EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I do not have the exact dollar figure available. However, as part of the funding formula, we do look at what the historical costs have been for the Iqaluit Housing Authority to operate their facilities. As they’re no longer operating them, then we will be adjusting their transfers accordingly.
We’re all fighting for the same dollars in our communities, so I wouldn’t want to see Iqaluit get another bone thrown at them, as it could be said.
I don’t know if that is more of a question or a suggestion.
The sea cans that we talked about when you were before us and the tabled documents, was it 3,000 sea cans across the territory or did they get the numbers mixed up?
How many sea cans do we have across the territory?
We have quite a large number of them. I do not know the exact number, to be honest with you. However, we do realize that there is a substantial amount of them around.
As we have discussed the last time we appeared before the House, part of what we’re doing is our spring clean-up is to identify where they are and possible uses for them because we don’t want them left derelict in the communities and we want to make use of them where we can.
In my head, usually they go for between $3,000 and $5,000. If they were $3,000, that’s a huge amount of money that could go to other projects. If they are selling them, and I think that you mentioned the last time you were here, do people have the ability if they wish to contact the local housing authority to ask to purchase one or do they have to contact the Nunavut Housing Corporation?
In order to avoid all of the phones ringing in all of our communities, I just want to clarify that we will be advertising in the communities when we have sea cans available for sale.
Once we have gone through the exercise of determining which ones we wish to keep for our uses, which ones we wish to remove from the community, and which ones we will make available for sale, these will be publicly advertised at that point. So we’re not at that point yet.
I have actually received messages sent from people who were watching from last week asking when they will be able to purchase them.
At least now I can go back and tell them that it will be advertised, depending on what is available.
I think, when I figured it out, it was about $9 million worth of sea cans. That’s a pretty sizable amount of money that could go towards some of the other projects that are going on.
That was everything, Mr. Chairman.
The Nunavut Housing Corporation’s draft 2001-14 business plan indicates that one of its priorities is to “Implement revised homeownership policies and guidelines and monitor success.” Which policies are being looked at and what changes to them is the Nunavut Housing Corporation considering?
The policy review referred to in the business plan by the member refers to basically trying to harmonize all of the programs that we have currently in our books. A number of them have been initiated since the Nunavut Housing Corporation was created and a number of them have been inherited programs from the Northwest Territories days. What we were going through is an exercise to harmonize the income requirements and the way that the processes are followed for all of our various programs.
So that is the first stage. We have identified that there are some changes to the programs as a result of this review that require cabinet approval before we can implement them.
We are moving that forward as we speak.
The second part of our review of homeownership programs was referred to earlier through our housing forum that we held back in January of this year.
We’re tying that in with our GN Comprehensive Long-Term Housing Strategy development that we’re aiming for the fall of this year to have ready. Keeping in mind the results of our Nunavut Housing Needs Survey, we will be looking at what the needs and the demands are within Nunavut and looking at our programs closely to see, in terms of uptake and effectiveness, if we need to revise them in terms of scope and to identify any gaps in our programs.
We also want to make sure that our rental programs, our homeownership programs, and our staff housing programs are all part of a continuum of housing so that they’re not developed or looked at in isolation.
We want to look at that as well from a more global prospective, which are all GN housing requirements in terms of what the private sector can do for us, how this ties into transitional housing, long-term residential care facilities, for example, and looking at this from a broader spectrum.
Currently, does the Nunavut Housing Corporation have a method of evaluating the success of homeownership programs?
Our main factor in determining effectiveness of programs is the uptake or the demand for programs. We have a number of programs that have very few applicants, so those can be deemed to maybe have outlived their usefulness. Meanwhile, other programs have very high demand, so those programs appear to be rather effective.
Our main measure is the demand for them.
But as well, if there are clients who are coming back and reapplying for the same program every few years, then we need to revisit that as well to see if there’s a better solution.
We will go to the Department Summary.
Nunavut Housing Corporation. Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $143,759,000. Do you agree?
Hon. Tagak Curley: Yes, I do. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to thank all of you. I know that the Nunavut Housing Corporation is a very important agency of the government.
Together, I think all of you, we have a commitment to provide affordable housing and we will continue to do that.
We recognize there are some challenges out there, but you have pointed out a whole slew of them throughout the course of the year and I want to personally thank all of you for making your points heard.
Particularly, I want to acknowledge our district officers out there who are doing quite challenging work as well, like monitoring all of the projects that they’re building throughout Nunavut, and we want to encourage them to continue that.
Now we have the commitment to restructure the corporation. Mr. Chairman, I just want to let you know that we will continue to work to make the Nunavut Housing Corporation an effective Crown agency and we look forward to the coming season to complete all of the units that we have committed to do so.
We would like to thank you and your staff for coming in before the committee to answer questions.
Do members agree that we will proceed with the next department, the Department of Justice?
Bill 01 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2011-2012 – Consideration in Committee – Justice
Chairman: Oh, that was scary.
I got scared for a minute.
You got quite a jolt there; it woke you right up.
The Department of Justice has been allocated a total operating budget of $88,387,000.
This represents a $10,335,000 increase, or 13 percent, over last year’s budget.
This additional funding allows us to move forward on:
Funding for four new community corrections officers.
A budget increase in the amount of $2,500,000 for the Legal Services Board to respond to growth in the delivery of legal aid services.
An increase in funding for the RCMP to cover pay and benefit increases for RCMP members and the addition of two crime reduction members at RCMP headquarters. These members will provide a proactive approach to address crime throughout the territory.
We have funding for 45 new positions for the new Kivalliq Correctional Centre in Rankin Inlet.
We hope that the majority of staff will be hired from the region. Training will be provided by our Corrections Division prior to staff working with offenders in the facility.
We have new funding approved for a correctional liaison officer that will better enable the department to provide culturally appropriate services in Inuktitut to offenders located outside the territory.
Mr. Chairman, the Department of Justice continues to encourage recruitment, training, and advancement of Inuit in positions relating to corrections, community justice, and throughout all of the Department of Justice.
In closing, Mr. Chairman, this is the summary of some initiatives that the Department of Justice is moving forward on.
Chairman: Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the minister and witnesses in.
To my right is Janet Slaughter, Deputy Minister of the Department of Justice, and to my left is Christine Bens, she is the Intern Corporate Services Manager.
This is her first time appearing before the Committee of the Whole.
I am pleased to provide opening comments on behalf of the Standing Committee on Social Wellness on its review of the proposed 2011-12 main estimates and 2011-14 business plan of the Department of Justice.
The standing committee notes that the department’s proposed 2011-12 operations and maintenance budget of $88,387,000 has increased by approximately 13.2 percent since the introduction of the department’s 2010-11 main estimates.
The standing committee also notes that the total number of positions in the department has increased from 267 PYs in 2010-11 to 317 PYs in 2011-12.
Members recognize that this increase is primarily a consequence of the anticipated opening of the new correctional facility in Rankin Inlet.
Mr. Chairman, given the nature of Department of Justice’s mandate, it is essential that the department set an example for the government when it comes to respecting statutory requirements for the tabling of annual reports, especially reports that are of high interest to the public, including annual reports under the Human Rights Act, the Family Abuse Intervention Act, and the Liquor Act.
The standing committee looks forward to improvements in the timeliness of these tablings.
In 2010, the Legislative Assembly approved Supplementary Appropriation (Operations and Maintenance) Act, 2010-2011, No. 3. This contained $2.5 million in supplementary funding to address the Legal Services Board’s “projected year-end budget shortfall.”
The department’s proposed business plan indicates that the amount of annual funding provided to the Legal Services Board is increasing from $5,807,000 in 2010-11 to $8,307,000 in 2011-12
The standing committee applauds the minister’s efforts to work with his provincial and territorial counterparts to lobby the federal government to fund a greater proportion of the costs of criminal and civil legal aid and notes the contents of the October 15, 2010 communiqué issued by federal, provincial, and territorial ministers of justice concerning this issue.
The standing committee also notes that the department’s proposed business plan indicates that the Legal Services Board, and I quote, “continues to assess the viability of a stand alone family law clinic at Maliiganik Tukisiiniakvik.”
The standing committee also notes that the department’s proposed business plan indicates that one of its priorities for the 2012-13 fiscal year is to “Investigate independent society status for LSB.”
The standing committee looks forward to future updates on this initiative following the department’s planned review of the board’s operations in 2011-12.
Mr. Chairman, committee members raised the ongoing issue of communication difficulties between the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and the public whom it serves.
The standing committee continues to be concerned that a lack of Inuit language capacity exacerbates communication difficulties between law enforcement and the public.
Members note that section 3 of the Inuit Language Protection Act provides that organizations shall communicate with the public in the Inuit language when delivering essential services, such as “emergency, rescue or similarly urgent services.”
The standing committee encourages the minister to work closely with the RCMP to address this issue and supports such initiatives as recruiting bilingual special constables into communities.
The standing committee also notes that enhanced representativeness within the ranks of the RCMP can be anticipated to have a positive impact on crime prevention initiatives.
The standing committee also encourages the minister to resume the practice of regularly tabling in the Legislative Assembly such items as the annual shared directional statement between the Government of Nunavut and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police.
The standing committee notes that the department’s proposed business plan indicates that “The RCMP has suggested changes to the way large orders of alcohol are shipped into the territory and will continue to provide input into the Liquor Act Review.”
The standing committee supports efforts to strengthen the working relationship between the government and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police with respect to information-sharing initiatives that are intended to combat the illegal sale of alcohol by bootleggers.
The standing committee also encourages the minister to pursue his idea of introducing civil forfeiture legislation to address the issue of assets acquired through the proceeds of crime.
Mr. Chairman, the department’s proposed business plan indicates that a one-year pilot project to create a “Healthy Relationships Court” in Iqaluit is under development.
Members look forward to ongoing updates on this initiative, including clarification on such matters as the extent to which its decisions will have the force of law.
An ongoing concern of members has been the issue of probation services in Nunavut. The standing committee notes that the department’s proposed business plan indicates that “Community Corrections has been working at establishing a ‘stand alone’ probation service for Nunavut.
Probation services that were formerly handled by Health and Social Services are now being conducted by Community Corrections officers in some communities. Community Corrections officers provide supervision, support and programming to adult and youth offenders serving sentences on probation or under conditional sentences.
Social Services still provide some services in communities where we do not have Community Corrections officers.”
The standing committee looks forward to ongoing updates on this issue.
The standing committee notes that one of the department’s priorities is to “Complete mentoring and training of staff for the new Kivalliq Correctional Centre in Rankin Inlet prior to opening of the new facility.”
The standing committee looks forward to regular updates on the status of staffing the new facility and encourages the department to make efforts to maximize local employment at the correctional centre.
The standing committee notes with concern that the department’s proposed business plan indicates that “no additional resources have been identified by either Corrections or Community Justice towards the reintegration of offenders after incarceration.
Options are being considered by both divisions and this will remain a priority of the division into 2011-2012.”
Recognizing that a number of important written questions have been posed by Members of the Legislative Assembly concerning the department’s programs to reduce recidivism, the standing committee encourages enhanced efforts in this area.
In June of 2009, the Department of Justice issued a request for proposals for an evaluation of the implementation of the Family Abuse Intervention Act.
A report was subsequently prepared by the Genesis Group. However, this document has not yet been tabled in the Legislative Assembly.
Last November, CBC News reported that it had obtained a copy of the report by filing a request under the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
The standing committee urges the minister to table this report in the Legislative Assembly.
The department’s proposed business plan indicates that one of its priorities in 2011-12 is to “develop policy and procedures for implementing Family Abuse Intervention Act (FAIA) practices including the enforcement of the Orders available under the Act.”
Recognizing that a number of important written questions have been posed by a Member of the Legislative Assembly concerning this legislation, the standing committee looks forward to ongoing improvements in its administration.
The standing committee notes that the department’s proposed business plan indicates that one of its priorities in 2011-12 is to “review the scope of work currently being conducted by Community Justice Committees.”
The standing committee applauds the minister for having tabled an annual report on the activities of community justice committees across Nunavut and expresses its support for measures to facilitate their important work.
I suggest to members that wherever possible you ask your detailed questions during the page-by-page review of the departmental estimates. Do members have any general comments? Mr. Ningark.
My question is pertaining to the opening comments of the Hon. Minister for Justice.
On the second last paragraph of the minister’s opening comments, the minister talks about the department encouraging recruitment, training, and advancement of Inuit in positions relating to corrections, community justice, and so on.
My question is in regard to community justice. I believe this has to do with community outreach program workers.
Yes, Mr. Ningark is correct; it is community justice outreach workers and community justice committees.
Subsequent to the response of the hon. minister, how many of the Nunavut communities now have a community outreach program worker?
I thank Mr. Ningark for that question. Mr. Chairman, I believe all of the Nunavut communities have community justice outreach workers.
In regard to the minister’s opening comments, there is an increase this year of 13 percent over last year’s budget.
I’m sure that I will have questions in regard to that issue as we do the page-by-page review.
Mr. Chairman, this is my general comment with respect to the increase.
Perhaps it is because the crime rate is increasing.
I will want to get that clarification.
The 18 percent is quite huge, but I do understand that there is going to be 45 new positions in the new Kivalliq Correctional Centre in Rankin Inlet and I’m sure that is why there is an increase in the operating budget.
In the opening comments, he also made reference to a correctional liaison officer “that will better enable the department to provide culturally appropriate services in Inuktitut to offenders located outside the territory.”
If I understand that correctly, as we do our page-by-page review, what percentage of Nunavut residents who are Inuit are incarcerated in the correctional facilities?
If we look at all of the inmates in the correctional facilities, how many of them are Inuit Nunavut beneficiaries? I meant living humans who are aboriginal.
I would like to get an understanding prior to your undertaking these activities.
Is this funding to be used for the corrections so that they can provide more services to inmates or is this geared towards incarceration?
So those are my two main questions. At the appropriate time during the page-by-page review, I’ll have more questions.
I’ll give the minister a chance if he wants to answer now.
Yes, Mr. Chairman, 13 percent is quite a large increase and Mr. Tapardjuk alluded to it.
The $5,884,000 is indeed for the new correctional facility. The $2.5 million is for an increase to the Legal Services Board so they can provide legal services to Nunavummiut. $564,000 of that is for probation officers.
Members have asked for more probation officers to relieve the work of the social workers. $450,000 of that is to provide the RCMP with two crime reduction members who would work with Iqaluit and all Nunavut communities to actually put programs and initiatives in place to help reduce crime in Nunavut in dealing with prolific offenders, repeat offenders, and help gather intelligence for drug seizures and bootleggers’ dealings.
Another $757,000 is for the RMCP pay and superannuation increase. $180,000 is for the liaison officer in Ontario.
We have a lot of our folks who were sent to Ontario.
There are three or four correctional facilities down there that have people from Nunavut.
I visited three of the facilities in 2009 and talked to several of the inmates there from Nunavut.
They indicated to me that they would like to have someone who could coordinate for them visits from elders, arrange for country foods, arrange for bibles to be delivered to them, arrange for calling cards and visits from their friends and relatives in Nunavut.
There was a person there who was on casual in Ottawa, and then we identified that he’s performing such a good service that we would make the position permanent and give him more resources to carry out his duties.
With respect to how many numbers of Inuit who are in correctional facilities in Nunavut and outside of the territory, I would have to get some details on that and provide that.
I’ll be asking more questions when we go to the page-by-page review and when we reach the appropriate time, we will raise more questions.
We have heard through CBC Radio that Nunavik already has a person who travels to the communities and you can hear the person on the radio talking about incarcerated individuals in the penitentiaries.
We will need to deal with the service as well for beneficiaries who are housed outside of the territory.
I am very pleased about that.
That’s just a comment, but I’ll be asking questions at the appropriate time.
I have no more names on my list here for general comments.
We will now proceed to the page-by-page review of the departmental estimates starting with E-4. Justice. Branch Summary.
Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $13,346,000.
Chairman: We will move on to E-5. Branch Summary.
Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $27,317,000.
Chairman: We will move on to E-6. Justice. Branch Summary.
Mr. Tapardjuk (interpretation): With respect to the legal aid services in Nunavut, what are the reasons for this increase? I would like to know the reasons.
Are the inmates increasing annually? What are the approximate numbers of people being incarcerated or charged with a crime that results in this increase, Mr. Chairman?
E-6 is actually lawyers who work for legal and constitutional law and legislation in the Department of Justice.
I can answer the question on legal aid. It’s a statutory body that’s at arm’s length from the government and historically they have been underfunded.
This current fiscal year, they identified that they need an increase of $2.5 million because there has been a significant increase in violent crime, homicides, and attempted murders in Nunavut.
They are very complicated, expensive cases to defend the accused and everybody is entitled to be represented in court.
So they have asked for the funding in this current fiscal year and an increase to their base funding in future years.
If you recall, in November, there was an increase through a supp bill of $2.5 million and we are asking for an increase for their base funding in the main estimates.
Unfortunately and sadly there in an increase of violent crime in Nunavut and we do have to represent these individuals.
I wish it was different, but it’s an increase in crime, very serious crime, and that’s why we need this increase for legal aid.
It further states under Corporate Services of the Department of Justice that there is a substantial increase of 28 percent. Is this related to the facility in Rankin Inlet or is the reason for opening the correctional facility in Rankin Inlet for this increase?
The increase seems a bit substantial if it were just for the opening, as it was $8,566,000, which is now $10,956,000.
I imagine there are underlying reasons for this increase. I would like to understand why this has increase, Mr. Chairman.
On what page is that in the business plan?
Mr. Tapardjuk (interpretation): The department’s draft 2011-14 business plans indicates that the venture for its Corporate Service Division… .
Wait; let me try to find it.
Perhaps I am mistaken. No, I don’t think so.
In the 2011-14 business plan, it indicates that the budget for its Corporate Services Division will increase from $8,566,000 in 2010-11 to $10,956,000 in 2011-12.
The increase is approximately 28 percent.
Perhaps they still have not understood my point, Mr. Chairman.
If it’s on page 61 of the business plan, the corporate services increase of $2.5 million is for the Nunavut Legal Services Board.
We will go to Justice.