EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Most importantly, Mr. Speaker, all the volunteers it takes to put together such a big tournament. Rankin Inlet is blessed with many volunteers and the Avataq volunteers did another super job.
I hope to see all the people who went to the Avataq Tournament this year come back next year.
I join you with a “thank you and congratulations” to all of those individuals.
Return to Oral Question 505 – 3(3): Nunavut Food Security Symposium (Taptuna)
The question was asked by the hon. member from Quttiktuq on February 28, 2012, Question No. 505 – 3(3), on the subject of the Nunavut Food Security Symposium.
In terms of the strategy, since so much collaboration was done in the meetings and whatnot, leading up to this point, who is actually writing the strategy?
Is it a combined collaborative approach with NTI or is it from government officials in his Poverty Reduction Secretariat?
My response to the hon. member:
As I stated in the House in response to the member’s question, the Nunavut Food Security Strategy is being prepared by the Nunavut Food Security Coalition.
Therefore, it is being prepared collaboratively with Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated.
The preparation of the strategy for the coalition is provided leadership and oversight by the territorial nutritionist, the Department of Health and Social Services, the directors of the Nunavut Anti-Poverty Secretariat, and the Department of Social and Cultural Development at Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated.
Question by the hon. member:  Is there a list of partners that would be able to be made available so that the public would know in a good way of publicizing all of the partners that are involved in the writing of this?
The members of the Nunavut Food Security Coalition are Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, the Kitikmeot Inuit Association, the Kivalliq Inuit Association, the Qikiqtani Inuit Association, the departments of Culture and Heritage, Economic Development and Transportation, Education, Environment, Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs, and Health and Social Services, and the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
A draft of the strategy will be provided to all participants in the Food Security Symposium for review and comments prior to publication.
A complete listing of participants will be included at the appendix to the strategy.
Question by the hon. member:
At the meeting, were the two major airlines or were all airlines in Nunavut participants in the food security meeting?
Mr. Speaker, no, the airlines clearly play a critical role in the distribution of market foods in Nunavut, but this activity is carried out under private contract with the retail stores.
Representatives of two major retail stores were participants in this symposium.
The airlines also support the distribution of country foods by providing favourable freight rates for country food shipment, which is arranged privately.
Again, while airline representatives were not present at this symposium, several participants at the symposium take advantage of these favourable rates, and these were discussed during the symposium’s sessions on country food access.
Mr. Speaker, I include my return to oral [question.]
Return to Oral Question 504 – 3(3): Status of Health Technology Initiatives (Peterson)
I would like to return to Question 504 – 3(3), Status of Health Technology Initiatives, dated February 28, 2013.
I wish to correct the inadvertent statement I made in response to MLA Hezekiah Oshutapik where I said, “I believe the plan is to purchase the CT scanner and ship it up via ship later this year.”
What I meant to say was, “ship it up by airplane later this year.”
Speaker: Thank you for clarifying the record, Minister Peterson.
One of my constituents is here in the House.
I want to recognize Rosemary Twerdin because she used to be a teacher of my children.
I also would like to recognize a representative for Nunatsiaq News, Jane George. They were not really mentioned, so I welcome them.
Speaker: Thank you, Ms. Ell. I welcome both of you to the Gallery.
Question 519 – 3(3): The Distribution of Medical Travel Contracts (Ningeongan)
I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Health and Social Services. I hope you are listening.
Mr. Speaker, the other day, my colleague from Hudson Bay asked the minister about the status of medical travel contracts.
The minister indicated that the department is using the same medical travel airlines that they have used in the past, but he did not specify which airlines he was referring to.
Some of my constituents have been asking why, when they are travelling as medical clients, they are only being put on Calm Air flights when First Air also provides medical travel services.
Can the minister clarify why this may be the case?
Mr. Speaker, I can’t offer specific details, but we know that when there are RFPs issued for medical travel or medevacs, the successful airline is awarded the travel contract. If there are scheduled airlines into different communities, there is a ratio of sharing between the two airlines.
It’s higher in some communities and lower in other communities. I can’t give you specific details of why an individual would go on one airline or another on a particular date. It could be subject to weather.
It could be mechanical issues or overbooking.
There are many variables.
Although I understand in some cases weather and whatnot may be the reason behind making changes to that effect, to the different service providers, can the minister provide an update on how medical travel services in the Kivalliq are split between the airlines and what percentage is allocated to each airline?
I thank Mr. Ningeongan for the question and the level of detail.
Unfortunately, I don’t have that level of detail with me today. I can provide that information to the member when it’s available.
The minister has just indicated that he will provide me the information when it’s available.
Will the information be available during the winter sitting?
Mr. Speaker, I will endeavour to make it available during the winter sitting.
Question 520 – 3(3): Status of New Marine Infrastructure for Cape Dorset (Schell)
Mr. Speaker, the community of Cape Dorset has been lobbying hard for a new breakwater for many years.
This is a project that was on the GNWT’s capital plan at one time, but which fell off after division of the two territories.
Can the minister indicate if his department is considering funding a new breakwater for Cape Dorset?
Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated in the past, there has been some lobbying down in Ottawa to bring to light the critical marine infrastructure shortages in Nunavut.
I have seen the document that the hon. member is referring to, going back to, I believe, 1988, in the NWT days, where there was a feasibility and a plan done up for $10 million.
As I indicated a couple of years ago, the study is outdated, old, and the cost for that infrastructure has more likely doubled or tripled as forecasted in the early days of the NWT.
Mr. Speaker, there’s ongoing work. Of course, Cape Dorset was one of the communities identified in the DFO preliminary phase of looking at what communities would be a priority, but there has been no work done on that front for Cape Dorset.
It’s my understanding that the Department of ED&T has allotted some funding from its 2012-13 small craft harbours capital budget for various small marine infrastructure projects in Arviat, Iqaluit, Pond Inlet, and Sanikiluaq.
Would the minister be willing to allot funds for an updated or needs assessment for the Cape Dorset marine infrastructure?
As you well know, it involves a lot of factors that we’ve got to put into place to plan a study like that. Usually, the first step is a user and assessment needs and the feasibility.
For a small boat launch, it’s quite different.
We initiated that in Pond Inlet and we’re hoping to build that within that community.
For major infrastructure that the member is asking about, which go into the $20 million and $30 million, we will have to possibly speak to the hamlet there and come up with an alternative plan to discuss either a boat launch or a breakwater or what type of infrastructure they’re actually looking at.
In the past, I know the minister has mentioned about alternative financing for three communities.
I know one community was Cape Dorset, the other one was Arviat, and I can’t remember the third one for alternative sourcing for building breakwaters.
Has the minister been able to find alternative funding for these types of projects?
Hon. Peter Taptuna: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I believe the member is referring to some of the partnerships that we’re hoping to create with resource developers.
At this time, no, we haven’t found any other alternative sources of funding for such infrastructure that he’s referring to.
The minister was correct when he had stated that in the 1980s, 1988 or 1990, there was a study done and putting a breakwater into Cape Dorset.
Actually, the breakwater was supposed to go ahead to be built in 1998, but unfortunately, with the change in government, like you say, it fell by the wayside.
Now, Cape Dorset does not have a commercial fishery, but in regard to the art industry, it is very important for collecting soapstone.
It was mentioned here, like you say, in 1998 that we have a major issue. We have large tides in Cape Dorset.
We’ve had the dock that was supplied there in the last year or two and it has never been put in the water because, unfortunately, it doesn’t do any good, except only in high tide. So we are in dire need of getting a breakwater there.
There have been many boats damaged over the years.
So I would urge the minister to look seriously at trying to get alternative funding for a breakwater in Cape Dorset.
There was no question there, I believe; just a statement to urge the minister to look into it.
Question 521 – 3(3): Status of the Ilagiitsiarniq Family Violence Prevention Strategy (Ningark)
I say “good afternoon” to Celine back home in Kugaaruk.
Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Hon. Minister of Health and Social Services.
I know the hon. minister works harder than most of us to ensure that violence against women in the territory is reduced. I know that from my heart.
In my Member’s Statement, I spoke about the need to take action against family violence in Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, can the hon. minister update this House today on the status of his department’s Ilagiitsiarniq Family Violence Prevention Strategy?
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank Mr. Ningark for the question and comments.
In his Member’s Statement, I appreciate that he read through this 120-page Stats Canada report, “Measuring Violence Against Women: Statistical Trends,” which speaks to the very serious issue of violence against women across Canada in all provinces and territories.
It’s very discouraging. I encourage everybody out there to read it.
If you want copies, I can certainly make copies available with all of my notes.
Mr. Speaker, as I have indicated before to the House, that I’m not the kind of person just to put a strategy out there with a lot of flash-and-dash style and no substance.
In my community of Cambridge Bay, we have been dealing with violence against women for many decades and we have a crisis shelter in Cambridge Bay.
When I was mayor, we used to meet with many of the groups representing women in that community.
So I know firsthand what it’s like to have a crying mother or lady or victim in your office.
I’m not prepared to put out a strategy that’s not going to get results. When I read the first draft, I wasn’t encouraged by it. I wanted to ask them to rewrite it.
I wanted a strategy that would actually help people. The way I see the strategy, we’re going to have to put some major and significant resources into the strategy. We’ve only got six crisis shelters in Nunavut.
We don’t have enough social workers. If we’re going to address this issue, we have to put the resources, funding, and support behind it.
I know, in the Second Assembly, all the MLAs in this House got up on November 30, 2005 and talked about violence. The Second Assembly introduced the Family Abuse Intervention Act and threw $2.3 million worth of funding behind it and 23 PYs. We saw that it got off to a bad start; the consultants said it wasn’t working.
There is a big issue out there.
I’m prepared to table a draft copy for Mr. Ningark and ask all of my colleagues, if they want some input, to provide me with their recommendations. They are the guys and gals on the front lines in the communities who can offer some insights on how this government can develop a strategy that will generate some meaningful results and curb the violence against women, not just women, but families in Nunavut.
We know that we don’t have enough resources. We may not have the PYs in the system, but we know that family violence up here is unacceptable. We all know that.
We also know that it should be a priority of this government, according to every other strategy, every other statistic that we read from the country.
Now, the hon. minister has indicated that he is willing to table the strategy.
Can the minister indicate when he will table the Ilagiitsiarniq Family Violence Prevention Strategy in this Assembly?
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to thank my hon. colleague from the Kitikmeot. I know he has done a lot of lobbying over the years in our region, particularly in his community of Kugaaruk, to get a family shelter in his community.
I know the community is working very hard to get that facility up and operational.
Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned in my earlier answer, I will table that document in this [sitting]. I just can’t give you a date.
Question 522 – 3(3): Government of Nunavut Submissions to the Nunavut Impact Review Board Concerning the Kiggavik Project (Aupaluktuq)
My questions are for the Minister of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs, whose department has been coordinating the Government of Nunavut’s submissions to the Nunavut Impact Review Board concerning the proposed Kiggavik uranium mine near Baker Lake.
(interpretation ends) In June of last year, the Government of Nunavut submitted a number of comments and information requests to the Nunavut Impact Review Board concerning AREVA Canada’s draft environmental impact statement.
In January of this year, AREVA released its responses to the GN’s comments and information requests.
Can the minister advise the House if the government was fully satisfied with AREVA’s responses? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Currently, I don’t have the pertinent documentation on the matter available and perhaps the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation is better able to speak to more recent departmental information.
It would be easier if the question was directed to the minister responsible.
Are you redirecting the question to the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation? Okay. Minister of Economic Development and Transportation, Minister Taptuna.
I thank the member from Qamanittuaq from the question.
Mr. Speaker, on February 6 of this year, all the involved parties were notified that a commencement on a 60-day technical review period had begun for the project.
All the parties have until April 8 to submit comments on the completeness and quality of information provided to NIRB.
Possibly with your assistance, either minister would be able to answer as well.
The government’s sustainable development function is being transferred from the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs to the Department of Economic Development and Transportation.
Can the minister confirm that responsibility for coordinating the GN’s submissions to NIRB regarding major mining projects will become the responsibility of the Department of Economic Development and Transportation after April 1, 2013?
Mr. Speaker, the evaluation and the committee that evaluates these projects as a full-time participant, what we call interveners, is not being moved to Economic Development and Transportation.
We did have a person who came over to Economic Development and Transportation as an associate deputy minister. He himself has been the lead during the EIA days and he will continue to do that from the Department of Economic Development and Transportation.
Mr. Speaker, as the member is well aware, it’s not just EIA and Economic Development that participate in these discussions.
Most of the departments within the government do have a say in a project like this.
I appreciate the responses as well from the hon. minister.
Just for the public record and for those in Baker Lake, I would like to clarify for the record that last month, NIRB began the technical review and public comment period for AREVA’s draft environmental impact statement for the Kiggavik project.
Can the minister indicate how the Government of Nunavut will be participating in this process?
As a government, we do not participate in the project. We evaluate the project, as legislated through our mandate.
We respond to the line of questioning and issues that are out there pertaining to the project itself. Mr. Speaker, in our participation throughout the process, we don’t take a pro or con outlook on the project itself.
We just abide by what’s regulated to us or what we’re legislated to do, and we respond to that through NIRB.
For the benefit of Baker Lake residents who are following our proceedings today, can the minister summarize the GN’s main concerns to date with respect to AREVA’s draft environmental impact statement?
Mr. Speaker, I do not participate in an evaluation with the project itself.
We do have our officials who do that.
As the member is well aware, the Minister responsible for Mines does not actively participate in and comment on the projects.
Mr. Speaker, AREVA has been working in northern Saskatchewan for over 30 years and they have demonstrated a good track record both environmentally, safety-wise, and overall reclamations of their projects.
Again, Mr. Speaker, all the information that does go to NIRB is posted on their website. All the comments, all the concerns, all the letters are posted on Nunavut Impact Review Board’s website.
If any member is looking for what’s happening out there, whether there are comments or questions being asked of a project, all of that information is available on Nunavut Impact Review Board’s website.
Question 523 – 3(3): Emergency Medevac Services in the Kitikmeot (Ugyuk)
I say “good day” to Nauyaq if he’s watching in Taloyoak.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my questions to the Minister of Health and Social Services.
Mr. Speaker, I understand that the government continues to face court challenges with respect to the current contract for emergency medevac services for the Kitikmeot region and I will, therefore, not be asking specific questions about that contract.
However, as a result of stories in the media, my constituents and other Kitikmeot residents have some serious concerns about these services.
For the benefit of the listening public, I would like to ask the minister to clarify some aspects of the emergency medevac service delivery to the Kitikmeot.
Can the minister clearly indicate how his department monitors the length of time it takes for an emergency medevac flight to arrive to pick up a Kitikmeot patient in their home community and how long it takes to deliver them to their destination?
Mr. Speaker, I almost feel like I should be the manager of a lot of these things because they’re always asking me these very detailed and technical questions.
I want to assure my colleagues that we have officials in the Department of Health, regional directors, and we have officials in the health centres who prepare reports that are analyzed by our staff. There are quarterly meetings with the contractors and vendors to review all the statistics and timelines to ensure that there is compliance. In fact, there’s an annual compliance evaluation going on this month.
There’s no one in Kitikmeot who is more concerned about air ambulance travel in the Kitikmeot than me because I come from Cambridge Bay and many of my constituents are medevaced. I take it quite seriously.
I want to comment while I have the chance.
People should not believe everything that they read, that there are always two sides to a story.  The health care of our people of Nunavut is a very high priority for our Department of Health and Social Services.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) Thank you. (interpretation) We do not believe all of the correspondence. Sometimes we hear things through the media.
(interpretation ends) A year ago, the minister indicated in this House that emergency medevac aircraft for the Kitikmeot would be positioned in Cambridge Bay, which is in the Kitikmeot region.
Can the minister update this House as to when exactly he anticipates emergency aircraft to be permanently positioned in Cambridge Bay?
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank Ms. Ugyuk for the question and again her concerns about air ambulance travel in the Kitikmeot.
Mr. Speaker, I believe the primary aircraft for the Kitikmeot is a Learjet 35A and I believe it is based in the Kitikmeot. It is backed up by a King Air 200 out of Yellowknife.
Depending on what the situation is with the weather, planes, and available flying time for pilots and other personnel, a plane could be dispatched from Cambridge Bay or from Yellowknife to the other communities.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) Can the minister indicate what measures have been taken by his department to ensure that emergency medevac services in the Kitikmeot have not been reduced or downgraded as a result of a change in contractor?
Mr. Speaker, [in October 2011], the former Minister of the Department of Health made a Minister’s Statement and assured all Kitikmeot folks that there would be no decrease in the level of service.
I have stepped in and endeavoured to ensure that that does not occur.
I regularly communicate with my officials in headquarters about services in the Kitikmeot. I get complaints as well from my constituents, which I take very seriously.
I communicate to the officials in headquarters and they communicate to the other people who are responsible for overseeing the contracts.
I have been assured that there has been no decrease in the level of service. As I have indicated earlier, there are quarterly meetings with the contractor. There are officials from the Department of Health who meet with the contractor to go over issues.
We recognize that it’s a transition year from the former contractor to the new contractor. There are some issues to be ironed out, but I want to assure the folks in the Kitikmeot that there has been no decrease in the level of service.
Speaker: You’re welcome, Minister Peterson.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the minister for his responses. (interpretation ends) What steps have the minister and his officials taken to ensure that Kitikmeot residents will not have to wait unnecessary lengths of time in their communities for emergency medevac services to reach them, pick them up, and carry them to their destination for urgent medical treatment?
As I had mentioned in my earlier answers, the department meets quarterly with the contractor. They hear the concerns from the health centres and review the reports for every medevac.
There are, of course, concerns from clients who submit complaints. They review those.
As I said, it is a transition year. The priority is to improve the service to ensure that there are no unnecessary delays. Unfortunately, there could be delays, weather delays, and problems with runways.
There are many areas where there could be delays in getting a medevac and a patient out of a community to a hospital in Yellowknife or Edmonton.
We don’t have control over all of those things, but we will do the best we can to ensure that, while the patients are in the care of our health centres and our nurses and doctors, they will receive top medical care. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Question 524 – 3(3): Status of Pond Inlet Community Arena (Enook)
Good afternoon, residents of Pond Inlet and Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, my questions are for the Minister of Community and Government Services, (interpretation ends) Hon. Kusugak.