EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
My question for the minister: can the minister tell the House if the minister is concerned that the Government of Nunavut policies may also prevent the acting president from speaking freely about women’s issues in Nunavut?
Minister of Health and Social Services and Minister responsible for the Nunavut Status of Women Council, Minister Aglukkaq.
In terms of government policies allowing whether women who are public servants can be appointed or be on this council is a matter that I need to review as Minister responsible for the Status of Women.
If there are policies within the government that prevent Qulliit members in speaking out on government policies, I need to be aware of that myself.
I have always supported individual women to speak up on issues of equality and I support that, and I’ve had a great working relationship with the board members, including the president that has recently resigned, over the last two years. They are strong advocates and have made a big difference in Nunavut, particularly around the Family Intervention Act, and so on.
As a government, I need to review that policy and whether we are consistent with how we deal with other boards and agencies that the member refers to, the DEAs as an example, hamlet council members, NTI members, KIA members, and so on. Could they be public servants speaking out on government policies?
That’s something that I need to review.
And I certainly will continue to say that women that sit on Qulliit to continue to advocate on issues that are of concern to them, that may discriminate them, and that may prevent them from participating in society openly.
As Minister responsible for the Status of Women, I will commit to look into that.
It is one that raises some eyebrows, in my view, and that is an area of question that needs to be investigated further and further defined.
Written Question 013 – 2(4): Appeals under the NNI Policy (Curley)
I have a Written Question for the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation on the issue of appeals under the NNI Policy.
The question is quite detailed and I would ask that it be entered into the record as read, otherwise we’ll be here all evening.
The appointments of previous members of the Contracting Appeals Board expired on January 31, 2008.
As of May 26, 2008, who are the members of the Contracting Appeals Board, established under section 18.1 of the NNI Policy?
The report is to include a summary of appeals heard and decisions rendered.
The report is to be made available to the public.
Since April 2000, how many annual reports have been prepared and submitted to the GN and NTI under section 18.31 of the NNI Policy?
When will the Contracting Appeals Board’s annual reports submitted to date be tabled in the Legislative Assembly, as per the ministerial commitment made in Return to Written Question 19 – 2(3)?
For fiscal years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 to date:
How many appeals have been directed to GN contracting authorities under section 18.11 of the NNI Policy?
What were the circumstances of each appeal made under section 18.11 of the NNI Policy?
How many appeals have been satisfactorily dispensed with under section 18.11 of the NNI Policy?
How many appeals have been made to the Contracting Appeals Board under section 18.12 of the NNI Policy?
How many appeals have been dismissed without hearing under section 18.14 of the NNI Policy?
How many appeals have been heard within the time limit set out under section 18.17 of the NNI Policy?
How many appeals have been dismissed under section 18.21(a) of the NNI Policy?
Broken down by category of remedial action as set out in sections 18.21(b)(i) to 18.21(b)(vi) of the NNI Policy, how many appeals have been allowed by the Contracting Appeals Board?
In cases where a contracting authority does not accept the recommendations of the Contracting Appeals Board, it is required by section 18.26 of the NNI Policy to issue reasons for its decision.
In each case since April 1, 2000, where a contracting authority did not accept the recommendations of the Contracting Appeals Board, what were its reasons?
Members, looking at the clock, we will take a 20-minute break.
So we will come back after 20 minutes.
>>House recessed at 16:36 and resumed at 17:04
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you for returning, Members.
Committee Report on Bills 011 – 2(4): Bill 28, An Act to Amend the Income Tax Act, No. 3 (Tootoo)
Mr. Tootoo: Thank you, Mr. Speaker… better late than never.
Mr. Speaker, I wish to report that Bill 28, An Act to Amend the Income Tax Act, No. 3, has been reviewed by the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Accountability and that the bill is ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.
Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 68(6) and have Bill 28 moved into the Committee of the Whole for today.
The member is asking for unanimous consent to waive Rule 68(6) and have Bill 28 moved into Committee of the Whole.
Bill 28 will be referred to the Committee of the Whole for today.
Tabled Document 233 – 2(4): Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act – 2007/08 GN Annual Report on the Administration of the Act (Okalik)
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I am pleased to table the following document: Access to Information and Protection to Privacy Act Annual Report for the period of April 1, 2007 and March 31, 2008, on time. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Please provide the document to the Clerk’s table so that they could see if they’re actually on time.
Tabled Document 234 – 2(4): Electric Power in the Kivalliq (Curley)
Tabled Document 235 – 2(4): Nunavut Transportation Strategy – Letter and Recommendations from the Nunavut Economic Forum to the Minister (Curley)
I would like to table the following documents and they’re titled in English: (interpretation ends) Hydroelectric Power in Kivalliq and Exploration of Alternatives, prepared by the Sakku Development Corporation; (interpretation) and the other one, (interpretation end) Recommendations (interpretation) prepared (interpretation ends) by the Nunavut Economic Forum Submission to the Government of Nunavut and Recommendation on the Nunavut Transportation Strategy 2008. (interpretation) Thank you.
Please provide the documents to the Clerk’s table.
Tabled Document 236 – 2(4): Hakapik - Photo (Picco)
Tabled Document 237 – 2(4): Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Foundation Documents for Nunavut Schools (Picco)
I have two documents to table today.
I would table the following document: Inuit Qaujimajatugangit: A Foundation Document for Nunavut Schools, and secondly, Mr. Speaker, I would like to be able to table a colour photograph of a hakapik.
There might be questions arising from that.
Motion 036 – 2(4): Banning the Use of the Hakapik (Okalik)
Hon. Paul Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends)
WHEREAS seals have been hunted by Inuit since time immemorial for sustenance, clothing and fuel;
AND WHEREAS the arrival of Europeans in our Arctic home led to Inuit being able to earn income through trade;
AND WHEREAS although the federal Fisheries Act allows for the use of the hakapik in sealing, less than 10 percent of the commercial seal hunt is actually conducted using this tool;
AND WHEREAS the animal rights fundraising industry focuses on the use of this European-designed tool in order to sensationalize and misrepresent the practice and tradition of sealing in Canada;
AND WHEREAS outdated, incorrect and misleading information concerning southern Canadian sealing practices has been circulated internationally by the animal rights fundraising industry for the purpose of lobbying European legislators to consider banning the importation of Canadian seal products;
AND WHEREAS European legislators, as they did in 1983, have suggested that a so-called “Inuit exemption” from this ban be permitted;
AND WHEREAS historical evidence conclusively demonstrates that such exemptions, which are colonialist in nature, do not work when an entire market is destroyed;
AND WHEREAS the livelihood and well-being of Inuit hunters and their communities is again being threatened;
AND WHEREAS discontinuing the use of the hakapik could eliminate the source of a significant criticism of the Canadian sealing industry without damaging the hunt itself;
NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the Honourable Member for Iqaluit East, that this House calls upon the Government of Canada to ban the use of the hakapik as a sealing tool. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Before we proceed, I wish to remind members of the following: any member will have the opportunity speak once for no more than 20 minutes.
The mover will speak to the motion first and the seconder will be next. The mover of the motion will have the opportunity for the last reply which closes the debate, if he wishes to do so.
I would like to thank my colleague from Iqaluit East for seconding the motion.
I am happy to rise and I am happy that as Inuit, seals were our livelihood that we used for fuel and clothing. That was the traditional way of life.
With the arrival of Europeans, we started trading. It has been like that up to today where we buy ammunition and gasoline.
I have asked the Newfoundland Premier to ban the use of hakapiks, even though it’s very small.
A lot of animal rights groups go to Newfoundland and that’s what they take pictures of.
When I was overseas, I’m told today, in 2008, “Why do you still use hakapiks?
Why don’t you use rifles like we do? We use rifles to go hunting.”
Those are the questions that they asked me. Some of them would say, “If you use rifles, it would be more humane and there would be less opposition from Europeans.”
So I am asking my colleagues to support this motion, especially because this is very important to Nunavut, especially to the smaller communities and outpost camps.
The meat doesn’t go to waste because we don’t have the availability of fresh produce in the communities and the seal meat is very good for the body.
So I’ll be very happy if this is passed because we have to let the federal government know that if we’re going to do trading with sealskins, the best before date has passed.
What we’re encouraging is for rifles to be used in Canada because less than 10 percent of the commercial hunt is conducted using this tool, so it will be more humane and we can easily trade the sealskins. That’s what they’re trying to take away from us.
So I am urging for your support for this motion and I want all the members to approve the motion. I would like to see a recorded vote.
When the suggestion came up during caucus for me to move forward and second this motion, I readily agreed to it.
I think I would like to begin by just giving an explanation of what a hakapik is and we were joking this morning with some of the colleagues, and I should have brought a hakapik in and I have one at the house, but I thought it would not be appropriate in this venue, in the Assembly, so I would like to give a description taken from our friendly computer.
A hakapik is a club, Mr. Speaker, it’s of Norwegian design, and it’s used for killing seals. The hakapik is a multi-purpose tool. It’s a heavy wooden club with a hammer head.
Mr. Speaker, you have a hammer almost like a baseball bat at the end, and on top of that is almost like a pick. There’s a broad part used to crush a seal’s skull and a hook which you dig into the back of the seal and you could drag it across the ice.
Mr. Speaker, I have tabled a picture of the standard hakapik in the House here and then after debate today, people will be able to have an opportunity to see what a hakapik looks like.
Maybe in Inuktitut, Mr. Speaker, and I just talked to our colleague, our friend Mr. Barnabas, and I said, “How would you describe that?”
I always thought when I have it at the house and I say to my wife what that is, I always call it a Nitsinnguaq for a hakapik.
So for lack of a better word, I would call a hakapik a Nitsinnguaq because it’s really not a Nitsik with a hook, it’s got a hammer at the end.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to give the House an overview of what I see this motion. I see this motion as an important gesture by our Assembly to show and demonstrate to Canada and to the world that Nunavummiut have been sealing and have used seals for millennia.
It has sustained Inuit in the harshest environment, Mr. Speaker, on earth and Mr. Speaker, our seal hunt is predominantly ringed seals and we don’t use hakapiks.
Mr. Speaker, when the seal hunt is mentioned and described from Los Angeles to New York, from Berlin to Rome, Mr. Speaker, around the world, one image has become standard, one image has been burned, Mr. Speaker, into the image of what our seal hunt is. That one image, Mr. Speaker, has become synonymous with the annual hunt.
Mr. Speaker, what is that image of the Canadian seal hunt? That image, Mr. Speaker, is a seemingly crazed, Cro-Magnon caveman clubbing a defenceless seal with a crimson red blood trail on a snow white ice flow.
What does that do, Mr. Speaker?
You have people across the world who have never seen blood in real life.
You have these people who will see a bit a blood on a bit of snow and they see this image of a giant barbarian whacking this poor little defenceless creature holding onto its little paws and looking up. Mr. Speaker, that is the image that Canada, through the seal hunt, has spread around the world.
Mr. Speaker, for the record, less than 10 percent, as the Premier stated, of all the seals taken at the annual seal hunt are harvested by a hakapik. What does that mean? 250,000 seals, a quarter of a million seals, less than 10 percent are taken by a hakapik.
Mr. Speaker, in Nunavut, zero percent, none, nil, nada, are harvested by a hakapik in Nunavut. None. Yet, Mr. Speaker, because of the PR campaign by animal rights groups, we are lumped in with seal hunting using hakapiks.
Now, Mr. Speaker, the Maritimes and the Newfoundland seal harvest is a commercial venture.
Our seal hunts is of a subsistence nature. All parts of the seal are used. The fur for Kamiik, mitts, even sealskin vests that we see the members wearing today.
The meat is a staple across Nunavut, Mr. Speaker. After harvesting the meat, if we can sell the fur and generate extra income, then that is a bonus for our hunters.
Between 1983, Mr. Speaker, and 1987, I estimate that in Clyde River, Broughton Island, and Hall Beach, I purchased and shipped on behalf of the Hudson’s Bay Company maybe 5,000 or 6,000 sealskins.
Mr. Arreak, I’m sure, will remember that in 1985, on the old National and the Journal, 23 years ago, Barbara Frum, when she was alive and was a famous national broadcaster, we did an interview on the Journal about the seal hunt and sealing, and how it was affecting our seal prices at that time.
This is not a new story, Mr. Speaker.
When we sold and bought 5,000 or 6,000 sealskins, as an example, Mr. Speaker, that was real income for our hunters.
The Greenpeace and the animal rights groups began their strong anti-sealing campaigns, and Mr. Speaker, the price of sealskins dropped and was no longer viable for the Hudson’s Bay Company, or indeed, the hunter to buy or sell the fur.
Now, this had a devastating impact on our small communities, and indeed, Mr. Speaker, on the entire economy of Nunavut.
I think Mr. George Wenzel, who did some fantastic work on the traditional sealing and economy in the 1980s, showed the spike in income support rates increase when the price of seals went down.
Mr. Speaker, famous celebrities, recently like Paul McCartney, who is internationally known, or in the past that sex kitten, Brigitte Bardot, described the sealers as barbarians, and of course, Mr. Speaker, the clubbing using hakapiks became their Alamo, their cry, Mr. Speaker, to rally around.
Mr. Speaker, banning the hakapik will not stop the protesters, but Mr. Speaker, studies have shown that the hakapik is, indeed, actually humane.
Mr. Speaker, what we’re saying here is that the opportunity to take away the live ammunition that the protesters have effectively been using worldwide will take away probably the single most damaging optic of the hunt and our sealing industry, and that optic, Mr. Speaker, is the picture of the barbarians with the big clubs coming down because that’s the image that’s burned across the world when it comes to the seal hunt.
Mr. Speaker, and I say this in all sincerity and seriousness, Mr. Speaker, as a Newfoundlander, as a son of a Newfoundland sealer who went to the ice in 1948 on the Old Eagle and who worked for five weeks, and as you probably know, Mr. Speaker, and I’m sure you have read the history of some of the old sealing boats and so on, it was very tough work.
My dad made $180 for five weeks work, 35 days, or it comes out, Mr. Speaker, at five bucks a day.
As a 25-year resident of Nunavut who has hunted and eaten seal meat as recently as this past weekend, as the father of a young Inuk hunter who loves hunting from our boat for seals, I am proud, Mr. Speaker, to second this motion. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
This is something that I had stated earlier but I would like to say it again because people have short memories. I had absolutely no idea what a hakapik was, however, thanks to the seconder to the motion’s comments, I now know what a hakapik is. Based on my new knowledge of the actual tool in question, I will now support this motion for banning the use of the hakapik.
My original reasoning for supporting the motion was television clips of those sealers on a ship, who disembarked from the ship and started using the hakapik to go after the seals, and the pictures show them hitting the seal with the hakapik and then they proceed to immediately butcher the seal right away.
This is completely contrary to Inuit cultural practices and values.
Those people who use the hakapiks are only hunting the harp seal pups near Newfoundland, but if they were Inuit hunters, they would be making a pot of tea to allow the seal time to expire so that they could butcher it properly. They never do that and that is usually the pictures that the environmentalists use to show misinformed people about the hakapik. It makes for good press when they just harvest the seals without waiting for them to die.
I know that the Greenpeace and the other organizations are not going to stop their campaign anytime soon, however, this seems to be their underlying reason.
Although I have gone on record with this tidbit, I would like to reiterate it.
One time I was listening to a CBC radio show and I happened to be driving my vehicle with my two sons. We were listening to the CBC phone-in show about what your favourite animal is.
This was a show where the environmentalists were trying to drum up support to stop the seal hunt.
What is your favourite animal was the question people were calling in about and one caller said, “Seal.” (interpretation ends) Why seal? Because I love their eyes. I didn’t know my son, who was six years old at the time, was listening, but he commented and agreed with the protester and said, “Me, too.
Yummy!”
Mr. Arvaluk: Mr. Speaker, I think we have profound, sensational, beautiful memories of our seal hunts because when we catch one, we stop, we make tea, we cook, we eat the liver, we make tea, and we cook that, too, and have it for lunch.
We don’t know if we’re going to get another one all day.
So it’s not commercialization, it’s a way of life.
The income from sealskin is very small.
Most of it is used for buying gas and supplies so that they could have more seal meat.
So I think that message has to be given to the entire world that the Inuit way of hunting is for food.
It’s not getting off the ship, hakapiking them and skinning them on the spot has sort have been the thing without actually appreciating the animal that gave itself to that hunter.
I will support that motion.
I, too, would like it rise in support of this motion.
I think, as my colleagues have put it, here, like I say, is another example of the European tool causing the problem.
Something that they brought over here and left here for us to use, or that’s been used in Canada for years that they started, “No, you guys can’t use it anymore,” it reminds me of the Americans when they said we’re not aloud to have marine mammals, like whalebone products into the States. They’re the ones that left all the whalebones here and they took all the rest with them. I think it’s another example of that.
I think another thing that really comes out clear here is, as both my colleagues on the other side of the House have indicated, it’s only 10 percent of the industry that that affects.
That’s like having a barrel of 100 apples and you let it go bad because there are 10 bad ones in there.
You would think the federal government and the Government of Newfoundland would realize that 90 percent of the market, or of the business, or of an industry is more important than 10 percent.
Hopefully they can see that just common sense and good math doesn’t take much to figure that out.
One of the other things that was raised that I strongly believe in and it’s something that I have always pushed for here in this Assembly, as my colleagues indicated, that the animal rights groups are portraying the whole seal industry over here, as my colleague said, as the barbarian with the hakapik. That’s not the whole picture.
If they want to tell the story, they should have to tell the whole story. I do that here in this House with the government, if you want to put some information out there, put all the information out there and let people make an informed decision.
These groups I think, along with something like this, there should be a lobby or a push to force them to put all the information out there, good and bad, because that’s the only way that people can make informed decisions.
You can baffle them with a little bit of ‘you know what,’ but they need all the information to make an informed decision.
I think if people realize what these groups are doing by only portraying a fraction of an industry and getting away with it because, it’s like James says, “I like to rise.”
I was in Vancouver for a meeting a number of years ago and I was wandering around downtown by the hotel and I had left here I think it was in November, so I had my sealskin coat with me.
In Vancouver, I didn’t need it. So I went around and I was walking around and I ran into this young lady who was handing out these pamphlets.
I never took them but I looked and she was with Greenpeace.
So I was only about two blocks away from the hotel, so I ran back there, grabbed my sealskin coat, put it on, and I went back to that young lady.
I said, “I’ll take one of those pamphlets,” and she just looked at me and said, “Oh, that poor seal,” and I said, “It took four to make this coat.”
Mr. Tootoo: The point, Mr. Speaker, I also made to her was the fact that every single piece of that seal was used.
Even the scraps of fur were used to make hair ties.
Everything is eaten. Everything is used; even the bones are used for tools.
Not like our neighbours to the south or people across the seas that waste stuff and throw stuff away, and only take what they want and leave the rest for nothing and waste it, we don’t do that, especially with any animal up here.
We couldn’t afford to do that. If we did that, none of us would be here today.
So I think it’s important that those kinds of stories get out there and people realize the negative impact and that the partial picture is shown.
I support this motion. I think there should be further push to force the advocates so that these advocate groups have to portray an accurate picture of the entire industry and not just one little thing.
To the motion. Member for Hudson Bay, Mr. Kattuk.
I would like to rise to state my support to the motion.
I have talked about the sealing issue on more than one occasion in the House and at this time, I would like to urge my colleagues to support the motion on banning the use of the hakapik.
I can say that Inuit go seal hunting on a regular basis and at any time.
It could be in the morning or late in the evening, but during a seal hunt, we hunt them at their breathing holes and at the floe edge.
I didn’t even know what a hakapik was as it is stated in the motion.