EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
We pay for claims from harvesters that may be injured while they are working in that type of activity throughout Nunavut.
The Worker's Compensation Board itself administers the program on our behalf but we pay directly the claim amounts from that program.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Ng. Let us stay focused on the bill.
Let us focus our questions on the bill.
I do not have papers in front of me.
I may be getting outside the scope of the bill.
But we just want to make ourselves clear.
If I am outside the scope of the bill please reprimand or remind me.
Now in terms of the Workers' Compensation Board not many of us have benefited from this Workers' Compensation Board in the Northwest Territories.
Now the board because they are a board for workers' compensation, you mentioned earlier harvesters' compensation.
This board is an independent board.
The harvesters' compensation board, do they have a board.
Is there a board for harvesters' compensation. The Worker's Compensation Board has a board of directors. Do harvesters have a board of directors.
Mr. Chairman, the harvester's compensation coverage program that the Government of Nunavut provides is administered by the Workers' Compensation Board.
So how it works is that harvesters do not have to pay premiums unlike other employers.
But if they were to be injured and as a result of the injury there are payments deemed to be required to compensate that hunter or carver in that situation, then the Government of Nunavut would be assessed an amount that we would pay to the Workers' Compensation Board for that coverage.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Ng. Mr. Puqiqnak.
Mr. Chairman, if I am outside the scope of the bill let me know.
I believe we work to make a living whether we are civil servants or other, we all work to make a living and there are carvers who try to make a living from their carvings.
I am wondering if carvers are covered under this bill too.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Yes they are Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, it is my understanding that similar legislation was passed recently in the Northwest Territories.
Again, that is why we are looking at doing this because it is a shared Board.
Mr. Chairman, in the Northwest Territories I understand they have identified that there should be five people in the Northwest Territories that would be eligible for lump sum payments.
I am just wondering if the minister has an idea of how many that would effect here in Nunavut.
There is one in Nunavut.
Mr. Tootoo: Mr. Chairman, the setting of the rate or the maximum contribution is being changed in here.
I asked last night but I want to ask again for the record, I don't expect the information right now but I would love to find out how that amount, that maximum amount is determined and what factors are taken into account in determining what that maximum amount of 63 thousand a year, where that comes from.
Mr. Chairman, I have a briefing note that is a page and a half and very detailed on the method that the WCB uses to determine the YMIR.
I am more than willing to provide it to the member, I don't know if the member wants me to read it out because it is quite technical.
So I am prepared to provide that.
That would be great if he could just get me a copy of it that would be great.
I was doing some other work here before and I am not sure if it was asked before and I am sure, I would just ask the minister if he has answered it already.
The make up of the Appeals Board, I understand the minister is responsible for the Workers' Compensation Board and are they consulted, has he been consulted on any of the appointments to the Appeals Tribunal. Also is he aware of who is on that Tribunal.
I take it the member is asking about the Appeals Tribunal.
There is a process right now to select some additional members, but that process hasn't been finalized yet.
I do work in close consultation with the minister responsible in the Northwest Territories, Mr. Handley, on this and we have discussed this actually quite a while back, predating us bringing forward this legislation to allow this expansion of the Appeals Tribunal to happen.
So it is in the works now.
Mr. Chairman, since this is basically under discussion right now I wonder if the minister is going to ensure that there is some type of equal representation between the NWT and Nunavut, taking part on this board.
Mr. Chairman, I wouldn’t necessarily say it would be equal.
But it would be proportional based on the formula that was reached in leading up to the division of assets and liabilities between the Government of the NWT, the Office of the Interim Commissioner and NTI at that time.
I believe that the Workers’ Compensation Board agreement allows for a proportional representation based on assessed revenues based on the jurisdiction of where it was.
That was originally what comprised the make up the board.
Members may know there are two Nunavut members and five NWT members out of seven, representing 28%, so there’s two out of seven, so that is roughly 28%. Our assessment revenue is roughly 26%, so that was the basis of how they determined that make up. I think that carries on in respect to the appeals tribunal make up as well, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Chairman, maybe just a suggestion and then another question.
I was wondering if it would be possible for the minister to look at having a separate appeals tribunal in Nunavut, to deal with Nunavut cases in a separate tribunal and in the NWT to deal with the NWT cases.
For the fact that anyone would probably feel awkward or uncomfortable if they were from one territory and they were appealing to people from a different territory.
I was just wondering if you could look into if that’s possible.
I’ll ask the same question that I asked earlier to Minister Picco in relation to fact that this Bill is a result of changes made in the NWT, because we are a shared board. Does the minister anticipate any other changes that may be coming forward as a result of changes on either our side or the NWT side.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Thank you Mr. Chairman. First of all, the reason for these amendments that we’re proposing, it isn’t so much because the NWT legislature has changed the WCB Act, it is a reflection of the request of the Workers’ Compensation Board itself which is an independent board as members know.
But as ministers’ responsible, because we have the legislation that outlines how they operate, and sets for example the YMIR where it’s legislated and there has to be changes.
The Workers’ Compensation Board approaches both the ministers on what they would like to see happening and if we were supportive of it, then we both put forward the amendment.
It just as easily could have been us putting the amendments through prior to the NWT.
It just happens that they have been sitting before us, when we had agreed upon this and it was near the end of our spring session and we didn’t have the necessary legislation all prepared ready to go at that time.
That’s why it’s come later than the NWT in this case.
In an ideal situation that would go forward at the same time, when both legislatures would be sitting.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Minister Ng. General comments.
Under the bill can only claimants who have been examined by a doctor get compensation.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Mr. Chairman, again that probably is outside the scope of the bill that is proposed here.
But generally where there is an injury and there is a long-term disability that results in compensation for the loss of income there would be medical reports required and medical assessments made of that individual.
This bill was from the NWT and Nunavummiut have to have a clear picture, a clear goal as to which way they want to go because there have been a lot of problems with the WCB.
Maybe this will give us a very clear goal, will this bill give us a clear goal.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Mr. Chairman, I would say it is clear in what is proposed in this bill.
But where the member is referring to some broader changes in respect to the Workers’ Compensation Board Act, as I indicated to the member earlier, that would come in more of an extensive consultation and reviews.
Because if you want to revamp or introduce a new Act that requires a lot more work and input from Nunavut.
Chairperson (interpretation): Do you want to go clause by clause.
Bill 2.
You have the page.
Chairperson (interpretation): Page number 2, clause 4.
Chairperson (interpretation): Page 4, clause 9.
Chairperson (interpretation): Bill 2 is now ready for third reading.
Thank you Minister Ng and Geoff.
I cannot pronounce his name properly.
Thank you for sitting before us.
Okay, Bill 1 - Supplementary Appropriation Act.
You want to start on that.
I will have to ask Mr. Iqaqrialu to come up please and take the Chair.
Chairperson (Mr. Iqaqrialu) (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Arvaluk.
Welcome to the Chair.
I was thinking that we might be spending quite some time on this bill.
Maybe if we could take a break.
At your own discretion.
We will have a 10 minute break.
>>Committee recessed at 2.25 p.m. and resumed at 2.42 p.m.
Does the committee agree we deal with Bill 1 Supplementary Appropriation Act. Bill 1.
I would like to ask Minister Ng to start with his opening remarks.
Bill 1 - Supplementary Appropriation Act - Consideration in Committee of the Whole
The purpose of the Supplementary Appropriation Bill is to provide additional funding for the government of Nunavut for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2000.
Authority is requested for a total of 28 million 438 thousand dollars in additional appropriations made up of 17 million 210 thousand dollars for operations and maintenance and expenditures of 11 million 228 thousand for capital expenditures.
A number of transfers between departments and votes are also a part of the supplementary appropriations which do not require additional funding.
These transfers include funding for centralized telephone payments to Public Works, Telecommunications & Technical Services and reallocation of funding within Community Government and Transportation to undertake various capital projects.
Also a transfer to Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs for the operational support of the Nunavut Government web site.
The operations and maintenance appropriation requirements include 12 million 479 thousand dollars for the increased lease costs of commercial and residential properties.
Four million 444 thousand for the impact of the new Collective Agreement between the Nunavut Government and the Federation of Nunavut teachers.
One million 742 thousand dollars to fund the requirements of the Non-Insured Health Benefits program contribution agreement with the Government of Canada.
The capital appropriations requirements include 1 million 100 thousand dollars for the Kuugaaruk access road, 8 million 673 thousand dollars for the carry over of funds from 1999-2000 for various departmental projects that can not be completed in that year.
The incremental funding requirements have been funded as follows.
The Non Insured Health Benefits funding of 1 million 742 thousand dollars is fully recoverable from the Government of Canada and the remainder of the 26 million 696 thousand dollars will be funded through the contingency reserve and the accumulated savings of the Government of Nunavut.
Included in this amount is a capital carry over of 8 million 673 thousand which is the equivalent to the prior year's lapses of the same amount.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Minister Ng. Now I would like to ask Minister Ng if he has any witnesses he would like to appear with in front of the committee.
They could go to the witness table.
Thank you for coming to the witness table.
Minister Ng could you introduce your witnesses.
To my right is Mr. Bob Vardy the Deputy Minister and to my left Mr. Victor Tootoo, Assistant Deputy Minister of the Department of Finance and Administration.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Minister Ng. Do all the members have a copy of the Supplementary Appropriation No. 1. Bill 1.
Do you have a copy of the bill.
All right I would like to ask if any of the members have general comments.
Mr. Chairman, maybe instead of just having questions all over the place on the bill here it has a breakdown by department of the appropriate changes.
I am just wondering if it might be better to just go page by page and if there are any questions under the detail by department starting on page six or seven.
We will starting off with page six.
I don't have a copy of the Supplementary Appropriation, No. 1.
Chairperson (interpretation): Are there other members that don't have a copy.
I am just turning through the pages.
If you have any comments.
Actually I wanted to have one question generally before we got into the detail.
I am just wondering if the minister could just give us an idea or an explanation on the special warrants and how things end up in a supplementary bill, whether it be something not previously authorized or the special warrants.
Just to set the framework where these things, how they come up.
I believe we use special warrants in the situation of capital carry-overs that are outlined in this Supplementary Appropriation Bill.
A special warrant can be used in emergency situations. The Financial Management Board may recommend a special warrant to the Commissioner for spending authority to allow a department to respond quickly, if there is unforeseen need that meets the criteria of an emergency defined by the Financial Administration Act.
Criteria that is used is that this expenditure is urgently required, is in the public interest and the department does not have sufficient funding for the expenditure.
When a special warrant is approved the department has access to the funding immediately.
So we use that in the case of the capital carry-overs because they had been approved in the previous year and the departments wanted to continue on with the projects in the current fiscal year.
I just want to be clear that special warrants are either for the carry-over of existing projects into this current fiscal year or for emergencies.
Is that what the minister indicated.
Normally it would be for an emergency situation. In this circumstance we used it for allowing the accessibility of the fund for the capital carry-over of those projects from the previous fiscal year.
Mr. Tootoo: That was it for my general questions.
I just wanted to get the framework for, the idea, and the rationale behind these things that we are looking at.
Maybe if we could now start on page 6, if no one has any general comments.
If there are no general comments.
We will go to page 6.
Do all the members have that document in front of them.
Legislative Assembly operations & maintenance.
Starting on page 6.
Mr. Chairman, under Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs communications policy and planning there is 120 thousand dollars transferred from finance and administration for the operational support of the Nunavut web site.
My recollection even during the budget there was a considerable amount of money being spent in the IT area.
I am wondering where we are at now.
Do we anticipate having to see much more spending in this area or have we reached the capacity that we want to be at as far as IT.
Mr. Chairman, we do anticipate additional IT requirements from the government, government wide.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Ng. Any other comments.
Mr. Chairman, maybe if I can to ask the minister if he is anticipating more, are we going to be seeing those numbers worked into the budget for next year or are we going to be anticipating another amount and a supp-bill for this current year.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: We understand there are some requests coming on the operations & maintenance side for supporting information technology systems for next year.
I mean right now as members may be aware, in the next several weeks, the Financial Management Board will be considering requests from all departments for new initiative funding, as part of the business planning process and in finalizing draft budgets for Standing Committee consideration and that will be one component of many initiatives Mr. Chairman.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Minister Ng. Any other questions on page 7.
Page 8, are there any questions. Mr. Tootoo.
On this page here it says Finance and Administration O&M under Fiscal Policy and Expenditures management.
There is 6.2 million dollars there for lease costs associated with commercial properties.
I wonder what properties those cover.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Mr. Chairman, these dollars are specific to all the Nunavut Construction Corporation commercial properties, the office buildings and the staff housing primarily in decentralized communities as they came on stream and they need to finance the lease payments from those properties coming on stream.
That is what this figure composes.
I am sorry, I am told it is the office only.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Minister Ng. Any other questions.
Would it be possible to get a break down by community as to what those costs are.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: I don't have it with me but we can provide that information.
Mr. Chairman, this is a considerable amount of money and I am just wondering if the government knew or anticipated that these leases would be coming on, why would they not have been in some way put or planned into the budget so that we would not be looking at supp-bills like this.
As you know, these Nunavut Construction Corporation contracts were negotiated with the Federal Government.
It was a part of their arrangements, so once they came on stream we assumed the liabilities for the rent payments but at the same time we also received the revenue in our formula financing agreement payments to cover off those costs so basically it is an in and out charge.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Minister Ng. Any other questions on page 8.
Turning to page 9.
I just wanted a clarification on the Directorate transfer of 1.4 million and page 11 dealing with Public Works.
I would like a clarification.
I think I understand but when we turn the pages again there is a section in there pertaining to Public Works.
The question I have is for the next page.
You are asking yourself questions.
I think that was just a general comment.
Mr. Chairman, here again under operations there is just over 6 million dollars there for lease costs for commercial and residential properties.
I was just wondering if I could get a breakdown of what those are for.
It is my understanding that if the member is referring to the 6 million 231 thousand, these are additional lease costs that are non-NCC lease costs for additional commercial and residential properties.
Mr. Chairman, I am wondering if he could give a better breakdown of where and what properties those are going to cover.
Yes, Mr. Chairman we will get the appropriate information from Public Works and Services and provide that breakdown as well.
Mr. Chairman, here it talks about leases for residential properties, I am just wondering if these are, what types of residential properties are these.
Are they strictly for staff housing.
Yes they would be Mr. Chairman.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Minister Ng. We were on page 11.
As there are no more questions on this page, let's turn to page 12.
This 800 thousand dollars that will be expended by the Department of Community Government & Transportation.
Will the fuel price increase effect any of the funds going to the Hamlets out of this 800 thousand dollars.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: I don't believe so Mr. Chairman.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Minister Ng. Mr. Arvaluk.
Mr. Arvaluk (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, could he answer without guessing, because I would like to know.
Could you give him an appropriate answer.
Thank you. Minister Ng.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: No.
I beg the committees' indulgence.
There is one last question to ask in relation to those lease amounts on page 11.
I am just wondering as I asked on the other ones is why those leases weren't incorporated into the budget planning process so that they would already have been aware of it, or is it just something that we just all of a sudden needed extra.
Why weren't they forecasted and put into the budget.
Primarily the reason Mr. Chairman, is that although there was general acknowledgement of the fact that there were leases, the amounts weren't finalized.
There were some outstanding leases and there was some uncertainty around it.
Public Works wanted to put some certainty around that before they put forward a request.
So we didn't just want to plug in an arbitrary number and allowed them that leeway of putting together that information and then coming forward to the Financial Management Board for that financing.
Mr. Chairman, I am just wondering then are these new leases or are they just existing leases that were there before.
Mr. Chairman it is a combination of both.
There were new leases that were entered into in addition to existing leases that might have been extended.
So that's why there were some that were carried over, some that we entered longer-term arrangements. That's why they needed the time to sort out exactly, dealing with the dozens or even hundreds I guess, of leases that the department would have with different landlords.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Minister Ng. We are on page 12.
Turning to the next page, page 13.
Any questions regarding this page.
This transfer from Community Government to the Transportation Division of the Community Government & Transportation, is that how I understand this very vague explanation.
Mr. Chairman, that is an internal re-allocation from the O and M side to the Capital side within Community Government & Transportation.
On the projects that are listed there, I am just wondering are these all emergency related problems or are any of them carried over from previous.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Mr. Chairman, I am not sure which page the member is referring to.
I was on page 13 on the 500 thousand and there’s no listing for projects on that specific item. Thank you.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Minister Ng. We are on page 13.
Mr. Tootoo: I guess I’m behind the times Mr. Chairman, I was looking at page 12, I was wondering if I can get an explanation there on those new projects.
Mr. Tootoo is posing a question pertaining to page 12, let’s go back to page 12.
Could you respond to Mr. Tootoo’s question please Minister Ng.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Mr. Chairperson, again this is an internal re-allocation from Community Government & Transportation from O&M side to the capital.
It’s not a special warrant.
It is just a regular internal transfer and a regular appropriation request. There is no determination if they're urgent in nature but certainly the departments felt that they have to be carried out.
That’s why the requests were approved and put forward, in the supplementary appropriations.
Mr. Chairman, just looking at the projects here, the mobile equipment repairs and we can understand that, the water problems they're having, the retrofit mapping project. It says a new loader for Pangnirtung, and I’m just wondering if that’s a result of another one they had, that broke down or what is the rationale behind that.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: The community currently has a 1987 cat 936 loader, which was retrofitted in 1997 at a cost of 70 thousand dollars.
The typical life cycle for a loader is 12 years, the intent is that the old piece of equipment would serve as a back up, and operate in conjunction with the new loader.
The primary reason Mr. Chairman is the community as a decentralized community, demands on the loader have increased substantially in trying to meet the needs of expansion.
So that’s why this request has been put forward.
Mr. Tootoo: I was just wondering if similar analysis was done for the other decentralized communities on whether if they're in the same boat or not. If not I guess I’m just wondering why.
Minister Ng
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Mr. Chairman.
If there was a need Community Government and Transportation, I’m sure, would have brought forward a request for these communities.
I can’t say if that department undertook assessments, but it might have been specific to this community because they might have brought forward a request to the department.
The department would support it and bring it forward to the Financial Management Board.