EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the Hon. Member for Pangnirtung, that Ms. Jeannie Ugyuk be appointed a member of the Standing Committee on Legislation, a member of the Standing Committee on Oversight of Government Operations and Public Accounts, a member of the Standing Committee on Social Wellness, and an alternate member of the Standing Committee on Community and Economic Development.
Speaker: Thank you, Mr. Aupaluktuq. Notices of Motions.
Motion 023 – 3(2): Removal of the Member of Iqaluit Centre from the Executive Council – Notice (Okalik)
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I give notice that on Thursday, June 3, 2010, I will move the following motion:
NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the Hon. Member for Baffin South, that the Member for Iqaluit Centre be removed from the Executive Council of Nunavut.
Bill 33 – An Act to Amend the Integrity Act – Notice
Mr. Elliott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I give notice that on Thursday, June 3, 2010, I will move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Iqaluit Centre, that Bill 33, An Act to Amend the Integrity Act, be read for the first time.
Speaker: Thank you. Notices of Motions for First Reading of Bills.
Bill 34 – An Act to Amend the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act – Notice
I give notice that on Thursday, June 3, 2010, I will move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Iqaluit Centre, that Bill 34, An Act to Amend the Legislative Assembly and Executive Council Act, be read for the first time.
Speaker: Thank you, Mr. Elliott. Notices of Motions for First Reading of Bills. Minister of Finance, Hon. Keith Peterson.
Bill 28 – Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 1, 2010-2011 – Notice
Bill 29 – Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 2, 2010-2011 – Notice
Bill 30 – Supplementary Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, No. 1, 2010-2011 – Notice
Bill 31 – Supplementary Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, No. 2, 2010-2011 – Notice
Bill 32 – Forgiveness of Debts Act, 2010 – Notice
Bill 36 – Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, No. 2, 2010 – Notice
I give notice that on June 3, 2010, that Bill 28, Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 1, 2010-2011, be read for the first time.
I give notice that on June 3, 2010, that Bill 29, Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 2, 2010-2011, be read for the first time.
I give notice that on June 3, 2010, that Bill 30, Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) Act, No. 1, 2010-2011, be read for the first time.
I have a few more here to go.
Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on June 3, 2010, that Bill 31, Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) Act, No. 2, 2010-2011, be read for the first time.
Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on June 3, 2010, that Bill 32, Forgiveness of Debts Act, 2010, be read for the first time.
Finally, Mr. Speaker, I give notice that on June 3, 2010, that Bill 36, Miscellaneous Statutes Amendment Act, No. 2, 2010, be read for the first time.
Please proceed, Mr. Aupaluktuq.  Motion 022 – 3(2): Standing Committee Appointments and Revocations (Aupaluktuq)
I also want to thank my colleagues as well.
AND WHEREAS the Member of the Legislative Assembly for Nattilik has taken office;
NOW THEREFORE I MOVE, seconded by the Hon. Member for Pangnirtung, that Ms. Jeannie Ugyuk be appointed a member of the Standing Committee on Legislation, a member of the Standing Committee on Oversight of Government Operations and Public Accounts, a member of the Standing Committee on Social Wellness, and an alternate member of the Standing Committee on Community and Economic Development;
AND FURTHER I MOVE that the appointment of Mr. Johnny Ningeongan as a member of the Standing Committee on Social Wellness and an alternate member of the Standing Committee on Community and Economic Development be revoked;
AND FURTHER I MOVE that Mr. Johnny Ningeongan be appointed a member of the Standing Committee on Community and Economic Development and an alternate member of the Standing Committee on Social Wellness.
Tabled Documents 13 – 3(2), 66 – 3(2), 99 – 3(2), and 100 – 3(2) with Mr. Okalik in the Chair.
>>House recessed at 15:46 and Committee resumed at 16:21
Chairman (Mr. Okalik)(interpretation): Thank you and good afternoon.
Today, we have the following items to deal with: Tabled Documents 13 – 3(2), 66 – 3(2), 99 – 3(2), and 100 – 3(2).
We wish to commence the review of the Tabled Documents as mentioned. For the record, that’s 66 –3(2), 99 – 3(2), and 100 – 3(2).
We will start with the Department of Community and Government Services.
If time permits, we will be proceeding with the Department of Executive Intergovernmental Affairs, followed by the Department of Health and Social Services.
Does the committee agree that we will deal with Tabled Documents 66 – 3(2), 99 – 3(2), and 100 – 3(2)?
Tabled Document 066 – 3(2): 2008-2009 Lease Activity Report – Consideration in Committee
Tabled Document 099 – 3(2): Contract Activity Report 2008-09 – Consideration in Committee
Tabled Document 100 – 3(2): Procurement Activity Report 2008-09 – Consideration in Committee
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, colleagues. We will begin with Minister Kusugak, the Minister of Community and Government Services, and he can start with his opening comments.
I am pleased to give you a brief overview of the contract services with CGS.
The department is responsible for the overall procurement process for the government and I would like to outline the various processes as follows:
(interpretation ends) The competitive procurement process which includes:
Request for tenders - This is used when a contract authority knows exactly what good or service is required and is only looking for the lowest prices to deliver it.
Tenders are awarded based on lowest price. (Assuming all vendors are responsive and responsible.)
Request for proposals - This is issued when a contract authority knows what it wants done but not how to go about doing it and seeks proposals on methods, ability, and price. Proposals are awarded to the contractor scoring the highest score based on published evaluation criteria.
Standing offer agreements provide the opportunity to establish, through a request for tenders or request for proposals process, pricing arrangements that will offer lowest costs for frequently required goods and services through the consolidation of demand. This is also known as achieving economies of scale.
The other aspect is the non-competitive procurement processes, such as sole source contracts, where regulations provide that a contract authority may award a contract without competition where there are reasonable grounds.
Departments are encouraged to work with CGS to determine the type of procurement process that would best suit their needs.
CGS manages the procurement process with the department. Awarded contracts are then managed by the individual departments. CGS reports annually on contracting activity and procurement activity.
A leasing activity report contains leasing information for commercial leases for all government departments. CGS is responsible for maintaining all commercial leases for government departments.
It is also committed to ensuring fair and ethical practices through the use of the consolidated policy for leasing of commercial real property.
I would be happy to respond to your questions on the overall procurement process, CGS contracts, and the government’s commercial leases for 2008-09.
Questions on specific details of contracts relating to other departments, Mr. Chairman, can be addressed to the appropriate minister.
(interpretation) Those are my opening comments, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Kusugak. (interpretation ends) It’s nice to see that you will be happy to answer questions. It’s a nice change.
Does the member who moved this item into the Committee of the Whole for discussion have opening comments?
Mr. Elliott, you may proceed.
I am very pleased to have the opportunity to provide some general comments as we begin our consideration of these four important tabled documents.
As members will recall, the motion to refer these items to the Committee of the Whole for consideration was adopted by the House at our sitting of March 22.
I would like to thank my colleague from South Baffin for having seconded the motion.
Mr. Chairman, as I noted in my motion, the government’s most recent annual reports on its procurement, contracting and leasing activities were tabled in the Legislative Assembly last year.
The government’s annual procurement report was tabled on December 7, 2009.
Similar information concerning the activities of the Nunavut Housing Corporation was provided in response to a written question that was asked by my colleague from South Baffin.
I would like to take this opportunity to note that the preparation and release of such information is consistent with best practices throughout the country in the area of government transparency and accountability.
For example, the federal government’s policy of proactive disclosure states and I quote, “The Government of Canada is working hard to enhance the role of Parliament and the proactive disclosure of information so that Canadians are better able to hold Parliament, their Government, and public sector officials to account.
To this end, the Government announced the mandatory publication on departmental Web sites of travel and hospitality expenses for selected government officials; contracts entered into by the Government of Canada for amounts over $10,000 (with only limited exceptions such as national security); and the reclassification of positions; and, grants and contributions awards.
Departments must also make available all reports for audits and evaluations that they perform.”
Mr. Chairman, as you are aware, a number of my colleagues have raised important questions and concerns regarding the Government of Nunavut’s activities and practices in the areas of contracting, procurement and leasing.
As a new Member of the Legislative Assembly, I have been very disturbed to see the extent to which the government relies on outside consultants to perform key functions and undertake major initiatives.
However, I would also observe that it is perfectly clear to me that it is not only the government that does this.
For example, you will recall that I tabled a copy of NTI’s recent report on nursing recruitment and retention.
That report was also prepared by a consulting firm.
Mr. Chairman, I believe that it is very important for members to have the opportunity to scrutinize these reports in detail.
Referring these important documents to the Committee of the Whole will allow for careful consideration of them to take place.
Mr. Chairman, one of the questions that I will be asking is for a clear and candid explanation as to why the government’s expenditures on consulting services continue to increase.
The government’s own annual reports indicate that in the 2005-06 fiscal year, the government spent approximately $3.3 million on activities that are classified as consulting services. However, according to its most recent annual report for the 2008-09 fiscal year, it spent over $17.2 million.
This trend disturbs me, although I do recognize that this category includes major contracts for specialized residential care and other services.
Mr. Chairman, as Members of the Legislative Assembly, we have a duty to act as guardians of the public purse.
We need to ask whether or not the government is getting value for money for the millions of dollars that it spends each year.
We need to ask what safeguards are in place to protect departments against such practices as bid rigging. We need to ask whether its practices with respect to such matters as sole sourcing contracts to individual consultants and companies are appropriate and justifiable.
We need to question whether it is prudent for the government to have issued over 1,200 sole source contracts between the 2006-07 and 2008-09 fiscal years.
We need to ask what impact these practices have on the morale of frontline government employees who are serving our constituents when they observe consultants who may not even live in Nunavut receiving sole source contracts that exceed $100,000.
We need to ask whether we are relying too heavily on consultants to do the work that should be performed by our own departments and employees.
We need to ask how the government evaluates the results of its expenditures in these areas and what conclusions it has reached.
Mr. Chairman, I noted earlier that audit and evaluation reports undertaken by federal departments are freely available to the public. For example, I have recently reviewed a highly informative evaluation report on the economic development programs of Indian and Northern Affairs Canada as well as a management practices review of the department’s Nunavut Regional Office.
This is the direction that our own government should be heading.
For example, the government’s most recent annual report on procurement activities reveals that consultants produce a significant number of reports and studies each year.
I believe that since the public paid for these reports, they have a right to see them. Every single one of these documents should be tabled in this Legislative Assembly so that the public and Members of this House have the opportunity to review them.
I can see no justification for treating any of them as secret.
Mr. Chairman, I will conclude by noting that I anticipate that ministers will appreciate the opportunity to account for their departments’ contracting, procurement and leasing activities over the next couple of weeks as we review each department.
I look forward to a productive exercise and I thank all members for having given me this opportunity to speak.
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Elliott. (interpretation) Minister Kusugak, do you have witnesses that you would like to bring to the table?
Hon. Lorne Kusugak (interpretation): Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Do you agree to bring in the witnesses?
Chairman (interpretation): They have agreed. Sergeant-at-Arms, if you could escort the witnesses in.
Minister Kusugak, please introduce your witnesses.
On my left is my Deputy Minister, Kathleen Lausman, and the Director of Finance, Alma Power, is on my right.
Welcome, witnesses.
Do any of the members have opening comments to make on this matter?
I would like to thank the minister and his officials for appearing before the committee today.
The questions that I would like to ask are: the government’s most recent annual report on procurement activities indicates that the total number of contracts issued by the Government of Nunavut has increased by 44 percent since the 2006-07 fiscal year.
In 2006-07, the government issued a total of 1,053 contracts. In 2008-09, it issued a total of 1,521 contracts.
What accounts for this trend?
Before I answer that, if I can, Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. Elliott if he could supply me and my colleagues with his opening statement, as we were not provided them, at an earliest convenience would be good so that we can refer those issues that you raised.
Mr. Chairman, in response to Mr. Rumbolt’s question, the increase is directly attributed to the increase in the infrastructure dollars that our government received and thus, the increase in contracting.
The government’s most recent annual report on procurement activities indicates that the Department of Community and Government Services will “continue to work with departments towards reducing the occurrence” of sole source contracts.
What specific steps are being taken to accomplish this goal?
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: There is a combination of things that our department is working on. We are working on training. A lot of those positions are sole sourced for lack of capable people of filling those specific positions.
We’re also working on standing offers and so on to try to reduce as much as we can on the sole sourcing.
What consequences are in place for senior departmental and Crown agency managers who do not comply with the government’s policies and guidelines in respect to contracting and procurement?
Hon. Lorne Kusugak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will ask my deputy to respond to that question if you don’t mind.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. Ms. Lausman.
Ms. Lausman: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are a number of steps that are taken. Quite frankly, training is the most important thing.
We run procurement training sessions. We also look at risk around the type of contract risks that exist, whether it’s construction, or consultants, or even air charters. If after time and coaching and mentoring doesn’t improve on performance, we actually limit the spending authorities for various managers until such time as training results in better contract management and procurement processes.
Also, the government’s annual reports on its contracting, procurement and leasing activities do not contain information on the activities of the GN’s Crown corporations and agencies.
When will the government’s major Crown corporations and agencies begin to table annual reports on their contracting, procurement and leasing activities?
I’m not at authority to decide when those Crown corporations would be dealing with that matter.
Chairman: Yes, Minister Kusugak.
Who would have the authority to put that kind of system in place?
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: Mr. Chairman, I would not be.
Chairman: Mr. Rumbolt was asking who we could direct the question to.
Mr. Peterson, as Chair of the Crown corporation, maybe he can answer those questions later on.
In the last two years, have any employees of the government been disciplined for not complying with the government’s policies and guidelines in respect to contracting and procurement?
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Rumbolt.
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: Mr. Chairman, maybe he could clarify the question exactly what he means by that.
Chairman: Yes, Mr. Kusugak. Mr. Rumbolt.
I’m just wondering if there are any cases where contract guidelines and procurement were not followed in the past. I’m just wondering if there are any employees who have had any kind of discipline for not following the proper procedures.
The question is if there have been rules broken in contracting and if there has been any disciplinary action taken.
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I could always address those that CGS is responsible for and to my knowledge, there has been none.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Kusugak. Mr. Rumbolt.
In 2006-07, the government issued 310 sole source contracts worth a total of $23,047,000. In 2007-08, the government issued 515 sole source contracts worth a total of $48,135,000.
In 2008-09, it issued 437 sole source contracts worth a total of $46,674,000.
Although the volume of sole source contracts decreased by 15 percent from 2007-08, it increased by over 40 percent from 2006-07.
If I could ask Kathleen to answer that question.
Ms. Lausman: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Most of the activity increasing in sole sourcing has to do with a lot more business activity, quite frankly, in the government relative to all departments.
I can only really speak to ours, but certainly a lot of specialty requirements, a lot of IT requirements that are really licensing agreements around existing software in proprietary upgrades that they are required for software.
We are, as a government, certainly using a lot more software systems and that is certainly driving a lot of our sole sourcing as well.
So from what I understand, we will have to go through each sole source identified in the book and ask about each one for justification.
Are there any further questions to the witnesses?
Mr. Rumbolt, do you have any further questions?
Mr. Elliott: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My understanding of the questions that we’re asking now are not necessarily specific to CGS but sort of government-wide issues and government-wide questions. One of the questions I have is sort of for the other side.
In terms of a business that wants to get into putting in tenders and getting involved in this process where they can actually get contracts from the government, is there any training available from your department to allow that to happen?
Not specifically from our department, but there are government departments, such as, I believe, Economic Development that do that kind of training, where that kind of training would be available.
So your department is not responsible for helping businesses understand the tender process, going through that type of process, how it’s reviewed, and how the business should be set up.
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: That’s correct.
Economic Development is the business end of our government and they would be responsible for training those in the business private sector to take advantage of or apply for different contracting opportunities.
It could also be seen, Mr. Chairman, as a conflict. Conflict issues could arise if we were to be trying to deliver training on what kind of contracting training, and so on and so forth.
I will save more of my questions about the specific training for when ED&T comes up.
I have a question. In a case where a departmental or Crown agency employee believes that the senior management of their department is abusing their discretionary authority in relation to issuing contracts, is there a formal process by which the employees can confidentially report their concerns to your department?
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: Not that I’m aware of, but it would be normal protocol, I believe, to complain to your supervisor. If it’s your supervisor that’s an issue, you would go further up the train.
I’m not aware or neither are we aware of a certain protocol in dealing with that.
I’m not implying that that’s actually happening. I’m just implying that in some of the conversations that I’ve had with people about this person who got that contract and this person, it’s almost like they imply that there’s something not right going on.
It would seem that if the government is putting up so many contracts and dealing this way so often, there should be a procedure available for employees to be able to do it.
Could you maybe commit to working with the Minister of Human Resources? I know he’s actually working on that whistle-blower legislation or something along that line.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Elliott. (interpretation ends) I think one of these is like if a deputy minister for a given department is perhaps abusing the system, where do you go?
For example, there is no higher level at the deputy level.
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I think any time you are dealing with contracts and tender processes, they are all done in public.
All of the tendering process is done through a public process and all of the tenders are open publicly, so it’s as public as you could get.
I am not aware of any tenders and public contracts that were done behind closed doors.
As for that, the process is very public.
If there are specific issues that I may not be aware of, I would invite any of my colleagues and the public to let me know and we will deal with it on a case-by-case basis and deal with it confidentially. The whole process itself is all very publicly done.
I think the question was: where there is a sole sourcing, for example, and if there is a perception problem, then where do you go from there?
At the deputy minister level, which avenue do you go? You don’t have a supervisor beyond the deputy, for example. I think that’s one of the questions that were asked.
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: I don’t know.
Maybe he could ask me again because that’s not what I heard him ask. I’ll leave it at that. What he’s asking and what you’re saying he’s asking is modelling the situation, so maybe he could be a little more specific.
I had a good discussion with all of my colleagues and that I would try and facilitate and add to their questions where it was necessary.
I’ll get back to the deputy minister, Mr. Chairman, in a minute because Mr. Kusugak said a few things in terms of… and again I hope people don’t feel that we’re on a witch hunt to try and find out and blame people for giving out contracts to wrong people, and stuff like that.