EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Members have also taken note of the minister’s recent statement of March 4, 2013 concerning this initiative.
The department’s proposed 2013-16 business plan also indicates that work is ongoing in consultation with Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated and the private sector to develop a revised NNI Policy.
The standing committee notes that the minister tabled the NNI Review Committee’s Summary of the 2008-09 Comprehensive Review Report on March 2 of 2011.
Members will also recall the Premier’s announcement of March 1 of 2012 concerning the government’s internal review of its public procurement practices.
Members look forward to ongoing updates on these complementary initiatives.
The standing committee notes that the 2008-09 NNI Contracting Appeals Board Annual Report was not tabled in the Legislative Assembly until March 22 of 2010.
The standing committee urges the minister to table the 2009-2010, 2010-11, 2011-12, and 2012-13 annual reports of the contracting appeals board in a timely manner.
The 2012-13 Ministerial Letter of Expectation to the chairman of the corporation’s board of directors outlines a number of priorities for the corporation, including pursuing strategic commercial partnerships with the corporation’s subsidiaries in “sectors such as mining or fisheries” and placing “investments totaling $500,000 into venture capital projects.”
The department’s proposed 2012-13 main estimates included $980,000 in funding for the Country Food Distribution Program.
The department’s proposed 2013-14 main estimates include $1,868,000 for this program, which constitutes an increase of approximately 90 percent.
The department’s 2013-16 business plan indicates that one of its priorities for the 2013-14 fiscal year is to “Review the Country Food Distribution Program and delivery of community freezer infrastructure...” Given the attention that has recently been paid in Nunavut to issues concerning food security, members strongly encourage the minister to table an annual report in the Legislative Assembly concerning the department’s expenditures and activities under this important program.
Mr. Chairman, the department’s proposed 2013-14 main estimates include $1,050,000 in funding for Nunavut’s three business development centres, which are the Baffin Business Development Corporation, the Keewatin Business Development Centre, and Kitikmeot Community Futures Incorporated.
On February 26, 2013, the minister tabled an implementation update on the evaluation of business development centres in the Legislative Assembly.
The standing committee looks forward to reviewing this report and encourages the minister to carefully evaluate the results that are achieved by the government’s investment in this area.
The department’s proposed 2013-14 main estimates include approximately $2.5 million in funding for the Tourism Development Program, the Nunavut Arts and Crafts Association, tourism and cultural industries, and the Visitors’ Centre Program.
The department’s proposed 2013-16 business plan indicates that “the comprehensive Tourism Strategy with costed implementation plan” is scheduled for completion within the 2012-2013 fiscal year.
The commencement of implementation, including development of tourism policies and programs, will carry over to 2013-14.
The standing committee looks forward to the tabling of an updated tourism strategy.
The department’s proposed 2013-16 business plan indicates that the department plans to “Complete negotiations with Baffinland for the Mary River project” and “Continue Development Partnership Agreement negotiations with Agnico-Eagle Mines for Meliadine” during the 2013-14 fiscal year.
It also notes that “Similar discussions are anticipated for AREVA’s Kiggavik Project.”
Given the impact that these major projects will have on neighbouring communities, the standing committee encourages the minister to provide regular updates to the Legislative Assembly on their status.
On June 5 of 2009, the Nunavut Transportation Strategy was tabled in the Legislative Assembly.
The department’s proposed 2013-16 business plan indicates that it is continuing to work on the implementation plan for the strategy.
The department’s business plan also indicates that one of its ongoing priorities is to “work with the federal government to advance projects to improve roads, airports and small craft harbours.”
Mr. Chairman, an ongoing priority for the department has been to develop new traffic safety legislation.
The department’s proposed 2013-16 business plan indicates that “A request for public consultation on the proposed legislation will be submitted to cabinet for approval.
If approved, public consultations will begin in January 2013.”
Mr. Chairman, the department’s proposed 2013-14 main estimates include $22,097,000 in grants and contributions expenditures, which accounts for over one-third of the department’s operations and maintenance budget.
This amount includes $500,000 in contribution funding under the department’s Community Access Roads Program.
The standing committee encourages the minister to report annually to the Legislative Assembly on how the department measures and evaluates the success of its grants and contributions expenditures.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my opening comments on the proposed 2013-14 main estimates and 2013-16 business plan of the Department of Economic Development and Transportation.
Chairman (Mr. Ningeongan) (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Rumbolt.
Before we go to questions, my colleagues, if you have any general comments on the minister’s opening comments, I now give you the opportunity.
Welcome, Hon. Minister Taptuna, Mr. Long, and Ms. Winmill.
As everyone is aware in Nunavut, education is the foundation to all to gain employment. With mining operations offering income and wages, families and private sectors are benefiting to enhance quality of life for them.
There is also conscientious awareness of enhanced and improvement of environmental assessment and sustainable development from the effects of environment and wildlife, as for many Nunavummiuts’ vested interest is in the protection and respect of the land and animals.
As Bakermiut have indicated, caribou management is essential and our way of life. It is sensitive and culturally relevant as Nunavummiut.
Many young and old of various backgrounds have also questioned the process of ensuring that the environmental assessment is adequate.
Basically, I guess I want to state as well with the opening comments that it’s encouraging as well to see that the sustainable development aspect of it is also being considered under the umbrella of environmental assessment.
It is also encouraging that the GN is continuing to support the Nunavut Employees Union by increasing the collective agreement progress as well.
With Nunavut Tourism, all of Nunavut can only benefit. It is good to see the department and the minister are also contributing to that as well. As I have indicated in past sittings, Nunavut is a great place to come and visit.
It would be nice to also see enhanced services provided to Nunavut Tourism.  Just as a comment, I’m sure some of my colleagues will also have additional questions or comments in relation to the departmental review.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Welcome, minister, deputy minister, (interpretation) and your finance staff. (interpretation ends) Mr. Chairman, my opening comments will focus on economic opportunities, maybe not so much development because there is really quite a broad range of categories out there that we can focus on.
In my opening comments, I do want to focus on the importance of supporting all sectors of economic activity.
I believe the government is somewhat, in my view, limited in providing services and financial assistance to some sectors, but not to others. I’ll give you an example. If you are a developer, you have no problem, really, doing business with the government.
A major developer or a mining company or an oil company or a huge airline company or if you’re a co-op, you have no problem in getting access to government funding and programs. If you are a Crown agency, somewhat, you could probably qualify for an extra boost from the government in getting your capital requirement to invest into a project. That would, by the way, come through supplementary appropriations or directly through the budget.
So when you look at small businesses and small enterprises out there that are interested in getting government help in terms of even a loan or financial assistance… . It is difficult for many small businesses in communities in our constituencies to get access. Unless they have a proven record, it is almost impossible to get a business loan from the banks, with rigorous financial regulations and rules that are quite complex, even if they have been around for a while.
You may be qualified to get some, maybe not, from the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation.
You may not qualify to get either bridge financing or line of credit, something most businesses need primarily because many of the activities of the small business entrepreneurs are more active in the summer months. So there’s a critical time period before they get some of the contract payments coming in. They need some assistance, but it’s really quite terrible.
If you’re maybe an arts and crafts producer, you qualify mainly if you belong to the Nunavut Development Corporation or its subsidiaries.
So what I’m saying is that if you’re a small entrepreneur out there, it’s almost impossible to get financial assistance from the government.
I’m giving you a broad picture.
What I’m trying to get at is that some of the small businesses must have access to, in my view, the Nunavut Business Development Corporation. They should be able to provide bridge financing or line of credit.
The economic sector is not one that I think, in my view, we should say, “That department is responsible for financing it.” There should be a central loan system of financial programs or financial services not to be picked and divided into that minister over there or this one over here. I’ll give you an example.
Our hunters may have some involvement in trading some of their products because they are also good artists and they may be selling some of the furs they caught. Some of them are trappers.
In order to access the expertise they have on furs and wildlife, their equipment is really quite expensive these days. Most of the time, they need expensive boats because in order to travel, they have to have certain types of boats. They also have to have certain types of snowmobiles.
Now, where can they apply to get these services?
Their only vendor in town is probably the Co-op or Northern store.
If they buy a product from these vendors and finance it through these vendors, they must be charged 28 percent. Most of the time, the 28 percent probably triples. If they miss one-third of their payments, it keeps getting larger.
So they could be paying three times more than they thought they had in the final analysis, yet they don’t qualify for government funding.
Is there a way that the government can broaden the expertise within the government and provide backup help for hunters who need some help in order to survive?
To me, that is one of the most critical poverty reduction assistance, giving independence to hunters and trappers, not just the wage earners in government.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Curley. I can tell you are eagerly awaiting the page-by-page review in order to query the minister, so prepare them at your pleasure.
I have no further names on my list. We just noted that refreshments are ready and we have been sitting for quite some time. We will now have a 20-minute break while we consume some refreshments.
Thank you. We will reconvene after the refreshments.
>>Committee recessed at 18:14 and resumed at 18:35
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Welcome back. (interpretation) I had no more names on my list for general comments on the opening comments.
At this time, we will proceed to page K-4. (interpretation ends) Economic Development and Transportation.
Total Operations and Maintenance. $13,911,000.
Thank you for the opportunity again to follow up in regard to sustainable development.
Recently, the Sustainable Development Branch was transferred from the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs to your department.
Sustainable development’s previous priority is “to take a comprehensive and strategic approach to promoting sustainable economic development and environmental stewardship coordinated with partners to support efficient and effective land use planning, environmental assessment, and regulatory processes.”
How will your department approach the issue of balancing economic development goals with environmental concerns?
When it comes to resource development, we are a partner in that economic development through our Minerals Division and there are six other departments that participate in the evaluation of the environmental processes.
As you know, Mr. Chairman, under the land claims, there is an article in there that, through NIRB, the process is run through and the Nunavut government is a full partner led by the Department of Economic Development and Transportation in trying to balance out the economic opportunities.
Once a process is started through the NIRB process, there are opportunities in there to evaluate and try and determine what the best benefits would flow into Nunavut.
As the member is well aware, we do have a mining strategy that states those principles.
In July 17, 2008, the federal Minister of then Indian and Northern Affairs released “The Road to Improvement,” the report from Neil McCrank.
It had to do with the Northern Regulatory Improvement Initiative. They offered several recommendations.
Three specific ones were “The federal government should, with the collaboration of the Government of Nunavut, NTI, the Nunavut Impact Review Board and the Nunavut Planning Commission, complete the Nunavut Land Use Planning and Impact Assessment Act”; the second one is “The federal government should make completing Land Use Plans for all of Nunavut a priority”; and the third one is “The duplication of efforts by the Nunavut Impact Review Board and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency should be addressed.”
Basically what I wanted to ask in regard to that aspect as well is that on June 4, 2007, the GN announced six principles to serve as a framework for the development of a uranium development and mining management plan.
As the minister is aware, in October of 2011, I had posed a question to Madam Premier under EIA and then followed up as well on June 6 of 2012 with the hon. minister in which he made a statement about the Uranium Mining Policy.
In regard to the McCrank report, in 2008, the federal Minister of Indian and Northern Affairs, then, released the McCrank report on regulatory systems in the north.
The report made three specific recommendations, which are outlined. What is your department’s position on regulatory reform in the north?
I’m reading my mind and brain to try and go back to 2007, but yes, I do recall some of those recommendations.
Mr. Chairman, we participated as a government with NTI and the federal government to make the regulatory process more efficient and timely.
That has been done. The federal government had approved NUPA and, at this point, it’s in the Senate.
Mr. Aupaluktuq: Thank you for the response.
I just want to advise the minister at the adequate time in another forum, I will proceed to ask formal questions in regard to environmental assessment in that regard to further enquire on behalf of the residents of Baker Lake.
In order for me to have my question responded to, I’m going to ask in English.
I applaud you as the Minister of Economic Development for being here today and your deputy. It’s really quite an important because economic development means in short, to me, that Nunavutmiut will benefit from activities that are occurring in their backyards.
We have a large backyard, so it’s pretty tough to survive up here.
Nunavutmiut need to be employed and that should be primarily one of the responsibilities of the department, as far as I’m concerned. It’s not just a game of pick and parcel with that minister who probably wasn’t informed of this kind of stuff. I don’t think we can afford to do that.
I think all ministers, even all MLAs, must push for 100 percent employment, whether it be GN contracts, not just NNI-related groups, but all contracts, large and small.
I can tell you that the Qulliq Energy project up here, expanding that project for the last two years, did not have local Inuit employed.
There was one Inuk employee and I asked the young man how many local Inuit were working up there.
It’s a Quebec company. He said, “I am the only one.”
Isn’t that a shame?
To me, the employment labour pool must be transferred to Nunavut. Block the labour pool from Quebec and Newfoundland.
Our workers should be from Nunavut.
That can exceed the ratio of benefits going to Nunavutmiut in terms of projects and amount of dollars that you’re just spending on contractors.
Plug the loopholes for having the majority of their workers coming from down south. Many of them are labourers. They’re not all carpenters, as far as I’m concerned.
We have those up here.
So that’s one of my comments.
Can the minister commit to helping us out on how to improve and not just concentrate on Article 24, NNI, but push for employment as well?
You have influence in working with other ministers. Can the minister respond to my question that you would do all you can to ensure Nunavutmiut are employed?
I appreciate the member’s comments and question.
Mr. Chairman, I’m not going to respond to the activity that’s happening up the hill there. As a department, we go out there and try and train people, try and train the younger folks. We have training programs.
We create partnerships with industry, developers, and communities to try and maximize the number of people who train within these smaller communities.
There is going to be economic activity to keep our people working. As the member is well aware, resource development, whether it be mining or oil exploration, is one of the key things that makes our jurisdiction get into a better position to actually create revenue for its jurisdiction.
For the most part, it creates a lot more employment and better quality of life for our smaller communities where they can get into wage employment.
I appreciate the minister.
The minister knows and he must understand that our unemployment rate is the highest in the country; it is not even comparable to even those larger unemployment areas within Canada.
No one in the government is really speaking about improving the unemployment rate so that Nunavutmiut are really starting to benefit from projects that we have control over, particularly with government contracts.
I’m not specifically asking each department to do their share; I think the government as a whole, particularly the economic development minister is one of the influential ministers.
Unless we concentrate on improving unemployment rates, we are going into uncharted territory. We do not really care about reducing the unemployment rate because the only way we can really control it is within our own, for instance, close to $100 million worth of contracts. These are significant, but the majority of the government contracts, particularly with the construction and so on, are heading down south.
They’re not being spent up here.
Again, will the minister at least take into consideration that the unemployment rate is unacceptable and that you will also help in reducing it in your role as the Minister of ED&T?
Again I thank the member for the comments and the question. As the economic development minister, we do have data that is collected on a monthly basis and that is posted up on a website for unemployment and employment statistics.
We try and use any kind of data that we can gather to try and find ways to improve the unemployment rate. As I have indicated, we’re working with other departments, partners, and NTI to find ways to train more people out there so that they can actually get more involved in the economy and wages.
I think what you referred to would be beneficial for Nunavutmiut to understand, if it’s released frequently, however infrequent it may be, but if it’s released, it would be good to have it occasionally. I know that in the United States, they take it deadly serious.
It comes out every month. I don’t know how often it comes out here in northern Canada and in Canada, quite regularly as well. To publicize it and make a press release on it occasionally would help for us Inuit, those of us in isolated communities, to understand what is happening with the unemployment rate.
I’m going to switch over to one of the most common issues that we face, which is the NNI Policy, our favourite topic. I was encouraged yesterday that the Minister of Justice and his officials indicated to us that Article 24 was not optional, whether to abide by it or not.
So in my view, specifically I asked the minister whether or not it was legally binding on all departments and all government agencies. I had an affirmative response that a legal opinion has been provided and it was binding on all government agencies.
So having heard that legal opinion that it’s not optional and, therefore, constitutional and must be implemented to ensure that NNI is carried out on all contracts so that we don’t see another project like Qulliq Energy having one Inuk employee, not because of the NNI, then I would like to ask the minister: how will you now enforce that provision that all agencies must comply with Article 24 and NNI?
As the Minister responsible for Economic Development and Transportation, I’m not going to speak on behalf of another minister responsible for a Crown agency. Mr. Chairman, the housing corporation abides by the NNI Policy and so do the other departments, but I’m not going to speak on behalf of another agency that I’m not responsible for.
Are you saying that you don’t want to implement Article 24 or the NNI Policy?
I’m not saying that. Every department strives to abide by Article 24 within the land claims agreement, but I’m not going to speak on behalf of another department that has its own legal opinion on it.
Well, I think the corporate management clearly indicates here that your department, that division is clearly responsible for that policy.
It is clearly mandated to review and make changes. I don’t need to interpret what the mandate from the cabinet is to the minister.
If the minister is not sure whether or not he wants to implement it beyond his own department, he may now have to explain to us why he doesn’t want to go beyond his own department in making sure that the changes that he’s currently conducting will affect all of the departments and Crown agencies, as was stated in a legal opinion which is straightforward.
It is that all agencies must comply. How will you communicate that you’re not responsible for ensuring that all the departments comply once you have done the review of NNI?
I didn’t say that we’re going to enforce Article 24 to another agency or department. As the department under economic development and transportation, we do have a secretariat which is under the department. They enforce the government policy, the NNI Policy, and not Article 24.
I think the minister either is intentionally trying to confuse us because NNI is related to Article 24. NNI itself couldn’t have any teeth into it unless it’s bound by significant legislation that affects and mandates it, and that is NNI.
So if the minister is not sure exactly what his role is, I think it would be simple that maybe you want to transfer that responsibility to some other minister. Would you do that?
I think the member may be confused in Article 24.
I’m speaking specifically of the government policy under NNI. If I can, Mr. Chairman, I would like my deputy minister to go into more detail in responding to that question.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Taptuna. (interpretation ends) I don’t know if you can, but I can.
I will allow Mr. Long to make a comment.