EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
My question is directed to the Minister of the Department of Sustainable Development.
Yes, our way of life is just one culture and the previous request to harvest a polar bear with a traditional method is our way of life.
For safety reasons that individual was denied.
Recently near Rankin Inlet there is a polar bear mauling.
Last summer in one of our communities there was a polar bear that mauled a tourist.
During the summer in the month of August literally every day in the community of Clyde River we have to protect ourselves. It has become a daily task to protect ourselves from the polar bears because they come into our community so often.
In addition, in the Gjoa Haven region they have to protect themselves from the polar bears, because the number of polar bears is increasing.
I am sure they will have to protect themselves also.
In view of that, when the department says the polar bear biologists will deal with the issue on an urgent basis they sometimes over power the Inuit needs.
I don’t like seeing this happen.
I know this is an urgent case but what does an urgent case mean to the minister and his department when the polar bear biologists say they have an urgent case. So my question is, what does he mean by dealing with it on an urgent basis.
Speaker: Minister of Sustainable Development.
Yes. I am not to sure if he is talking about the funding that I alluded to earlier on or is it because of trying to get the polar bears out of the community.
I don’t understand the member's comment about urgent cases.
Perhaps I was too clear on my comment, too simple.
We heard in the past that the number of polar bears were decreasing and when the polar bear biologist says that the number of polar bears are decreasing they work on an urgent basis.
I don’t think that is the case.
I think they should be using the Nunavut harvesters, on the land experts, rather than the polar bear biologists.
I was wondering would it be considered an urgent case when we have polar bears coming into our community on a daily basis, as I stated earlier.
I asked if we could get an employee during the summertime and this individual could be a polar bear watcher to keep the polar bears at bay, so that campers can enjoy the outdoors.
Would this be considered an urgent case.
Our staff with Renewable Resources are working in almost all the communities.
I think there are only three communities in Nunavut that do not have Renewable Resource Officers.
Those are the individuals that work on urgent community cases, and they work with the communities and us.
They can request renewable resources to work with polar bears on urgent issues.
The communities have to work with the wildlife officers, but that is the communities' responsibility.
I just want to state further that just recently this past October there two biologists that came into our community just to scare the polar bears away and there were three Officers in total just to scare the polar bears away.
It became understandable at that time that they used bear bangers, and they are very loud, to scare the polar bears away.
This might damage their hearing.
I was wondering if he could commit to me that they are not just pestering the polar bears because there are too many.
I would like to thank the member for his questions.
Yes, we would like to know how to scare polar bears away using Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit.
So therefore, we have to work together to determine the best possible way to scare polar bears away.
My question is what would be the best way to scare them away.
That will be my question when we are working with the communities.
How can we lure the bears away without abusing them.
I will ask my officials to work with the communities Renewable Resource Officers to find out the best way to scare polar bears away in the communities.
I wonder if his department could do a study in Clyde River and Broughton Island about the frequent visits by the bears and the kinds of problems they are creating.
Because we are losing everything from our shells and ammunition and other things.
Last summer I went out hunting and caught a seal and I made a rope.
The rope was taken by a polar bear, even though making the rope was a lot of effort.
We are losing our equipment and the government or the polar bear biologists are not replacing this equipment.
I wondered if Sustainable Development could do a study to see what kinds of losses we are experiencing in Clyde River and Broughton Island.
Yes, I realize this is a problem in those two communities.
Perhaps other communities as well.
I will look into seeing whether my department can find out what is happening in those two communities, and they can consult with the two communities to determine the real problems there.
The HTO and Wildlife Officers can probably work together to determine what the problems are and we will keep working to try and protect the people in the two communities from the bears and hopefully those officers will do their best to correct that problem.
Tabled Document 061 - 1(5): Nunavut Arctic College Annual Report
I would like to table the Inuktitut and the English copies of the Annual Report of Arctic College.
Tabled Document 062 - 1(5): Letters & Press Release Regarding Nanisivik Closure
I would like to Table three documents.
The first of these is a News Release dated October 29th, Breakwater Resources announcing that the Nanisivik mine will be closed in September 2002.
The second of these letters is dated October 21st addressed to me from Cominco Limited informing me of the mine closure and providing me with additional information.
The last document is dated November 26 from the Hamlet of Arctic Bay addressed to me as the MLA for Quttiktuq.
In the letter the community indicates although the Vice-President of Breakwater has met with the Mayor of Arctic Bay, the Government of Nunavut has not yet contacted the Hamlet on the closure of the mine.
Tabled Document 063 - 1(5): Response to Tabled Committee Report on Income Support
My staff has been working quite a bit.
I would like to table a document in Inuktitut and English in response to the Standing Committee's recommendations.
Tabled Document 064 - 1(5): Report on the Payment of Indemnities, Allowances & Expenses
I have a document members I would like to table.
I wish to table the following document. Report on the Payment of Indemnities, Allowances & Expenses for the year ending March 31st 2001.
Motion 015 - 1(5): Referral of Language Commissioner Annual Report to Ajauqtiit
Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Quttiktuq that the Annual Report for 2000-2001 of the Languages Commissioner of Nunavut be referred to the Standing Committee Ajauqtiit and that the Committee report back to the House at the earliest opportunity with its findings.
Motion 016 - 1(5): Referral of Information & Privacy Commissioner's Report to Government Operations
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Baker Lake, that the Annual Report of the Information and Privacy Commissioner be referred to the Standing Committee on Government Operations and Services for review, and that the Standing Committee report back to the House at the earliest opportunity with its findings.
Bill 13, Supplementary Appropriation Act No. 2, 2001/2002.
Tabled Document 41 - 1(5), the Nunavut Liquor Act Report, with Mr. Iqaqrialu in the chair.
Members we will break for lunch.
Lunch will be served at 12.15 in the Tuktu Room and you will report back here to the Chamber at 1 o'clock.
>>House recessed at 12.03 p.m. and resumed at 1.07 p.m.
Chairperson (Mr. Iqaqrialu) (interpretation): Thank you. I will now call the committee to order.
We have Bill 13, Supplementary Appropriation Act No. 2, 2001/2002.
Mr. McLean: In committee of the whole today we would like to deal with Bill 13 and Tabled Document Liquor Act Report.
Do we agree that the committee will deal with Bill 13.
Does the Minister of Finance have any opening comments.
Bill 13 - Supplementary Appropriation Act No. 2, 2001/2002 - Consideration in Committee
Thanks for the opportunity to discuss the Government of Nunavut Supplementary Appropriation No. 2 for the fiscal year 2001/2002.
The purpose of the Supplementary Appropriation bill is to provide additional funding to the Government of Nunavut for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2002.
This is made up of 37 million 588 thousand 500 for operations and maintenance expenditures and 3 million 459 thousand for capital expenditures.
The operations and maintenance appropriation requirements include 14 million 913 thousand dollars across the Government of Nunavut for increased compensation and benefits costs associated with the NEU collective agreement.
Twenty million 750 thousand dollars to the Department of Health to meet anticipated operational expenditures, and 307 thousand 50 dollars to the Department of the Executive & Intergovernmental Affairs to fund the Ikuma II Working Group.
The capital appropriation requirements break down to 1 million 368 thousand dollars to the Department of Community Government & Transportation for the Pond Inlet sewage lagoon which is comprised of a special warrant of 500 thousand dollars and 868 thousand dollars in a Supplementary Appropriation.
Nine hundred and 20 thousand dollars for the Bathurst road and port project contribution and 1 million 871 thousand for Community Government & Transportation to fund capital shortfalls in their budget.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my remarks.
I look forward to answering any questions the committee may have.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Ng. Minister do you have your officials here with you.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: My officials are on their way.
But I am ready to go.
Would you like to go to the witness table and your official will be guided to the table as well when he comes in.
At this time we will wait for your officials.
I just want to let the members know that Bill 13 is on page 6.
We will begin on page 6.
Minister Ng I would like to ask you if you want to wait for your officials or would you like to begin.
Mr. Chairman, looking at the amount of this supplementary appropriation, my understanding of a supplementary appropriation is that it is for things that weren't thought of or weren't inquired or we never thought these things would be necessary.
Looking at one of the items that the minister mentioned, almost 15 million dollars for increased compensation and benefits for Nunavut employees as a result of the collective agreement.
Is this still one.
To me having a supplementary this large is quite a substantial amount, 41 million dollars.
What kind of budgeting, proper budgeting would not seem to end up being out this much money. Like in general.
What practices are used.
Are there things that could have been incorporated into the initial budget that we knew about.
Things that may not have been necessary to show up in here.
One example that I'll use is just in the compensation and benefits that was budgeted for and I said in the past that we are budgeting based on being 100% staffed.
To me even though we are not going to be 100% staffed, we are still budgeting it that way.
That is not proper planning.
If we know that we are going to be 80% staffed, tat 20% go could towards other programs and services and all the members would have some say in where it is going.
When we see a supplementary appropriation for the most part, a lot of this stuff is done by the time it comes here.
So I would like to ask if the minister can respond to those general comments.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Well I guess, Mr. Chairman, in the normal course of business in an ideal situation, you have everything planned and everything works out the way it is planned.
In the case of, if you look at the amounts that I mentioned in the opening comments, and Mr. Tootoo pointed out the 15 million dollars approximately for the NEU collective agreement.
Although we could have put an amount into the budgetary estimate until an agreement was finalized, but why pre-judge what the outcome would be.
So in that case, this 15 million dollars is for the 2001/2002 year for the two and three quarter percent increase for the Nunavut Employees' Union and it is spread out across all government departments to reflect the monetary increase as the result of that ratified agreement.
For the issue of the other amount for Health and Social Services, as member know approximately 20 million dollars.
Given that we have talked about this in the House and in committee on various occasions on whether or not there is sufficient funding for the department, and it has been as the minister has articulated on several occasions, that has to be verified. There was some extensive work carried out in conjunction, between the Department of Finance and the Department of Health to substantiate some of those amounts and that is what is reflected here to deal at least with this year.
Next year's main estimates will obviously be reflective of some of those additional needs as well.
So I mean, by and large, that's the bulk of the 40 million dollars or so of Supplementary Appropriation requests.
But in respect to the member's question about staffing and budgeting based on actual expected levels versus vacancies.
One has to remember that even though the departments, roughly the government is around 80% of staffing, there is a 20% as you know vacancy rates, let's not forget that the work still continues to be done.
There are still costs involved in getting that work done even though there is that vacancy factor because there are consultants that are hired to carry out work, there are staff that are putting in tremendous amounts of extra work and overtime, there are casual employees, indeterminate employees that are hired to fill in on a short term basis.
So there are all those factors that require funding for departments.
Now, if we were to cap it at, say 80% of funding for departments based on the expectation of 80% of staffing and put the 20% into programs, what happens when your staffing gets increased past 80% and you have to cut back on programs that you have allowed to be funded from the vacancy levels.
Because that would create some significant problems, I don't think any of us would want to have to face having those cutbacks.
How do you explain to the public at large that yes, we had this program and now we have additional staff requirements and we have to reduce those programs.
So I guess that's the basis of the rationale that we use in our budgeting and how we operate on the fiscal side, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I am pretty sure that in the minister's fiscal update he mentioned the fact that a lot of the accumulated surplus that we had was a result of lack of capacity in the government and all those vacant positions, and that's where a large portion of this surplus is coming from.
Or a portion, an amount of it, is coming from the almost 15 million that is in here for additional costs associated with the collective agreement.
Is the minister saying that all the amounts that have been budgeted for in the main estimates for compensation and benefits has been spent and it needs this much more to top it off to meet those needs.
I would like to correct the member, Mr. Chairman, I have never said that the bulk of the surplus has come from the vacancy levels of this government.
There certainly is, as I have said in the past, a portion of that, but it is not a significant component of the overall accumulated surplus of the government.
We have recognized that it has given the government some flexibility to deal with funding matters in other operations and maintenance and capital requirements. As I said earlier, there have been casual employees, consultants, overtime and all the other things associated with completing and delivering government services that is funded from some of the excess under-spent salaries and benefits from the government.
Yes, Mr. Chairman, the 14 million 913 thousand dollars for compensation and benefits costs two and three quarters of the adjustment is for the civil service as a result of the collective agreement for those employees.
That is what is in this supplementary appropriation.
I guess as a result of the 20 percent vacancy rate that the government has, was that amount taken from the number of positions with the government and the pay ranges that they are at and whether they are vacant or not, to come up with this number.
I don’t have a detailed calculation of what is making up or comprising that 14 million 913 thousand dollars.
My official when he comes might have those details. I have a break down of departmental costs with me, but that is the extent of the details I have.
I am certainly willing to provide any more detailed information that the member wants at a later date, if my official doesn’t have it when he arrives Mr. Chairman.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Ng. Remember that you didn’t want to wait for your official.
Mr. Chairman, I guess what I am getting at is I am wondering if the methodology that was being used in calculating this amount was based on all the PY’s within the government that are there and multiplied by the percentage increase.
Is there a potential that some of this 15 million dollars is targeted toward these vacant positions that could end up being lapsed anyways, because there is no one in those positions.
That's what I was trying to find out.
Like I said to Mr. Tootoo, I don’t know.
But like I said earlier as well, there are casual and indeterminate and non-funded positions within the government as well that if they are unionized would require the adjustment on their salary.
So that would certainly compensate for some of the amounts of the cost and benefit increase.
That might or might not be used.
Mr. Tootoo: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman.
Just a general question here I guess, on the almost 38 million there that is for operational and maintenance expenditures.
What percentage of that funding, I guess I am asking the minister if he knows or not, or if he has to wait for his official to find out, what percentage of that, whether that be lapsed benefits due to vacancies, programs that aren’t being used within the government and those types of things.
Where is that money coming from and then where is it going.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Well certainly Mr. Chairman, some of the information isn’t as detailed in each of the departments depending on the transfer amount.
Those are the items that we will get into once we get into the departmental review.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you Minister Ng. Before we go any further I believe your official is here.
Sergeant-At-Arms could you escort the individual please.
Thank you, Minister Ng would you please introduce your official.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: I have me with me Mr. Ted Dingle who is the Senior Financial Analyst for the Department of Finance.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Ng. Mr. Tootoo.
Mr. Chairman, I am fully aware of the detail in here.
But I was wondering if it had a breakdown of percentages.
Overall, the whole thing without looking at it.
Just to get an idea of where the funding is coming from and where it's going.
Mr. Chairman by and large the bulk of it is additional funding, a supplementary request so it comes from the accumulated surplus that we have, as far as where the funds would be paid out of.
And just earlier in respect to Mr. Tootoo's question about the numbers for the Northern Employees' Union increase, it is based on all organizational chart positions.
In another words, they'll be based on 100% of positions.
I look at a supplementary appropriation for over 41 million dollars, and looking at it, 14 million 913 thousand dollars for increased compensation and benefits due to the collective agreement.
Was this a budgeted figure that was in the budget when we approved it last spring.
I thought I saw a line item for 10 million.
Was this in fact budgeted in the last budget.
At that time I don't think it would have been a budgeted item.
Certainly it would have been in our fiscal framework overall.
With the expectation about a reserve for an amount that we would expect to have disbursed.
But again the budget, that is why we are here.
Until it was finalized there was no need to predetermine what that amount was until it was finalized.
Yes, I know the union negotiations were hot and heavy for a while.
So I guess it is hard to take it down to an actual figure.
We know what they wanted and asked for and what they received.
That aside.
The part of the expenditure that perhaps I have to look at with a critical eye, is in health.
We know that our health care costs are going to go up.
And I know when we looked at the budget and approved the budget figures for each department, that health was maybe too low.
The issue here is another 20 million dollars that comes out of I don't want to say is the blue.
It does pop up in the budget, 20 million dollars.
So when we approve a budget I know our costs go up and it is operational costs and things like that.
Is this poor budgeting on behalf of the Health Department or is that kind of like money that was just totally overlooked, or is it needed for emergencies in that department.
Because when we are approving budgets we like to have half decent figures that are accurate.
I am sure there is an explanation why there was an additional 20 million dollars put into the Health budget.
But why was this not anticipated in last year's budget.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Glenn. Minister Ng.
Mr. Chairman, as you know a lot of the financial accounting was with three regional health boards.
Quite frankly some of the information wasn't readily available and wasn't as accurate as it could have been.
Obviously at year end and audit time a lot of those things were picked up. As I had mentioned earlier, the overall needs of the Department of Health and Social Services, may not have been fully addressed when we established the targets that we received from the Office of the Interim Commissioner on day one of April 1 1999.
I said that the minister has frequently articulated that in different ways, whether it is in the House or the Standing Committee or at the Financial Management Board level. After the roll up or the dissolution of the Boards in the final accounting and accruals were to come into place, now that they are more centralized at the Department of Health, it became more apparent that there were issues of costs exceeding their budgeted amounts that had to be addressed.
So you will note even in the first year's Auditor General's report that they were slightly over their budget at that time and in the next fiscal year's they will be significantly over approved budget expenditures.
So it will be another matter that will have to be addressed as well.
We are trying to deal with this, as I said Mr. Chairman.
This year we undertook actively with the Department of Health, the Department of Finance undertook a detailed analysis of their expenditures and there is a report that is just being finalized now on that.
As I said, it will have to be recognized in the upcoming main estimates for the next fiscal year that there will have to be some additional appropriations made for the Department of Health and Social Services. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Ng. Glenn.
Thanks for that answer.
Yes you are correct, I sit on the Standing Committee and I have listened to the minister numerous times saying that his base was way too low in Health, and I am starting to see it now.
Are we looking at increasing the Health Minister's base so that we are not looking at another 20 million dollars next year at this time.
Mr. Chairman, yes we are looking at increasing the Department of Health and Social Services base and in fact we are using this base here, this Supplementary that is here before us, the 20 million 750 thousand dollars as the starting point with the Department of Health preliminary targets for next year.
However, having said that, once this report is finalized, the Department of Finance will be making some specific recommendations to the Financial Management Board in respect of the Department of Health and Social Services operations.