EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I want to assure the member that that’s not the case.
We will take seriously into consideration all of the comments that we hear at this forum from all of the stakeholders and develop or come up with something based on that.
If it’s identified that some things need to be changed and suggestions as to what those changes would be, then we would have to take a look at them and then try and integrate it all into something that would have to be brought forward by the corporation, developed into a new rent scale and brought forward to cabinet for approval, and then it would be shared with all Members of the House and all of the public.
I think that it’s again an important thing to say that we don’t want to say we’re going to have it by a certain date, but it will be, and I can commit to the member there, a priority of the corporation. It has been mentioned as a priority of this government and as soon as we possibly can, that information will be brought forward.
I did not have my hand up to ask a question.
Speaker: I’m sorry.
I suggest you stop scratching your head.
Question 270 – 3(2): Compensation for Polar Bear Outfitters and Harvesters (Arvaluk)
All my previous thoughts just fell off me (reacting to laughter).
She has the discretion to pass the question on to any one of her ministers, but my question is directed to her as she is the head of the government.
For the past few days now, I have been asking questions about the loss of livelihood that the people are now experiencing with respect to wildlife, especially the outfitters who assist in polar bear hunts for wealthy sport hunters.
Is the government going to develop a policy to compensate the outfitters in Nunavut for this loss?
It’s obvious that this issue is going to have a profound impact on the people of Nunavut, especially those who make their living on polar bear sport hunts.
This is an important issue and as a government, we are all very concerned about this.
That is why we hope to move on this issue with a long-term view.
As the Minister of Environment said in response to some of the questions raised, the government is seeking ways on how to better provide programs to the outfitters through existing businesses and to set up training programs for those affected.
We heard clearly what the Minister of Environment said in his statement.
He never made any references to any financial compensation.
Instead, he referred to existing programs that would be brought to bear to offer alternative business options for the Inuit guides and outfitters who currently make their living catering to sport hunts.
However, we are all aware that the majority of those affected have no experience running a business.
Their only true knowledge and expertise is the land, the environment, as well as their traditional culture.
We try and represent our fellow Inuit because we feel for them and identify with them.
Let me give you an example of our identity with them. A new piece of legislation was enacted in the House for the Department of Education.
Because we want to ensure a better foundation for our children’s education and their future here. We also enacted the Language Protection Act, which relates to the protection of languages, especially the Inuit language.
We did all of this so we would not lose our language here in Nunavut.
As a government, we provide financial aid to most students attending Arctic College, whether they attend NTEP, nursing, or any other program.
We provide this funding so that students can focus on their studies and not have to worry about their families and how they will be fed. Now, why should we treat those individuals who are impacted by our policies on polar bears any differently? These people are not only losing their main source of income; they are also losing their chosen profession.
Regarding the export ban on polar bears from EU and the USA, will this government be monitoring this situation closely? Does it promise to try and give fair and equitable treatment to those individuals affected by the polar bear export ban as they do to the rest of Nunavummiut?
It is very important to seek out viable solutions, especially now, since we are all impacted by this issue. We are all concerned by this.
As a government, we want to help those affected by this change by involving them in seeking solutions.
As you look around this room, it is all men who are sitting here, all who are hunters. They are rightly concerned over this issue.
As a government of this age, I cannot make decisions on these issues based only on my wishes.
We work together and decide on issues as a Caucus.
I know that we will work together on this and consult on what and which direction we should be going on this.
We are cognizant of the harmful implications this issue has on Inuit of Nunavut, especially the hunters who hunt polar bears.
The minister indicated that there are three communities that are especially impacted by this: Pond Inlet, Qikiqtarjuaq, and Clyde River, and that he would like to visit these communities to talk about this issue and about the reductions in total allowable harvest numbers for polar bears in Davis Strait.
The total reduction proposed is ten bears per year for four years, which comes to 40 bears off the quota.
Will the minister, before his visits to these communities, direct the government to develop a policy to give financial compensation for those who will lose out in potential revenues in these affected communities?
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker and for the question.
As a government, we would give compensation immediately to those affected if we had the money, but we unfortunately don’t.
This being the case, we will work closely with the federal government and through consultations to come to some solution.
So I’m reiterating that again.
I’m sure I know what the Premier is saying.
However, we can say offhand that if we use the moratorium of recent memory in the McClintock Channel near Cambridge Bay as precedence for compensation, that $200,000 was made immediately available to those affected.
I know that there are differences in these two situations, but the fact remains that there was loss of income from the moratorium on polar bear hunts and the hunters there received help.
We would like to be kept abreast of future planned ministers’ visits, which are rare to our communities. We hope that the minister will have something good and useful to say when he goes to Pond Inlet, Clyde River, or Qikiqtarjuaq.
I would like him to give a message on what the government is planning to do with this issue.
I would like Inuit and the hunters to know what is going to be happening to them.
Would the Premier be accompanying the Minister of Environment when he tours these communities?
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Arvaluk. (interpretation ends) Premier Aariak.
Like my colleague, I, too, concurred with what the minister stated.
During our deliberations regarding this matter, we spoke to the three communities most impacted by this ban, namely Pond Inlet, Clyde River, and Qikiqtarjuaq.
Communication is the most important aspect, specifically proper communication between the government and the communities. This applies especially to current government initiatives, past initiatives, as well as news releases.
Many communities have many news items that are broadcast on their local radios.
So my expectations are that the issues will surface, that their views and opinions, and/or their needs or requests will be voiced.
This relates to proper communication.
At this time, I don’t have my travel schedule handy, so I cannot commit to attending this meeting.
Question 271 – 3(2): Municipal Funding Levels (Ningeongan)
I want to revisit an issue that I raised yesterday in the House.
I don’t think that I got a clear answer, so I’m going to try again today.
The department provides over $35 million per year in core funding to municipalities. This funding is for hamlets to provide services and hire staff.
I raised concerns yesterday about whether the funding is sufficient for municipalities to attract and retain qualified employees.
Can the minister indicate whether his department views the current levels of funding as being adequate?
I thank my hon. colleague for asking the question.
Like any other funds, we can always do with more and the more we get, the more we can do in municipalities and other areas.
To date, to fund the municipalities, I believe it’s adequate and like anything else, it would be nice to have more funding, but I believe that with the funding that they’re doing, there is enough money there to carry on the duties of the municipalities to run the government and municipality, Mr. Speaker.
As I noted yesterday, both the minister and I are former mayors and we both know that making ends meet in municipalities can be tough.
Oftentimes, funding allocations for municipal governments differ quite a bit from what funding is allocated for GN employees.
Does the department have any plans to review its municipal funding policy and if not, why not?
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: I want to thank the hon. colleague for the question.
I always enjoyed the years where my colleague and I sat many a round table discussing how we could get more from the government in order to make our municipalities more efficient and be able to do more, and that was always a difficult challenge at best.
Mr. Speaker, our department is constantly looking at ways to improve funding to the municipalities and I believe that we take that challenge on seriously.
We have some examples of that in terms of creating block funding for mobile equipment in municipalities. It is one step that we have taken of many to start trying to find out ways we can better fund the municipalities.
Mr. Speaker, we’re constantly challenging ourselves in the department to see how we could better work and fund the municipalities so that they could run a more effective and efficient municipal government.
The minister is already in a lot better position than I am in order to make a difference for funding allocations for municipal governments in the capacity of being the Minister of CGS.
As the minister and I has been aware over the years, we have always talked about municipal governments not having adequate funding.
I would like to ask the minister if he’s prepared to commit to reviewing the municipal funding policy so as to alleviate part the problem when it comes to hiring SAOs.
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank my hon. colleague for the question.
I agree with my colleague; it’s always a challenge to get senior administrative officers in municipalities.
I am pleased to note that right now, I believe there’s only one municipality that doesn’t have an administrator. Unfortunately, it is the one in your riding.
We are constantly looking for ways to attract qualified individuals for those positions.
Sometimes it’s not necessarily always the salary that’s an issue.
There are other positions out there that the qualified individuals seek. It’s often a challenge just to attract people.
Other than financial issues, there are many other variables in attracting individuals.
Our department, with the municipalities, is constantly seeking ways of attracting qualified individuals who want to work in making our communities in Nunavut a better place in which to live.
I realize that there are many factors that can be enhanced within the municipal governments, but the problem seems to exist throughout communities in Nunavut.
I would like to ask the minister: when was the last time a review was done on the municipal funding policy?
Unfortunately, I don’t have that detail in front of me, Mr. Speaker.
Question 272 – 3(2): Sunset of Aboriginal Healing Foundation Funding (Elliott)
Further to my Member’s Statement, I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Health and Social Services, the Hon. Tagak Curley.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to know if the government is aware of the fact that the Aboriginal Healing Foundation funding is ending.
Hon. Tagak Curley: Mr. Speaker, the answer is yes.
The programs that I described in my Member’s Statement focused on healing, harm reduction, and counselling, all areas which fall under the umbrella of Health and Social Services.
What is the minister’s department doing to ensure that these essential programs will continue in our community?
Hon. Tagak Curley: Mr. Speaker, I think the question is really much broader than what it appears to be.
These programs were contribution agreements directly with the federal government, not through the Department of Health and Social Services.
My colleagues are well aware of the cancellation and I know my colleague, the Premier, has been in contact with the various issues, including the cancellation of the National Aboriginal Healing Fund.
We have expressed that disappointment through the Premier’s Office.
To be specific, my department was not directly administering that part of the program, so I’m not 100 percent prepared to respond in detail.
As the federal government will no longer be supporting these programs in our communities through the Aboriginal Healing Foundation, is your department willing to allocate some of the renewed Territorial Health System Sustainability Initiative funding that has been earmarked for health programs to these community-based programs to ensure that they have adequate funds to continue their valuable work?
The government is committed to helping any services that we can provide, whether it be related to any social or healing programs that we have on our books, if we have any.
At the moment, the federal government has contributed substantially over a number of years.
On this particular program, I don’t believe the health sustainability initiative is really the area that we are prepared to do because it’s really quite specific not only to Nunavut but also to the Yukon and the NWT.
As a result of that, my colleagues and I will continue to press the federal government to see if there is any way that we can perhaps find a way to provide some sort of funding.
But to try and suggest that we would find an equal amount of funding for what they had contributed before, it’s really going to be difficult to do so. We will do our part.
We recognize the importance of that and we will not, in any way, compromise our commitment to our people, particularly to Nunavutmiut.
We will do our best to lobby the feds on this issue.
With that being said, will the minister commit to working with his colleagues and counterparts in other jurisdictions to identify those programs and help the communities access additional funding sources for the community-based grassroots programs?
Certainly, I will do that. I will continue to update the Members of the House if we have made any progress.
I would also like to open communications with our partners in Nunavut, particularly NTI and all of the Inuit organizations.
I think it’s time to review all of our funding programs to see if there is any way that we can partner with them and find a way to make it more maybe with less, but to find a way to effectively carry out the work that is being done.
We are grateful for all of the work that these groups have done for Nunavutmiut and it’s, in a way, sad that the federal government has chosen to cancel the Aboriginal Healing Foundation.
I am committed to working with all of the groups and I will continue to discuss with the partners, particularly the Inuit organizations, because I think that by pooling some programs along with the feds, we can probably find a way to continue in some way.
Question 273 – 3(2): Water Subsidy for Municipalities (Ningark)
Mr. Ningark (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and good morning. I wish my wife, Celine, a good day in Kugaaruk.
I’m going to direct my question to the Minister of CGS, (interpretation ends) Hon. Lorne Kusugak.
(interpretation) In Nunavut, sometimes the municipalities go into debt because of difficulties with their finances, especially for the communities that are not tax-based. When they go into a deficit situation, they start cutting programs and services. It’s no wonder.
It’s at the discretion of the municipality and they have been empowered to make cutbacks.
I would like to direct my question to the Hon. Minister of CGS, Minister Kusugak. The Water Subsidy program is not for liquor, it’s a water subsidy.
Is it at to the discretion of the municipality to administer that or is the municipality not allowed to cut the Water Subsidy program?
I was told by one homeowner that their invoice used to be cheaper with the Water Subsidy program, but it became very expensive once the subsidy was removed.
Is it at to the discretion of the municipality to take out the Water Subsidy program in the communities?
We normally have agreements on the Water Subsidy program and we provide municipal subsidies for water and sewage services.
They vary from municipality to municipality.
If it’s in the agreement with the municipality, the municipality has the discretion to administer that.
When he says that when they administer that, does he mean that it’s at the community’s discretion?
If the provisions for water and sewer are in the municipal agreements, then the municipality has the discretion to administer that.
Municipal agreements vary from community to community.
For example, the municipality may be given authority to administer the water delivery and Water Subsidy program. If that provision is in their agreement, then they have the discretion. If it’s outside of the agreement, then it’s not up to municipality to administer that.
As long it’s in the provisions of the agreement, the municipality has the discretion to administer that.
I thank the minister very much for the clarification.
During the second session, prior to us going back home, can the minister provide me with a clarification by way of correspondence with the provisions they have in their municipal agreement?
What would you like clarified in the municipal agreement?
It contains a lot of various items. It is an agreement between the Department of Community and Government Services and the Hamlet of Kugaaruk.
What is the member seeking?
The minister is seeking clarification to your question, Mr. Ningark.
I hope that this does not take away from my ability to ask further questions.
As the minister stated earlier, this Water Subsidy program varies between communities.
With respect to the arrangements between Hamlet of Kugaaruk and his department, I wonder if he can elaborate on the water subsidy agreement and whether the hamlet has the discretion to disburse the subsidy.
Does the agreement stipulate that the subsidy has to be allocated to residents equitably in the Hamlet of Kugaaruk?
I am unsure as to whether private businesses and the GN buildings are included. I was wondering if that Water Subsidy program was supposed to be applied to them as well.
I don’t have that agreement in front of me for the community of Kugaaruk as to whether the Water Subsidy program has been cut off. I don’t have the detailed information with me, Mr. Speaker.
The minister stated that he doesn’t have the information in front of him. I didn’t hear him say that once he gets the information, he will consult with me and let me know.
Will the minister let me know once he gets that information?
Once I get that information, I will come to his office and provide him with a copy and try to give him further clarification. We can discuss what exactly he is concerned about.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the member for asking me those questions.
Question 274 – 3(2): Government of Nunavut Lobbyist for Devolution (Okalik)
I submitted a document yesterday to be tabled respecting our supposed representatives in Ottawa who will have to go before committees in Parliament.
I could hardly contain my disbelief when I saw the listed company.
I didn’t know that we had started to undertake this type of contract, simply due to the continued rhetoric from our government that our funds are very limited and that we cannot fund everything.
In looking at this contract, my perception is that our government has simply thrown Nunavut money into the wastebasket.
That is why I wish to redirect this question to the Premier. How did this company get hired?
In my experience, Mr. Nault was the biggest obstacle we faced and here we have him representing us as the chief negotiator.
Since partisan politics hold sway, how can he be heard when his party is no longer in power?
This seems to be contrary to our goal of devolution.
So I ask: what process was used to select this person to represent us?
The individual was not meant to represent us long term.
Mr. Nault was once the Minister of DIAND in a previous government.
He was just brought in for the short term and he worked on a specific project.
He was hired in December and he left after just a few days.
As a matter of fact, he worked for only a two-day period.
Here we are, continually rebuffed by our government whenever we request funding by their contention that we have scarce resources to apply towards our fellow Nunavut residents.
Yet, here we have a transient non-resident who, due to partisan politics, will not be very effective. It seems we have just thrown a lot of money towards this individual for his benefit only.
How much was this individual paid?
As the Premier alluded, this individual worked for just two days. Yet, we have not been informed as to the amount for his short-term contract. How much was he paid?
I would first like to state that this topic related to devolution of powers is a critically important priority for this government and I know for a fact that this is an issue dear to my colleague’s heart.
In his previous position, my colleague was on record as stating that he felt that the devolution process would be completed by the end of the year 2008.
However, it has become apparent that this is a very complex and challenging process to undertake.
Further, it has proven to be a long and winding path towards attaining devolution and it seems that this will be an ongoing file.
I have made this a top priority for this government due to the importance of devolving more powers from the federal government to Nunavummiut.
Additionally, with respect to Mr. Nault, whom he referenced, he was hired on a sub-contractual basis and he was hired for a portion of the contract.
However, as the member knows, as a government, we cannot go make personal inquiries without a knowledgeable consultant who is aware of the requirements to complete the devolution process.
Mr. Nault was retained due to his intimate knowledge of the process required to complete devolution as he was involved in the negotiations in prior years. It was due to his expertise in this area that he was hired for a short-term contract.
The Premier is avoiding the question as I did not hear a response to my query about the cost. I ask again: how much was the cost of this contract?
In the past, when I was involved with the devolution discussions, the Prime Minister and I came to a common agreement that we would try to complete the negotiations on devolution by the end of the calendar year 2008.
This was not my personal statement but an agreement between the Premier of Nunavut and the Prime Minister of Canada.
However, it was only when this individual, Mr. Nault, was transferred out of that portfolio did we make any progress on the file. Mr. Nault was not very supportive of our efforts to devolve more powers. It was only due to his removal from that department that we started to make some progress.
With that kind of historical opposition, why has our government appointed this individual to represent us on this file and how much did that cost?
Mr. Arvaluk: Good question.
With respect to Mr. Nault, he has a vast amount of experience with the devolution process and further, he was involved when the Yukon government undertook their devolution negotiations.
He believes in the principle of devolution. He has the trust of political parties based on his experience.
He is also familiar with the underlying legislation related to this process.
If my esteemed colleague was unaware of this fact, (interpretation ends) in order to have conversations with Members of Parliament and government on Parliament Hill, individuals must be registered as a lobbyist. (interpretation) That firm was registered.