EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
The minister indicated that his department has no plans at this time.
The standing committee was very pleased to note the minister’s statement of March 18, 2010 in which he announced in the House that the US proposal to up-list the polar bear under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species was defeated at the meeting in Doha.
The standing committee applauds the department for its hard work and collaboration with its partners in ensuring that Nunavut’s values and interests were taken into account.
The department’s 2009-2010 business plan indicates that “with Nunavut’s rapidly growing communities come the challenges of managing waste in an Arctic environment, particularly given Nunavut’s aging waste management infrastructure.
The 2009-2010 business plan also indicates that “a lack of modern community waste management infrastructure impacts compliance with the Environmental Protection Act.”
The department’s draft 2010-13 business plan does not clearly address this issue.
The strategy “sets out a harmonized framework to manage discharges from more than 3,500 wastewater facilities in Canada, many of which are currently in need of repair and upgrading.”
The strategy also indicates that “due to the extreme climatic conditions and remoteness of Canada’s Far North, a viable means to improve human and environmental health protection needs to be carefully considered.
The minister’s report indicated that “Nunavut, Québec and Newfoundland did not endorse the document.”
The report also stated that “Nunavut agrees in principle with the strategy but is extremely concerned about costs associated with implementation and the lack of direct funding options.
Nunavut will certainly support the strategy when funding is more definitive.”
During one of the minister’s previous appearances before the standing committee, members were advised that it would cost the GN approximately $500 million to implement this new national strategy.
During the minister’s recent appearance before the standing committee, members again questioned the minister on the status of the department’s work regarding the Canada-Wide Strategy for the Management of Municipal Wastewater Effluent.
The minister indicated that his department is working with Community and Government Services on the location of new landfills and is looking into incineration projects.
The standing committee encourages the two departments to also continue working closely together with respect to the development and management of such infrastructure as sewage lagoons and landfills.
In March of 2009, a Nunavut Wildlife Symposium was held in Rankin Inlet.
The symposium was held to address such issues as the “handling of wildlife in research and the integration of science and Inuit traditional knowledge in wildlife research and management.”
The standing committee notes the Minister’s Statement of March 10, 2010 in the House titled, “Development of New Research Methods for Polar Bear Population Studies.”
Members are encouraged to see that the department is incorporating concerns from elders and hunters to use less invasive methods for wildlife research in Nunavut.
The department’s 2010-13 business plan indicates that one of its priorities is “conducting sealskin marketing and public education projects as part of the Nunavut Sealing Strategy implementation.”
Members also note that the Department of Economic Development and Transportation’s 2009-2010 business plan indicated that one of its priorities has been to “identify new markets for seal skins.”
The Department of Environment’s 2010-13 business plan indicates that its priorities include “continuing inshore fisheries development, including a summer turbot test fishery in Cumberland Sound” and “expanding the coastal resource inventory project to more communities across Nunavut.”
Members encourage the department to also explore the development of test fisheries in other communities where potential exists for commercial harvesting.
The standing committee was pleased with the federal fisheries minister’s announcement on November 9, 2009 of a 1,500-tonne increase in Canada’s turbot quota.
The announcement indicated that Nunavut would be receiving 90 percent on this increase.
During the minister’s appearance before the standing committee, members questioned how the minister is working to ensure Nunavut is able to take full advantage of this increase.
The minister indicated that he will lobby the federal government for more facilities, such as fish processing plants and small craft harbours, which are crucial to increasing Nunavut’s ability to take advantage of this turbot increase.
The standing committee looks forward to ongoing updates on this important issue.
On January 15 of this year, the Government of the Northwest Territories introduced a 25 cent fee on plastic and paper bags that will go towards funding a waste reduction recovery program.
During the minister’s appearance before the standing committee, members questioned if his department has looked into introducing a similar fee for Nunavut.
The standing committee encourages the government to carefully consider introducing a similar initiative in Nunavut and looks forward to ongoing updates on waste reduction initiatives.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my opening comments on the 2010-11 main estimates and 2010-13 business plan of the Department of Environment.
I do not want to make a lengthy comment, but I want the minister to be patient with me as I ask my questions when we get to I-5.
In your opening comments, I don’t know how much spillage you said there was of hazardous materials as we did not hear of them either from the media.
My question regards your opening comments about the spills of hazardous materials.
How much of the spills came from residential sources?
I don’t have that exact information in front of me, but my understanding is that a very small percentage of the 57,000 litres, I think, that were reported in the 146 occurrences that took place, very few of them were to homeowner fuel tanks.
I have no more members on my list for general comments. We will now proceed to the page-by-page review of the departmental estimates starting with I-4. Environment.
Branch Summary. Corporate Management. Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $3,867,000.
Chairman: We will go to I-5. Branch Summary.
Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $16,272,000.
Under I-5, I need some clarification here. You have Grants and Contributions for $1,891,000.
If you go to I-6, Summary of Grants and Contributions, on the top part is grants, $150,000, and the contributions part is on the bottom for $1,891,000.
That should total to $2,041,000.
Why is Grants and Contributions on I-5 only $1,891,000? Where is the grants part on this page?
If I could take the member back to I-6, I believe he says that the total of the grants is $150,000 and then the total of the contributions, if you look above the $1,891,000, is $1,741,000. When you add those together, you get the $1,891,000.
I should have worn my glasses.
Mr. Chairman, on the grants part, you have Program Management in the Summary of Grants and Contributions of Disaster Compensation.
Can you tell me what it covers?
The Disaster Compensation Program at present, with the criteria we have, will cover anything that is a natural disaster and there is criteria set out for that.
I could also state the process of how that compensation is awarded.
So that has nothing to do with the disaster we just had from the export ban on polar bear hides.
Hon. Daniel Shewchuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The member is absolutely correct on his statement.
Will the minister then be putting forward a supplementary budget for the spring session to cover that disaster from the export ban on polar bear hides?
Hon. Daniel Shewchuk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. No, there are no plans to do that.
I think we discussed this in the House that I am meeting with all of the affected communities in Baffin Bay to explain the options that are available to them. It’s actually next week, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Arvaluk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am little bit confused.
How do you determine what is a disaster and what is not?  The export ban on the Baffin Bay polar bears has a disastrous effect on the hunters and the sport hunting programs.
There has to be some kind of compensation made because there is a definite amount that is lost in each of those three communities that have direct effect of that export ban.
Is there at least a plan to discuss the effect of that disaster with your cabinet?
Again I will state, no, there are no plans.
We are going to visit the communities next week that are affected by this.
Along with ED&T, we are going to explain the programs and other options that are available to pursue other tourism and outfitter industries that are there.
The answer is no, we are not going to look at any type of program like that.
Your department’s draft 2010-11 main estimates include $80,000 in disaster compensation funds, which is the same as the previous year.
Has this amount of funding been adequate and if not, has your department looked into increasing the fund?
Thanks for the question.
Yes, this amount of funding has been adequate and it has never been completely all used up.
In your department’s draft 2010-11 main estimates, the amount of funding for hunters and trappers organizations has not increased from previous years.
On March 23 of 2009, you committed in the Legislative Assembly to review the amount of funding provided to HTOs.
What is the status of this review?
The funding contribution to HTOs and RWOs has been looked at. The funding has not increased.
However, the end increase to funding to RWOs and HTOs has been through other sources of funding that they have received.
So this has been reviewed and at the present time, there is no intent to increase that funding.
I have no more names on the list here.
I want to raise a question while we are in Program Management with respect to the caribou population study in the South Baffin region.
I am unsure whether this issue falls under your department, but I do know that the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board has sent out information regarding this matter.
I wonder if this population survey will commence this year and if so, what the approximate end date of this caribou population survey is.
I would just like to ask for clarification from the member if he is speaking about his own community and the area or is he talking about the planned survey that’s coming up with the NWT and Nunavut for the western Arctic.
But I believe he’s talking about his own area, I think.
Chairman: Mr. Komoartok.
I’m talking about the Pangnirtung area and also Qikiqtaaluk.
I believe there was a news report a few weeks ago from NWMB indicating that they want to do a caribou numbers survey on Baffin Island.
I believe I responded partially to this and the member in his question in the House too.
Consultations are taking place very soon and once those consultations are complete, an action plan will come up on doing the survey.
Also, in conjunction with this, which I made a statement on, we are completing a caribou management strategy for the entire territory of Nunavut. So that will also assist us in completing the survey.
Mr. Komoartok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. His response raises another question with respect to sealskins that are sent down south for auction.
I believe that in the last auction, the skins were selling at much reduced prices, at approximately $25 to $35 per pelt.
When Nunavut residents purchase tanned pelts from the sale of these same skins, they have to pay upwards of $90 to $110 per pelt.
However, these companies are able to purchase these skins on the cheap, so to speak.
Shouldn’t they be offering discounts or incentives on tanned pelts coming back to Nunavut for retail sales?
The member brings up a very good point in the sealing industry.
As the House knows, we are continuing our fur program and our seal program, as has been in the past, even due to the low price of sealskins. We had quite an inventory of sealskins in the south at the auction.
However, we offer the program, as the member has stated, and that is the cost of getting those seals tanned and returned to Nunavut is the price of why they are.
We have actually, out of those 11,000 skins, probably brought back about two-thirds of them to Nunavut for individuals to buy, for businesses to buy, and also in our involvement in Arctic College programs with our fur dressing programs too.
So that is the price that we have to pay to get them back.
It’s not the price that we set; it’s the price of the cost of the auction and the price that they have to sell it back to us.
I want to thank the hon. minister and his officials for being here.
As you know, Baker Lake is the only inland community, not only in Nunavut but in Canada. We are very proud of our land. We’ve got rolling hills, great landscape, the scenery is amazing, and our waterways are amazing.
They are even accessed and shared by many wildlife tourists every summer.
We get them from all over and if not, even in the winter, we get a lot of the Kivalliq coastal communities coming inland to go hunting and we’ve got a lot of wildlife over there.
We the people of Baker Lake are very proud of where we come from and with it, we have, as you know, the Thelon Game Sanctuary and the Thelon River as well as the Kazan River being a Heritage River.
But I have mentioned as well before that the Back River holds a lot of significant historical values to the people of Baker Lake with other ties to other communities, such as the Kitikmeot and Nattilik extended family members.
With that, specifically the group of people who come from the Back River area have contributed a lot and majorly into the world of arts as well as cultural awareness. We’re very proud of that aspect.
I was glad to see before in the minister’s opening comments mentioning the possibility or potential of having Back River recognized as a Heritage River.
We would very much welcome that opportunity to preserve and also enhance our cultural identity, not only as unique Inuit but also as Canadians.
I wanted to see at this stage: what would the process be in order to get a Heritage River recognized and how long would the process be?
I thank the member for that.
I think, by the statement that I made today, our commitment is shown by our department to support the request of the member in the Back River being named a Heritage River.
I must be honest, though, and say it’s a very long process. It is a nomination that first takes place and then in 2011-12, we plan to have a more in-depth community consultation with the community of Baker Land. From that, it goes on through the whole process.
It is a lengthy process, but we are committed to it, it’s initiated, and I assure you that we will follow through with this process.
I’m glad to know that there is a process in place and we are aware that it takes procedure, it takes time, and it won’t happen very quickly.
It may not even happen during our term of office, but in the meantime, it’s good to see that there is some commitment.
I guess what I just want to express as a comment, Mr. Chairman, to share with my colleagues and the rest of Nunavut is that for example, Kazan River, you can go from Saskatchewan and end up in Baker Lake. You can also end up in Great Slave Lake right down Thelon to Baker Lake.
We get a lot of wilderness travellers and a lot of tourists.
I think it’s exceptional that Nunavut would be able to identify that, and I say that humbly and without favouritism for my community or even distinctly my relation to the people of Back River. I think it’s just more or less to enhance the heritage aspect of it.
I think that’s something that is very unique to the rest of the world and I have been emphasizing that as well.
We have different needs that are different from Canadians, but we also have the same rights as Canadians in order to provide our landscape and to be able to protect.
I just want to share that with a comment.
Mr. Ningeongan (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Your department’s draft 2010 -13 business plan indicates that the evaluation of the Conservation Officer Trainee Program was completed in October 2009 and 27 recommendations were provided.
Can you provide an update on this issue?
I thank the member for that very good question.
We are so very much interested in this trainee program to offer conservation officer positions to beneficiaries.
We had this program operate once already. It’s being reviewed. The review has been quite in-depth.
The plan is to initiate another intake of three trainee positions coming this fall.
I don’t have any more on my list here, so we will go to Branch Summary.
Environment. Program Management. Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $16,272,000.
Chairman: We will go back to page I-3. Department Summary. Environment.
Detail of Expenditures. Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $20,139,000. Agreed?
Chairman: Are members agreed that we have concluded Environment?  Some Members: Agreed.
Chairman: Does the Minister of Environment have any closing comments?
Hon. Daniel Shewchuk: I do. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Again I would like to thank all of my colleagues around the table for contributing to the work and the efforts of the Department of Environment and serving the people of Nunavut as best we can.
I would like thank my witnesses, Simon Awa and Camilius, for supporting me and providing me with documents.
Today, I would just like to make a special “thank you” and that’s to my staff upstairs, Susie Alainga, who brought her brand spanking new little daughter in to visit us today, and Susie Arnaquq. A very special “thank you” goes to my Executive Assistant, Tracy Hughes, who was working 24/7 behind me all of the time. So I would like to send her a special “thank you.”
Thank you all, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to thank you and your officials for showing up.
I am advised that the Premier is not available to appear before the committee at this moment, so we will proceed with the review of the main estimates for the Legislative Assembly.
I would now like to ask the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut to make his opening remarks.
Bill 22 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2010-2011 – Legislative Assembly – Consideration in Committee
It is a pleasure for me to appear before members today to present the 2010-11 main estimates and 2010-13 business plan for the Office of the Legislative Assembly.
The proposed 2010-11 operations and maintenance budget for the Office of the Legislative Assembly is $15,508,000.
This represents a moderate increase of just over 3 percent from the Legislative Assembly’s 2009-2010 main estimates.
Over 75 percent of our budget increase is accounted for by the upcoming establishment of the Electoral Boundaries Commission, which will be established later this year. $400,000 has been allocated for the commission.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Chairman, in addition to highlighting our operational priorities for the coming fiscal year, I would like to update members on the status of a number of our ongoing initiatives.
As members will recall, The Order of Nunavut Act was passed by the Legislative Assembly at our last sitting and came into force on January 1 of this year.
The Act establishes the Order of Nunavut Advisory Council, which is chaired by the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly.
Its other members are the Senior Judge of the Nunavut Court of Justice and the President of Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated. Support to the council is being provided by the Office of the Legislative Assembly.
As chairperson of the advisory council, I was honoured to convene its inaugural meeting last year.
I am pleased to announce today that the council has begun working towards our goal of unveiling the designs for the order’s insignia on July 9 of this year.
Nominations for the order will be opened on that day and the council looks forward to the first investiture ceremony taking place on July 9, 2011.
(interpretation) As I noted earlier, an Electoral Boundaries Commission is planned to be established this fall.
The Office of the Legislative Assembly and Elections Nunavut will be collaborating on a number of preparatory technical steps over the coming months so that the commission will be able to begin its work immediately upon the appointment of its members.
Mr. Chairman, the Third Speaker’s Youth Parliament will be held this fall.
We look forward to again hosting young Nunavummiut and future leaders in this Chamber for a week of learning and fun.
Later this year, I also look forward to launching the Bringing our House to your Home: Speaker’s Parliamentary Outreach Program and Community Mace Tour.
It is my intention to visit schools and elders’ facilities in a number of communities across the territory over the coming years.
These visits will help to improve awareness of our Assembly’s procedures and activities and contribute to a greater understanding of our distinctive style of consensus government.
I am very pleased to report that Premier Aariak and I have undertaken preliminary discussions about jointly undertaking these visits as a team.
(interpretation ends) Mr. Chairman, under the direction of the Management and Services Board, the Office of the Legislative Assembly continues to undertake improvements to the services and infrastructure supporting the work of members.
These include upgrades to audio-visual and interpretation equipment, as well as a redesign of the Assembly’s website.
That concludes my opening comments, Mr. Chairman. I would like to thank members for their ongoing support and I welcome their comments, suggestions, and questions. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, I do.
To my right is John Quirke, the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly, and to my left is Michael Rafter, Director of Corporate Services.
Hon. Louis Tapardjuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also want to welcome the Speaker and his officials to the witness table.
I wish to speak to this matter as I am very proud of the initiative to create an Order of Nunavut. This is intended for all of Nunavut. Once approved and passed, the Order of Nunavut will be another point of pride for our residents.
I believe it was last year or the year before when we discussed an Elders’ Parliament. If you recall, we held a Youth Parliament and are in the process of setting up another one.
I asked about this issue previously with respect to the Elders’ Parliament that was held in Québec City.
I would like to know if this is an idea with merit and if we could consider it down the road. This idea of holding an Elders’ Parliament, Mr. Chairman, I would first like to ask if this will occur.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I also thank Mr. Tapardjuk for his question.
We are aware of the subject raised in his previous question and we have conducted research on the matter.
The Management and Services Board has analyzed this situation.
We reviewed this matter, but we agreed that we will not create an Elders’ Parliament at this time.
The reason for holding a Youth Parliament is to expose young people who may wish to pursue a public career and it allows them to think about their career path in government if they so desire.
Also, as I said earlier, we will be touring the communities. We are currently planning and organizing for this tour where we want to present ‘Bringing our House to your Home.’
This tour will include visits to local elders’ facilities.
At this time, we agreed to defer the idea of an Elders’ Parliament as it is not considered a priority item by the board.
I also thank the Speaker for his detailed response.
We can claim that this government passed two language bills, namely, the new Official Languages Act and the Inuit Language Protection Act.
In my opinion, the operations of the House should have the appropriate written documents and signage in all of the official languages. I have already discussed this issue of signage with the Clerk.
Consider for a moment the badly done sign inside this House, which I find embarrassing. I am referring to Nunavut Sanginivut.