EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I'm just wondering here Mr. Speaker, why they were further devolved down to each community and all the contracts were run through all the LHOs in the community. I'm just wondering why if they are fully staffed at the community level and they are used to running and administering those projects why is it being pulled back into headquarters and then contracted back to Yellowknife, when it could be done locally as it always has been done.
I know that Mr. Tootoo was involved in the Housing Association and I know he knows all the details about the Housing Corporation situation.
I would like to thank him for understanding.
Yes, I do know that our staff have been consulting with Yellowknife's technical experts.
We have to get a lot of help from others like the GNWT.
It has been a few years since we have erected so many housing units in Nunavut.
This is not an easy thing to deal with, but here in Iqaluit our technical staff have been working hard to try and provide housing in Nunavut, because it has been a few years since public housing units have been erected in Nunavut. So we have had to work with our Yellowknife office regarding this.
Speaker: Supplementary Mr. Tootoo.  Mr. Tootoo: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I don't know if that answers my question but I would like to rephrase it. Is the role of the departments whether they be Public Works or the Nunavut Housing Corporation, have moved towards more of a centralized function in the way that it operates. Or are they going to continue the way they did in pre-division where things devolved to the communities and were administered at the local level.
I was talking in regards to the 11 technical staff that will be decentralized. They will not be in the headquarters region, as I understand it.
They were all in one area under Housing and Public Works.
But we are going to see positions decentralized and we are trying to revert to the ways things were before.
Mr. Speaker, for the minister's information I wasn't referring to the decentralization of positions.
I'm talking more on the devolution of responsibilities and authority to the community level.
In the past the LHOs in the Baffin communities were the ones who tendered, awarded and administered all the contracts through the Housing Corporation.
Now it seems that function has been pulled back from the communities and administered through a central organization.
That is what I was asking if that was going to be the continued plan to do that. As the minister indicated capacity is a problem and she also indicated there is no capacity at the regional level and there is no capacity at the headquarters level. Those are organizations that have carried themselves through the transition and that is where their strength lies.
I was wondering is the plan to take back those responsibilities at the headquarters level.  Speaker: Minister.
What I was trying to say is the headquarters were not fully staffed. In the meantime the regions took care of their responsibility. For instance the workers in Arviat would be there representing their region.
In the Baffin it was in Iqaluit. In Kitikmeot it was in Cambridge Bay.
I did not say there was a shortage of staff. But we had positions that required people to take those positions at headquarters. We have never seen an increase in housing to be built since 1993.
We are trying to build all of a sudden a huge number of houses. Even though we will not be able to complete the number of houses immediately. There is a requirement for 100 new houses and this is quite a big responsibility.
I think the member understands that already. I think it is quite clear already that we want to give the communities more empowerment and more responsibilities because they have to increase their own capacities. We have to go according to the capabilities of the communities.
I think that is obvious already. We have a huge number of houses to be built after a long time of this being non-existent. I think we already understand that part.
Question period is up.
Motion 21 - 1(3): Bill 16 to Committee of the Whole
I wish to report Bill 16, An Act to Amend the Property Assessment and Taxation Act has been reviewed by the Standing Committee on Community Empowerment and Sustainable Development and that the Bill is ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.
Uqaqti, I seek unanimous consent to waive Rule 68(5) and have Bill 16 moved in to the Committee of the Whole for today.
The member is seeking unanimous consent to waive Rule 68(5) and have Bill 16 moved to Committee of the Whole for today.
Bill 16 has accordingly been moved to Committee of the Whole.
Tabled Document 77 – 1(3): Technical Report on Baker Lake Adult Education Building
Uqaqti I would like to table a preliminary technical building report on the Adult Education building in Baker Lake that was done on February 3 on the condition of the building and the status of it.
I need to get a longer arm to or John needs to get a shorter chair Mr. Speaker.
Tabled Document 78 – 1(3): Iqaluit Housing Authority Concerns
Mr. Tootoo: Mr. Speaker I would like to table a letter I received.
It was carbon copied to me and directed to the President of the Housing Corporation Ms. Pamela Hines.
It is from the Iqaluit Housing Authority citing some concerns that they have including leadership with the district office, training, new houses versus modernisation and improvement and tenant issues Mr. Speaker.
Item 14. Notices of Motions. Mr. Anawak.
When you table documents Mr. Speaker from wherever that tabled documents is acquired. Are they to be provided both in English and Inuktitut.
Is there a requirement that everything tabled be both in English and Inuktitut.
Speaker: Mr. Anawak there is no firm rule for documents to be put forward and translated in both languages.
That is not to say we can not review this.
There are documents that come from outside this House that would not normally be translated.
It is something that we can review.
Item 14. Notices of Motions. Notices of Motions.
Item 15. Motions. Motions.
Item 17. First Reading of Bills. First Reading of Bills.
Item 18. Second Reading of Bills. Second Reading of Bills.
Bill 16, Bill 13, Tabled Documents 41-1(3), Tabled Documents 51-1(3), Tabled Documents 60-1(3), Tabled Documents 61-1(3), Tabled Documents 77-1(3).
According to the authority vested in me by Motion 3-1(3), the Committee of the Whole will stay in session until it reports itself out with Mr. Iqaqrialu as the Chairperson.
I would ask that the committee commence its deliberations immediately and not break until 12:15 at the earliest.
We will continue from yesterday's discussions.
Bill 13, Bill 16, 41-1(3), 51-1(3), 60-1(3), 61-1(3) Tabled Documents, and Tabled Documents 77-1(3).
Bill 16 and Tabled Document 77-1(3) are under discussion in the Committee of the Whole and Public Works did their opening comments.
Public Works already did their opening comments for their Department.
I think the Committee has opening remarks.
Mr. Akesuk. Mr. McLean.
Committee Report: Bill 16, An Act to Amend the Property Assessment and Taxation Act
Mr. Chairman the Standing Committee reviewed Bill 16, An Act to Amend the Property Assessment and Taxation Act with Minister Anawak and with his officials on April 12th 2000.
Itsivauta this Bill is quite straightforward.
The Standing Committee recognises that it is intent is to permit the government to collect property taxes for the year 2000.
The Standing Committee is aware that the Department of Community Government and Transportation plans to undertake a comprehensive review of Municipal Legislation in the coming year in consultation with the Nunavut Association of Municipalities.
Mr. Iqaqrialu (interpretation): Can you hold on a second Mr. McLean.
First I was supposed to ask the Committee whether you want to deal with the Bill.
Minister comments in regards to Bill 16. In regards to An Act to Amend the Property Assessment and Taxation Act.
The Minister yesterday already did his opening remarks. Do you have opening comments to the Bill.
I am sorry. We were dealing with Public Works yesterday. We will have to deal with Public Works.
Does Mr. Anawak have other remarks.
Hon. Jack Anawak (interpretation): The Committee already dealt with the Bill and I think it is my understanding that the Chairperson of the Committee could just do his opening remarks.
I do not have any opening remarks. Maybe the Committee can do their opening remarks at this time.
Mr. Iqaqrialu (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Anawak.
Mr. McLean you can continue with your report.
The Standing Committee is aware earlier in 1998 a review committee made recommendations for amendment to the property assessment and taxation act.
The Standing Committee looks forward to making input during the coming year as the Department undertakes its review.
Mr. Chairman the Standing Committee supported the Bill at the clause by clause stage of the Standing Committee Review.
Ma’na Itsivauta.
Perhaps the minister can take the seat at the witness table with his staff.
The minister is now at the witness table. Perhaps Mr. Minister you can introduce your staff.
Hon. Jack Anawak (interpretation): I am the Minister of Community Government and Transportation.
Mike Ferris to my left is my Deputy Minister and to my right is Mark Spakowski our Legislation Director from the Department of Justice.
I would like to thank the Standing Committee for dealing with this Bill yesterday and if there are any questions from the floor, we will be able to assist you.
Bill 16 – An Act to Amend the Property Assessment and Taxation Act – Consideration in Committee
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Minister of Community Government & Transportation.
I am sorry I was reading the wrong paper.
General comments from the floor. General comments.
If there are no general comments then the Bill An Act to Amend the Property Assessment and Taxation Act.
I will go clause by clause. Clause 1.
Chairperson (interpretation): Number 2.
Chairperson (interpretation): Number 3.
Chairperson (interpretation): Bill 16, An Act to Amend the Property Assessment and Taxation Act.
Chairperson (interpretation): Is it agreed that Bill 16 is ready to be read for the third time. It is now ready for third reading. That Bill 16 is ready for third reading.  Some Members: Agreed.
Bill 16 is completed.
Thank you Jack and his staff. Perhaps we can get back to Public Works.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Anawak and his staff. That was short.
The Committee will now discuss Public Works. Perhaps the minister and her staff can go to the witness table.
Thank you minister and staff.
You already made your opening comments yesterday. Are there opening remarks from the Chairperson Mr. Irqittuq.
Committee Report 15 – 1(3): Public Works, Telecommunications & Technical Services
Mr. Irqittuq (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.
I have a cold today but I will try reading.
Mr. Chairperson I am pleased to be able to make some opening remarks as we begin the debate of 2000-2001 main estimates for the Department of Public Works, Telecommunication and Technical Services.
Over the past year the standing committee has had an opportunity to meet with the minister on a number of occasions.
Some members of the standing committee have also served on the Minister's Task Force on Housing.
Mr. Chairperson two areas in particular have captured the attention of the standing committee over the past year.
The first of these is housing.
When we reviewed the 1999-2000 main estimates Housing was part of the Department of Community Government & Transportation.
Since then it has undergone significant changes where it ended up where it is today as a stand alone Corporation with the Minister of Public Works, Telecommunication and Technical Services responsible.
I am sure that the members will have more to say on the issue of housing when we review the estimates of the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Another issue that has seized our attention is that of the reform to the Government of Nunavut contracting policies and how best the government can live up to the provisions of article 24 in the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement.
Mr. Chairperson the past year has seen progress made in this area as a made in Nunavut and NNI policy has now come into affect.
The Department of Public Works, Telecommunication and Technical Services will be responsible for the successful implementation of the NNI policy.
This standing committee will take a strong interest in the success of implementation over the coming year.
Mr. Chairperson another area of concern is that of the fuel prices and their impact on smaller communities and such vulnerable groups as hunters.
Significant attention was paid to this area during the Rankin Inlet sitting.
The standing committee is also aware that the recommendations contained in Ikuma report relate in part to the long-term future of the PPD.
The Department of Public Works, Telecommunications and Technical Services had serious responsibilities related to the successful implementation of the Government’s Decentralization plan.
Co-ordination between this Department and others will be essential to ensuring that Decentralization is a success.
Mr. Chairperson the standing committee also noted that while the IT budget for the Department of Finance has increased significantly this year the Informatics budget for the Department of Public Works, Telecommunication and Technical Services has remained exactly the same as it was last year.
This strikes us as strange.
Mr. Chairperson as with all Departments we want to see a long-term capital plan brought forward for the Department.
Mr. Chairperson these are some of the general areas of concern that we have had as a standing committee.
This is part of 77-1(3). The one we are dealing with right now.
If there are any general comments or questions feel free to do so.
Minister of Public Works, Telecommunications and Technical Services welcome to you and your officials.
If you would like to make your introductions at this time before we get into questioning.
Minister of Public Works, Telecommunication and Technical Services. Manitok.
Hon. Manitok Thompson (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairperson.
People sitting with me are Ross Mrazek, Deputy Minister of Public Works and Patrick Galbraith.
He was in attendance when we first dealt with our departmental budget. He is the Director of Finance. I am sure you recognize him.
Yesterday I was going to make my opening remarks however I could not attend.
I wish to thank Mr. Kelvin Ng very much for doing my opening remarks.
I know he expects me to thank him for it.
I am sorry I did not state your name properly.
At this point in time the floor is open for questions. Mr. Nutarak.
I was going to ask a question during question period but your department, or the Minister of Public Works indicated that the Task Force on Housing had a meeting and the members were Mr. Iqaqrialu, Mr. Puqiqnak and Mr. Irqittuq.
These were the members of the task force.
After they had their review did they produce a report on that review.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you. If you could thank the chairperson.
We are not really dealing with housing at this point we are dealing with the Department of Public Works, the Petroleum Products division.
We are under program review.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): It is almost lunch time and I just wanted to indicate that I just wanted to ask questions regarding the Task Force on Housing.
That was just my first question and that will be my question again.
Madame Minister if you want to respond to his comment dealing with the Task Force on Housing.
I do not mind you calling me Manitok, I do not mind.
I know we are not dealing with the Housing Corporation but I will try to reply to his question.
I am still waiting for the actual report from the Task Force on Housing. At this point I do not have the report in hand. I am still expecting a report though.
Yes, I will be calling you Manitok from now on.
Any further comments. Mr. Tootoo.
I can't remember who it was that asked a question earlier this week or last week. I think it was the exact same question and the minister had indicated that although she hadn't received a hard copy of the report that she did have a copy of it via email.
I just wanted to clarify that as something that she had said last week.
Any further questions or would you like to respond Manitok.
We are not dealing with Housing at this point in time.
When that report is ready I will be tabling it in the House.
I know that I have it through email but we are not dealing with that report at this time. We are dealing with the Department of Public Works.
That's all I wanted to say. Thank you.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Manitok.
If you do not have any comments pertaining to the Department of Public Works, Main Estimates.
I want to take a break for lunch now.
I am quite hungry now and I do not have any questions at this time.
Maybe after lunch I will be raising some questions, but I need to eat first.
Yes, at this time we will break for lunch.
We will be back at 1.15.
>>Committee recessed at 12.10 p.m. and resumed at 1:15
Chairperson (interpretation): Okay I think the mikes are fixed.
Any general comments.
If there are no more questions or general comments.
Capital Estimates.
In regards to Housing, there was a question, there were some questions to the minister.
I just wondered if that still has to be done by you or your staff or by the Cabinet about the Housing policy.
Minister for Public Works or your staff.
The Housing guideline that was done was done by the departments.
Departments were asked by questionnaire and data collected.
I have to give it to Cabinet so it is still with Cabinet at this time because they have to have a guideline.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Minister of Public Works.
Mr. Akesuk (interpretation): Thank you Mr. Chairman. The guidelines or the policy that was done for housing.
It is not the same as the ones that the communities are using.
I just wanted to know whether the communities would have the chance to review those.
For instance, if there is damage in housing I just wondered if the communities would have the same thing.
Minister of Public Works.
Hon. Manitok Thompson (interpretation): Yes, that information will be given out.
We are just talking about staff housing and the departments and the Cabinet were given the information and as soon as we have the guidelines and the policy in we will notify the members.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Ms. Minister.
Any comments or questions from the floor.
If there are no more questions or comments from the floor.
The Main Estimates, everyone has the book in front of them.
Page 6 – 5, 2000/2001 Capital Estimates.
Public Works, branch summary, Petroleum Products Division.
Detail of Capital.
Buildings and Works, Baffin Region.
Total Baffin Region, 3 million…they are under the bottom page number 6 – 5.
We are on page 6 – 5.
Petroleum Products Division.
Detail of Capital, buildings and works, Baffin region.
Total Baffin region, 3 million 211 thousand.
Are we still on the Petroleum Products division, Public Works.
At this time maybe I could ask the minister's staff to provide me with an answer to the question that I asked earlier this morning in regards to how the different subsidies are arrived at for different fuel products.
I wasn't able to get an answer this morning and the minister had asked that I ask again in committee of the whole so I would like to do that at this time.
Madame Minister or your staff.
I thank the member for raising that same question from this morning.
We have the person that deals with finances and I will get him to answer the question.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Madame Minister but I forgot your staff member's name.
Could you introduce him again please.
Hon. Manitok Thompson (interpretation): Galbraith and the first name is Patrick.
You can call him Patrick if you want.
Mr. Galbraith: Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Indeed, I was hoping that Mr. Green for Petroleum Products would be in town for this however, I will try to answer the questions as best as possible.
The subsidy so to speak, they are not different subsidies, it's a general what it costs us to produce the product to the communities and that was the answer to Mr. Tootoo's original question, one of the factors involved in that, so one of the factors is the general costs.
The subsidy basically is that we have to sell it at a specific amount of money until such time as we get approval to raise the costs, usually in October.
Then we would perform an analysis to identify the actual costs of the product so that we could actually increase the price to meet the actual costs that it is costing us to purchase.
I realize that response kind of outlines the mandate of Petroleum Products. But looking at subsidy by territory, customer and class document that the minister tabled in Rankin Inlet, it has a definite subsidy for the different types of heating, motor, aviation, non-motor, gasoline, naptha, Jet A-1 and AV-Gas.
The amounts that are, I would guess that these are subsidies because that's what the name of this document is called, subsidies.
Does that mean that amount that is there is the amount that we are losing by selling the product at that price that we are selling it.
If one of you would care to respond further. Go ahead.
Mr. Chairman, in light of that then I am just wondering if a clearer definition of what these numbers are, they are not an actual subsidy then but an operating loss from the Petroleum Products based on its operations, it's not a subsidy it's a loss.
I am just wondering if in light of the definition or the answer that was given that I would look at it as a loss, not a subsidy.
If one of the minister's witnesses could respond.
I think he is making a comment.
According to the Financial Administration Act I think he is just trying to make it clearer.
I think it is just a comment.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Madame Minister, Mr. Tootoo.
Not just a comment but just to confirm that is what it is.
Is it an operating loss and not an actual subsidy.
I would think that with my limited knowledge of accounting, a subsidy or something is revenue or something that is provided to offset a cost and I don't see that in the explanation.
It's just a loss and I would just like to confirm that it is actually a loss and not a subsidy.
Madame Minister if you wish to respond or any of your staff members.
Mr. Galbraith: As you know the price of fuel and petroleum products are set prior to initiating a cost throughout the course of the year.
Can you make sure, we are not hearing you, could you repeat your response please.
The petroleum products, fuel and all the product lines that they deliver, the price is set prior to actually incurring the costs.
Therefore the price is set before we purchase the fuel.
Before we purchase the naptha and so on and so forth.
During the course of the year there could be price increases that we, that Petroleum Products did not identify.
Therefore they have to sell at that specific price as set or legislated by Cabinet.
Therefore there is losses and the way that Petroleum Products identifies these in our accounting procedures they classify it as a subsidy.
If they were able to raise the price in accordance to their costs, which varies throughout the course of a year, I could understand the word loss being used.
But in this case, subsidy identifies it more clearly in accounting terms.
Mr. Chairman, I understand what Mr. Galbraith is explaining and that was made very clear in Rankin Inlet.
Maybe just at this point in time, I would like to thank him for that, but I would like to ask the minister as was noted in Rankin Inlet that we're losing money on the sale of fuel products to the Federal Government.
I don't know, to me I can't see why we are doing that and the minister at that time I believe indicated that we would be reviewing it. I was just wondering if they have had a chance, or if there are any plans in the works for reviewing the subsidies. I believe the minister and her staff said in Rankin that there had to be a change in their mandate and the way that the Petroleum Products division operated in order to have the flexibility to be able to recoup its' total costs to those outside government agencies.