EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Now, my understanding is that there was $11.1 million collected in interest and my understanding is that that went to the Housing Corporation.
Now, if it went to the Housing Corporation instead of the general government fund, I would like to know: what did the Housing Corporation do with $11.1 million?
I would like to thank the member for clarifying his question and hopefully he can get a clear answer too.
Mr. Speaker, I just want to assure him that I don’t think that he’s picking on me, he’s doing his job and that’s what we’re all here to do.
Mr. Speaker, the interest that was earned on that funding, some of that funding was allocated to the corporation when the Housing Corporation put forward its preliminary estimates in 2006-07 for a number of units that would be delivered across the territory through the $200 million in Northern Housing Trust, their numbers were based on their costs of that year.
Since then, the construction costs for units have increased. Some of the additional increase in costs in those projections still allowed us to maintain that extra revenue through interest and still allowed us to maintain being able to deliver the 725 units that we committed to at the beginning of the trust.
That number was based on lower construction costs that were there that year but have increased in subsequent years to that.
So that interest was used for housing and enabled to help us maintain our objective of putting out and putting on the ground 725 units by the end of this year through the Northern Housing Trust Program.
Question 032 – 3(1): Status of Sanikiluaq Health Centre’s Power Generator (Rumbolt)
As the minister will appreciate, it is essential for our communities’ health facilities to have a reliable source of power.
It is my understanding that when CGS contracted for a new generator to be sent to the community on last year’s sealift for use at the Sanikiluaq health centre, the wrong model was sent. As a result, the health centre is still using its aging and unreliable generator.
Can the minister provide an update today on what actions his department is taking to either procure a new generator for the health centre or to make the necessary modifications to the one that arrived on last year’s sealift so that it can be used in the community?
The generator that is in the current health centre is old and pretty much on its last legs, but nonetheless, be assured that it still runs, you just have to switch it manually.
The department did go ahead and ordered a new generator for it.
Unfortunately, unlike most of the generators in the Baffin region, Sanikiluaq’s generator system is a three-phase generation system.
The new generator that was ordered is a one-phase generator. Our department has since purchased a three-phase switch for it and that system is all in Sanikiluaq now, Mr. Speaker.
Your first supplementary, Mr. Rumbolt.
As the minister can appreciate, it is important that steps be taken to ensure that these kinds of errors are not repeated.
Can the minister explain the costs that were incurred with this mistake?
I don’t know the current cost that it was; I think that it was around the $30,000 mark.
But the phase converter is on site and is ready for installation and hopefully we will have it installed in the coming months, as soon as we can get an electrician on site.
I would just like to make a comment instead of a final question.
The people of Sanikiluaq know probably better than anybody the importance of having backup generators because they lost their power plant to a fire nine years ago. So I would just like the minister to be sure that in the future, we can make sure the proper equipment is sent to the communities.
Speaker: Thank you. (interpretation) That was just a comment.
Question 033 – 3(1): Protection of Lands, Wildlife and People from Development (Aupaluktuq)
I’ve just got a question for the Hon. Minister of Mines.
Baker Lake residents are concerned of mining activities. We’re aware the federal government issues the approval of development for mines as the federal government receives royalties from the mines. We’re also aware that the Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporation and the Kivalliq Inuit Association also represent the people of Baker Lake.
We also are aware that these Inuit organizations also receive royalties.
We know for a fact that people in the Kivalliq region often say, “Baker Lake has the mines. You have nothing to worry about.” Right now, what’s handed out by mining companies are calendars, mugs, cups, caps, etcetera.
We know for a fact that when they are operable, they will provide some royalties to some social development programs in the community.
I would like to ask the minister: will this government ensure that my constituents, the people of Baker Lake, our lands and waters are protected and better represented to ensure that our lands, animals and wildlife are safe?
Minister responsible for Mines, Hon. Peter Taptuna.
I’ll try and answer you here. Thank you for the question from the hon. member of Baker Lake; I’ll try and answer that question.
This government doesn’t collect royalties from the production of mines. We don’t have any mines that are in production now in the Nunavut territory and he’s correct in saying that there is some Inuit organizations, such as NTI and the Kivalliq Inuit Association, that do collect through their IIBAs with the exploration and mining companies.
These projects go through the NIRB process and everything, including water, lands, and wildlife, is looked at throughout the review process.
Maybe the hon. member can clarify his question as to exactly what he’s referring to.
Maybe he’s asking about the government protocol.
I do apologize for not presenting that as adequately as I wanted to, but the basic question was: what practices have been or will be enforced so that the lands, waters and people are well protected?
I do understand that the Inuit organizations do represent the Inuit but at this point, there are some constituents who feel like they’re not being heard adequately.
So is there any way that the GN can do to ensure or monitor that the lives of Inuit of Baker Lake are being well protected?
That was my question. Thank you.
Yes, there’s a committee put together to monitor the socio-economic situation in these communities that are affected by the mining and exploration companies.
The government does participate in the overall review process, through the NIRB process, and for the most part, NIRB has the authority to listen and review any concerns that any individual may bring up throughout the whole review process.
And I can assure the member that the government does participate in the review process.
Your second supplementary, Mr. Aupaluktuq.
I also want to thank the hon. member. And I just want to advise him that this is a real sensitive, delicate issue for my community and my constituents.
I just want to advise you of the fact that I’m ready and willing to work with you as well to inform my constituents using what’s available to them. I look forward to sharing more information with you in the House and as well as possibly on one-on-one meeting.
As we have indicated before that we are open and willing to communicate and have the regular members participate in all of these issues that we’re facing, especially when it comes to mining, I appreciate the member’s comments.
Question 034 – 3(1): Sealing Issue (Okalik)
My question is dealing with the sealing issue.
I would first like to ask: how many years have you resided in Nunavut?
I never heard the question. Could the member please repeat it?
That question has nothing to do with the minister’s responsibilities, so it should be ruled out of order.
Thank you for that Point of Order, Mr. Tootoo.
I would like to remind hon. Okalik that the question has nothing to do with his portfolio.
Can you clarify your question, please. Mr. Okalik.
When he rose earlier to make a statement, he stated that we remember the devastating effects of the seal ban in the 1980s.
So therefore, I wanted to ask how many years he has resided here. If he is going to state something like that, I wonder how long he has been here if he can remember that far back.
This is totally in line with his statement.
I would like to ask Minister Shewchuk if he could respond to the question.
I’m not quite sure what the member is trying to get at here.
But the sealing issue has come before Nunavut, then the Northwest Territories before, 20 years ago, and it was a similar situation and that is what’s referred to in the document.
As far as how long I’ve lived here, I have no comment on that then.
The sealing issue comes and goes and politicians come and go.
I have only been here for a short time, but I wasn’t here back in the 1980s when the sealing ban was taking place.
The reason why I posed my question is if we are going to make these types of statements of remembering the effects on Nunavummiut, we have to be able to explain to outsiders how the sealing issue has and will affect Inuit, both from our ancestors’ perspective and what we see today, and the truth stemming from our experiences to back up our position and this has always been our argument.
How can the minister explain how important the sealing issues are to Nunavummiut without using his personal experiences when debating these animal rights activists?
Nunavut requires strong leadership on this file.
Yes, as minister, I understand and I fully well know how important sealing is to Nunavut. I’m a hunter myself and I hunt seals, and seals are culturally, holistically, and for economic reasons very important to all Nunavummiut.
And the member understands that also, I think so.
Yes, I do know how important seals are to Nunavut. We are trying our best as the Government of Nunavut to team up with Canada and deal with this sealing issue and do the best we can.
I would want you to consider these discussions well into the future because this is a big issue overseas as well.
According to the overseas report from other departments, we want to be able to be strong and speak for our communities. In April, there’s going to be a vote on whether or not the sealing ban would proceed and we want to be able to have answers for our communities.
Yes, we will have to wait until April 1 before a decision is made as we don’t know what that decision is going to be in the European Union.
I can assure that the sealing topic and the sealing industry... we had a very strong Inuk. My deputy minister represented us in Europe on two occasions recently and he took the strong voice from Nunavut there and as a Canadian delegation, so I do understand.
If we’re just going to wait for April to come, it’s going to be too late.
You need to plan this before April 1 so that we can work together on this area in Canada.
Are we just going to wait for things to happen? If we’re just going to do that, the people in our region will be affected.
If members have something to say or a question to pose, they have to remember the proper parliamentary protocol of directing them through the Speaker.
As I have stated already, we are working together very strongly with Canada and we do have a strategy in place. We have been to European nations twice in the last three or four months and we are carrying on with our strategy.
We are waiting for this decision to come through because we have done what we feel is everything that we can up to this point. If this decision does come through to ban seal and seal products from the European Union, we do have a strategy in place of how to deal with that too in conjunction with Canada.
Please note that Question Period is now over. (interpretation ends) Moving right along, Item 7.
Reply to Opening Address 001 – 3(1): Mr. Paul Okalik (Okalik)
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) This new government’s mandate is one of change. My colleague for Quttiktuq keeps referring to how wonderful it has been for him to be given a chance for such a mandate.
Let me do the math in the most recent election on this agenda for change. Only 11 people chose to run for re-election of the 19 ridings in this wonderfully great territory.
Out of those 11, 6 were re-elected, which means that the majority of Nunavummiut who were given an opportunity to vote for change chose not to do so.
Mr. Speaker, I also want to go a tad further on the numbers and see how strong a mandate that my colleague for Quttiktuq was given to construct such a change. To begin, he won by nine votes.
That is even less than the number of Stanley Cups that the Toronto Maple Leafs have won.
If his competitor had won over five of those votes - that is one hand - he would have lost the election and the mandate for change.
How is he representing those good folks that chose not to vote for change, who narrowly lost?
My election, which was won by a gap of 44 votes, has been called a squeaker and so close. How would my friend’s votes by nine be classified?
(interpretation) I am sure if I were in his shoes, I would be enjoying the type of change that he represents of this government and he is boasting about it.
As an Inuk who was born and raised in this great territory and who has spent his entire adult life on improving our plight, I beg to differ.
I have worked very hard to be able to do the best job that I can to provide my support to my fellow Inuit and have earned university degrees in the process.
I am forever grateful to my late mother for pushing me to get as much education as possible and for my late father for passing on the traditional ways of hunting and fishing.
Both my parents tried to teach the proper ways of the land and the Inuit way and for that I truly thank them.
I do not claim to be an expert in the traditional ways that permitted our ancestors to live in harmony, but I was fortunate to learn a few things from my family. I try to live by the values that they passed onto me and I believe we were making progress with the government that I was so blessed and lead.
I have tried to be as helpful as I can, I want the very best for my constituents and fellow Nunavummiut, and what I am noticing is that I feel like a stranger to this government.
This was supposed to be our government and I am starting to sense that we have gone back in time.
I led a government that at first was trying to get organized and have a good foundation to deliver the services that the Nunavummiut have grown to accept. From there, we focused on improving our lot and providing a government that is reflective of the citizens it serves.
We passed our Wildlife Act during our first term to address the expectations of our Inuit partners. During our second term, we passed our language legislation to ensure that our traditional language had its rightful place.
We also passed our Education Act to ensure that our children will learn Inuktitut in the classroom. We passed our Midwifery Act to permit the use of our traditional knowledge of this long-standing practice in Nunavut. We also passed our Family Abuse Intervention Act to try to respond to the unacceptable rates of violence and return to some of our traditional ways to tackle these challenges.
In the area of corrections, we focused our attention towards healing the inmates and made investments for the necessary infrastructure.
We increased the number of Inuit employees to the point where they form the majority of our workforce and are improving the services to our unilingual citizens.
We focused our attention to the economy where we were second in growth rate in the entire country.
We also increased assistance to our Inuit students who wanted to pursue a higher education and they responded by going in higher numbers.
I also took part in delegations to Europe and southern Canada to tackle the agendas of the animal activists and made real efforts to increase our chances of making progress with some key European governments.
I would explain to the foreign governments that as an Inuk, I had the honour of killing my first seal when I was eight years old and how I obtained my first real income from the sealskin trade, of how proud my parents were as they knew I was continuing on with the ways of the Inuit that had sustained us since time immemorial. This has been encouraging to watch over the last few years and I thought that we were heading in the right direction.
Today, I look across the floor and see for the first time in our young government that once again a non-Inuk minister is making very important decisions for us on the most basic of our necessities in managing wildlife. I recall that this individual was trying to extract a commitment from me during the lead-up to the leadership forum when I was running for Premier.
I was not comfortable making such a commitment but someone must have as he is sitting where he is today.
For example, at the federal level, the minister representing Fisheries and Oceans always comes from the sea.
Today, I see that we have a credibility problem in tackling the animal rights movement, in presenting our case before the European community.
An Inuk in your position today can easily give our case a lot of weight by telling our stories firsthand; you cannot offer that to the Parliamentarians who will be making this decision in a month’s time.
I regret that the Inuit hunters and their families will suffer greatly as a result of your lack of credibility.
As Premier, I always tried to ensure that we had the strongest case to present to the outside world so that our constituents were rewarded by our actions.
The incompetence shown by this administration is unforgivable for the suffering that will be faced by the most vulnerable of my fellow Nunavummiut.
The decision to ban sealskins was made on March 2 and it took our Premier until March 10 to issue a press release without any other effort to counter these measures.
I was taken aback by the inability to answer a basic question as to why it took her over a week to draft a press release. It also became very obvious that there are no plans in place to challenge the European community over this act.
Nunavummiut deserve a far more active government to protect our interests and this act alone shows how out of touch this government is.
How could you place such a low priority on the basic needs of the Inuit? We deserve better!
I had already expressed my disappointment with the removal of the former Minister of Justice, who is very wise and knowledgeable about Inuit, and will focus on the most recent decision on this crucial matter for Inuit. In prior governments, we worked very hard in trying to honour the dream of Nunavut by working on reflecting the laws for Inuit as this is our homeland.
We have made real strides in the areas of family abuse, language, education, and wildlife, but there is so much more to do and once again, we will have a non-Inuk trying to interpret what is best for Inuit.
To the new minister, I know that you will work very hard, but you will be busy trying to manage our dwindling finances.
I, along with numerous Inuit in our territory, feel that we have gone back in time with this questionable decision by our Premier.
Inuit want a government that reflects our cultural values and priorities.
I find it difficult to put into words how alien this new government feels, how far they have strayed from the path so many Inuit worked so hard to create.
(interpretation ends) I have been very critical as I must as a Member of this Assembly representing the interests of my constituents and as an Inuk who feels our voice is no longer the one that is being heard. However, it pains me; there may be some that say I’m bitter or angry and trying to undermine this government.
Life brings many changes to all of us.
My role now is a new experience that I have not before. I led this government for nine and a half years, we faced many challenges. The first was one of inexperience, the second of unrealistic expectations.
What experience teaches me is that change is inevitable, change is necessary, but change for the sake of change accomplishes nothing.
(interpretation) We, as Inuit, have learned we are the sum of our experiences, we learn from our past, from our elders, and from those who came before us.
If what we are witnessing today is an indication of what is to come, we will be sorely disappointed and the Inuit agenda that we fought so long and hard for will be lost as we are returning to the days of non-Inuit making Inuit decisions. We can use a better approach in our future.
Tabled Document 017 – 3(1): EDT Staff Directory (Okalik)
I wish to table a staff directory and how this contravenes an Act, and I would like to go into more detail in the House.
Tabled Document 018 – 3(1): 2009 Kivalliq Mayor’s Meeting Resolutions (Ningeongan)
I spoke with the Mayor of Coral Harbour and he was the chairperson of the Kivalliq mayors meeting in Coral Harbour.
I wish to table copies of three resolutions that were passed at the recent Kivalliq mayors meeting.
I encourage all members to review these with care and I look forward to seeing the government’s responses to these resolutions.
I request consent of this Assembly to waive the two-day notice requirement to allow for the first reading of Bill 1, Appropriation (Capital) Act, 2009-2010.
The minister is seeking consent to waive the two-day requirement rule so that Bill 1 can be read today for the first time.
Bill 01 – Appropriation (Capital) Act, 2009-2010 – First Reading
I move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Rankin Inlet South and Whale Cove, that Bill 1, Appropriation (Capital) Act, 2009-2010, be read for the first time.
I request consent of this Assembly to waive the two-day notice requirement to allow for the first reading of Bill 2, Interim Appropriation Act, April 1 – July 31, 2009.
The minister is seeking consent to waive the two-day regular notice so that Bill 2 can be read today for the first time.
Speaker: Please proceed, Mr. Peterson.
Bill 02 – Interim Appropriation Act, April 1 – July 31, 2009 – First Reading
I move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Rankin Inlet South and Whale Cove, that Bill 2, Interim Appropriation Act, April 1 – July 31, 2009, be read for the first time.
I request consent to this Assembly to waive the two-day notice requirement to allow for the first reading of Bill 3, Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 3, 2008-2009.
The minister is seeking consent to waive the two-day waiting rule so that Bill 3 can be read for the first time.
Please proceed, Minister Peterson.
Bill 03 – Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 3, 2008-2009 – First Reading
I move, seconded the by Hon. Member for Rankin Inlet South and Whale Cove, that Bill 3, Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 3, 2008-2009, be read for the first time.
I request consent of this Assembly to waive the two-day notice requirement to allow for the first reading of Bill 4, Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) Act, No. 3, 2008-2009.
The minister is seeking consent to waive the two-day waiting rule so that Bill 4 can be read today for the first time.
Bill 04 – Supplementary Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, No. 3, 2008-2009 – First Reading
I move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Rankin Inlet South and Whale Cove, that Bill 4, Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) Act, No. 3, 2008-2009, be read for the first time.
All those in favour, raise you hand.
Bill 01 – Appropriation (Capital) Act, 2009-2010 – Second Reading
I move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Rankin Inlet-South Whale Cove, that Bill 1, Appropriation (Capital) Act, 2009-2010, be read for the second time.
Bill 1 is referred to the Committee of the Whole.
Bill 02 – Interim Appropriation Act, April 1 – July 31, 2009 – Second Reading
I move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Rankin Inlet South and Whale Cove, that Bill 2, Interim Appropriation Act, April 1 – July 31, 2009, be read for the second time.
The motion is carried and Bill 2 is referred to the Committee of the Whole.
Bill 03 – Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 3, 2008-2009 – Second Reading
I move, seconded by the Hon. Member for Rankin Inlet South and Whale Cove, that Bill 3, Supplementary Appropriation (Capital) Act, No. 3, 2008-2009, be read for the second time.
The motion is carried and Bill 3 is referred to the Committee of the Whole.