EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
We are working with HR to fill these positions. These are funded positions and we would like to have them filled.
If they’re not highly technical in nature, our first priority would be to fill them with local beneficiaries.
I’ll just anticipate the forthcoming information, including how long these vacancies have been sitting.
Community and Government Services. Directorate. Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $12 million... .
Minister, welcome.
Following your 2017-18 main estimates, in the Office of the Fire Marshal, there are positions that you want to realign or rework the job descriptions or something like that. Your department is not only combining the Office of Fire Marshal with this Inspection Services Division; it is also proposing to add five new PYs to the Inspection Services Division.
Why are you setting it up like that?
If I understand the member’s question correctly, I believe he’s talking about realigning, changing, and moving positions.
We were approved new positions last year for the Emergency Management Division and we are putting an emergency coordinator program, I believe they’re called, in each region and one in Pond Inlet. We are also moving the assistant fire marshal position from Pond Inlet to Iqaluit.
That position is being replaced by one of the emergency program coordinators. Plus we are also getting building inspectors for each region.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, you’re moving jobs and on top of that, you want to create five new PYs for the Inspection Services Division. Are you creating five new PYs?
Yes, the member is correct. These new positions will be to fulfill our mandate to do inspections for safety and standards and fire regulations.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, I’ll stop here for now. Thank you.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) Community and Government Services. Directorate. Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $12,353,000.
Chairman: Thank you. J-5.
Community and Government Services. Local Government Services. Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $86,359,000.
Mr. Enook: Nice try.
In regard to search and rescue organizations, these two policies are specific to that area, but they have long expired. I believe they expired about seven years ago.
These policies are related to local search and rescue organizations. I am also of the mind that these are good foundations and they should renew these policies annually.
Members keep asking when these policies will be tabled and wonder why these policies are never released.
What is preventing the policies from being renewed?
They previously existed and once their expiration date was reached, it seems no other policies can be released.
I’m hoping to table that policy this sitting.
My colleagues, I would like to remind you that if you have a question, please raise your hand ahead of time.
The minister indicated that he would like to table those renewed or updated policies during this winter sitting. Is there a possibility that you might now be able to table those policies during this sitting?
There are processes that have to be done. The policy is complete and my goal is to table it this sitting.
Again, in the 2017-18 main estimates, your department’s Community Support Division includes 11 positions.
On February 27, 2015, during the Committee of the Whole’s consideration of your departmental estimates, you indicated that you would have meetings with municipal councils to hear any concerns or challenges that they may have and to look at mobile equipment and other infrastructure to see if it was properly maintained.
How many communities did your department’s Community Support Division meet during the 2016-17 fiscal year?
This is one of the vacant positions in Cape Dorset and we are doing our best to fill it.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Do I understand that there were no meetings held through that division?
We’ve had one meeting in Pond Inlet and one meeting in Rankin Inlet.
A regional engineer, which is a part of the team, has been to most of the communities, I believe.
During those meetings with the municipal councils and hamlets, did you identify any outstanding areas of concern?
I was reading too quickly.
Just to make a correction, we have what was written now that there’s a position in Pond Inlet; we have not had a meeting in Pond Inlet, just to correct myself.
The bulk of the concerns from the communities have been about water and wastewater.
Local Government Services.
Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $86,359,000.
On J-6.
Informatics Planning Services.
On J-7. (interpretation) We have approved J-6 and we are now on J-7. (interpretation ends) Community and Government Services.
Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $108,790,000.
If we’re on page J-7, I have a question.
Members of the Legislative Assembly have raised concerns and asked questions regarding the lack of office space.
In its 2014-17 business plan your department had indicated that one of its priorities for the 2014-15 fiscal year was to “Finalize Office Space Strategy and implementation plan.”
However, to this day your department has not made any such office space strategy available to us.
Does your department have any plans to finalize an office space strategy for the territory?
The office strategy study is not done yet.
We are working with the client departments to try to find spaces wherever we could. There have been some RFPs put out in some of the communities where we can’t find space locally.
Can you tell us if your department conducts visits across the territory to determine the specific office space needs for each community?
What we do is we ask each client department in each community what they need for office space and that is how we determine what office space is needed, and then we look for the office space and we do our best to find office space.
Like I said, if we cannot find it, there have been RFPs issued in some of the communities.
Can you tell us today how many communities in Nunavut are currently experiencing an office space deficit?
We don’t have the list of who is in the most need, but I can tell the members some of the communities that are in need: Arctic Bay, Baker Lake, Coral Harbour, Gjoa Haven, Iqaluit, Naujaat, Resolute Bay, Taloyoak, Arviat, Clyde River, Chesterfield Inlet, Hall Beach, Kugaaruk, Rankin Inlet, and lastly Sanikiluaq.
You have identified quite a number of communities, but have you identified which communities are in critical need?
Do you have them categorized from urgent need to least in need?
The most critical departments that we have been working with are Health and Family Services.
I didn’t ask this question, but thank you for that extra information.
I tried to ask which communities are in most critical need of an office space.
Maybe it’s Sanikiluaq or Pond Inlet.
Which communities are in critical need today?
The member from Sanikiluaq will probably be happy to hear this, but I believe that Sanikiluaq is in the most dire need of office space.
On his comment, I have already known that for about five to seven years now.
Mr. Chairman, at this time I would like to make a motion to report progress, please.
I’m sorry for forgetting that.
(interpretation ends) I will now rise to report progress to the Speaker.
Mr. Isaac Shooyook.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) This House stands adjourned until Friday, March 3, at 9:00 a.m.
>>House adjourned at 19:40
Friday, March 3, 2017
Pages 3586 – 3647
Opening Prayer 3586
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters 3586
Report of the Committee of the Whole 3646
Orders of the Day 3646
Friday, March 3, 2017 3586
Bill 34 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2017-2018 – Community and Government Services – Consideration in Committee 3587
Bill 34 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2017-2018 – Nunavut Housing Corporation – Consideration in Committee 3610
Good morning to the people of Sanikiluaq and people of Nunavut.
I ask that members remain at their desks so that we can immediately proceed to the Committee of the Whole.
Chairman (Mr. Mikkungwak) (interpretation): Good morning, people of Baker Lake and all Nunavummiut.
Mr. Chairman, we wish to continue with Bill 34 and the review of the main estimates for the Department of Community and Government Services, followed by the Nunavut Housing Corporation and, if time permits, the Department of Family Services.
Does the committee agree that we first deal with (interpretation ends) Bill 34?
Chairman: I would now like to ask the Minister of Community and Government Services if he has officials that he would like to appear before the committee.
To my right is Ms. Lori Kimball, the DM, and to my left is Mr. Darren Flynn, the ADM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Welcome, Mr. Flynn and Ms. Kimball.
Yesterday we were on page J-3.
Community and Government Services. Infrastructure. Following my list of names, Mr. Joanasie.
An Hon. Member: J-7
Mr. Joanasie (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think we are on page J-7 (interpretation ends) under Infrastructure (interpretation) if I’m not mistaken.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Chairman, last year on February 29, 2016 during the Committee of the Whole’s consideration of the department’s 2016-17 main estimates, the minister had stated that the Department’s Property and Assets Management Division was undertaking a program review to update its maintenance management standards.
At that time the minister indicated that this review would help to ensure that the government’s preventative maintenance and lifecycle renewal initiatives would support longer lasting buildings and that the review would be completed during the 2016-17 fiscal year.
Can the minister confirm if this review has been completed and, if so, what specific changes will your department be making to its maintenance management standards, if any?
Hon. Minister of Community and Government Services, Mr. Savikataaq.
The review is still ongoing.
Some of the stuff that we do now is, if there are any new buildings that are being designed, they are designed to be energy efficient; less energy used than normal like light bulbs, better insulation, better doors, better windows.
The review itself is still ongoing, but we are getting the best practices to get more energy-efficient buildings, whether the building is a hamlet office or a hamlet garage or whatever the case may be.
My apologies to the members. We are on page J-7.
Mr. Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning too.
The minister talked a bit about energy-efficient buildings.
Can he state, out of the number of properties and assets that the government has, how many does the government consider to be energy efficient? Can he answer that?
I can’t talk about how many we think are in the category about being really energy efficient, but the two that I can think of right now are the two new hamlet offices. One was built in Arviat and the other in Cambridge Bay.
They have such stuff as the whole buildings, I believe, are LED lighting. I know the one in Arviat is and they have well-sealed doors on there.
In that matter too we’ve got projects where we spend money to make a building or buildings more energy efficient, and then the money is recovered in terms of the efficiencies that we find in operating the building.
Mr. Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Can the minister state how much cost recoveries are saved through this process of having energy-efficient buildings?
I don’t have the exact figures, so I can’t say we do this and we will save 10 percent or 20 percent.
There’s a project that will be going ahead in the Kivalliq and $20 million will be spent and our savings are going to be approximately $2 million a year.
That would be a 10-year recovery on our investment.
Can the minister clarify if he said he doesn’t have that information or he can get that information?
I think it’s one or the other. Can the minister clarify?
Just to clarify, I don’t have that information for any other projects, but I can get the information for Iqaluit because that was a pilot project and that one is done.
If the members want, I can give them the figures for Iqaluit’s pilot project.
Mr. Joanasie (interpretation): Can you hear me?
(interpretation ends) Okay.
We look forward to that information and any other cost savings that the government incurs when they apply energy-efficient practices on their buildings.
Moving on, according to your draft 2017-2020 business plan one of the priorities, and I’m on page 188 of the business plan right at the bottom, the priorities for fiscal 2017-18, the upcoming fiscal year, is to “Work with the Department of Finance on refining the Government of Nunavut’s capital planning process to identify long-term strategic priorities for infrastructure investment.”
Can the minister indicate if your department is planning on making any significant changes to the government’s past capital planning process during the upcoming 2017-18 fiscal year?
One of the initiatives that has been done in that aspect is they’re forming committees. I know you will probably say, “Well, there are all kinds of committees,” but this is another committee that’s going to deal with the capital planning process there.
The rating criteria and prioritizing criteria may be changed by this committee.
We’re looking at any inefficiencies that will be there and stuff that we already do, like the preplanning studies, to make sure that before we commit the budget to a project, the project is feasible and viable.
I’m trying to figure out how. There is the Nunavut Infrastructure Advisory Committee.
I thought that committee would do the ratings already.
Can the minister explain how… . He said that there is a new committee that’s being formed. Is it one committee or multiple committees?
How would they work in relation to the current Nunavut Community Infrastructure Advisory Committee?
I’ll clarify for the member that NCIAC deals with the gas tax and ICCP deals with the GN portion.
For clarification, the gas tax is 100 percent federally funded.
With the other one, we either put in our share depending on which project or we fund it all. If it’s with the New Building Canada Fund, then we pay 25 percent.
This committee will prioritize the GN’s projects; they’re all GN projects, but GN-funded projects.
Also on the same page, in this current fiscal year’s priorities you talk about that your department has begun developing “draft improvement measures based on initial feedback from departments and review of a cross-jurisdictional scan of capital planning processes across Canada.
The primary focus of the improvement measures will focus on the pre-planning and planning phases of capital planning.”
When you did the cross-jurisdictional scan, what did the department find in terms of best practices? What have you learned through this exercise?
The member is correct that it’s one of the priorities to look at the other jurisdictions.
I think one of the outcomes has been that we have to come up with our own prioritization criteria.
How can I put this cleanly?
Down south they have more or less the same system, but they have competition. There are a lot more companies that can bid on projects.
We are limited by the number of companies that can bid on certain projects. The competition is not quite as fierce up here.
The minister stated that you have to come up with your own priority structure or process.
I’m at a loss of how it is currently that you prioritize projects to go into the capital planning process.
One of the things we have done is we have taken the criteria when we look at a project from three… .
If you can look at a check-off list, there used to be three that you check off, whether to prioritize it. Now it’s up to 10.
All the DM departments get together and they go through the criteria as to which projects should be prioritized because we’re all aware that our needs are way more than the funds that we get.
It’s just a sad fact of life that some projects that are dearly needed don’t get approved. We have to approve the ones that are the most critical needs.
Along that same line he says that departments put in their priority lists, but then also there are these, he stated, ICCP and NCIAC. They deal with different funds.
If a department says this has to be above this, would your department listen to the… ?
For example, community X needs a health centre but community Y needs a school. Does Health go forward ahead of Education?
How does your department deal with those kinds of situations?
Before I answer his question, I’ll just give him a brief explanation about the different funding sources.
For example, gas tax is 100 percent funded by the federal government, therefore it’s included in the capital plan, but it doesn’t go through the scrutiny and it doesn’t need the approval process as like GN projects, which are funded by the GN.
As for his question for one community that needs a school while the other one needs a health centre, we would look at the criteria of which is more in need, which is older, which is more used, what capacity is the school at, what the attendance of the school is, whether there are any work-related health issues with one or the other building.
There are many different criteria that are put to it and it’s just based on needs.
Like I stated earlier, our needs are just more than what we are funded with.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) Community and Government Services Infrastructure. Next name on my list, Mr. Akoak.
Mr. Akoak: Thank you. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, colleagues, minister and staff, and Nunavummiut.
Yesterday my colleague, Mr. Enook, touched up on the office space strategy.
In your answer you said that there were some RFP issues.
I’m just wondering what that means, if you can explain it to me.
Maybe I didn’t speak clearly then. RFPs were issued, not issues.
Mr. Akoak: My apologies.
I thought I heard “issues” yesterday. Maybe I was sleeping already.
On page 187, Regional Infrastructure Offices, I have asked about an old building over in Gjoa Haven last year and I didn’t really get any answers, I don’t think, but I have been trying to get a building turned into a shelter of some sort.
I’m going to ask: if somebody checks the building, then who would do the scope of work to see if it’s feasible to renovate a building such as the size of that?
If the member can just clearly state, he didn’t quite ask. Is he talking about GN surplus buildings or GN buildings that are going from one department to another?
I’m talking about an old health centre building over in Gjoa Haven that has been sitting empty and it is now being used by three Family Services employees. Do you know what building I am talking about now?
When any government asset buildings are no longer being used by the department that was using them and the department does not want to use them anymore, the department surpluses the building.
We have a process and the way the process works is first it goes to see if any other GN departments want to use that building for their department’s uses.
If any departments do want to use it, then our department assesses it to see if it’s feasible to use for the purpose that they want to use it for.
It depends on what they want to use it for because there are codes that have to be met and stuff like that.
If no GN department wants it, then it is surplused and the hamlets have the first right of refusal to acquire the property.
Mr. Akoak: How can I put this, Mr. Chairman?
We have no other buildings in the community and every building is almost used for something else.
As you know, all the communities in Nunavut are always short of housing and there are a lot of people on the waiting list. There are a lot of people that are homeless in a sense, but they have been taken in by their families.
I’m trying to find a way to be able to get the building assessed to see if that building would be made available so that it would become a homeless shelter.
Would your department be able to go to my community tomorrow and assess it?
As I stated earlier to the member there, if the client department surpluses it, then it’s offered to the departments.
If the departments don’t want it, then the hamlet will have the first right of refusal.
I’m not sure where in the process that the old health centre is. I believe it has been surplused by the client department, but I would have to verify that. I don’t know if any other departments want it.
I can feel for the member.
I know he’s only looking for a building, but it’s not our mandate about homelessness. That would be to do with other departments.
The process is, if they need a shelter for the homeless, then they should be talking to the hamlet there. Once it’s surplused, the hamlet would acquire the building and they can do whatever they want with it.
The building is in the right place where there’s access to other services. It’s a perfect place for a place such as a homeless shelter. I’ll go on to something else.
For office spaces, I’m just going to use my community again as an example because I know it.
We have three people working in the old health centre, but I believe there is something out that they will be putting it into the present government office. Do you know when that RFP is going to come out to get new offices into that building?
No, we don’t have that information because we work with the client departments.
When the client departments are going to move out of a building, that’s when they would let us know.
As for when there will be an RFP issued for any new office space in Gjoa Haven, no, we don’t have that right now.
From rumours I have been hearing, they would be moved into the present government office.
Ms. Angnakak: Thank you and good morning. Ullaakkut.
I want to ask a question about codes.
Let me just back up a little bit. Remember when the Governor General’s office was here and they said that the schools were not in compliance with fire codes and that, I’m wondering if you could tell me what percentage of facilities within the government at this present time are not in compliance with fire codes or other kinds of codes up to where they should be.
We don’t have that level of detail with us, but any inspections that are done, the deficiencies are noted and they are issued to the schools or the daycares or whatever is inspected.
There should be a follow-up process where they check again to see if the deficiencies are corrected.
Apparently I said Governor General; I meant Auditor General. Sorry.
It was kind of alarming when we read that report and it makes me wonder: if you have an office that looks after this kind of thing, how do you get to that point at that time?
Why were schools and daycares put in that kind of situation, and what has changed now so that that never happens again?
I can’t comment on how those schools got to that stage before the issues were addressed.
To correct it, I believe we do inspections twice a year on schools and other properties now.
Since you do regular inspections now, I would imagine then you have a pretty good idea of where things are at. I know you say that you don’t have that level of detail, but do you know of anything before you that is a real concern at this present time?
There are no major concerns or issues right now because if there was, then we would be dealing with them to make sure that they weren’t big concerns or issues.
I want to go on to something else about what my colleague, Mr. Akoak, talked about, about properties.
I know as the minister, you said that you don’t know what’s coming up in terms of an RFP and that, but do you have a list or does the department have a list of properties that are currently up for disposal or have been identified as surplus?
If the member can just clarify if she’s talking about buildings that are going to be surplused or if she’s talking about leases that are about to expire. I’m just not clear on that.
I was not referring to any leases, just buildings.
I thank the member for clarifying it.
We are compiling a list, but each department has to come up with that list of surplus buildings to CGS.
We’re, I guess you call it, the collector of the lists, but the departments have to give us the information on any buildings that they are not using and they wish to surplus.