EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Mr. Speaker, there are many schools in Nunavut and it’s very likely that bullying is occurring in most, if not all, schools in Nunavut, even if we don’t hear about it. My question for the minister: can the minister tell the House how prevalent bullying is in Nunavut’s elementary and high schools, and how do the schools deal with the bullying incidents?
We have different programs within the Department of Education to help our schools deal with the issue of bullying. Let’s be serious, Mr. Speaker, that bullying not only occurs in our schools and playgrounds but it occurs away from the schools.
So what you need to be able to do, as a government, is to work with families, with parents, and with the local District Education Authority and start talking about the effects and the causes of bullying.
Some of those are the socio-economic conditions that we see at home. Some of them are from issues that the child may not have control over outside of the school environment.
We have put in place effective behaviour supports, or EBS. We have worked with Tribes Training, that we have talked about before in the House, to deal with the issue, as well as the Council of Ministers of Education, or CMEC, which I’m a member of. We have also talked, at a national level, about bullying in our schools across Canada.
Again, Mr. Speaker, this issue is more than just five hours, or from 9:00 to 3:00, that we have children five days a week, or 25 hours a week, that we have children at schools. It happens off the playground, and certainly, it happens away from the school and we need to be able to deal with it.
The other big issue, Mr. Speaker, on bullying, if I can just very quickly say, we have seen an increase in cyber bullying across Nunavut and that has raised some red flags.
I thank the minister for that informative information.
I agree with the minister; there is no doubt that bullying occurs away from school.
When parents contact MLAs, they’re concerned about their children being bullied when they’re at school, or on their way to school, or on their way home from school. When parents send their children to schools, they’re in the care of the Government of Nunavut and that’s where the Department of Education has to be very conscious of the issue.
Mr. Speaker, my question for the minister: can the minister tell the House what the long-term consequences are for victims, bullies, and bystanders of bullying incidences in schools?
I think the department has been very proactive in trying to deal with the issue of bullying across Nunavut. We actually have pamphlets and posters on bullying and how to recognize it. We’ve got student support teams in every school across Nunavut.
The long-term effects of bullying are well documented, Mr. Speaker, and those include issues with low self-esteem, issues with holding jobs, emotional problems, and so on. What I can say at this point is that if parents are aware of issues with bullying, they should immediately contact the school so we can actually have it addressed at that issue.
Again, I want to emphasize that the issue of bullying now is occurring outside of our schools so much so that when the children go home and use the computers, we’re seeing more and more of this cyber bullying and that’s where children are going on MSN Messenger and going on websites like Bebo, which is very popular across Nunavut in all of our schools, and saying things to different classmates, using intimidation on the Internet and computer. So that’s something else that we have to be aware of.
So it’s not just aggressive physical behaviour in the classroom; we’re seeing more and more aggressive cyber behaviour outside the classroom.
That’s more worrisome because we are not able to see the physical results of it, for example, punching and everything, because a lot of that is emotional and that is very serious.
I thank the minister for that answer and I agree that cyber bullying is a big issue now, not just in Nunavut but right across the world. The minister indicated that bullying happens everywhere; it happens away from the school elsewhere in the community, or in the homes, who knows where it can be happening.
I’m wondering if the minister could make a commitment today to work with other agencies in Nunavut to address the bullying issue, I’m speaking about RCMP, wellness centres, and hamlets, to come up with an overall bullying strategy to address the bullying that goes on within our communities and in cyberspace.
The Department of Education is very interested in working collaboratively with other departments of government or interagency groups at the local and community level to try to address the issue of bullying.
As I said earlier, we’ve got pamphlets, posters, we have held workshops, we’ve got different programs, we’ve got school supports in place, and yet, we still see more and more occurrence of bullying.
As I said earlier, it may not be just physical; it could be the mental or emotional bullying that’s occurring now, probably, in some cases, more frequently.
In cases where bullying becomes threatening, I know of cases where we’ve had to call in the RCMP, so that would continue. The RCMP has done an excellent job with the DARE program and some other programs in our schools across Nunavut, and that type of interagency work will continue.
Question 514 – 2(4): Fuel Stabilization Rider (Curley)
Mr. Curley: Thank you. (interpretation) This was on for a while.
Mr. Speaker, my question is directed to the Premier concerning the URRC; I don’t know what it is in Inuktitut.
Last month, I asked a question the Minister of Energy concerning the increase in the Fuel Stabilization Rider which the Cabinet approved on October 23, 2007.
When it was approved by the Cabinet, although the Minister of Energy stated that was not the case when I asked him about it at the time, this stabilization rider was implemented and added to our monthly bills starting November 1, 2007 and end on October 31, 2008.
It states that we will be paying an additional 6.40 cents per kilowatt-hour during this period and that the Cabinet has approved this rider.
Due to this reason, why is it that there are more reviews on costs by URRC when this rider was previously approved by the Cabinet just a few months ago on Oct 23, 2007?
I believe the member addressed a question to the Minister responsible for the Utility Rates Review Council, the URRC.
Premier Okalik will respond to the question.
This committee is our watchdog and they operate at arms length and they usually review the riders to ensure that all of the costs are taken into consideration.
They usually undertake a thorough review and invite concerns from the public.
After they conducted their review, they agreed with the Rider of 6.40 cents per kilowatt-hour due to the rising costs of fuel. The committee agreed with the rate rider set by the Cabinet and that it was in order.
Mr. Curley: Thank you. (interpretation) As I stated earlier, the Minister of Energy’s response when I posed those questions to him, was that there was no increase in regard to this matter and I asked the minister on October 31, 2007 whether or not there would be a rider implemented and his response was that there was no such increase upcoming.
Why is it then that the minister didn’t appear to be telling the truth when the Cabinet had already approved the Fuel Stabilization Rider on October 23, and it is also in the Nunavut Gazette, this figure of 6.40 cents per kilowatt-hour, and I believe that, based on these facts, the minister will have to revise his previous answer to me as it is currently written in the Hansard.
An Hon. Member: Point of Order.
Hon. Ed. Picco: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I know that the member is very concerned about the issue of the URRC and has raised the rider many times.
However, in this House, we should try to stick to some parliamentary level and some parliamentary language.
It’s not appropriate for the member to suggest that the member has deceived the House and deceived the public.
I have stated the facts, there was a decrease, the member states that the date of the timing was inaccurate, and I gave him the facts in this House.
So I would ask that the Speaker rule on the unparliamentary language that the member is using because that is not a correct statement the member has made.
Mr. Curley: I don’t know how it was translated in English but I said in Inuktitut, Sulijuujaanngittuq. It doesn’t appear to be the truth what the minister indicated at that time when I asked him on October 31: will he be imposing any fees or a Fuel Stabilization Rider on October 31.
I remember using the word “Halloween” at that time, and therefore, since then, there appears to have been a fact of the acknowledgement that the issue of the Fuel Stabilization Rider in fact...
Speaker: Mr. Curley, to the Point of Order, please.
Mr. Curley: Mr. Speaker, there is no Point of Order because what I have said, and the record will show, my questions are consistent and there is a contradiction as to what the minister is saying then and today.
We will review the transcripts and translations and make a ruling on this Point of Order tomorrow.
Mr. Curley, can you repeat your second supplementary, please.
My supplementary is this: the Premier did acknowledge that, as a matter of fact, the Cabinet has approved a continuation of the fuel stabilization that was carried, even at the slightly reduced rate, to 6.40 cents to continue from October 1, 2007.
What is the reason for URRC if the Cabinet has approved the proposal from the Minister of Energy?
We do not fix fuel costs; we follow the changing world price accordingly.
Energy depends on fuel; once fuel costs increases, we are forced to keep up with the increases.
The increase by 6.40 cents per kilowatt-hour is the result of careful review and we implemented that rate accordingly.
We put that in place so we could have it reviewed again by the independent working group.
After conducting the review, they concluded it was a good rate and resulted in a small increase that tracked the increase in fuel costs.
This rate is going to stay in place until that fuel has been fully paid.
Mr. Curley: Thank you. (interpretation) My last question is in regard to the proposal received by QEC to continue using the same rate.
The Premier stated earlier that they are reviewing the URRC, so is their review done and when are they tabling the report from that review in this House?
We now have that report and the 6.40 cents per kilowatt-hour has been approved.
We have to follow it in accordance with the increases but there were concerns given to us regarding that increase, so we will table the report once we have reviewed those objections further.
Speaker (interpretation): Question Period is now over. (interpretation ends) Item 7.
Committee Report on Bills 010 – 2(4): Interim Report on the Review of Bill 20 (Alagalak)
Mr. Alagalak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) Interim Report on the Review of Bill 20:
Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to have the opportunity today to provide the House with an Interim Report of the Standing Committee on Health and Education on its review of Bill 20, the proposed Midwifery Profession Act.
Mr. Speaker, Bill 20, the proposed Midwifery Profession Act, was introduced by the Minister of Health and Social Services.
Following second reading of the bill on November 6, 2007, it was referred to the Standing Committee on Health and Education for review.
Mr. Speaker, the standing committee has been reviewing this bill with care and attention. The committee received input from a number of stakeholders including the Nunavut Association of Midwives, Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated and the Irnisuksiiniq Inuit Midwifery Network of the National Aboriginal Health Organization.
I will be tabling copies of their written submissions in this House at the next opportunity.
Mr. Speaker, the standing committee certainly supports the principle and intent of Bill 20. This legislation will serve to bring maternal care and midwife services closer to the community level, something that families and community residents have been requesting for some time.
However, as a result of our review of the bill, the committee raised a number of concerns that remain unanswered despite repeated requests to the sponsoring minister for clarification.
As you will recall, last week, this House passed a motion to extend the period of time for the committee to continue its review of the bill.
I would like to thank all members for their support of the motion.
The extension will allow time for these issues to be resolved and to ensure that any legislation passing through this House best serves Nunavummiut.
Mr. Speaker, members remain concerned that despite the fact that the term “traditional Inuit midwifery” is referred to in both the summary and body of the proposed legislation, the actual practice of traditional Inuit midwives is not clearly defined.
Mr. Speaker, the standing committee supports this government’s efforts to incorporate Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit within its policies, practices and proposed legislation. However, in order to do this realistically we need something more substantial than vague and undefined references.
Mr. Speaker, a second issue of concern relates to the process of ensuring that any individual practicing midwifery in Nunavut is adequately protected by liability insurance.
Even though bringing forward civil suits is not a traditional practice in Inuit society, it is becoming more common in this modern world.
As such, it is critical that anyone who is providing maternal care services, in a traditional or a contemporary manner, be adequately protected in the event of a lawsuit.
Mr. Speaker, the committee looks forward to working with the Minister of Health and Social Services to amend Bill 20 accordingly.
The committee hopes to be in a position to make its final report to the House in the spring sitting.
With that, Mr. Speaker, I move that this interim report of the standing committee be received by this House.
>>Applause  Speaker: Thank you, Mr. Alagalak.
Do members agree the report of the standing committee be received?
The report is received. Item 12.
Tabled Document 211 – 2(4): Memorandum of Understanding between HTAs of Arctic Bay, Grise Fiord, Qikiqtarjuaq, and Resolute Bay to form the Arctic Fishery Alliance (Barnabas)
I am pleased to table today, in Inuktitut and English, a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding to form the Arctic Fishery Alliance. (interpretation ends) Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Tabled Document 212 – 2(4): Letter to Prime Minister on Devolution (Okalik)
I am pleased to table the following document: Premier’s Correspondence to Prime Minister Stephen Harper on Devolution.
Tabled Document 213 – 2(4): Development Partnership Agreement between the GN and the Meadowbank Mining Company February 17, 2008 (Netser)
Tabled Document 214 – 2(4): NHC 2005-2006 Annual Report (Netser)
Tabled Document 215 – 2(4): Future of NBCC and NDC Report February 2008/Crown Agencies Assessment Final Report April 2007 (Netser)
Hon. Patterk Netser (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I am pleased to table the following document: Development Partnership between the Government of Nunavut and Meadowbank Mining Corporation, Agnico-Eagle.
Also, I am pleased to table the following document: The Nunavut Housing Corporation Annual Report for 2005-2006.
Also, Mr. Speaker, the following documents which I am pleased to table is: the Interdepartmental Working Group on the Future of the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation and the Nunavut Development Corporation.
Speaker: Thank you, Minister. Tabling of Documents.
Tabled Document 216 – 2(4): CGS & HSS RFP for Medical Travel on Scheduled Airlines – Standing Offer Agreement (Brown)
I am pleased to table the following document: RFP for Medical Travel on Scheduled Airlines.
Tabled Document 217 – 2(4): Towards a Representative Public Service Statistics as of December 31, 2007 (Tapardjuk)
Tabled Document 218 – 2(4): Online Lottery – Audited Financial Statements March 31, 2007 (Tapardjuk)
The first one is: Towards a Representative Public Service Statistics as of December 31, 2007.
The other one, Mr. Speaker, is: Online Lottery – Audited Financial Statements in accordance with the Western Canada Lottery Act.
Tabled Document 219 – 2(4): “Not All Bugs Need Drugs” Pamphlets (Aglukkaq)
As part of the campaign referred to in my Minister’s Statement, I’m tabling the “Not all Bugs Need Drugs” Pamphlet and a sample of the printing for t-shirts that will be distributed to the communities.
Tabled Document 220 – 2(4): Written Submissions on Bill 20 “Midwifery Profession Act” to Standing Committee on Health and Education (Alagalak)
Tabled Document 221 – 2(4): Hudson Bay Quest Official Website (Alagalak)
I would also like to table two documents.
First of all, submissions on Bill 20.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) Earlier, I delivered the Interim Report of the Standing Committee on Health and Education on its review of Bill 20, the proposed Midwifery Profession Act.
I now wish to formally table the submissions that we have received on Bill 20 from the Nunavut Association of Midwives, Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated and the Irnisuksiiniq Inuit Midwifery Network of the National Aboriginal Health Organization.
(interpretation) I would also like to table another short report on the dog quest from Churchill to Arviat. It’s a press release for everyone’s information.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Alagalak. (interpretation ends) Tabling of Documents.
Motion 030 – 2(4): Extended Adjournment – Notice (Peterson)
I give notice that on Friday, March 14, 2008, I will move the following motion:
I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Iqaluit East, that notwithstanding Rule 4, that when the House concludes its present sitting in Iqaluit, it shall be adjourned until May 22, 2008.
I move, seconded by the Honourable Member for Iqaluit East...
Speaker: Mr. Peterson, you may seek unanimous consent to deal with your motion today. Mr. Peterson.
Mr. Peterson: Sorry, Mr. Speaker, I’m a little eager to get going here. Mr. Speaker, I seek unanimous consent to deal with my motion today.
Motion 030 – 2(4): Extended Adjournment (Peterson)
Further, at any time prior to May 22, 2008, if the Speaker is satisfied, after consultation with the Executive Council and the Members of the Legislative Assembly, that the public interest requires that the House should meet at an earlier time during adjournment, the Speaker may give notice and thereupon the House shall meet at the time stated in such notice and shall transact it’s business as if it had been duly adjourned to that time.
>>House recessed at 15:28 and Committee resumed at 15:58
In the Committee of the Whole, we have the following items to deal with: Bills 22, 23, 24, and 25.
We would like to continue with Bill 23 and the review of the Department of Finance, followed by the Nunavut Housing Corporation and the Department of Justice. If time permits, we will proceed with the Department of Economic Development and Transportation, followed by the Legislative Assembly.
Are we in agreement that we continue with the Main Estimates for the Department of Finance?
Minister Tapardjuk, do you have witnesses that you would like to bring to the witness table? Minister Tapardjuk.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk: Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.
To my left is Peter Ma, my Deputy Minister, and to my right is Chris D’Arcy, Acting Assistant Deputy Minister of Finance, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Ma and Mr. D’Arcy, welcome to Committee of the Whole.
We will go to page C-7.
Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $1,148,000.
I know the Internal Audit Division goes around and does audits of different departments. In doing that, I’m just wondering if the department has used the information that it has obtained in any of the internal audits that it’s done on different departments to assess which departments may be targeted.
You had mentioned yesterday, for re-centralizing financial services, looking at where there may be problems as a result of the audit.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): I will have my Deputy Minister, Mr. Ma, respond, Mr. Chairman.
Certainly, we would assess the information as provided to us by Internal Audit as part of our evaluation to determine which departments would be further re-centralized into Finance.
As a result of any internal audits done, have there been any flags raised at the departments that you may want to look at prioritizing for the re-centralization process?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): I will have Mr. Ma respond, Mr. Chairman.
None jump out particularly at this point in time. Obviously, some departments have better strengths than others and some, obviously, are weaker than others.
At this point, I would say none jump out in my mind.
I know something I have raised over the years and I still get issues raised to me by businesses within Nunavut is that they’re having a hard time getting paid in a timely manner.
I know that one of the functions of Internal Audit is to go in and take a look at those documents, when they’re received, commitments are made and then they get paid.
I’m just wondering if they have found any concerns of businesses in Nunavut, according to the Financial Administration Act, I think they’re supposed to be paid within 20 days, where that hasn’t been happening.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk: Mr. Ma will respond to that.
The Internal Audit Division went in and audited a significant number of departments throughout the past year.
Most of the difficulties, I guess, in paying, as far as on time, have to do with the interpretation of the actual directive that we have, the FAM directive.
With that said, I’m not sure if all members are aware, the Department of Finance has recently introduced the electronic funds transfer and we’re rolling this out slowly.
Some of our staff and you, as members, have had an opportunity to have funds directly deposited to you. So that will also help expedite prompt payment to our suppliers.
As a result of those audits that Mr. Ma mentioned, usually things are in percentage like in the Auditor General’s findings where they say 40 percent of the files that we reviewed, and so on and so forth, was there a percentage of files or documents that were looked at where that 20-day period wasn’t met?
Yes, there were some numbers. I don’t have that in front of me and I can certainly undertake to provide that to the member at the earliest opportunity.
I certainly look forward to getting that information and hopefully, whatever the number is, we look forward to it going down in the future.
Can the minister or his officials give us an idea of how many actual internal audits were conducted by this division?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Please wait a moment while we look for that information.  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
From 2006 to the end of March 31, 2007, there were 2,030.
That’s the number of audits that were done on the government departments for 2006-07, Mr. Chairman.
I assume that they don’t have a number for the 2007-08 year, but could they commit to providing that information as well?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): We don’t have those figures in front of us, but we can elaborate more on how many audits they did within the government departments tomorrow, Mr. Chairman.
Would the minister or his officials be willing to provide a report on the findings, like the percentages that didn’t comply or did comply; the good, the bad, and the ugly of it, I guess, in a report?
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Can the member clarify if he is talking about public accounts or if he’s talking about audits? I would like the member to clarify his question for our understanding, Mr. Chairman.
Chairman: Thank you, Minister. Can you clarify your question for the minister?
Not that but just the results of the findings generally. I don’t want the government to be in a position to point, “Okay, this individual didn’t do this ten times,” or whatever, but just some general information on the findings of those internal audits.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): We will research the issue to see if we can get that information.
We will try and provide that information but we will have to review what kind of information that we would need to provide you.