EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
So we are going to continue on this process. From my understanding from the department, we will have a class “B” estimate here in mid-November or so.
By the time I come back to you in the winter sitting, we will have a class “A” estimate with a very definite price tag to this.
So I hope that answers the process question that we ended off with yesterday.
Yes, the answers are evolving, obviously, because initially when you made the presentation, not just in this session but even in the previous session, you made a request to enhance the existing facility.
That was the original idea.
I did, at all times, indicate that I think that is separate because you and I know that $8 million in initial funds were never going to be enough to facilitate a new facility.
So I think it’s important to indicate to the committee and to Nunavutmiut that this is a new facility.
That should be right up front. What you’re asking is two-part, I think, and I think you need to be very clear to Nunavutmiut that we’re not just approving capital planning dollar amounts.
We’re being asked to approve a capital planning amount needed to design. I’m not sure whether they had been tendered yet. If they are, I think the minister should indicate to us exactly where we are with the design process.
You’re also asking us to approve some construction dollars.
Am I correct on that?
To give a very insightful answer, I’m going to ask Chris, our manager of capital, to respond to Mr. Curley.
Mr. Stewart.
Mr. Stewart: Thank you very much.
To give a little bit of background, the RFP was awarded to Stantec Architectural in July.
We began design in July after the award. We have proceeded in September when we got our class “C” estimate and are continuing with design work now and, even next week, are continuing that design to work towards the class “B.” So design is ongoing right now.
Chairman (Mr. Tapardjuk) (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Stewart.
So my next question to the minister is… .
So the contract was awarded. Obviously it’s in the process. That particular contractor, are they using the funds that were allocated through the House and approved or do you need extra dollars to complete the whole design process?
I’ll attempt to answer this and Chris can correct me if I’m wrong.
That process is ongoing, but as Mr. Curley knows, we approved $700,000 last spring in the House for this process.
We actually needed some more funding and you probably saw in the supp bill there today where we transferred another $600,000 carryover from the Rankin Inlet facility to complete this process.
That $600,000, Mr. Chairman, would then complete the planning and design required by the contractor for the whole new facility.
Would I be correct in that?
That’s absolutely correct.
Mr. Curley: Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I’m sure there are work timelines that have been agreed upon through this contract.
When exactly will these designs as well as the ongoing work required for the capital planning process that is handled by the contractor be completed?
Hon. Daniel Shewchuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will pass that question on to Mr. Stewart. Thank you.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Shewchuk. (interpretation ends) Just before I recognize Mr. Stewart, I think, in your earlier comment, you made reference to Chris.
I would appreciate it if you can at least be more courteous and address them by their proper names. It is a little difficult to use their first names, so I remind you, Minister Shewchuk.
With that, I will recognize Mr. Stewart.
Mr. Stewart: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
As I was saying, the design work has started and is ongoing and will continue into the new year. We will be working towards a class “A” estimate and construction documents will be completed by March 2013. As stated, the funds we do have now will take us all the way through design.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Stewart. Do you have any additional questions? Mr. Curley.
Mr. Curley: Thank you. Mr. Chairman, that proves my point that the minister has a lot of time to bring in a proper budget, whether they be class “C” or final estimates, in getting this thing completed.
This funding that we have been asked to approve has nothing to do with the capital planning exercise.
This has to do with construction dollars that are being handled by the architectural design contractor.
So it is very difficult for me to say to the Auditor General of Canada, “We’re going to now approve construction dollars in the amount of $8.9 million, inclusive, for the design and planning that has yet to be completed.” Would I be correct in stating that?
Again, I will have Mr. Stewart add if I need to, but I think I will try and attempt to answer this question. I see where Mr. Curley is going with this.
I think, as with any other capital project, we are going through the process and we have a class “X” estimate. I do think, as we move forward, not with just this project, but with any project, that we can try and have maybe more of a precise estimate as to what we’re doing.
I think we all agree to that and I think that’s an important lesson to be learned out of this whole study that we’re doing here.
I do think that it’s important to have the commitment of what we put forward. It’s regular process that we will come back for a supplementary once we get a more precise class “A”, class “B” estimate, and we will come for the required funding at that time.
Yes, it is a lot. The question here, I think, is just the difference between the class “X” and class “A,” and we’re getting held up on this and it is process.
What I’m really concerned and what makes me feel really intense about this is that the process is one thing.
It’s the purpose and the need that we need to meet to the challenges that we face is the real issue here.
I know that each and every one of you have concerns about this and feel that way, and each and every one of you probably has had a relative or know somebody or has a friend who has been through the system at BCC and have heard stories.
We are in a critical situation, and I have said that before and I’ll say it again.
Yes, the process is one thing, but the absolute need and purpose is another thing.
I understand all of that. I think what we’re dealing with is not just the process; we’re dealing with the procurement proposal also.
We’re approving the actual construction, material, and hardware costs that have yet to be identified clearly. Using the class “X” estimate doesn’t prove anything.
What I’m trying to get at is that by the time the class “B” and “C” estimates are done, eventually the class “X” estimate, which we have been asked to approve in excess of $8 million, will then be incorporated into class “C,” no doubt about it, because that will be the total construction project cost.
So what I have been trying to do is… . The minister has a lot of time to complete the actual class “B” and “C” before the winter session.
Why not wait until that time?
You have enough dollars for the capital planning exercise, and then present them all at once at that time so we’re not jumping the gun by approving $8 million worth of construction allocations that are not going to be spent until next summer anyway. Is that possible?
Minister Shewchuk, before you respond, I would like to remind the members that we’re on page C-3. $400,000. Directorate. Various Minor Capital.
It hasn’t been approved yet.
We are talking about C-5 at this moment. I would like to remind the members that we’re on page C-3 and you can ask additional questions when we go to C-5.
C-4 has not been approved yet and it’s $400,000.
I would like to remind members once again that we’re going page by page.
Minister Shewchuk, it’s at your discretion if you would like to respond to this question, but I would like to go back to C-3 once the response is completed.
I think it’s important that we approve this $8,575,000. I think it’s important that we approve it and make that commitment today. When we come back for that supplement bill in the winter session, the members will have the opportunity to either approve it or not approve it at that time too.
I feel like we should follow the process we’re going on and I’ll leave it at that, Mr. Chairman.
I understand your point. I think the director is also responsible for a whole lot of things, including capital planning requirements.
My point really has to do with also complying with the planning requirements of all major projects.
I think the Auditor General has indicated over and over to the departments and to all the MLAs that dollars, unless they have been identified properly, is one that we are simply normally not required to vote on because we have, for instance, class “C” and class “X” estimates that really don’t mean anything.
That’s the only point that I’m getting at.
We’re not disagreeing at all that this facility is put into question or not.
I will say that I support the proposal, but we need proper dollar amounts.
We are going to be approving $8 million that will not be tendered until likely April or May, not until the next fiscal season.
Mr. Chairman, that’s the only point that I’m making because eventually it will be identified that the planning and developing actual estimates properly have not been followed through.
That’s the only point I wanted to make. It’s just a comment for now.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. That’s a very good comment.
We’re on page C-3. (interpretation ends) Directorate.
C-3. $400,000. (interpretation) I have no more names on my list.
Directorate. $400,000. (interpretation) That was approved.
We will go to page C-5.
Corrections. (interpretation ends) Justice. $8,575,000.
I believe Mr. Enook has a question.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Minister and your officials.
I have a question for further clarity and some comments that were made earlier.
Sometimes we don’t understand right away when a subject comes up. There was a question by my colleague, Mr. Curley, about the overcrowding relief structure. I would like to know exactly what it is for my clarity and for the people of Nunavut.
It’s about $8 million, so the people might think that we’re going to be building a new correctional facility.
It states that it’s a temporary structure.
Eventually, a few years from now, we will see new plans for a new structure.
I would like to get that clarified first and foremost because it requires $8 million. We know that there is going to be supplementary appropriations in the winter session.
So exactly what is this relief structure so we will be on the same page?
I’ll have another question afterwards, if you give me the opportunity.
I will try and explain all the answers to Mr. Enook’s question.
First of all, I think that we have changed the name on the structure now to call it an overcrowding relief structure because “temporary relief structure” doesn’t help out what this facility really is. This facility is a new structure that we are proposing to be built.
We have before us today a capital request for $8,575,000. We know right now for this structure, we have a class “C” figure out there and it’s going to be $13.2 million. We expect it not to exceed $15 million.
The purpose of the structure is to absolutely relieve the pressures we have on our existing facility. The facility was built for 66 beds, 66 inmates. I know, as of last week, there were days where we had 107 inside the facility.
Anyone who has been there, I have taken a few of you on a tour. The gymnasium is serving as a huge bedroom in it.
The conditions are very poor. The structure is an old structure. We have very little room and space for a proper rehabilitation programming that goes on.
So we have come up with this plan to build the structure to relieve those pressures. Also, half of the structure is going to be designated to mental health inmates. Part of the structure is we’re going to have proper programming space in there to deliver programs, education programs, schooling, and cultural programs that we have designed.
So that is the purpose of the structure. It’s something new.
As far as the temporary part, it’s not temporary. It is going to be a structure we will always use.
Of course, our plans in the future are to construct a more permanent residence for all of our inmates and hopefully we could house all of our inmates from the territory within our territory at some point in time into the future.
That is going to take a huge amount of negotiation, funding, and funding sources to do that.
A structure like that, looking into the future, we’re estimating even right now that it could be $150 million to $200 million. This is going to be a major capital project when it does take place.
Up until that time happens, we need to do something and this is our attempt and answer to do something about the problem we’re facing.
I also thank Mr. Minister for clarifying the situation.
I would like to ask this supplementary question prior to moving on to another matter, as I have further questions on other matters related to this.
If we were to approve this structure and it proceeds to construction, do I understand that in the upcoming years down the road, when the Nunavut government is contemplating a new correctional facility for construction, this structure will eventually be an addition to this new facility?
Did I understand this correctly?
If and when that time came that we had the resources to absolutely build something that is larger, more state-of-the-art, and meet our needs like a facility that I did see in Whitehorse, Yukon when I was there and toured it, we would continue to use this structure for programming, storage space, and many other reasons.
It’s something we would always have use for.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity.
This other question I want to raise relates to my colleague Mr. Curley’s line of questioning about the $8 million fund and when it has to be utilized.
In order to ensure I completely understand the situation, I would like to rephrase the question in this manner.
This $8.5 million, which Minister Shewchuk would like approved, why do we have to approve it at this time? Why can’t we review and approve this appropriation in our upcoming winter session?
Perhaps I should ask the question in this way.
Prior to the start of the new fiscal year, April 1, is the reason for this prior approval request because part of these funds will be expended prior to the end of the fiscal year?
Is this the reason why the members have to approve this request at this time, if we are to approve it here?
I hope that my questions are comprehensible.
I think we’re doing the approval now for a couple of reasons. We are in the capital process. Our winter sitting is going to be the O&M process when we go through that timing.
Another thing, I believe, is that I’m asking to get the $8,575,000 approved because we have it dedicated in that capital. If we approve it, we don’t need to spend it right now, but we are in the process and I think the proper process would be to approve what we have before the House with capital. We know it’s not going to be less than $8,575,000.
We do know it’s going to be more than that, and I will come to the winter sitting with a supplement funding amount.
Corrections. $8,575,000.
Just before we go to C-2, I will get members to vote on C-6, Baffin Correctional Centre Temporary Housing Structure.
Under C-5, even though the minister stated that it’s going to be a permanent structure, it states over here that $8,575,000 is for the temporary housing structure. (interpretation ends) Corrections. $8,575,000. (interpretation) Mr. Enook, you have a question.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don’t want to ask a question, but I just want you to give me some advice.
We said and Minister Shewchuk also mentioned that the title now has changed.
It states that we could just use the word “temporary.” Can we vote on that even though it says “temporary”?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Enook. I am the one that made the mistake; I’m sorry.
Under C-5, $8,575,000, it has been agreed to.
We’re going back to C-2.
I’m sorry about that, I made the mistake myself. I’m sorry for confusing you. C-2.
Justice. Total Capital Expenditures. $8,975,000. Do you agree?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Do we agree that the Department of Justice is completed?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Minister Shewchuk, if you have any closing remarks, I’ll give you the opportunity to speak. Minister Shewchuk.
Hon. Daniel Shewchuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank you and I would like to thank your committee for your support in this endeavour. I think it’s much needed by all of our residents and communities across this wonderful territory.
I really do at this time would like to thank my staff for their work that has been put into this and the urgency in it.
I would like to thank all the staff in Justice, but especially the corrections staff.
They have a very difficult job to go to work every day and deal with the issues they have to deal with and come home, and then be with their families and have a normal life. To all the corrections staff out there, I would like to thank you very much for your services and continued hard work.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Shewchuk, Mr. Stewart, and Mr. Deroy. Thank you for being present.
Members, maybe we can take a five-minute break at this time before we start with another department.
>>Committee recessed at 16:19 and resumed at 16:30
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you for returning to the Committee of the Whole. I would like to call the committee meeting to order.
We have quorum for Committee of the Whole.
We will be dealing with Nunavut Arctic College. I would like to ask the Minister responsible for Nunavut Arctic College to go to the witness table.
Welcome, Minister Shewchuk.
Would you like to make your opening remarks?
Bill 41 – Appropriation (Capital) Act, 2013-2014 – Nunavut Arctic College – Consideration in Committee
Good afternoon to you and to your committee.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to be here today to present and discuss the proposed 2013-14 capital plan for Nunavut Arctic College.
Nunavut Arctic College has taken on the responsibility of their capital planning- linking facility development and delivery strategy.
They continue to develop their internal capital planning capacity to build a firm infrastructure for training Nunavutmiut.
As the only post-secondary institution in the territory, Arctic College plays a central role in providing Nunavutmiut with adult learning programs and services. Our core business is training for employment. Building self-reliance through training and employment is our goal.
This year’s submission requests $8.27 million in capital funding.
The focus is to build infrastructure which allows program delivery in all communities and facilitates student services and learning.
You will see on the plan that work continues on the Kitikmeot Residence and Daycare Centre in Cambridge Bay ($6,560,000).
Student accommodation and services is a foundational piece for program delivery at the campus level.
Arctic College can only train as many students as we can house when taking campus-based programs.
This supports the development of the Mine Training Centre/Campus in Cambridge Bay and will allow the enhancement of health and education programs in the region.
This project also provides us with great opportunities to build relationships with the Canadian High Arctic Research Station, which is scheduled to be completed for 2017.
Nunavut Arctic College’s roots are the services provided for students in the communities. The core of our program delivery is in the community learning centres. There are three new CLCs in the planning stage: Iqaluit, Grise Fiord, and Whale Cove.
The Grise Fiord CLC will continue to undergo planning and a site visit of the old hamlet offices is planned this fiscal year to review design options.
The new hamlet office is scheduled to be completed April 2014. Whale Cove planning continues and a site has been selected. Design of the facility will begin in 2013 with the budget of $460,000.
Continued efforts to develop a community learning centre in Iqaluit are in progress.
Consultations with community stakeholders will take place this year, as well as site selection.
Design of the facility will be initiated in 2013 with the budget of $1 million.
Completion of these facilities will provide a physical space for CLCs in all communities of Nunavut and strengthens the number of new initiatives which can be offered at the community level.
Minor capital of $250,000 is also on the plan. This allows Arctic College the flexibility to address minor needs not met in normal maintenance but essential to the smooth running of facilities and programs.
The future design and construction of the Kitikmeot Campus and Mine Training Centre will ensure that each region has a campus facility and the ability to deliver innovative and diversified programs.
Design money for this facility is requested for 2014 in order to be completed by 2017.
The equipment training centre provides the delivery of equipment operation and maintenance programs as planned in the Nunavut Trades Training Strategy of 2006.
The occupations of heavy equipment operator and heavy duty technician remain in high demand in Nunavut communities, airport facilities, and private industry, especially the mining industry.
Interim program delivery is planned using the old trades training facility in Rankin Inlet and in partnership with institutions in southern Canada.
The equipment training centre builds continued capacity in Nunavut to deliver these important programs in our own territory. We will be able to meet the needs of industry in heavy duty and automotive mechanics and heavy equipment operators needed by the industry.
The Arviat Teacher Education Centre is an important project for Nunavut in providing the necessary infrastructure to meet the needs of Nunavutmiut.
Nunatta Campus includes a teacher education centre for the Qikiqtani region as well as the new Kitikmeot Campus for the Kitikmeot.
The Kivalliq also requires a teacher education centre to support community-based deliveries in the region.
Arviat has the second largest school population in Nunavut and also hosts the Curriculum Division of the Department of Education.
Arctic College currently has a community learning centre and its administrative headquarters in Arviat.
Both are in older buildings which do not meet the needs for this increase in program delivery.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to be here today to discuss Nunavut Arctic College’s capital plan for 2013-14 and the subsequent four years. This is a critical government investment in training Nunavutmiut for employment. I look forward to your questions, comments, and discussion.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Shewchuk. Do you have witnesses that you would like to bring to the table?
Hon. Daniel Shewchuk: Yes, I would. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Minister Shewchuk, for the record, please introduce your witnesses from Nunavut Arctic College. Minister Shewchuk.
Hon. Daniel Shewchuk: Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Yes, I will. To my right is Mike Shouldice, the President of Nunavut Arctic College, and to my left is Eric Corneau, the Coordinator of Policy and Planning for Arctic College.
Welcome, Mr. Shouldice. I didn’t quite catch the name of the other official, Mr. Corneau.
Does the Chair of the Standing Committee on Social Wellness have comments? Ms. Ugyuk.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I am pleased to provide opening comments on behalf of the Standing Committee on Social Wellness as the Committee of the Whole begins its consideration of Nunavut Arctic College’s proposed 2013-14 capital estimates.
Nunavut Arctic College’s proposed capital budget for 2013-14 is $8.2 million, which will be allocated to three community-specific projects as well as towards minor capital projects, including upgrades and renovations to current facilities.