EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Mr. Speaker, in fact yes.
I have given it some thought as to the possible options with my officials and in fact with the former past Government of the Northwest Territories of which I was one member and other members of this House were involved.
There was at some point in their capital planning process a split of the division of the capital.
They did it earlier in the fall and did the main estimate review in the spring.
But it was found to be very impractical from the perspective that it took as much work to present one main estimate and capital estimate document and the whole process of going through preparations, reviews with standing committees as it did.
There is minimal work involved in doing it once versus splitting it twice.
So that was a factor given the fact that our Human Resources are as we all know are working overtime in a lot of situations to meet schedules and meet demands and commitments.
At this time it is probably more prudent and practical to try to keep it together.
But to bring it up earlier into the process where we would we have a February or early, mid, start on the budget review process as far as main estimate review and capital estimate reviews in this House to allow adequate time for that to happen, it would have minimum impact to the delivery of those programs in future fiscal years.
Mr. Speaker, the Minister of Finance indicated there was something they looked at before.
I was just wondering if he could provide us with some options.
He indicated the plan would be to ensure that information is prepared earlier.
I think the Members of this House remember last year us being told the same thing that we were going to get it earlier and we will not have this problem next year.
Mr. Speaker, I know here we are again going through that same process with not enough time.
Can the Minister of Finance commit to us; to this House that this will be the case next year.
That we will get the information in a much more timely manner.
Mr. Speaker, let us forget the reason why we are a bit backed up this year.
We all agreed, all Members of this House agreed to the budget consultation process, to speak to our constituents in every community in Nunavut and that is what we did this past fall.
Basically Mr. Speaker, we lost about six weeks out of this process.
Having said that Mr. Speaker, we recognise we are not going to do a budget consultation process every year.
Particularly not one as extensive that took place this past year.
So having said that we would expect like I said the budgetary process would start very much earlier for the 2001-2002 year.
As I alluded to in an earlier response we are probably looking at sometime in February where would get this public process underway.
I would also guess Mr. Speaker, I have indicated in the past the government is preparing a 5-year capital planning document that is going to be available this fall.
That will start the process a lot earlier in respect to the big portion of the review or a significant portion of the review of the main estimate for the future years.
That information will be available earlier and all members know there is a certain amount of scrutiny on the capital expenditures of the government and would think we would save a lot of time by having that available earlier.
Mr. Speaker I can appreciate the fact that the time was lost due to the pre-budget consultations that were initiated this year.
However again the idea of those consultations initiated with a capital consultation process that all members agreed to when we were in our retreat in Baker Lake.
For some reason everything was thrown into the picture this year on the consultation process.
I am happy to hear that the minister of committed to providing a 5-year capital plan in the fall.
Again, if that can be provided in the fall, there are your capital projects.
You know we already have main estimates provided to us in two separate binders.
We have the capital mains and we have the operations & maintenance mains.
You know is it something we can look at doing or re-look at that option to something that is more suitable to us here in Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, I believe I have already answered yes.
Question 448 – 1(3): Deletions from Capital Plans
First of all yesterday I saw a concern, possibly what I can do is direct the question to the House Leader or to the Premier.
My question is when we were with the previous government we saw architectural plans and they were 2-3 year plans to build facilities in the communities.
Afterward there were cuts.
I will use Kimmirut as an example where we had some plans.
Some money was given to us in the first year and than there was no money allotted for the following year.
Are we going to be doing this same thing this year.
Are we going to be setting up 2-year plans and then deleting the money the following year.
Mr. Speaker, I think I have said this on many occasions and I will say it again.
The whole plan for the Government of Nunavut is to exactly to avoid those types of situations, the fact that we are putting planning dollars, we are going to see the project goes through to realisation to its final construction.
The problem we want to avoid frankly is developing a 5-year capital plan that is deliverable and that is why we are taking a bit more time so that it is done properly Mr. Speaker.
We want to make sure that when there are things put into the 5-year capital plan that for all intents and purposes it is what this government is planning to deliver within its mandate.
So in other words, there will not be things showing up there that keep being deferred to future years unless there are extenuating circumstances that require that to take place.
So that is the whole emphasis of what we are trying to do to develop a realistic 5-year plan.
What we grandfathered from the GNWT I am sure if they had a project going there was probably money that was given to us so that we could continue on with that project.
Mr. Speaker, the member is correct and all members know that we did have the planning documents from the GNWT, their 5-year planning document.
I have said in the past that is one of the components that we are using in the development of Nunavut 5-year capital plan.
We are also using the input from the community consultations that have taken place, the input from members of this House on their needs and priorities and trying to balance out and provide and deliver a realistic 5-year capital plan for the government of Nunavut.
Now there would not have been any finances, anything that would have been identified prior to April 1 1999 as far as the GNWT planning document.
They might have identified funds in there but none of those funds would have been approved.
It is up to this government to recommend to this Assembly approval for capital expenditure.
That is the process we are going through Mr. Speaker.
Trying to finalise the main estimates or the capital estimates for this upcoming fiscal year or the current fiscal year, we are in right now Mr. Speaker.
We are well aware of the deletions that went on when we looked at the 1999 capital plans.
They were already some architectural blue prints done.
The foundations of buildings were done and then they were deleted.
What is going to be happening with the projects that were started but have never been completed because most of the blueprints and the foundation work has been done already.
Mr. Speaker, if there are instances where there has been significant capital investments already undertaken as the member alludes to, if there has been some final design work and some foundation work done for whatever reasons they happen to be deferred.
I mean obviously that would be a factor in consideration of the development of the 5-year capital plan and just as importantly more importantly Mr. Speaker, the priority depending what type of facility the member is speaking of.
Obviously that would have to come into play as well in respect to what the current government priorities are in trying to finalise the government of Nunavut 5-year capital plan.
Question 449 – 1(3): Funding for Search and Rescue
In my community of Taloyoak they have to do their fundraising for buying search and rescue equipment like snowmobiles, GPS and so on.
Because of their fundraising abilities they buy gasoline for reserves and also because they operate solely on their fundraising.
My question is are there monies or programs available for these types of organizations.
Search and rescue services are very important.
This morning we heard there was a party of hunters broken off on a floe edge near Sanikiluaq.
A helicopter was called down there.
We think it is very important to support search and rescue groups and we will be talking about this with elected leaders in the region during the mayors conference in May.
Mr. Speaker, we will be looking at how we can better support the search and rescue operators.
I have been a member of search and rescue parties, I know how very hard they work, and we have to look at how we can better provide support and services for them.
It will be included on the agenda.
Mr. Puqiqnak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker and also the Minister.
As the Minister has indicated, he will include that in the agenda of the mayor's conference.
I would like to thank him for that.
I know where the Minister is coming from but as a person from an island, it takes a long time to cross the sea to the mainland with my other community when it is blowing from the wrong direction.
Should one of the pieces of equipment breakdown for example an outboard motor we do not even have the appropriate, adequate machinery or equipment to rescue a person who is stuck on the sea.
I would like to see some funds set aside so that they will be adequate funds for search and rescue parties.
What kind of plans do you have as the Department of Community Government & Transportation so that adequate and supplies are made available to the search and rescue parties.
We do not have specifics yet but I drove by boat from Cape Dorset to Coral Harbour and of course there are high winds in the fall and it is quite dangerous when you are crossing the sea.
We will be discussing this issue and I am sure that what you brought up will be discussed also.
Iqaluit is the only well prepared community that has emergency boats and so on.
What we do is use personal equipment when there is a search and rescue operation in the communities.
Like I said, this issue will be discussed at the mayor's conference.
It has not fully planned yet but we do want to see search and rescue chairpersons or emergency services people to participate at that meeting.
As the department responsible for emergency services my question is are you going to be building cabins outside of the communities for example Baker Lake has a lot of cabins built outside of the community.  We hope to see cabins, emergency cabins built on the trails.
It would be nice to see emergency cabins built outside of the communities.
Do you have any plans to build cabins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker for giving me the opportunity to ask another question.
It is pretty obvious that we will include that in part of our discussions.
The communities themselves are the ones that know what their environment or terrain is like.
It would be best if we talked to the individual communities before we get into those discussions as the Member has stated.
It is a very important issue and I do know that in Rankin Inlet there has been, the emergency cabins, or even the personal people's cabins have saved lives.
For example is a person gets lost or have run out of gas, they have used those cabins.
Mr. Barnabas: I would request to Return to Item 5.
Recognition of Visitor's in the Gallery.
Speaker: The member is seeking unanimous consent to return to Item 5.
Proceed Mr. Barnabas.
I would like to recognize three people in the gallery.
Behind me is our Elder, is my great father in-law and he's also a member of the Elder's Society in Arctic Bay, Mr. Lazarusie Audla, also from the community of Arctic Bay, Saila Akikuluk and Rhonda Qiaurapik.
Speaker: I would also like to recognize somebody in the gallery, a retired Catholic priest from my hometown of Glace Bay, Nova Scotia, Father Stanley Macdonald.
Speaker: Father Macdonald is here until May helping out at the local Catholic church.
Welcome Father.
Question 450 - 1(3): Update on Previously Approved Capital Projects
I thank my colleagues for allowing me to recognize my constituents.
Mr. Speaker my question will be directed to the Minister of Finance.
Mr. Speaker as he stated earlier the Minister of Finance that the community, pre-budget community consultation process was to help the Cabinet to write their departmental main estimates.
(interpretation ends) The past practice of the GNWT was to establish A, B and C lists and so forth for the communities capital plans.
Many communities including the ones I represent are now uncertain and confused about the status of their projects that have been previously approved for inclusion of the 5-year capital plan.
Would the Minister be willing to provide communities and the Members of the Assembly who represent them with an update on where previously approved projects now stand.
Mr. Speaker I don’t believe the GNWT had ABC lists.
I think in fact the Government of Nunavut, the Office of the Interim Commissioner, when we first took office had those kinds of categories for qualifying projects.
But regardless Mr. Speaker in answering the Honourable Member's question about where communities stand, I mean, obviously, when we were preparing in trying to finalize our 5-year capital planning document that I committed in trying to have for this fall.
I mean that's where we are going to outline some of the needs in trying to balance out the community in Nunavut interest in trying to forecast the capital needs and in trying to deliver on those capital needs for the balance of the term of this government.
Mr. Speaker, I apologize I just made a mistake.
It was not GNWT it was the Nunavut Government that used the ABC list.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask another question that the ones in the A-list are they now starting to use the expenditures from the current budget.
Obviously, the bulk of those projects have come forward in the form of these current main estimates for the House.
Mr. Speaker we received approved interim Appropriation Act, are there anything from the A-list that is included in the interim Appropriation Act.
Speaker: I'd like to thank Minister Ng for that concise answer.
Now that I have the answer and my final supplementary.
What are in the A-list of the interim Appropriation Act we are now expended.
Mr. Speaker, if the member would care to check the Hansard when I detailed during the Committee of the Whole and review the interim Appropriation, the bulk of those projects if not all of them Mr. Speaker, were on the original A-list that the Honourable Member refers to as far as Capital Plans for the Government of Nunavut.
Question 451 - 1(3): Jury Honoraria
I will be directing my question to the Minister of Justice.
Is the jury honorarium of 40 dollars a day set by the Department of Justice.
I apologize I do not know who set the rate so I'll take your question as notice and I'll be able to get back to you once I find out.
Perhaps within a day, like tomorrow.
Question is taken as notice.
Question 452 - 1(3): Nunavut Correctional Facility
Mr. McLean: Ma'na Uqaqti. Uqaqti my question today is to the Minister of Justice regarding correctional facilities.
Uqaqti I know the correctional facility in Iqaluit is overcrowded and full.
Does the Minister responsible have any plans to build any correctional facilities in the Kivalliq region.
Speaker: Minister responsible for Justice, Mr. Anawak.
As we are all aware the Baffin Correctional Centre in Iqaluit is too small for the whole of Nunavut.
We did a review last winter and the people who did the review know that we have to set up another correctional facility.
I have also met with the Solicitor General from the federal government who deals with this issue.
I spoke to him about the need for a correctional centre in Nunavut.
At this point he is looking for additional dollars.
If we were able to get further funding from the federal government then we would find out where the facility would be or if we are going to build one facility or more than facility.
Uqaqti could the Minister be a little bit more concise on what kind of time line or date that he'll be hearing back from his people on the construction of a facility.
As a matter of fact we're in the process of setting up a follow up meeting with the Solicitor General, the Honourable Lawrence Bacally, once we have set that up then we should have a better idea of what the time-line would be.
Uqaqti I'd like to stress upon the Minister that crime is on the rise throughout Nunavut and it's not a statistic that anyone of us are proud of.
Mr. Speaker I wonder if the minister would seriously consider when he's negotiating with the federal government on this correctional facility or the enlargement of it, would he seriously consider establishing on in the Kivalliq region.
The Honourable Member should know that there has been some several communities approaching the department about a correctional facility in Nunavut in their community.
However, we are not to that point yet and once we do then we'll consult with the Members of the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut as well as the public.
However, the understanding should also be that if we are going to build a correctional facility anywhere in Nunavut then we have to look at also some other areas like the security concerns that would have to be addressed.
I realize the minister has to take into consideration different things like security, jet strips and large RCMP detachments in the communities that they are considering for the correctional facilities.
Like I said my final question will the Minister commit to looking at the Kivalliq region for a correctional centre.
Hon. Jack Anawak: Mr. Speaker I will commit to having a correctional facility in Nunavut.
Question 453 - 1(3): Changes to Main Estimates
Mr. Speaker my question is to the Minister of Finance.
At this time we are under review of main estimates for the government departments, my question is have there been any changes to the main estimates.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Mr. Speaker I'm not sure what the member is referring to.
The main estimates before the House haven't been changed because they haven't been approved yet so nothing has changed.
Maybe the Member can clarify his question for me so that I might be able to comprehend it.
Speaker: Could the Member clarify the question.
I understand there are no changes then according to the main estimates.
Question 454 - 1(3): Bathurst Mandate
Mr. Speaker my question will be to the Premier.
The Bathurst Mandate set out in August 1999, the intent and the purpose of this document.
I would like more information of this publication made from the Bathurst consultation.
Speaker: I believe the question is directed to the Premier.
Those are our priorities as outlined in accordance with the departments of the government.
Once we review the department priorities, we try to make sure that they follow the priorities as set out in the mandate.
This is like our main guideline.
I understand that these are the guidelines for policies for the leadership.
How tightly does he plan to enforce and for how long does he plan to enforce these principles.
We put those together for our tenure as a government.
These are the long-term goals that we have set aside and for the immediate future these are our goals and objectives.
I plan to meet with my colleagues in June along with the staff to re-review just where we are as far as our goals and objectives are scheduled as.
We have to find out where we are in terms of our short and long term plans.
Question 455 - 1(3): Capital Projects in Jeopardy
I'd like to ask the minister if he is aware of any projects or capital projects that are currently in the capital main estimates that may be in jeopardy as a result of the debate going on in the House because of timing.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Well thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker given that when we first sat and we had agreed upon I believe it was tentatively around April 19 or 20 finish.
As Members know it looks like we may get into the latter part of April now.
I would say that from the perspective of some projects that require specially ordered items, to meet the sea lift requirements because of their size and the speciality nature of them having to be ordered from specific manufacturers that we probably have the possibility of some projects in jeopardy.
If we get into May certainly there'll be problems in the possibility of delivery of some projects.
So, as it stands now we are aware of this.
I actually have asked the Minister of Public Works to put together a list of what's out there and the possibilities of what projects may be impacted as a result of a later than expected completion of the main estimates and the capital estimates as well.
I guess that would explain the Minister of Public Work's comments on the radio this morning.
Mr. Speaker maybe I could ask the Finance Minister if once he receives that, you know, it's not the intent of any Member of this House to make projects not happen this year as a result of debate in this House.
Could he provide us with a listing of projects that maybe time sensitive and have a briefing on that as soon as he gets them.
Can I ask the minister when is the time frame of when we can expect to see such a list.
I believe that that list would have an impact on the debate in this House and Members would want to be aware of the consequences of the debate.
Mr. Speaker a lot of it would depend obviously on the complexity of the project and the stage of development of each project.
I would say as soon as it's available, I mean we would provide it it's just a matter of how much work is involved in putting that information together.
I can understand that there's some work involved that needs to be done but still there should be some type of an idea as when, you know, this week, next week, three weeks from now.
I'd just like more clear answer than as soon as possible.
I would expect we would have it available next week, Mr. Speaker.
Speaker: Thank you Minister Ng. Oral Questions.
Question 456 - 1(3): July 9 Nunavut Day
In further reference to Mr. Irqittuq's question. This has not been brought before the standing committee and we plan to work on the issue.
I was wondering how you found out that date of July 9 was most appropriately considered by the residents of Nunavut as compared to the August date.
Yes, as I said earlier the date of July 9 has been officially used on previous occasions whereby people hold special festivities on that date.
It was also the date of the signing of the land claims agreement for Nunavut and so we made it that date of July 9.
Mr. Akesuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, we have been in contact with the people of Nunavut as regular members, we’ve held phone-in shows and through other means of media access and we had planned to talk about it again in a regular members’ caucus concerning Nunavut Day.
But it seems to have been another waste of time for us as the representatives of the people who were not given a fair opportunity, because our intent was to find out from our constituents what they thought.
Now will this be considered as the final date regardless of our wishes or not.
Yes it is before the Standing Committee.
It is up to you to decide, but we want to make it clear that this is a Bill for enactment if passed and it will be up for your review on the Standing Committee to decide what you wish to do with it.
I was just explaining the procedures and the impact of it on the residents of Nunavut.
Speaker: Supplementary, Mr. Akesuk.
So will we still be given the opportunity to change that date according to the wishes of our people.
Apparently we are still able to review the date.
Can we change the date if we want to.
You can put forth your written submissions to our department and we will leave that up to your discretion and to your Standing Committee to deal with.
I would like a response, either a yes or a no.
Are we going to be able to change what you have finished reviewing.