EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Again I’m at a bit of a disadvantage Mr. Chairman because I don’t have the O and M sheets here I’m only going by memory.
Mr. Puqiqnak (interpretation): Taking my community as an example, I wonder if the Minister can provide me the copy of the increases for those safe shelters?
Chairman (interpretation): Uriash, I think you are talking about Operations and Maintenance rather than Capital Estimates.
What we are dealing with right now is the Capital Estimates and just to remind you.
Mr. Chairman, yes, we can provide that information to the Member.
I will just ask the Deputy Minister to make a note of it and we will provide that information on the Operations and Maintenance and also the increases.
Mr. Puqiqnak (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, the Kitikmeot Member talked about the Boarding Home in the Kitikmeot Region.
I do not think that I am mistaken when I asked about the safe shelter not being in the Capital Estimates and I do not think I am wrong.
Chairman (interpretation): Yes, okay, thank you, Mr. Puqiqnak.
Under 10-6, Qikiqtani Hospital, what does FF and E mean under 10-6?
Hon. Ed. Picco: Mr. Chairman, FF and E means furniture, fixtures and equipment.
I will get right down to the questions.
On the Qikiqtani General Hospital, $14 million, 1 hundred for 2004-2005, projected 2003-2004, $15 million 9 hundred and 2005 to 2009, $25 million, 650 thousand, can you tell me what $15 million is spent on in 2003 and 2004?
Mr. Chairman, the way the budget and allocations are written in the budget allocation books that we are discussing right now, in the case that the money was not spent then the money would be carried over.
So, it could say for the year there is $15 million and this year it would be three, so it showed allocations at $18 million, because of the $15 million has been carried over.
That would be standard practise in the Capital Planning Books.
So, if I am understanding the Member’s question correctly, based on the page number he is on, then the Capital that the previous expenditures was what was budgeted for the year before that, not necessarily what was expended.
I am sure we all understand that in this room today, that explanation.
Can you tell me what the $14 million, 100 thousand is going to be spent on in 2004-2005 and if that will all be spent?
Mr. Chairman, the budget allocations, again, are based on the expenditure timeline.
In this case, Mr. Chairman, the budgetary timeline in the case to us that the major portion of the construction would begin in the year 2004-2005 and that amount being allocated in the budgets to date is the amount that the Member just read out, that is what the amount means.
If they expect the amount in the fiscal year it would be in amount of fourteen million one hundred, the amount that the Member mentioned.
I am a little confused now, so okay this figure of fifty million nine hundred thousand for 2003/2004 has not been spent and if it hasn’t been spent, how much of it has been spent and where did it go?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you Mr. McLean.
The money hasn’t gone anywhere, the process for the budget are such that what we do is we budget for it, we do capital carry over, they do supplementary appropriations and so on.
I am not going to go through the whole financial size.
What happens in layman’s terms, we budgeted a hundred thousand dollars this year to build a house and we only spent twenty thousand, next years budget will indicate a project continuing and you have eighty thousand dollars left.
We’ve never spent on the house and which indicates that twenty thousand was spent the previous years, that’s what the amount would be.
In this case when we are talking about the amount we have budgeted fourteen million, next year we are budgeting ten million, so in prior amounts we show fourteen plus the ten for a total of twenty four and if you go through each year, Mr. Chairman, the total amount again will be the total cost of the project year by year, because it’s a multi year project.
At that point, understanding again, I'm asking capital budget, is that correct.
That’s the way it is, I think that’s clearer for the Members.
I'm sure we all understand here, the explanation, Mr. Picco, I'm trying to comprehend what you’re talking about, you know I am a little slower than most people.
But at the end of the day I just did my math here, and I could be wrong but 2003/2004, 2004/2005, 2005 to 2009 were up to sixty five million dollars in a hospital if you add the figures up; I could be out ten or twelve million.
But what is going to be the actual cost for that health facility in Iqaluit? Is it sixty five million for just that building?
Is that the price? What’s the actual price on this facility according to your calculations, not the calculations of the Capital Estimates?
Mr. Chairman, we’re allocating, I'm just going to say this again.
The total project is $55 million, 650 thousand; that’s on the target sheet, that we have in the Capital Plan and on that there’s a little over $10 million dollars, which is furniture, fixtures and equipment.
So if the new facility, you build the building but you still have to put beds in there, x-ray equipment, surgical equipment and so on, and that’s for $10 million, so that forty five plus ten, however because tender is not out for the full package for the facility, right now we’re out for service contract, I think you asked that question the other day, when I tried to explain it to you.
We have a service contract right now, Mr. Chairman, to do the site work on the project, those $4.2 million dollars.
By January or February this year, the complete package will be ready to go to tender and at that time you’ll see what the price, concrete price, because we’ll build a tender, we’ll accept the tender and so on.
That’s why we have budgeted the amount you see there; I believe its fifty five by fifty short, it should be within five percent of that, that’s definitely right.
We don’t have the tender, so I can’t tell you exactly what the price.
In the accounting system we had to adopt two years ago, the Auditor General for Canada said you had to book those expenses off in your Capital Plan, which is something you and other Members have to do, indicate what total cost of the facilities will be.
Give or take five percent, that is what the total cost will be.
That was the guestimate that we have in place.
So the total cost of the facility, Mr. Chairman, including fixtures, furniture and equipment, we are looking at about $55.6 million.
So the actual building itself would be around $45 million.
Again, when the tender gets out, and that will be January, so give or take five percent.
That is the same, not just for these facilities but any other facility, the same thing that you do with any government itself.
It is not unique just for the one project.
Boy, when you think guestimate, you really mean guestimate. When you say we are a guestimate, when the Queen was here Mr. Picco, we had a big picture.
You had a little model hooking up the old hospital with the new hospital and stuff like that.
You were so proud of it, and I am so proud that we are going to actually have a facility in Nunavut.
I am very proud.
You are like me; you are getting into that stage in your life, where you may have to use it for some kind of operation, and stuff like that, and I am sure looking forward to coming over and using that facility like everybody else.
You are guestimating that this facility will cost about $55 million dollars with furniture?
Mr. Chairman, I do not want to get into a debate with the Member on guestimates, and so on.
All I am suggesting to you, like any other capital project that the Government does.
We say right now for example, we have budgeted $200 thousand dollars for houses.
If the tender goes out, and the houses come in at $215 thousand dollars, the best guess that we had is the houses will cost $200 thousand.
When the Tender package based on what the steel costs are at that time, based on what the shipping costs will be, and so on, and so forth, that will give you the account.
So any type of project, you are building a house, you allow for a contingency. We have allocated enough for the facility, but you have to allow for contingencies.
That is why I am saying that we have booked off $55 million dollar; for the costs of the facility, including the furniture and the fixtures.
Give or take, we say about five percent.
That is a fair industry standard.
The Member, who is a businessman, he knows that.
So it is not just unique to this.
It is not that we are pulling numbers out of the air or whatever; it is based on those figures.
For example, on the Rankin Inlet facility that you are very familiar with, we had a budgeted price going into that, we have come a little bit under budget.
A little bit under budget.
We have budgeted about 16 million and then we come in at about 15.6.
So give or take again.
So that is a pretty good standard, we believe.
There is really no issue here. We have booked off what we believe is a reasonable cost; again it was the Auditor General who said to book off those costs with the accountants that we have in place.
When the project package goes out to tender, then we will know what the costs will be because they will be bidding on the total package.
However, I would like to stop here, Mr. Chairman, and ask the Capital Planner just to confirm for the record if what I am saying is correct.
If what I am saying is not correct then I would like for her to give you a little bit more of an overview.
I am not a Capital Planner.
Chairman (interpretation): Ms. Brown.
Ms. Brown: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
At this stage in the design in the Qikiqtani Hospital, we are attempting to reduce costs to the building.
The site is very challenging.
The Government had to spend additional money for the remediation, which was $1 million dollars.
I think that the Department would like to see everything come in at $55 million or less, including equipment for it.
It will be a challenge, but with Public Works, and working with QC, we are trying to contain costs.
We are also facing a big building boom in the south where construction materials have increased, plus freight costs.
Those are very challenging roads and sites and I guess that’s what Public Works would say as well that we are doing our very best to contain costs within that target and what will be confirmed when the results of the tender come back in the new year, if what the construction market tells us this building is worth.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you Ms. Brown.
I think I’m starting to understand the complexity of this issue and the costs, but like I’m a simple man and I did the math and I added up the furniture and the equipment and everything that is important to the books that we get what we are supposed to believe, it’s around 65 million and now he’s guestimating $55 million, so I guess he’s got that $10 million in there to play around with in case you know the pressure on stuff.
But looking at this it looks like it’s going to cost us with furniture and equipment 65 or 66 million, but then he told me that that is not necessarily the case because in 2003-2004 there’s a carry over of what and then there’s a flight problem for a million and they spent 4.2 million and you know what I mean.
So are you inflating the cost of this building just to cover off maybe the deficiencies of not having the expertise available or whatever?
You did a great job on the Rankin Inlet one; you said you saved $500 thousand dollars.
It came in, it was budgeted at 16 and come in at 15.6, it shows good fiscal management there and I commend you for saving 400 thousand dollars on the Rankin Inlet facility and if finance had the lead on that, good for them.
So your best guestimate is $55 million dollars for furniture, equipment and the new building, by the time it opens in 2009.
Give or take 5 %.
Mr. Chairman I just want to correct some inaccuracies in the Member’s comments for the record, it’s not 2008-2009, and I had said in the House for the last couple of days we plan to have the facility open in late 2006.
The numbers that I’m looking at, the numbers that we have in the targeted Government of Nunavut Capital Plan, it didn’t go in the books, I’m using a different figure and below the 55 there is the extra 7, so the numbers he is talking about the 65 as well is actually there, budgeted in the books is correct and there is a line below that.
What we have done, what we are saying right now based on everything, that information we have available to us is that the total cost of the facility will be around 55.
That includes furniture and 46 for building, roughly ten for the furniture.
We hope to be able to do a little bit better; we won’t know until the tender package goes out.
So work that has occurred for example remediation of the lot was 860 thousand dollars that was for the environmental damage for oil removal and we had a conversation with our good friend Mr. Bob Nault when he was here a couple of weeks ago from Indian and Northern Affairs Canada and we are in negotiations to cover those costs, Mr. Chairman.
The 4 million dollars that is budgeted right now under the service contract with the Qikiqtaaluk Corporation is to do the site work, the lot work that you are seeing right now that is occurring at the facility at the site, relocating the poles, putting in the access roads, doing the blasting and so on to get the site ready.
We knew the site was going to be a challenge in the beginning stages Mr. Chairman and the Member will remember him saying that what a great idea it was to use reheat from the Power Corporation and have it relocated next to the other one because, although the site costs will be higher, we will actually save more money because we will be able to have it affiliated and linked with the old facility and those O and M costs will be able to keep the costs down.
So, there are many challenges about having it adjacent to the old facilities and it makes more sense, it makes financial sense and it makes administrative sense.
For the record, strictly for the record because there could be a whole new group of people here next year going through the same exercise.
For the record, what furniture and what equipment give or take 5 percent that this hospital, this health facility in Iqaluit is not going to cost the people of Nunavut no more than $55 million dollars give or take 5 percent, is that what he is saying?
Will the Minister commit to that, if that is actually going to happen on that facility?
Hon. Ed. Picco: Mr. Chairman, first of all, I appreciate the Member’s questioning, I really do.
I cannot guarantee that the cost is not going to be more than that.
I am telling you what I know.
I was not elected to lie to people; this is being broadcasted right now in Iqaluit, and the people are watching this.
The reality, anyone watching this knows, I cannot tell you what the price of lumber is going to be in January or February.
We have done the best budgeting that you can do.
Like anyone else, you want to buy a car; you budgeted $20 thousand and six months down the road, the cost of the car got up $5 thousand.
It is not your fault.
So, we are saying to you, based on industry status, we have Public Works and Services, we have the Department of Finance and we also have the Department of Health and people working on a committee overseeing the facility, the construction phases and so on.
We are working with the Qikiqtaaluk Corporation.
We believe we can do a little bit better right now given all of the economic circumstances.
I am prepared, Mr. Chairman, to say in the meeting here, for the record that the best information available to me is that we should be able to bring it in for that amount and that is what we give in or take in 5 percent.
That is, you cannot ask, Joamie School, we budgeted $ 10 million dollars, Mr. Chairman, or a bit more for Joamie School based on the best information that we have available to us right now.
At the end of the period, it may be $2 million dollars more based on whatever contingencies that are there.
So, for the Member to try to get me to confirm in the House and lie to someone to say, yes, $55 million dollars, but I do not even know what the shipping cost will be or any other contingent factors including the cost of steel that is not responsible.
So, I can say, for the record, that we believe within 5 percent of that amount and I think the Member knows that and I think, coming from me, he knows that that is a pretty strong commitment.
Bear with me; I know these are only Capital Estimates and I really do not expect the Minister to lie to the people of Nunavut on the cost of this facility, but you know, we have such an experience, we have got such a background in building facilities like the, we have absolutely none.
Surely this is an architect drawing of this, surely the architects can give you a budget, and a figure for everything else they do up here.
What I am saying is the architects might be out 5 or 6 percent give or take and I know you are trying hard and I know your people are trying hard to bring this facility and on budget.
But, I do not want to belabour this too much, but Mr. Picco, as Minister responsible on a $55 million dollar project, 10 percent means $5 million dollars.
That means that we go over or 20 percent is over, that means that we have to look for $5 or 10 or 15 or 20 million dollars, and where is that going to come from?
That is going to come from the Education Budget, it is going to come from the Sustainable Development’s Budget, it is going to come from this budget and that budget.
So, all I am trying to do here is confirm, you know and you basically said yeah, we should commit at $55 million dollars, but as a Member of the Legislative Assembly approving the budget and the project at this magnitude, I am trying to make people very aware out there we are taking this seriously, I am taking this seriously as a Member of the Legislative Assembly about this project.
I know it might not mean anything to somebody down south $55 million dollars for health facility.
The way I’ve seen it the way it has unfolded in the last 5 or 6 years for this facility they finally got the one in Rankin Inlet down right, it went down to tender, yes know what it is going to cost we can put that into the budget.
I know this is only an estimate.
That’s why I ask you that question about Joamie School; by the way, it came to $13 million.
It was insured for ten so we have to come up with another $3 million, you know.
We’re doing hiring freezes now, we are going to be doing lay offs and we’ll be cutting backs in education budget by $4 million dollars.
So you know, what I want to say is, if we have to tack another $10 million dollars onto this facility, where is the money going to come from?
We’re all aware where it’s going to come from.
It’s going to come from education; it’s going to come from public works, stuff like that.
So I take this seriously Mr. Picco so I’m not picking on you.
I’m just asking you question.
Do you think it is a realistic figure and is it going to come in $55 million dollars, give or take 5 percent?
That’s all I want to know.
As a MLA I got a problem approving capital estimates, you know, we’re guestimating that word scares me guestimating.
So in all, it’s my job to make sure your guestimate are within five percent.
Chairman: Thank you Mr. McLean.
Hon. Ed. Picco: Thank you Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chair, I appreciate the Member and the Members interested in the project.
I mean I wanted to come in on time with the budget too.
If I say sixty or seventy million dollars over I’m not going to be in this House next year or ten years from now.
Who knows whose going to be here and I have to live here.
And I don’t want somebody to say that we’re off by X number days or months or years.
So when I say to you and I mean it in all sincerity and seriousness, Mr. Chairman, and to the members of the House, the best estimate, the best forecast from Public Works, Health Finance, the architects, the people from QC is fifty million dollars give or take five which is a contingency that you have in these projects.
And I stand by those numbers.
And I can’t go any better than that for the Members so I hope that he would appreciate that.
I’ve never heard Minister Ng saying that there are going be lay offs in the Government, that cut the budget by $4 million dollars and I don’t think it is fair statement to make in a public debate.
No one in this government say there are going to be lay offs because some kind of financial cut back or whatever.
Mr. Ng indicated for example that we’ll be back in the black next year based on the forecast he has available to him.
I think that should be clarified also.
I stand by the numbers.
And I have been working on this project since 1995 to bring this forward.
Hopefully based on those things, based on the best recommendations and based on types of forecasts and I believe it’s a solid figure.
Mr. McLean: Thank you Mr. Chair.
That’s all I wanted to hear you say.
Why did we spend 20 minutes doing this Mr. Picco?
Anyhow, as this is my last question on this issue, has the overall projected cost of building three new health facilities increased from about $91 million to over $103 million?
What accounts for a projected cost increases of over $10 million?
How can the Minister ensure that the projected overall costs don’t keep increasing in totally?
Hon. Ed. Picco: Thank you Mr. Chair.
There are different reasons for increase in costs each time the project, the projects delayed.
Remember when we started in l999 we had these on, we tried to bring forth P 3, and those costs inflation so I bring those costs up forward.
We had an additional $2 million from Sakku when we finish off the accounts receivables, or accounts payables to Sakku for about $2 million.
So those are the contingent costs increases that you expected to see.
I don’t believe there was anything extronius to that but again I wanted to confirm that with the capital planner, that’s correct and I will ask Ms Brown to confirm that.
Chairman: Ms. Brown.
Ms Brown: Yes, Mr. Chairman, I confirm that.Thank you
I'm glad there are not too many more, extronious cost increases there or whatever it is but has there been any progress in accepting federal funding or financial assistance specifically in health facilities?
Mr. Chairman, I believe there has been help for our health facilities; there has been some extraneous money, from our federal part.
I'm down from four hundred to three questions, so I’ll continue on with my three; what options are being considered to insure that these three facilities will be fully operational and adequately staffed by the time they are constructed?
Mr. Chairman on the federal contribution Mr. Nault was in town as the Member remembered; Mr. Nault made a contribution of I believe a little over $300 thousand dollars to our new health facilities to help with the plan, which includes the facility here and Rankin, and we thank our federal partner, so that one tenth, one percent on our facility.
Mr. Chairman, on the second question, Mr. Chairman, we do have and we’re in the process now of developing a Human Resource strategy in plans, to make sure that the facilities are staffed up to standard level and that debate has come up to the house over the last couple of days.
We’re quite confident Mr. Chairman, that we will be able to meet the requirements of the staffing level for the facility and again having a newer facility, and working, we can see what happens for example and note it, when they built the facility and they’ve actually increased their staffing levels because of that.
I should also point out Mr. Chairman, the Qikiqtani hospital is not just hospital; we see it as a centre of excellence, and we see that as an opportunity for a learning centre for medicine in the North.
There are no other facilities like it being built in the north, so there are opportunities to bring in other opportunities, university and teaching college?
I'm glad that he’s speaking that way and they’re going to be the centre of excellence.
I'm sure it’s going to be a lot easier to, when you have a facility like that, that will be able to train more local people, and people will take ownership in their territory.