EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Can the minister tell me approximately how many individuals have hearing problems in Nunavut?
The current statistics that we have in terms of the number of people assessed in Nunavut for that would be 935. Assessments were conducted, but that doesn’t mean that the results are conclusive to that.
Medical devices such as hearing aids are often covered under the Non-Insured Health Benefits Program which is administered by the federal government.
Can the minister clarify for this House what input our government has with respect to determining what kinds of hearing devices are covered under the Non-Insured Health Benefits?
As part of the services that we provide to Nunavummiut, many of the services are covered through the Non-Insured Health Benefits Program and this is one of those areas that are also covered under the Non-Insured Health Benefits Program.
As the member knows, we have the Physiotherapy Division within Health located here that provides the service to citizens in Nunavut. As far as I know, the service is covered under Non-Insured Health Benefits for individuals that require assessment, or treatment, or hearing aids.
Mr. Arvaluk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) Can the minister then clarify whether or not her department has considered the feasibility of offering implants to Nunavummiut who suffer from hearing problems?
I believe individuals that have problems with hearing are treated and I will confirm that. As far as the non-insured coverage, that is in place and coverage is provided to Nunavummiut that require assistance in addressing their hearing.
Mr. Arvaluk: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will the minister then commit to directing her staff to examine the possibility of providing cochlear implants to deaf Nunavummiut who are suitable candidates?
I will raise that with my staff and see if it’s something that we can also cover under Non-Insured Health Benefits if it’s not already covered.
Question 519 – 2(4): Homeless Shelter for Women Update (Peterson)
My question is for the Minister responsible for Homelessness Issues.
Mr. Speaker, last November, a comprehensive study about homelessness among northern women was released on Parliament Hill and it contained a lot of very startling and revealing facts about Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, we know there are shelters for abused women in Nunavut, there’s only five though, but there are none for homeless women.
The minister, in an interview, indicated that he would meet with the Qulliit Status of Women Council to discuss a homeless shelter for women in Nunavut.
My question for the minister: can the minister tell the House what the outcomes of his meeting were with respect to developing a homeless shelter for women in Nunavut?
The report that the member mentions was well documented and very well researched.
It indicated that there was a huge problem, not just in Iqaluit and Nunavut but across the north and in rural and remote areas of the country, when it comes to homelessness for women specifically.
Here in the community, Mr. Speaker, we have been in contact with the YWCA which is a proponent and an advocate to open up a homeless shelter/transition home for women here in the Capital. They have received funding through a program with the federal government for the three territories.
I believe the amount is about $300,000 and we’re just waiting for a proposal from them to see how they would look at bringing forward a transition or a homeless facility or shelter specifically dedicated to women.
It’s a little bit of positive news. Mr. Speaker, in the same interview, the minister is quoted as saying that this study gives the government a road map to deal with homelessness among women.
My question for the minister: can the minister explain to the House why the government had to wait for this important report to be released before the Government of Nunavut had a road map to deal with homelessness among women in Nunavut?
As the House knows and the member knows, we didn’t wait for this road map but, indeed, we’re the only jurisdiction in the country other than the federal government that actually has a Secretariat for Homelessness, number one.
Number two, about 14 months ago, we actually allocated and helped put a program in place at the women’s shelter here in Iqaluit, that when they had vacancy rates, there would actually be some transition beds for homeless women there.
What we have seen from that and what we have seen from the report, in that it’s been documented and now, well researched, is that there is a continuing need for a real shelter for homeless women in the community here.
That’s been documented.
What we need to see is how big this shelter could be and what the actual need is on the ground, and when I suggested to you that it was a road map, that road map or that report suggested that we need to move quickly to open up a facility.
That requires infrastructure money but it also requires O&M dollars to be able to run that facility, and the member knows very well how tight some of those dollars are.
I thank the minister for that information. So you’re saying that money is the root of all our problems or the lack thereof in Nunavut for a lot of important issues.
Mr. Speaker, in the past, the minister has mentioned homelessness versus absolute homelessness in reference to individuals who are homeless in Nunavut. My question for the minister: can the minister tell the House how serious the issue of homelessness and absolute homelessness is among women in Nunavut?
Minister responsible for Homelessness, Mr. Picco.
The people who deal with homelessness on a regular basis categorize homelessness in two ways - there’s relative homelessness and absolute homelessness.
Absolute homelessness, Mr. Speaker, is what we see in the south when we see people on the streets sleeping in sleeping bags and so on. Relative homelessness is what we really see here in Nunavut. If someone was sleeping on the street here, they would freeze.
Relative homelessness is when we have overcrowding in houses. It was documented in this report that you have women with children who had to go from door to door, from house to house. Allegations or innuendo that there could be sexual favours being given, as an example, to get a place to sleep.
So that type of documentation has been in place.
What we do see and we believe right now, based on the best numbers that I have seen and based on the report, there could be as many as 10, 12 or more people who would fit in that category here in Iqaluit specifically. The numbers outside of Iqaluit specifically are greyer and I would suggest to you that the number of women who are in a relatively homeless situation is probably quite large also.
Can the minister tell the House what accounts for the absolute homelessness among women in Nunavut?
There are several reasons why you would see a situation where a woman, or indeed, any person, could be in a homeless situation. In this case when we talk about absolute homelessness for women, in some cases, they have been in relationships which have broken down, where they have been asked to leave the home by the partner or spouse. We have seen situations where people have been unable to find accommodation because of various social and economic conditions.
The good news on the homeless front, Mr. Speaker, is now we have an advocate on the ground: the YWCA. They have a proposal and a plan to look at opening up a facility that will be able to address that need, and that work is continuing through the Qulliit Status of Women Council. I know Minister Aglukkaq has had an opportunity to also speak with the YWCA to see if we could come together with a proposal plan to open up the first homeless or transitional home for women who find themselves homeless here, and then to be able to reach outside of our borders to see what we’re dealing with.
It’s important to point out that many of the women that we’re talking about, and indeed, many of the men who are homeless in the community or in the Capital of Iqaluit, are not directly from Iqaluit. Indeed, Mr. Speaker, they come from different communities across Nunavut and that’s why we need to be able to deal with it in a very proactive but a Nunavut-wide way.
Question 520 – 2(4): Construction of New School in Sanikiluaq (Kattuk)
My question will be to the Minister of Education. It will be a nice, sweet and small question.
As we started this sitting here, we have been talking about the Sanikiluaq new school, so my question is: has he come up with something that this new school will be constructed this fall?
I’ve had an opportunity to speak with the member a few times on this situation in Sanikiluaq, and indeed, through the House over the last few weeks and the member has been a strong advocate for the new school in Sanikiluaq.
The good news, Mr. Speaker, is that the tender documents are almost ready to go out; they have to be tendered and that should happen in the next few weeks.
I would suspect, Mr. Speaker, and the best information given to me by my department as early as late last week was that we would expect to see movement on the ground in Sanikiluaq this construction season. That would mean some site preparation, and so on, sealift will arrive, then the materials would arrive, and then construction in earnest the following year.
Did he say the following year?
I did and what I suggested, Mr. Speaker, was that we would hope to be in a position to have the tender come out in the next several weeks. We would also expect to see site work begin this summer as a preliminary step to the construction of the school. So the people in Sanikiluaq will see work occur this summer and we would expect to see construction begin in earnest in the following construction season and that would 2009-10.
Mr. Kattuk (interpretation): I was waiting long, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, my question was going to be brief but it just got longer because I got the response that I do not like.
Why do they have to wait for a whole month to put out a tender? I didn’t quite understand that, the residents of Sanikiluaq requested a new school in February, so why do we still have to wait another month?
Just very quickly, the tender has to go out first and that should happen, as I indicated, in the next few weeks.
The tender has to go out and when the tender comes back with the construction companies who have bid on the new school and then to be able to marshal and get everything ready for the sealift, and when the sealift comes into the community in July or August, depending on what the timeframe would be for the arrival of that material, as I indicated, that we would start at least the site preparation at the very least this summer and this fall, and then construction would occur the following summer because the material then would be on ground to arrive.
There was a technical concern with one piece of the tendered documents.
I believe that has been corrected now and that’s why I’m suggesting that the tender should be out very soon.
So again, the good news for Sanikiluaq is that the new school is a go, people in Sanikiluaq will see movement and activity at the school site this coming summer, construction should begin in earnest after that period, and the schedule for the new school in Sanikiluaq will be met. The member has to take a lot of credit for that through his very proactive work in the House to bring that project forward.
I don’t know why he had to wait for the next fiscal year for a tender document, but what I think is that he can make a decision now and get the materials into communities this summer and start the construction this fall.
Will he commit to that?
Hon. Ed. Picco: Not letting me off the hook, Mr. Speaker.
I can’t commit to that because I don’t know what the tender schedule will be. Like I said, the information provided to me is that we’re trying to have these documents ready and they should go out in the next few weeks. Again, if I commit to the member to start construction this summer, I don’t know what bids will be, what that price will be, and what the logistics are in getting the material and everything in.
What I have committed to is that the work will begin in the community. If everything goes according to plan, the materials, and so on, will be on the ground, and I said earlier, the construction timeframe that has been presented will occur.
So people in Sanikiluaq are getting a new school.
I can’t commit to speeding it up anymore in having the actual lumber and all that material being on the ground, and having to build this summer. What I can say is that I’ll again speak to our officials this afternoon at the break to see if we can rush things up, to see if we can expedite and be more expeditious, and try to get the project to move.
Question 521 – 2(4): Update on Repulse Bay School (Mapsalak)
I would like to direct my question to the same minister, the Minister of Education.
Mr. Speaker, I believe the member remembers that the school in Repulse Bay has become too small to house the whole school population.
As I stated earlier, they’re even holding classes in the hallway.
Could the minister give us an update on if the money will be in the budget?
I would like to thank the member for his question. Again, on the school in Repulse Bay, just some quick numbers, we’re at about a little over 100 percent capacity in the school; right now, the enrolment is 266 and the capacity of the school is 263, and the information that the member has given is correct.
We have provided a plan in our Five-Year Capital Plan to look at doing an addition to the school in Repulse Bay.
That is still underway and is being committed to, so I think that’s good news for the community.
There are approximately over 900 residents in Repulse Bay and that in the near future, we’re going to have over 1,000 and along with more and more people coming into the community.
Could the minister indicate to the House what year the addition will be built?
One of the things I think people have to remember is that from 1995 to 1999, the capital budget for the Northwest Territories Government was cut in half. When 1999 rolled around, the Government of Nunavut was playing catch-up and we had to replace a lot infrastructure and we’re hearing that here in the House. We have a lot of school projects underway and there are quite a few more that we need to be able to do.
What I can commit to the member is over the next few weeks, we’re going to be undergoing an exercise where we’re looking at opportunities within the Five-Year Capital Plan to see if there are extra monies through the Canada Building Infrastructure Fund to see if we could move programs up, or down, or into the Five-Year Capital Plan.
This is one of our projects that we’re trying to move within the Department of Education.
We have realized the school is over capacity right now, so I can commit to the member that this is one of the projects that we’re looking at to see if we can bring up in the plan to be able to do the addition.
Could the minister indicate to the House how many schools are overcrowded in Nunavut? I know that Repulse Bay is one of them, but are there other schools that are overcrowded.
The member again is correct. There are several schools in Nunavut right now that are at overcapacity or capacity. At the same time, we’re trying to replace our older facility.
I believe this facility was built in the early 80s. We did a renovation to the project in the 1987, I believe. We have a lot of older schools that we need to replace.
In some cases, it may be cheaper to renovate than try to build a school the same size, so we’re looking at, in this case, an addition to the school. I don’t have the numbers right with me on the number of schools that are at overcapacity.
Could the minister give me some information in the near future about the planned funding that will be made available for the addition of the school in Repulse Bay? Could he give me that information as soon as possible?
When we looked at the Five-Year Capital Plan, there was a number a little over $5.6 million that was in the capital plan for the school. Again, that has to be revised and I’m sure the number is going to have to go up because we know that, with the inflationary factors that we’re seeing, especially within the capital plan, those number continue to increase.
What we need to do, Mr. Speaker, is to review the total costs of what we have to do in the community, and then look at that. Again, it will happen over the next six weeks, in cooperation with the House and all the members, to see where we can move the capital plan around to take advantage of some new dollars that we have through the infrastructure program and I can provide that information to the member.
Question 522 – 2(4): Taxes on Per Diems for Medical Home Boarding (Tootoo)
Mr. Speaker, we all know, especially here in Iqaluit and probably in Rankin Inlet and Cambridge Bay, people open up their doors to help the government by boarding patients because they have no room in the boarding homes.
I believe it was three or four years ago, the rate was dropped from $75 a day to $50 a day.
Mr. Speaker, I know the government itself, the per diem it pays out just for meals in Nunavut is $102.65. What the Department of Health is offering these people that are helping them out by boarding people is less than half of what it gives its employees to eat for a day.
Not only are these people losing money by looking after these individuals for the government, but now, I understand in the last two years, the department has been sending them T4s and are actually getting taxed on that amount.
So instead of just losing money at $50, now they’re losing even more because they’re getting taxed on that money that’s been sent to them, too. Can the minister indicate to me and the people out there why they decided, in the last two years, to start taxing people for helping them out?
I believe the taxation laws are federal and we follow the same legislation in any other jurisdictions as it relates to reporting income and taxable income.
As I stated earlier, this only started happening once she was the Health Minister.
It wasn’t being done before; it’s just in the last two years that that’s been practiced. So I would just like to ask the minister: why have they started to do that? I mean these people are probably saving the government at least $150 a day and if they are to put in commercial accommodations, they’re looking at $200 a day.
So why have they started doing that?
As the Minister of Health and Social Services, I am not responsible for the implementation of tax laws.
That falls under the Department of Finance and the Department of Finance implements the taxation laws of the federal government.
The minister delivers that program and pays those people. If there was a policy change or a change in how the laws were being applied, what did her department do to let people know that there was going to be a change?
Like I said, this just started happening in the last two years. So what steps did the minister or her department take in informing people that, “You know what? Now, you’re only getting $50 a day.
We know that’s not enough but you’re also going to get taxed on it now”? Did her department make those people aware of the tax burden that they would be facing as a result of that?
Minister of Health and Social Services... I’m sorry. I will have the Minister of Finance respond to your question. Minister Tapardjuk.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) Thank you for asking that question.
In this particular case, we are talking T4-As and not T4s. The boarding and billeting payments are considered fees for services rendered, so as a result, the department was following the Canada Revenue Agency guidelines for those purposes.
Having said that, I would like to assure the House that the Finance Department is currently reviewing the situation with the Canada Revenue Agency and we will be reporting if there are any changes on that. We are well aware of the situation and we are looking into the matter, Mr. Speaker.
I would still like to hear from the Minister of Health that runs that program what her department has done to inform these kind people that are taking people in and saving the government money, that they’re also going to be dinged for taxes by doing that.
It’s just like I said, it just started happening a couple of years ago for whatever reason, but you would think the onus would be on the delivering department to make sure that those individuals that are helping out our government are informed that they would be taxed on that benefit that they were being provided for opening up their homes and saving the government $150 a night.
Given that, would she also commit to working with the Minister of Finance to look at some type of tax credit to offset that amount for those individuals?
Again, the Canada Revenue Agency Regulations are federal laws, not the laws of the Department of Health as implied by the member.
The information that was outlined by my colleague, the Minister of Finance, is that they’re looking into that, so I think Minister Tapardjuk answered that question. In terms of what we did, I was not aware that they were issuing T4s. That’s not the responsibility of Health; that falls under the Department of Finance’s responsibility in the implementation of tax laws as per the federal law.
So I think my colleague has answered that question and under the Canada Revenue Agency process, he has committed to looking at that further and I have nothing else to add to that.
Question 523 – 2(4): New Pricing Arrangement with PPD (Curley)
Mr. Curley (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) This is a rather short notice but I think the Minister of Energy is quite familiar with the request by QEC to PPD was indicated in one of the briefing documents somewhere that they had asked PPD for a new pricing arrangement with QEC.
Could the minister explain to this House exactly why he wants a new pricing arrangement?
I appreciate the member asking me again so we can clarify it, and hopefully I’ll take my time and I’ll deal with it if the Members in the House would allow me.
First of all, under the regulations and under all the legislation that we have in place, there is an instrument called the FSR, the Fuel Stabilization Rider. It’s not unique to Nunavut; most territories and provinces have it, and indeed, in this case, it came over from the Northwest Territories.
So that the Power Corporation doesn’t have to go forward and put a General Rate Application forward every time the price of fuel goes up, meaning they want to increase all their kilowatt per hour prices, the Power Corporation has the opportunity to come to the minister, in this case, me, as the Minister responsible for the Power Corporation, to say, “We would like to implement a Fuel Stabilization Rider.” It’s no different than that of what we see from Canadian North who puts a rider on when their fuel costs go up, too. They don’t put their ticket prices up; they put a fuel rider on.
So in our case, the Power Corporation receives the fuel rider application, they get that, they put the application together, I receive it as minister, and then I pass that on to the Minister of the URRC, the Utility Rates Review Council.
He submits that application then to the URRC and then they review it. And that’s how the implementation is. It’s not that the minister wants it; it’s something that is done when we look at the pricing structure of fuel and electrical rates in Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, my question was quite simple and the answer is not even related to my question. My question was if QEC has requested a new pricing arrangement.
Right now, the minister knows and I know, but not many in Nunavut are aware, that there are two pricing arrangements that QEC currently utilizes - one is a nominated price and the other is at cost - and there is a discussion between the two departments, at least one Crown agency and the department, that they would like to establish a new pricing policy.
Maybe that’s a little clearer.
Why would the minister request a pricing change when it appears to be working at this moment, except for the public involvement when the fuel stabilization issue is imposed upon the public?