EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Can the minister describe what kinds of resources are allocated specifically to family violence prevention in Nunavut’s communities?
I thank Ms. Ugyuk again for the question.
I know Ms. Ugyuk is a very staunch supporter and advocate for the protection of the most vulnerable in our communities.  It’s no secret that we do have a very serious issue in Nunavut.
Recently, Stats Canada gave us another No. 1 rating, “Nunavut’s sky-high family violence rates tops in Canada.” This is unacceptable. Mr. Speaker, the numbers are over 1,000 in Nunavut and it’s probably many more than that.
Mr. Speaker, in many of the communities, we have social workers and counsellors who can work with people. We have the Saillivik Policy that provides shelters in six communities, and ladies and families who are in difficulties can be sheltered while they are determining how to help them.
The Government of Nunavut, in March 2008, rolled out the Family Abuse Intervention Act. That’s a program that is picking up in the last couple of years. We have community justice outreach workers in every community who can work with people who need assistance.
We call them CJOWs.
We can get emergency protection orders and community intervention orders that can help get people away from potential violence and hopefully bring them back together with counselling.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) Can the minister confirm there are family violence prevention programs offered in every single one of Nunavut’s communities and, if not, then why not?
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank Ms. Ugyuk again for the question.
Mr. Speaker, I can’t confirm precisely what’s in every community.
I do know we have social workers, mental health workers, and other individuals, nurses. For example, in every community, if an individual requires help, they can contact those people directly.
We’re also putting government liaison officers in most communities in Nunavut whom they can also go to, to seek assistance and direction on who to contact.
Yes, under the FAIA Act (Family Abuse Intervention Act), our expectation was that the elders would undertake family intervention counselling where families are undergoing difficulties or abusive situations.
However, I don’t know of any elders who are also social service workers, at least from a personal level.
(interpretation ends) Will the minister commit to tabling a copy of the Family Violence Prevention Strategy at the earliest opportunity?
Mr. Speaker, as I indicated earlier in my answer, I hope to take the strategy to the cabinet for review and approval at the earliest possible opportunity.
I can’t confirm when we will table it, but very likely, if it is approved by cabinet before our next sitting, it will probably be announced and I’ll ensure that all members receive a copy.
Question 369 – 3(3): Marine Infrastructure in Pond Inlet (Enook)
Good afternoon to the residents of Pond Inlet as well as my fellow Nunavummiut.
My questions are for the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation, (interpretation ends) Hon. Taptuna.
(interpretation) As the minister is aware, I have raised the lack of adequate marine infrastructure in Pond Inlet on a number of occasions since my election to the Legislative Assembly and I have repeatedly drawn the attention of the House to the dangerous conditions that are currently being faced by my constituents.
My first question for the minister is this: can he update me today on the status of the government’s efforts to obtain additional federal funding under its Small Craft Harbours program? I would like some more information on that matter, Mr. Speaker.
I thank the member from Tununiq for that excellent question.
Mr. Speaker, as I have stated before in the past, we do have continued efforts to lobby the federal government, especially DFO, to access funding for badly needed marine infrastructure in Nunavut.
As you know, we have one small craft harbour in Pangnirtung that’s still yet to be completed. Having the longest coastline in Canada, we do not have anything else compared to the Eastern Seaboard.
It’s great for the small communities in the Eastern Seaboard. There are over 300 harbours for their small communities, but up here in Nunavut, we do not have any.
Mr. Speaker, I did indicate that I’ll be meeting with the federal Minister of Health and our MP, Hon. Leona Aglukkaq, to discuss the lack of marine facilities in Nunavut.
It sounds to me that we are not going to see any new federal dollars any time soon.
The Department of Economic Development and Transportation’s 2012-13 capital estimates did include $500,000 in funding for the GN’s contribution towards the construction of small craft harbours in Nunavut communities.
Can the minister indicate how the department will be spending this funding during the current fiscal year?
Minister for Economic Development and Transportation, Minister Taptuna.
It’s a small amount, $500,000 per year, which is for infrastructure, such as breakwaters and proper marine facilities in such coastal communities.
For the most part, the estimates are well over $20 million, so this $500,000 per year is just insufficient to carry out some of these projects that we keep bringing up continually, not just here in the House but in Ottawa.
In the past, we have contributed $2.5 million to small floating dock initiatives throughout different communities in Nunavut.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the minister for that clarification.
Last year, the Legislative Assembly’s Standing Committee on Community and Economic Development urged the Department of Economic Development and Transportation to “examine options for feasible and affordable improvements to existing community infrastructure that focus on the safety of boaters and protection of equipment.”
Can the minister indicate how his department has responded to this recommendation?
There’s a small amount of available funding for each community that puts in their application.
This is more or less to clean up the beach side areas for resupply. This amount of money is very small. That depends on the hamlet; they can put in an application to the department to try and clean up or make safer the area where the ships or barges land into a community for resupply.
This amount of money is very small and it’s run through an approval system, depending on the applications that come in from our communities.
Speaker: Thank you, Minister Taptuna. Your final supplementary, Mr. Enook.
I would like to take this opportunity to formally extend an invitation to the minister to visit Pond Inlet this summer during boating season and see with his own eyes the situation facing my community.
Does the minister accept my invitation?
I thank the member for that invitation.
Mr. Speaker, when we’re dealing with infrastructure in Nunavut, it’s quite pertinent, and I understand that the engineering technicians we do have available assist with the projects that we’re trying to do.
Of course, by looking and going straight to the site of where a community is wishing to put in some infrastructure is a valid point. I consider that as a valid point. There’s nothing like going on the ground there and inspecting and looking at what the community wants.
I know it’s very difficult at times to get to some of these communities throughout Nunavut.
To look at some of this very important infrastructure that the member brings up is a real need throughout Nunavut communities.
It’s one of the things that this government, including myself, will have to address down the line here.
To a degree, we do need help from Ottawa. There are campaign promises talking about some certain situation, deep sea anchorage, and we do have to pursue that fact, that this infrastructure is desperately needed up north.
Question 370 – 3(3): Correctional System Issues (Elliott)
I would like to follow up today on the issues that were raised by my colleague from Baker Lake during last Friday’s question period, so my questions are for the Minister of Justice.
Last week, the Northwest Territories Minister of Justice tabled a technical report in his Legislative Assembly concerning the impact that the new federal crime legislation, Bill C-10, would have on the GNWT’s correctional system.
Bill C-10 received Royal Assent in March.
The GNWT concluded that the federal legislation will result in an additional 3,878 bed-days per year in their correctional system.
Can the minister inform the House if our Department of Justice has undertaken a similar analysis of the impact of Bill C-10 on our correctional system and, if so, would he commit to tabling it in the House this week?
In regard to C-10 and the capacity that Nunavut has, we are presently reviewing this information and doing an analysis on Bill C-10 and the effects it can have on Nunavut.
We do not have a final report. We are working on putting together information on not only what kind of demands and pressures it’s going to put on us in our justice system but also the costs that come with that.
We have nothing that is completed, but when we do have something completed, I will commit to tabling it.
On January 26 of this year, the minister met with his federal, provincial, and territorial counterparts. The communiqué from the FPT meeting indicated, and I quote, “Federal Ministers stated that the views of the provinces and territories will be considered regarding the coming into force of amendments included in Bill C-10 and that a staggered implementation of amendments to the Criminal Code, Youth Criminal Justice Act and the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act within a reasonable time will facilitate preparation for implementation for all jurisdictions.”
Can the minister advise the House when the federal changes will come into force and start impacting Nunavut?
I would like to thank Mr. Elliott for that excellent question.
He is absolutely right. There was consensus amongst federal, territorial, and provincial ministers that we were concerned about Bill C-10 coming into effect and how soon that would happen.
At that time, it was the position of a majority of us that this C-10 would be implemented over a period of six or seven years.
That was a position that we left with.  He’s absolutely also right that the bill has assent now and it is in effect.
As far as implementation and the layout of the bill, that is not yet to be defined and finalized in my view.
I think that it will be given through the direction of court services across Canada.
During Friday’s question period, the minister indicated that Nunavut’s current memorandum of understanding with the Government of the Northwest Territories regarding placement of inmates does not expire until the fiscal year-end of 2014.
Has the minister discussed a timetable with his NWT counterpart for the repatriation of Nunavut offenders currently placed in NWT correctional facilities?
As I said, information just came out late last week.
No, I have not had the opportunity to discuss this with my counterpart in the NWT.
However, as I have indicated, our agreement is valid until the fiscal year-end of 2014.
At that time, Mr. Speaker, we are going to have the Rankin Inlet facility open and hopefully by that time, our plan for our temporary emergency structure that we have here in Iqaluit would be in place too.
I look forward to getting that information as well as the commitments regarding any sort of cost increase and whatnot that will be happening.
Earlier this year, I asked a written question to the minister concerning our correctional system’s programs for the healing and rehabilitation of offenders.
To me, it would seem that if the impact of federal legislation is going to be more offenders in our correctional system, the minister is going to have to ask the Legislative Assembly for more funding for programs to deal with the increased prison population.
Can the minister give us a sense of what new resources his department requires?
We have quite a lengthy list of programs that are offered in BCC and are potentially going to be offered in Rankin Inlet.
I can’t provide any additional costs that would come with those programs.
However, what I will do and I can supply the member is a list of programs that we do have in our programming right now and what we plan for the Rankin Inlet facility.
Question 371 – 3(3): Plans for Unmanned Aerial Drones over Canadian Arctic (Curley)
There was a CBC news report on June 1 with regard to drones flying over the Nunavut territory.
The Harper government is now considering if they could use the drone airplanes (interpretation ends) to patrol the Canadian Arctic. (interpretation) Can the Premier tell us whether she has been updated or have you told the federal government what the position of the Government of Nunavut is on what the federal government is proposing?
This announcement is so recent that we haven’t had an opportunity to review the drones that the federal government is proposing.
I have not yet received any correspondence on this issue.
The United States government is usually the buyer of these drones known as Polar Hawks, which could fly from one end of Nunavut to the other end five or six times.
That is what is being proposed.
The Prime Minister also made an announcement last year that if the Arctic is not used, then we will lose it.
This proposal appears to be pointless.
Can you communicate with the Prime Minister informally, if not by correspondence, that we don’t even want those drones considered?
I also thank the member for speaking his mind on that issue.
Mr. Speaker, as I stated, we just recently heard about the federal government’s plans.
This is indeed a very important aspect of sovereignty, especially when we are trying to prove to Canada and to the rest of the world that sovereignty is important.
It is our position that Inuit have inhabited this part of the world for millennia.
I believe it is very important that our positions be understood by the federal government in relation to this issue. We keep trying to focus their priorities on housing and other infrastructure that’s important to Nunavut, such as small craft harbours, docks, and airstrips.
We believe that these actions would strengthen Canadian sovereignty.
If the federal government is serious about sovereignty, they should be investing in infrastructure that allows the residents to practice their sovereignty.  Inuit have inhabited the Arctic for many years and we have never left the Arctic homelands.
We believe it is much more important to focus on infrastructure, such as housing, marine infrastructure, and others. We have to make that very clear to the federal government.
Does that mean, as I understand, Madam Premier, you will now be informing the Prime Minister that these funds of $150 million to $170 million that they have estimated using American figures for these unmanned drones are absolutely of no use to the people of Nunavut?
Will you be able to contact him right away and let him know what we feel about this?
Will you be writing to the Prime Minister on this issue?
With the very recent announcement that proposes to introduce these unmanned drones to our territory, this is a brand new initiative which we’re just starting to examine. Whenever we have held discussions with our federal counterparts, we have always stated our priorities and the fact that we require more infrastructures.
Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the article states right in the preamble that the Harper government is considering a proposal to buy at least three high-altitude unmanned aerial vehicles to patrol the Canadian Arctic, Also, Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has indicated to Canadians that if we don’t make an effective use of the Arctic, we will lose it.
I think it’s important that the Premier immediately communicate to the Prime Minister that it is not in the best interest of Canadians nor Nunavutmiut to use unmanned craft to patrol the Arctic; it’s a waste of resources.
Will the Premier tell the Prime Minister to fly the kite somewhere else?
I appreciate the fact that the Prime Minister comes here every summer. He has seen with his own eyes what we need every time he comes here.
I will keep pushing for what we need and try to make them understand our need for infrastructure.
The only way we can do this is by working together.
The Nunavut government alone cannot pay for the entire infrastructure we need, but only by working together with the federal government and other stakeholders, and that is what I continue to push hard for.
Member for Quttittuq, Mr. Elliott.
Question 372 – 3(3): Community Access Program Funding (Elliott)
My questions are for the Minister of Education and are based around the Minister’s Statement that she did today regarding the Community Access Program.
I have worked with the Community Access Program for years in my community of Arctic Bay and I have seen the definite benefits to the communities when they receive the free Internet access for people who are not able to actually access it at home.
I was hoping for a little bit of clarification. In a statement by our MP, the Hon. Leona Aglukkaq, in her role as the Minister of Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency, announced $525,900 over three years to the Nunavut Community Access Program.
Obviously, it would appear that the federal government and the territorial government are working together in tandem on this program.
Obviously, this cooperation is needed and makes good sense. Obviously, something I have been trying to promote is having governments work together.
Could the Premier clarify in terms of her Minister’s Statement talking about $85,500 and Minister Aglukkaq was referring to $525,000?
So if she could clarify whether these are the same funds or different funding.
Speaker: Hopefully that wasn’t an unmanned drone flying over town.
As I said today, the $85,500 is to make up for what we lost from the federal government’s Community Access Program funds.
It will include funds to cover the rising costs of Internet access and office supplies, such as paper and ink.
Mr. Elliott: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Thank you for explaining that.
Again, I’m still a little bit confused in terms of what the $525,000 is that’s being stated by our federal minister.
It’s for the same sort of services.
The initiative will enhance the basic services currently provided at the CAP sites, [which] is what Aglukkaq was saying in her minister’s statement today.
Again, you had said that money was not renewed through Industry Canada. I’m wondering: are these separate programs?
Maybe she could just clarify again because I’m still a little bit confused.
Hon. Eva Aariak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I was referring to the funds that were cut. We started looking for additional funds to see if we could make up for that loss within the department’s budget to ensure that the communities can continue to provide Internet services.
With respect to these funds announced by Ottawa, I would have to check into it and provide that information at a later time.
Again, for clarification, are your officials aware of the federal funding that’s provided to the Nunavut CAP Association over each fiscal year?
It sounds like, in the minister’s statement, it is ongoing funding that has actually supported the CAP program for a number of years.
The announcements were about the cutbacks to the federal funding of the CAP program, which was the reason why we had to start searching for additional funding.
If the member recalls, just a short while ago, this announcement was made of the cutbacks in funding for this program. That was the rationale for introducing this budgeting change and this is to ensure that communities continue to provide Internet access.
There are limited opportunities for Internet access in the smaller communities, so these access programs are much more important to them.
There are 24 computer systems that we have identified to be provided to 20 communities in Nunavut.
Thank you for that information. For my final question, the minister had committed to getting back to us in regard to what federal funding was provided for the Nunavut CAP program and also what funding the Department of Education provides. I was wondering if the Premier could let us know how long it will take for her officials to get the information and report back to us in the House.
We know very well that within the Department of Education, the $85,500, that I identified what they are going to be used for, where they are coming from, and why we had to produce this.
As I said, I want to check and find out what the federal government has actually said after they announced this other funding following the CAP cutbacks.
I will retrieve this information from our office at the Department of Education. It could be that we have the full information, but it’s something we have to double-check with that last announcement from the federal government.
Question 373 – 3(3): Arrangements at Winnipeg Airport for Medical Travellers (Ningeongan)
Mr. Ningeongan (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are to the Minister of Health and Social Services. A lot of times, I don’t ask questions because he sits right beside me.
From the time the airport in Winnipeg started to be used, it has been noticed that passengers have to take a long walk to the terminal to pick up their luggage.
This has been a problem for some people and I was asked to look into it.
I’m just wondering if the minister can look into how to alleviate this for the patients.
You sit beside him, so I’m assuming you have a healthy relationship. Minister of Health and Social Services, Minister Peterson.
Yes, we do have a healthy relationship. He allows me to use some of his desk with my binders, so I’m just very appreciative of that.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Mr. Ningeongan for that question. It’s an issue that came to our attention some time back when the new airport opened.
We learned that the distance from the airplane gates to the terminal area where the passengers enter the airport is a 5- to 10-minute walk and there are stairs along the way.
Our Kivalliq office has made arrangements with the airlines and the airport to ensure that if there is a medical patient or an elder who needs transportation, they will be met at the airplane gate to be transported by wheelchair or one of those cars that they drive in the airports that we hear beeping and all that for us to get out of their way.
So it’s quite an issue for us and we’re working on it.
Your first supplementary, Ms. Ningeongan.
Mr. Ningeongan (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also thank the minister for solving this problem; at least we will cooperate on that.
I appreciate the minister’s understanding of the situation and his response.
I think the heart of this issue is that some medical patients have arthritis or are quite elderly and they cannot walk long distances. It seems like there wasn’t enough consideration given to people in that situation.
If they remedied this situation and if they are looking at solutions, perhaps the minister could look at including the airlines that provide medical travel and ambulance services.
So can the minister commit to discussing that with them?
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Again I thank Mr. Ningeongan for raising that issue on behalf of his constituents and I believe that all the folks from the Kivalliq region have to go through that airport.
I apologize, of course, for any inconvenience and difficulties anyone has experienced going through that airport.
I will assure that our officials in the Kivalliq who make arrangements for travellers will talk to the airport managers and airlines to facilitate easier transportation between the airplane gate and the baggage claim area.
Question 374 – 3(3): Completion of Renovations at Taloyoak Arena (Ugyuk)
In Taloyoak, this is now the third year that the arena hasn’t been open.
When it does open, it’s open for only two to three weeks or up to a month.
This facility is important to the young people.
They have been trying to renovate it for a number of years. When will it be fixed?
My name is Quasa, so I know the need to have that Quasaarvik fixed.