EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
The RCMP just coordinates everything to make sure that everything is… . I guess the key word is they help organize the search and keep it orderly.
As I stated earlier, I want to be clear in my understanding, especially why the RCMP are even involved when they have absolutely no knowledge of the outlying lands and waters.
I used to think that the search and rescue groups in the communities were the foundation for searches and I wondered why the RCMP was appointed as the lead agency, yet here are the local knowledgeable experts, capable of initiating searches having their authority usurped.
I imagine it was due to some SAR groups not having the legal capability to properly organize their societies, as you stated in English as being “orderly.” Apparently, the RCMP is the only orderly group.
Can’t the communities be orderly in their management of the searches? Can’t they be also one of the lead agencies or is this due to the lack of government not having faith in them?
As I stated earlier, the local search and rescue teams are the experts and they’re the organizers. They organize and they decide where to search.
The RCMP doesn’t say, “Go search here, go search there,” but they are in charge.
It’s the process. We all know that the local search and rescue teams are the experts and sometimes it’s the Rangers that are part of the search and rescues, but the RCMP does have a role there and they play a role.
We have a good working relationship with them there and sometimes they have resources that are needed that they can come up with.
I, too, prefer coordinated and organized processes. However, I have deliberated on these issues for a while.
The RCMP, even in our community, sometimes gets requests to get involved, but their refrain tends to be that they have too much work on their plate. They have sometimes not even bothered to show up at meetings.
I wonder how better to appoint a lead agency since there have been cases where their presence is requested for searches, but they rarely attend even if the community feels it is a dire situation. Perhaps I am misunderstanding the reasoning, but in looking at our alternatives to support our SAR groups, I wonder what further duties they can accommodate since the RCMP already protests saying that they have too much work to do when invited to a search and rescue meeting.
Let me move on to another subject.
I want to speak to the devices with buttons.
If you don’t have the documentation, I will understand.
If you have that information, I refer to this statement, “…there were 251 searches, 82 of which were triggered by SPOT devices.”
Is it documented anywhere?
I would like to hear from you, Mr. Minister.
The other searches that are not SPOT initiated are generally started when someone is overdue, either a family member or someone that a person going out on the land told, “I will be back in two days. I will be back today.”
If someone is overdue, then generally a search is started.
A clarification on the same line, I think it has been three years and I know the minister was not here at the time, but his officials were here, so perhaps I can get a response.
About three years ago, the minister at the time mentioned that a concern is the devices that are borrowed are sometimes misused. Sometimes they are just playing with the devices and they initiate a search, but it turns out it was not a real emergency. This is a serious issue.
At the time, your department was considering perhaps putting a policy in place or even legislation for this serious matter.
Searchers put themselves in personal danger to provide assistance, even though people are just playing with the devices.
Have you done anything else on this matter?
I think the member is talking about the misuse of SPOTs, not accidental use, but misuse like initiating a distress signal when there is no distress.
Of course, we don’t recommend anyone do that, but we have no way of controlling that.
Every time a SPOT device is set off, we will go check it out because we don’t know if it’s for real or not.
We don’t have any way of tracking whether it is misuse or accident.
Unless someone admits that they purposely pressed it just to see what would happen, we won’t know. Someone can always say, “Well, I didn’t know I pressed it.”
We highly discourage the misuse. There might be some accidental press of the SPOT and those probably can’t be avoided.
There is a chance you can accidentally set it off, but even if there is misuse, we will always go check out the location.
At time when the SPOT is activated, we do not know if it’s an accident, misuse, or an actual distress call.
Every SPOT device that is activated will be investigated.
Yes, I fully agree with you that every incident should be investigated because we don’t know.
Perhaps I will restate my question.
Once you find out that it is misuse or they are just playing around with the device and they issue a search, if you know of intentional misuse, are there consequences in place or do you just tell them, “Don’t do it again.”?
Currently, we don’t have any legislation to punish anyone that misuses a SPOT because the only true way of knowing if it was misused is if the person admits to it. Anyone can always say they accidentally pressed it.
There’s no way of proving that someone intentionally misused the SPOT unit. Currently, we have no legislation against it.
We just encourage people not to do it.
Yes, the searchers are very serious in doing their duties. If somebody presses a SPOT device, we should consider that very carefully.
They give of themselves. Searches are usually initiated in the worst of weather. In summer or winter, they give themselves to the search.
We have to think of and take care of the searchers.
Yes, I totally agree with you that they should not be misused and all Nunavummiut probably agree with that.
Perhaps this will be my last question. In Pond Inlet, the searchers and their coordinators always go on the radio and tell the people to bring those devices if they’re going out.
They always tell them that in Pond Inlet and I’m happy to say that, but they are still underused.
I know they’re free, but even when we tell them to please bring it with them, there are still people who go out without bringing them.
Do you have anything planned on how we can get the information out to more Nunavummiut that these devices are available, they’re free, and they can bring them when they go out?
I totally agree with my counter MLA that they are being underused and we’re not sure why.
We have public announcements. I know the HTOs go on the radio, the search and rescue go on the radio, the RCMP goes on the radio.
For whatever reason, there are just some people that don’t go pick them up. I don’t know if they’re in a hurry, but we fully encourage everyone to do it.
It’s small, it’s light, it’s free, and it may save a person’s life.
There is no reason why someone should not pick one up.
I encourage all the people of Nunavut to pick one up, even if they’re going out for the day. Just pick one up.
They’re small, they’re light, and the newer models are harder to accidentally activate.
I encourage everyone to pick up a SPOT. It may save your life.
We’re on Branch Summary. Community and Government Services. Community Services.
Mr. Pauloosie Keyootak.
The questions I was going to ask were asked already.
I will also base my questions on search and rescue.
The comments were already made on the question I was going to ask, but I have an idea too about search and rescue.
I have been part of the searches and other people here have probably been a part of the searches. I have been involved in searches for about 20 years.
I know this is a difficult issue when you are one of the searchers.
The comments were made about RCMP not being directly involved, but searchers rely on the RCMP because we have no idea whether those who are lost are alive or dead.
We have to notify the RCMP beforehand because we have no idea initially on the condition of the lost person.
I think it was last year when we were discussing this and there was a question from my colleague, Mr. Enook.
With respect to the equipment that we use, the single sideband radios are utilized by searchers, especially in the Baffin region.
It is a mountainous region.
The radios that are used are line-of-sight only and you cannot see them as long as they’re behind land.
That becomes a problem when you’re doing a search, especially here in the Baffin in the mountainous region.
The new radios, VHF and CBs, are being used more these days and people have been saying that single sideband radios might not be used anymore.
There are repeaters. VHF radios go much longer distances than single sideband radios.
We have more than one repeater and I think Pond Inlet also has repeaters, but there are still a lot of communities that don’t have that equipment.
Are there any plans being made when it comes to search and rescues for CB and VHF repeaters?
This can provide a lot more assistance to search and rescue.
Has this been considered?
We’re open to any suggestions and we’re always looking at new technologies.
I believe all local search and rescues have at least one, if not more, satellite phones.
I know that when searches are going on, there may be multiple parties and everybody can’t get a satellite phone, but they are also looking at what I think are called Go-Box units. They are a form of satellite communication that can be used with smart phones and texting.
They are looking at another form of communication. I can’t remember the name offhand, but you can text with it.
We’re looking at anything that would help out searches.
I know some local search and rescue organizations have their own communication system.
They may have mainly radios, whether it be VHF, which I believe is only used in Pond Inlet because there are not a lot of communities that use the marine VHFs. CBs are used a lot in the summer.
I know that the CBs have limitations when the weather is cold.
Communication is a big part of search and rescue.
If someone is found, you want to know right away so that you call back the other search and rescuers.
Like Mr. Keyootak said, sometimes you are searching in very bad weather and the searchers put themselves at risk at times to look for someone who is lost or overdue.
We will look at any cost-effective way for communicating systems when we’re having searches.
Indeed, the local SAR responders sometimes venture out in inclement weather to search for the person and sometimes there is no choice in the matter, especially in a dire, emergency situation.
The equipment we use, such as the radios, can also be affected by bad weather with transmission and reception issues.
The equipment works best in the summer when there is no cold weather unlike the winter months. Based on real-world experiences, during the summer months, the equipment that worked best were the cellphones.
Apparently, they were the most dependable means of communications and currently, everyone who goes hunting usually brings along a cellphone.
I wonder if the communities have the ability to request repeater towers, if they can undertake that work unilaterally, or if they would have to request funding assistance for that.
We don’t have any funding specifically for communication projects, but if a municipality were to put it on their sustainable community infrastructure plan, I think… . I’m new, so I don’t know all the acronyms yet, but if a municipality were to put it in there, then it would be looked at like everything else that they put in there.
We don’t have a budget specifically for communication in communities.
The next name, Mr. Mikkungwak.
In line with the search and rescue, I know the funding hasn’t increased in the past several years, but in listening to my colleagues and having been involved in search and rescue also and as a committee member and a volunteer, my question to the Department of Community and Government Services is, in some cases, there are companies or private industry organizations that do want to donate, but sometimes the barrier is registered society status.
If a search and rescue has a registered society status, they can receive financial donations from private companies or organizations.
How is the department tackling that considering the fact that search and rescue people also have to submit a report when a search has been completed?
I’m not sure how to answer that question at all because I’m not familiar with how registered societies are and I did not know that they’re not allowed to take donations.
I’ll have to get back to the member on that because I wasn’t aware of that clause.
To help the minister here, some private industries or companies that are independent, at times, do like to make financial donations in a considerable amount.
If a search and rescue does maintain a registered society status, they can do a tax write-off for the financial donation that is being given to the search and rescue.
My concern here is: when you look at search and rescue across Nunavut, and I presume there’s search and rescue in all communities across Nunavut, how has the department of Nunavut Emergency Management assisted the community search and rescue to maintain their registered society status?
I won’t have to get back to the member there on how societies can accept donations because he answered that himself.
They can give a tax receipt.
Now, as to how we help them out, we do give them some money. I believe it’s $2,500 a year to help them out to do their financial reports because they do have to do a financial report.
Another way that a search and rescue organization can get donations could be through private individuals, if they want to give large amounts. I don’t see a reason why they could not give it to the hamlet.
For example, let’s say someone wanted to buy a new snowmobile for the search and rescue. They could donate that to the hamlet and then the search and rescue could use it from the hamlets.
I don’t see that there are any barriers with that.
Before I move on to another subject, in reference to emergency management, there’s usually a secretary treasurer in respective search and rescue organizations.
Is there territory-wide training provided at least once a year to ensure that they are keeping their bookkeeping records up to date so that they maintain their registered society status?
Currently right now, no, we don’t offer such training.
It can be looked at, but I’m also aware that sometimes search and rescue organization committees do change on a regular basis.
If there was such a need for one and a proposal was put through, it would be easy to put it on through MTO. That would be one avenue where such training could be done if there was a need for it and if there were enough participants.
Moving on to another subject under J-5, according to its draft 2016-17 main estimates, your department spent $1,024,000 in funding under its Community Development Fund Policy in the 2014-15 fiscal year.
However, the Government of Nunavut’s 2014-15 Grants and Contributions Report indicates that a total of $265,000 in funding was distributed under the Community Development Fund project for that fiscal year.
Can you clarify how your department spent the remaining $759,000 under this line item?
We’re going back to 2014, so I don’t have any knowledge of that.
What I’ll do is hand it over to Mr. Flynn here whose memory is good and he has been around a while. I’m sure he can answer that.
Chairman: Mr. Flynn.
Thanks to the minister and the member for that question.
I believe what you’re referring to is under the Community Development Fund, there is $10,000 of an annual grant that is a block funding item and goes directly to municipalities through a contribution agreement.
The balance of the $1 million plus you’re talking about in the Community Development Fund is what goes in towards doing the Municipal Government Program, which is done through the Municipal Training Organization.
According to your department’s draft 2016-19 business plan, this fund is used to support “community based capacity development in program management and delivery, self-monitoring and self-evaluation through training and development initiatives.” Can you provide a breakdown of how this funding has been spent during the 2015-16 fiscal year to date?
I would just like the member to clarify what page he is on so that we can find it.
It’s under Community Services.
That would be on page 172.
While I’m looking for it, if he can just rephrase it, please, because I completely can’t remember what he asked.
Chairman: Mr. Mikkungwak, the minister wants you to ask again. Mr. Mikkungwak.
That will surely eat up my clock, but I’ll rephrase my question again.
I thank the member for clarifying.
That funding is transferred to MTO to put on training.
It will be part of that. …(inaudible)…members, it was 644 participants or sorry, 744. It’s funding that was for MTO.
I don’t have a breakdown of all the courses that were put on because there were 69 of them.
If the member wants it, then I can get what those 69 courses were.
I would appreciate the document and I’m sure my committee colleagues would also appreciate that.
Moving on to another subject which reflects my community by another entity or organization in my view, on October 27, 2015 during the Committee of the Whole’s consideration of your department’s 2016-17 capital estimates, testimony provided by your department officials indicated that Dalhousie University had completed its preliminary analysis of effluent quality in Nunavut’s wastewater.
The next step would be then to work with Environment Canada to set effluent standards that are realistic for the north.
Can you clarify when your department plans to have completed an analysis of the current effluent quality in Nunavut?
With this Dalhousie study, some communities have already been done and other communities will be done this summer. Before this, we just relied on the federal regulations that were set right across the board across Canada.
With this study, we’re finding that things are different up here.
In some cases, it’s telling us that whatever wastewater system and sewage lagoon they have in certain places works just well. Some communities may not need a sewage lagoon; they just need a wetland area where it’s naturally cleaned up. It just berms up and slows the process so that it’s just not a river.
What this study is doing is it’s telling us exactly what’s coming out. The sewage is poured out on one end and what comes out on the end, the study is telling us that in some places, what we’re using up here is very good.
The standards can or may even be changed up here so that our standards for wastewater are applicable to Nunavut.
Mr. Mikkungwak: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess my follow-up question to that would be: when you look at the effluent standards, does that also contain sloping of contaminated soil that starts leaching into water surrounding a community pumphouse?
No, this study is strictly on wastewater. It is in no way connected to contaminated sites. That’s a whole separate issue.
Most contaminated sites are chemical or hydrocarbons that would have to be cleaned up. This is only about residential wastewater, wastewater/sewage.
The minister sort of led right into my next question.
Wastewater regulations in northern Canada, as we all know, Dalhousie University is doing research and should be completed by 2016-17 and there will be a timeline to establish northern wastewater regulations.
Can you indicate who will be involved in these discussions and negotiation on wastewater regulations in northern Canada and what the discussions will involve?
CGS will be working with INAC, the water board, and the federal government. There is going to be a working group that will come up with regulations that are relevant to the climate and conditions here in Nunavut.
While compiling the regulations, does the department have a rough idea as to how long the regulations may take to be completed and enforced?
This is a federal responsibility, so I can’t say when it will be done and I don’t speak for the federal government, so the ball will be in their court and we will be waiting for the regulations to come out after this working group puts in a recommendation.
As a department advocating on behalf of the territory, how will you stress to deal with these wastewater regulations to be more compatible and to ensure our safety regarding wastewater regulations?
That’s what this study with Dalhousie University is doing to make sure that we have data to back up our claims. This is a scientific study.
It’s not a guess. It’s a scientific study that Dalhousie University is doing and that data will be used, hopefully, to make the regulations that are applicable to Nunavut.
All of a sudden; I thought Simeon would have a few more questions.
I want to talk about, from your opening comments, actually the Arctic Winter Games.
I know we’re involved with that, but I want to know how much of a contribution we’re providing to the Arctic Winter Games.
I don’t have the exact figure, but I know that we’re decreasing our budget next year by a little over $1.1 million when there’s no Arctic Winter Games, so that would surmise to say that we probably help out in funding to the tune of $1.1 million.
Can the minister explain why we’re not doing Arctic Winter Games next year and what’s being provided or given to, is it, the Yukon?
Or the next time it comes around?
We’re not doing Arctic Winter Games next year because it’s on a two-year rotation, but it was delayed.
We were supposed to host it in 2020, but it has been deferred to 2026 because we can’t host it ourselves.
We don’t have the ski hills and our climate appears to be too cold because they have regulations on how cold it can be for the biathlon and the outside sports.
We have to co-share it with Greenland and a decision was made to defer it ‘til 2026.
I’m going on to something else. In your opening statement again, it talks about the Energy Management Pilot Project in Iqaluit.
Maybe you can elaborate a little bit more on how you worked with QEC on this.
I’m not fully aware of working with QEC, so if the member can just point me in the right direction, I’ll try to do my best to answer the question.
You didn’t say anything about QEC, so that’s why I’m asking you.
Under this pilot project, was QEC involved in any way if you’re talking about energy-efficient lighting and stuff like that and solar panels?
I’m bringing this up because a couple of weeks ago, I had somebody write to me to say that they were trying to do an elders facility project in Kugluktuk and they wanted to save energy and they wanted to have solar panels and different things that would help them to use energy in an efficient way.
They found out from QEC that they have no policy to accept, like if you’re off grid or something. I’m not an expert in this area.
With all the work that you are doing here, what kind of discussions have gone on with QEC in regard to energy efficiency within the government?
If the member is asking about producing more energy and putting it back in, then that’s a QEC issue and I can’t speak to that, if that’s what she is talking about.
Our program is to save energy by changing light bulbs or putting in sensors where, when someone leaves the room, the lights go off. It’s mostly for that.
We have our own energy policy that has nothing to do with QEC and I can’t speak for QEC. We’re doing stuff to try cut down on energy uses in our own buildings.
There’s the Energy Secretariat too that may be able to help out and that’s with ED&T.
If I understand the member correctly, she’s talking about producing power and putting it back in, that sort of a system.
I believe we are not set up at all for that right now.
I appreciate your comments, but I’m just thinking that we’re going to be talking about saving energy across the government. To me, QEC should be involved in those discussions.
We do have in your opening comments on page 4 where you talk about solar panels.
It just brought to mind the issue that that community had.
I think we need to start to work with departments instead of maybe you guys going ahead and doing what you guys are doing.
Maybe you do need to reach out and work with the Energy Secretariat or QEC. I think, within the government, we need to do more of that.