EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
One of the ladies was seriously beaten.
I was talking to the health nurse out there who said that she was black and blue and looking very beaten up.
The hamlet has written a letter to the Minister of Justice, and I would like to ask the Minister of Justice what assurances he could give to the ladies in my community, in fact to all of the residents in Nunavut, that the justice system in Nunavut isn’t failing our residents in favour of the criminals who are locked up for these dangerous and violent offences.
In Nunavut, the government is in charge of policing.
We contract that out to the RCMP, and we lay the necessary charges when the investigation is successful, but that is where our involvement is limited.
The prosecution rests with the federal government here in Nunavut, so the courts are independent of our government.
It’s very difficult for me to deliver the expectations of the victims and new offenders.
Mr. Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you, Mr. Minister, for that response.
I am wondering if the minister could tell us if there is some way that the Government of Nunavut could get in charge of the judges and they would work for us and not for the federal government so that they would deliver sentences under the laws of Nunavut.
Currently, the appointments rest with the federal government for justices in Nunavut.
Under the Constitution, all superior court judges are appointed by the federal government and that remains the same for Nunavut.
We have been consulted on appointments in the past, but that’s where it ends.
Once the appointment is made, the courts are independent of the government completely.
The courts operate under the Constitution of Canada and keep an independence from any government.
Thank Mr. Minister.
Related to this whole issue of dangerous offenders, in our case, in Cambridge Bay, this dangerous offender was released and nobody in town knew that he was coming back to town.
Within a short while of coming back to town, he went on a violent sexual assault spree where he was rounded up tossed back in jail.
I wondering if the minister could tell us a little bit about how the Government of Nunavut and the RCMP work together to track violent offenders so that we know where they are, whether they are in jail or whether they are in a community.
We have been working with the federal government on the National Dangerous Offender Registry and we will continue to work with the federal government.
I know that the federal government is currently working on legislation to make sure that the system is in place, for the sake of the victims, in the future.
Can the minister give us his commitment that the RCMP and the Government of Nunavut will give hamlets and communities sufficient advance notice when a dangerous offender or a violent offender is being released back into our community.
As I said, we’re working with the national government so that there is a system in place for everyone.
I’ve said in the past that there are two present penitentiary systems in the country: some are territorial and other ones are federal penitentiaries.
So, we do not always have information when an inmate serving time in a federal institution is being released.
So, that is why we feel strongly that a system has to be national in scope, so that for everyone, regardless of which institution they may have come from, the community knows that the offender is being released to their home community.
I’m sorry, Mr. Tootoo.
Question 071 – 2(2): Update on Condominium Units
I got caught off guard.
There is still time left.
The clock started ticking again.
Mr. Speaker, my question is for the minister responsible for the Housing Corporation.
As the members are aware, on Friday I tabled a copy of an RFP that was put out by the Nunavut Housing Corporation for remedial work for the condominium units up in the Road to Nowhere subdivision.
I’d like to ask the minister if he could explain exactly what that work entails.
Speaker (interpretation): The Minister for Nunavut Housing Corporation.
The people that are going to be residing in those condos... .
Their houses were inspected and there was not enough fire prevention equipment in their apartments.
But I can say that in August 2004, we put out an RFP to have them updated.
As I’m sure the minister is aware, those units are in Iqaluit Centre, and I was talking to some of the owners of those units.
They were telling me that in fact the architect has decertified the units.
Can the minister indicate if that was the case and exactly why?
I was looking at my information sheet but I do not see anything that the member was asking about, so I will take the question as notice and respond later.
Speaker (interpretation): The minister is taking the question as notice.
Tabled Document 023 – 2(2): Cambridge Bay Elders’ and Youth Reports
Mr. Speaker, I’d like to table the month-end reports, the elders’ and youth reports from my constituency and tell the minister if he gets a chance to read them, they have some very good comments from the elders and youth of Cambridge Bay.
Tabled Document 024 – 2(2): Photos of Abandoned MOT structures in Chesterfield Inlet
I would like to table a series of photographs taken recently in the community of Chesterfield.
As you will notice, the photographs are of abandoned structures located on the old MOT site.
These structures contain asbestos and are located across from the community’s main school.
Mr. Speaker, constituents have expressed concern to me about the need to clean up this site, and I hope to see action on this issue.
Tabled Document 025 – 2(2): Nunavut Fire Protection Strategy Implementation Plan
I spoke of it today: the Fire Safety Strategy for Nunavut.
Item 16. Item 17.
Orders of the day, Item 19, Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters, Bill 4, Appropriation Act, Capital, 2005 and 2006, with Mr. Evyagotailak in Chair.
We will take a break for 20 minutes before we go to Committee of the Whole,
>>House recessed at 15:22 and resumed at 15:56
In the Committee of the Whole we have the following item to deal with: Bill 4, Appropriation (Capital) Act 2005-06.
Mr. Arreak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We wish to continue with the review of the capital estimates for Nunavut Housing Corporation, and once completed, proceed with the review of the Department of Health and Social Services.
Are we in agreement that we will deal with the Nunavut Housing Corporation?
Minister Kilabuk, will you need your officials?
Chairman (interpretation): Do members agree that we have witnesses in the chambers?
Welcome back to the witness table.
For the record, Minister Kilabuk, please introduce your witnesses.
Hon. Peter Kilabuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Although I was with these officials already; Peter Scott, President of Nunavut Housing Corporation; and also to my left, Abraham Tagalik, Mr. Scott’s assistant.
Chairman: Welcome President Scott, for Nunavut Housing Corporation.
Welcome Mr. Tagalik.
We are on page L-11.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, we were almost falling asleep yesterday dealing with these capital estimates.
Yes, first of all, I just wanted to make a comment.
Before we move on to the details, I would like to thank the minister and his officials for coming.
I would like to ask the minister in regards to his response to the standing committee’s questions in the September meeting, there are two.
The dates were December 22, 2004, and yesterday the questions posed by the standing committee have come, why did you respond very late in time?
Is that done on purpose and this information was just given to the standing committee yesterday afternoon.
I don’t think this standard procedure.
Could you respond to that?
I can elaborate to my colleagues here that this was not done, not on purpose, when we gave the information pretty late.
We didn’t have any plans to delay the information in giving it to the members.
Chairperson: Thank you, Minister Kilabuk.
Mr. Curley: Yes, thank you.
I certainly hope so, because it is no laughing matter, Mr. President.
It’s really shameful because this information that was required by the committee involved $1,000,000 fire fund, as well as other allocation funds.
It came in about one or two hours before the consideration of the House, this committee for the housing budget and it really was troubling to some of us.
I am wondering if you could assure this committee that it will not happen again.
I will assure the House that the next request from the standing committees, or members in preparation for our appearance before the Committee of the Whole or in any sitting, we will make every effort to provide the information as soon as we can have it available.
Chairperson: Thank you, Mr. Minister Kilabuk.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): Yes, thank you, for reassuring us.
It would be ideal when we are planning to review the department, the information will help, and I thank you, Mr. Minister.
My next question is in regards to the information we receive in regards to cost per unit went down a bit by about $213,000 that was standardized.
It costs around $250,000 per public housing unit.
We were living in that kind of expensive unit, and if you are homeowner, it is very expensive to build and construct and the cost is still increasing.
Do you think the average cost is going to be closer to the $250,000 range?
I am sure the sea transportation fees are going to go up.
Have you found or looked at cost savings or how to put the cost down?
Yes, we are still using close to $250,000 range per unit.
Also, before the construction of the units there were quite a few over-expenditures.
So at times, the prices would go down in other units and other ones were overspent.
We are going to keep continuing to look at how we can keep the costs down because we rarely get any surplus from our plans.
Now I would like to ask, last year, the units that were tendered out in Rankin Inlet, I think we over-budgeted by $200,000 and they were for labour only.
What is happening to the units that were going to be constructed in Rankin Inlet?
The units that were going to be constructed, we now have plans to start constructing them this coming spring in Rankin Inlet.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): And they weren’t constructed last year.
I don’t think the construction supplies arrived to Rankin Inlet last year.
The units that were going to be constructed last year, are they going to be constructed?
The units from 2003-04, because the tenders and the bids were too high, and because the bids for 2003-04 were too high, are these the same units that we’re talking about that were going to be built in 2003?
These units that were going to be built in 2003 will be constructed in 2005?
Chairman: I would like to remind members that we are on page L-11.
Questions on page L-11, L-11 sorry.
The information that I have that the units that were supposed to be constructed previously, are supposed to have been constructed, and the units that were going to be built by 2003-04 will be constructed this coming spring.
I apologize, Mr. Chairman, the units from 2003-04 have already been constructed.
In 2004-05, they were supposed to be constructed will be constructed this coming spring.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): Yes, if they are going to be constructed, on the labour just last spring they over budgeted by $200,000.
In the Keewatin region, Rankin Inlet construction budget isn’t here.
It is not included here.
How come they are not included here and they were supposed to be constructed last year, but they will be constructed in 2005.
How come they are not included under the Kivalliq region’s budget in the detailed estimates?
The information we have at hand, I don’t know what page he is on.
Perhaps if my colleague can elaborate to me what page he is talking about.
Then I’ll ask President Scott to respond to his question in regards to the construction.
Mr. Curley they are asking you what page you are on.
L-12.
Mr. Curley: Mr. Chairman, mainly for your information. We have the hardware sitting in Rankin Inlet but there is no labor estimates, labor budget in this Kivalliq region capital spending exactly will be, I believe there are three units that will be constructed in Rankin Inlet this coming season, but there is no item on it.
The construction labour only has already been approved during the House, even though they weren’t used in the previous years, they can be rolled back to another year.
The funding that is already been approved, will be carried over.
If that is going to be the case, my question then is in regards to the labour estimates.
In this current fiscal year the bids were over $200,000.
Has there been an adjustment, or have they gone over for the last two fiscal years?
Are we going to see the construction of these units next year?
They will be constructed in Rankin Inlet this spring.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): Then, I have another question.
What I read in the statement, that the official responsible for the NNI Policy, have you had discussions on how those bids will be taken care of because they go way over when they are bidding for contracts with the Government of Nunavut.
They are saying that the reason for that is because of the NNI Policy.
If there is going to be no changes in this trend have you decided on looking at cheaper ways of constructing units?
Or have you talked about the supply only and have the local companies erect the unit?  Have you thought about the alternatives or other options that you might apply?
I will not speak on behalf of the minister who is responsible, but for ourselves, we would like to see more training involved in the construction of these units.
We will implement our plans.
At this time, I cannot respond to the NNI Policy.
Thank you, Mr. Curley for all the questions.
I thank the minister and his officials for coming before us again today.
I would like to follow up on my line of questioning yesterday.
What size of houses would you be constructing in each of the communities that are being allocated housing; two bedrooms; three bedroom; 1,000 square feet; 1,500 square feet?
I will have Peter Scott respond to the question, but I would like to remind the members that if we go ahead with the construction of the units, we will inform you when that will be taking place, and in which community.
Also, we’d like to consult with the communities to see what type of housing or units they would like to see constructed in their communities.
I will pass on the microphone to Peter Scott.
Mr. Scott.
The units that are delivered this year, in particular Cambridge Bay with the triplex, I believe it is a two bedroom triplex, each fill the living units, I believe is a little over 780 square feet per unit.
They are pretty well the same units across the board, with the exception some of the senior’s fourplexes that were delivered.
For next year, delivery with our plan to go ahead with an intensified delivery schedule, we’ll have to discuss with the communities what type of housing that they want, whether it’s large multiplexes, with one bedroom, or if they want larger units.
Those discussions haven’t been held yet with the communities.
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Scott.
Could the minister tell us what the average cost per square foot is to construct a housing association house in Nunavut.
At this time we pay about $330.
Could the minister share with us some information on why it costs $330 per square foot to construct a Housing Corporation house in Nunavut?
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Peterson. Minister Kilabuk.
I’ll have Peter Scott give you further details but, to date, we’ve been using this formula and Peter Scott will give a supplement.  Chair: Thank you, Mr. Minister.
President of the Nunavut Housing Corporation, Mr. Scott.
The total full cost of construction is affected by a number of factors; there is the cost of materials, the cost of shipping, freight, beach handling, cost of land, all of those added up, land development, the foundation system and all of that add up to a very high cost of construction.
Even here in Iqaluit, the construction costs are very high, with new home construction in that same range, in that same area as the public housing construction.
And that’s private construction, done through private firms.
We do go through a public tending process with this last year for material and we’ve gone through a public tending process for labour.
Through that process, that is how we establish our costs to deliver.
Chair: Thank you, Mr. Scott.
Three hundred and thirty dollars a square foot does sound quite high.
I have a 1,600 square foot house in Cambridge Bay, and using that figure, my house would cost $520,000 to construct now.
There might be a few people in Nunavut that can afford $520,000 but I don’t think the average citizen in Nunavut could afford to construct a house.
At that cost, I’m thinking that we’re trying to encourage private home ownership.
How can your ministry encourage that if it’s going to cost $330 per square foot?
If that’s what it’s costing you, then surely it’s going to cost other people.
You have to be in a greater economic scale to purchase materials and get lower freight costs.
Chair: Thank you, Mr. Peterson.
Hon. Peter Kilabuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We know that it’s extremely expensive to build a house and what has been the past experience is that the government has had to give financial support for the construction, and that is the only way that we have been able to get the houses up.
In regards to homeownership, we are promoting it for Nunavut, and we will keep doing so.
We will look at where we can give further support to the potential homeowners.
Mr. Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Two years ago, when I was working with Nunavut Association of Municipalities, we were getting information to do a lobby document for federal officials in Ottawa, and the number cost per square-foot we were given then was $225 per square-foot.
So it has gone up over $100 in a little over two years.
I am concerned that those inflation costs or those escalation costs are $330 today, or when you construct the houses, within a few short years, it could be over $500 to $550 a square-foot.
I am wondering if the minister could comment on what his department is doing to try and control the costs, so that we could afford to build more houses in Nunavut?
Hon. Peter Kilabuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well, it’s impossible to hide, and I think it’s no secret that it’s extremely expensive to build a house up here in Nunavut.
We have had ongoing discussions with the federal government that it costs a lot higher to do construction up here than with the other jurisdictions.
With the houses that we are going to build this year, and since there’s going to be a larger number, we hope that it will reduce the costs for transportation and for buying because of bulk purchases.
Mr. Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to move to the community allocation.
Can the minister tell us if, for example, in Kugaaruk and Arviat, where they put 15 houses into each of these communities.
Will that have a significant impact in terms of decreasing the pressure on the requirement for more housing in subsequent years?
Hon. Peter Kilabuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It definitely will have an impact and put a reasonable dent in reducing some of the pressure for the communities identified.
So it will also have a ripple effect in easing some of the pressure for Nunavut as a whole, because the current allocation that we have in place now is really geared towards extreme measures of trying to address the overcrowding and severe housing shortages, especially in those communities.
Will those communities possibly going to need another 10 to 15 houses in those subsequent fiscal years?
We are certain that the communities will need the same number of houses or even in the excess, but I remind all members that the funding and assistance that we are getting from Infrastructure Canada, which we are using to do this, may not be there, the following year.
We will continue, as I had stated earlier in the House yesterday, that we will continue to lobby the federal government for more assistance to provide more houses in all of Nunavut communities over the next 10 years.
Can the minister confirm for us that when these houses go in into these communities that they will be built in the construction year which they’re approved.
For example, when they go into the communities next August, will they be constructed available for occupancy within that fiscal and not carried over into the subsequent fiscal year?
I’ll remind my colleagues that in the Kitikmeot, they have a two-year delivery cycle.
We are still proceeding to aim at constructing the units in those communities specified.
Chairman: Thank you, Hon. Peter Kilabuk. Mr. Peterson.
Last week, I tabled a 208 name petition from the Cambridge Bay Housing Association, they indicated in their petition that they could have probably got a couple hundred more, more likely.
So there is a great urgency for houses in Cambridge Bay.
At least the people, themselves, who apply for houses are telling us, me and other elected persons, including the Hamlet Council of Cambridge Bay.
Judging by the letters and emails I get, the phones calls, that there is a need for housing in Cambridge Bay.
I’m not exactly sure how your allocation formula worked out.
I’ll have to trust that it was done fair and objectively in the desktop exercise that your officials did.
I know that even as the minister of Housing Corporation, the Member for Pangnirtung, that you are number 20 on the list.
I’m not sure I want to be the minister of Housing Corporation and have to go back and tell my constituents that he can’t provide housing for them, additional housing.
However, Mr. Minister, I think people need hope in their communities that there will be housing brought to them or delivered to them, without hope, what else do we have for people.
They depend on us to bring affordable housing, social housing, public housing, and elders’ homes.
We have to give them hope.
The folks that you are proposing to give housing for are very fortunate.
I’m wondering, Mr. Chairman, if the minister could commit to the members that he will assure that the communities will be moved up in the system in the list when allocating housing in the next fiscal year so that in the subsequent fiscal year, they will receive higher priority for receiving houses than the top seven communities.
That will give some of the people in our communities that there will be housing coming in the future fiscal years.
First of all in response to his first comments about this not having been an easy decision to make.
It definitely was not an easy decision to make, but it was also, at the same time, made easy by the high demand and high need for extra houses in those communities where the pressure is the greatest.
I can assure the member that I can have staff members go over the allocation method that was used to determine the numbers.
It is quite easy to understand.
The other part of his question that this will ease the pressure for the communities not getting houses this year, it definitely will decrease the pressure from those highest need communities now, and chances are that communities not receiving units now will get moved up.
I guess the best assurance I can give my colleague is that once we have constructed and move people into these houses, we will definitely re-evaluate the priority list for all the communities.
Until such time I have had a chance to do so, I don’t want to do any guess work here by saying which communities will move up because it is not my practice to do that, first of all, and secondly, it would only be fair that we give accurate information to my colleagues.
I would like to remind the members we are on capital estimates 2005-06.
Please keep your questions to L-11.
I’m hearing the minister saying he can’t give any assurances or commitment that the other communities that aren’t receiving housing will receive housing in future fiscal years.
I think that is what I’m hearing.
No, I’m not indicating that we will not build houses for those communities not receiving any this year.
Maybe it is my English so I will try this again in my first tongue – Inuktitut.