the lack of funds. We are trying to make sure that the unsafe ones are fixed first.
I can talk to my fellow ministers, but the Kivalliq Regional Visitor Centre will be for visitors. It won’t be like a museum or a heritage centre. It’s for the purpose of visitors right now.
Mr. T. Sammurtok, are you done?
Mr. T. Sammurtok.
Mr. Tom Sammurtok: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chairman.
One of my colleagues just mentioned this a little earlier that apparently money can be accessed through the Building Canada Fund for local and regional airports.
I’m wondering whether your department has made any submissions at all to the federal government to maybe look at funding the smaller airport terminal buildings.
Regardless of whether the airport terminal building in Chesterfield Inlet was built in 1984, the condition is such that it is a dangerous building.
I think that is something that the department should seriously consider looking at, at this point.