EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
On April 26, 2002, I received a letter from the District Education Authority Chairperson person from Coral Harbour.
I’m not going to read the letter but it states that we’ve been trying to get a high school for four years and because there’s no plan for a high school we would like to request money for elders to get involved in the school because there are so many more students.
We also brought this issue to the Department of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth; we didn’t receive a response.
This situation is becoming quite urgent and I am looking forward to a response.
Could you tell me, because there are so many students in Coral Harbour and in other communities, in the schools, based on the previous year figures how they determine many teachers there will be in the New Year?
We also know that the teachers are doing a tremendous job; the parents are getting involved in schools.
You see a lot more students going back to school that have dropped out and that’s why there are so many more students. So my question is the school will be out in June probably.
What are your plans for the New Year, not just in Coral Harbour but in the other communities as well, for the fall when the student-teacher ratio is really high?
What plans do you have for schools that might have a high student-teacher ratio?
Is the funding set aside under 9-18 to plan for the high student teacher ratio?
Before I get the minister to respond, 9-18 goes to 9-24, please make a note of that.
The Department of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth, there was a program where money was put aside for a time for elders to get involved in the schools and since that isn’t there any more we are looking at how we could involve more elders in the schools.
There was an agreement approved for 2.8 million dollars.
Eighty five percent of it would be used for new teachers and we would consider Coral Harbour in that program once we start looking at the communities that are in priority need.
The Minister of Finance mentioned that 2.8 million dollars.
Are there any other additional plans if there are too many students are for teacher-student ratio for this coming August?
Yes, looking at the students every year, the students increase up to three percent for the schools according to the report.
I don’t think we will lack any more positions because of the funding.
But of course, we will need to seek more funding for the next school year.
We are trying to keep up with the new students and the student-teacher ratio.
We will continue to push for elders to take part in the classrooms.
I think our minister knows this as well as I do that in Iqaluit there are a lot of students moving into Iqaluit because their parents are finding employment here.
In Coral Harbour, there are more people moving there even without the government because it’s a dry community, they like the community, there is a low crime rate and the community of Coral Harbour is always looking for ways of having a better life.
Because of that people are moving in even though it’s different from Iqaluit.
Other communities are decreasing in population while other communities are increasing very quickly, I think we should be aware of that when we are talking about the capital funding for each community.
Coral Harbour for example, because it’s a good community, there are more people moving there all the time.
Some of the students who drop out in grade 10 are beginning to come back to high school even though the population is approximately 700, there are more and more students in high school.
It’s good to see the students coming back to school but they lack classrooms. Sometimes there are 26, 27 students in one classroom.
For example, it’s not a big classroom and the more updated classrooms are a little bit smaller. Because of that it’s confusing when there are too many students in one small classroom.
They would like to be assisted by Elders, they are called classroom assistants but that would be of help.
I talked about the increasing number of students.
People are moving from other communities to Coral Harbour and those families with children who move to Coral Harbour I don’t know from what community, that other community decreases in students when somebody moves to Coral Harbour.
That’s something to consider.
It’s hard to pinpoint how many students are moving from community to community.
This has been happening for more than one year.
Looking at the school operations, Coral Harbour for example, there are 27 students in a classroom.
The lowest number of students in a classroom is 12.
Looking at this figure it’s not just Coral Harbour’s concern it’s the other communities as well.
The Finance Minister responded to me saying that there are funding lapses.
This 10 million dollars for funding lapses will not be available because it will be used for other emergency operations from what we have used in the last three years.
He mentioned that there was 2.8 million dollars, because of that, not just for Coral Harbour but is there a plan to use that money for overcrowded classrooms?
Sorry, the 10 million wouldn’t be here but if we need teachers in different communities I’m sure there will be money available and we’re going to keep track of which communities need new teachers, and new classrooms and which of the communities are most in need, perhaps Coral Harbour for example.
The last item I have Mr. Chairman.
That money wouldn’t be available then but would we be able to consider in the classroom plans for 2003 – 2004 O&M for the school operations there are just a few, 145 million around that area.
I am sorry, Mr. Chairman, O&M, 152 million 453 thousand.
It is up to us to approve that or not and that is our prerogative.
Even though we have that figure, are there additional funds set aside?
Shouldn’t there be an additional two million up to five million for the whole of Nunavut to be used for school operations or sometimes staff housing is seriously lacking in some communities, thereby preventing the filling of some positions.
I have heard of cases where 70% and 65% of positions have not been filled due to the lack of housing and if the housing were to be found, then the school positions might be opened for the next year.
Due to that reason and others facing us, for next year’s funding, will there be any set aside that can be used for emergencies?
The member here, I understand what you are saying, it would be good to have extra money put aside for things like that, but I can tell you that there will be no money put aside.
We have to have a plan for funding to go to the FMB, when we request funding.
I don’t have any of the operating figures, the openings are very tight right now, and I doubt that further funding requests would be approved at this point.
The last question for Mr. Arvaluk.
Looking at the figures for the operations 2001-2002 last summer, which we are using for our planning for this year.
They quickly planned a yearly plan in Coral Harbour.
Three up to five, I don’t have the figure in the documents in front of me here but there was a motion in the Second Reading of Bills stating that there will be money available from 2001-2002.
Wouldn’t we be able to plan just before school starts to make sure that there is enough money for classrooms and enough teachers?
This is to ensure that there is no shortfall in our operational requirements, let us say that we cannot hire teachers in August and find ourselves in a jam.
Shouldn’t we have enough money planned to operate the school system as planned in case of fiscal difficulties?
Yes, there are communities that will be getting their new schools.
On September 30th, we will be able to find out exactly how many more students will be enrolled in the classrooms, based on the previous estimate of new enrolments.
So that’s when we’ll be able to find out the number of students that have enrolled.
That is the only time that we can identify shortfalls or surpluses in our plans.
At this time I have Mr. Nutarak.
On 9-18, under school operations, the line item “compensation and benefits”, there was 58 million dollars in 2001/2002 and the number has increased in 2002/2003 by roughly four million dollars to over 63 million dollars and I just want to get some clarification as to why the compensation has increased and what has caused the sudden increase.
Minister Kilabuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The collective agreement that was negotiated is part of the reason for the increase.
It was a little over 2 million 300 thousand dollars of new commitments.
Also because there has been an increase in the teachers and the students, there’s a little over 2 million, 700 thousand dollars as well for the forced growth of the schools.
That’s why there’s an increase in compensation and benefits.
Turning the page to 9-20, the top paragraph, it was a little over 3.2 million dollars and now it’s only 2.8 million dollars.
Like I said before, it’s got to do with a one-time funding that was given for new technology and we didn’t have to budget for that again this year.
The one-time budget that was used, I guess that it was good to have it as it gave the department more funds to allocate but are there going to be difficulties if there are any more decreases coming this year or the next year.
Because it was one-time funding, after this fiscal year is over, we’ll be negotiating with the Federal Government for further funding and during those negotiations with the Federal Government we’ll be submitting the request for further funding.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): I didn’t pay attention to some parts of his response, even though I know that, do I understand that you’ll be negotiating with the Federal Government and you will not be decreasing that funding.
Is that what I understand?
Chairperson (interpretation) Thank you. Minister Kilabuk.
Yes, we will not be decreasing the funding for the department.
We will be negotiating again with the Government of Canada for some funding and it would be under this section.
It would be under this section here under the Labour Market Development Agreement, and it would only be added if the federal government agreed.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): I have to turn back a little bit to 9-19.
The 9 million dollars under the line item grants and contributions.
Is that 9 million for the entire 26 communities in Nunavut or is that just for one community?
It’s for the 26 communities in Nunavut.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): Will that be distributed according to per capita or is it divided as per the wishes of the members.
It’ll be distributed evenly for operational requirements and thereafter according to per capita.
We will use both methods.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): The minister stated that it would be distributed according to both per capita and distributed evenly for operational requirements.
What do you mean when you say that you will use both methods?
Are you going to follow the population or by using other formulas and how does that work exactly?
So, what will be the process, would the more populated areas get the majority of the funding or the smaller communities, I’ll use an example, would Grise Fiord, with its smaller population base be given an even distribution or according to per capita?
It would be for the operating expenses of the schools.
If we were to use the old way of doing things, if we were to give the DEAs contributions of 15 thousand dollars and 86 dollars per head, then according to this new formula, it would get 25 thousand dollars and 86 dollars per head and that’s for the operating expenses of the schools.
These contributions are to Divisional Education Authorities and that’s the way we will arrange the contribution funding and it would be about 350 thousand dollars.
Just further clarification on a question from one of the members.
The minister talked about the 4 million dollars on 9-18, the 4 million that is an increase for school operations.
What kinds of new programs are you going to be providing?
Because four million dollars is a lot of money so what kinds of new programs can the communities expect for that increase in funding?
I mentioned the increase for school operations was primarily for the compensation and benefits according to the Collective Agreement.
These are included and two million was for the forced growth of the teachers and the students as well.
On page 9-19, 9 million 447 thousand was the figure used in 2001/2002, but the revised estimate was a little over 7.783 million dollars.
The minister stated that there would be over 800 thousand dollars that would be given as a contribution to District Education Authorities for operations, meetings and temporary teachers.
There’s about 9 million 447 thousand dollars that was budgeted for 2001/2002 and then he said that an additional 800 thousand dollars for the next fiscal year would be given to District Education Authorities.
There’s a decrease in that figure, so how come he’s saying that it’s going to be more money.
Could the minister make a clarification in this regard?
If I misunderstood your question, please tell me.
The District Education Authorities, this fiscal year will receive an additional 800 thousand dollars for this fiscal year.
Also, on top of that, what was approved by the education board, are going to be for new staff and the operations and also for the substitute teachers.
I hope I understood your question correctly.
In 2001/2002 the Main Estimates were 9 million 447 thousand dollars and the revised estimates were 7 million 783 thousand dollars.
Now the main estimates for this year 2002/2003 are actually decreased from 2001/2002.
That’s what I’m trying to ask.
It’s actually decreased.
But you calculated from the revised estimates to this year.
So I would like to know, my question is, did it actually decrease from 2001/2002.
I was just reminded that for 2001/2002, 7 million 783 thousand dollars, in the revised estimates, according to the way it’s written, it was a revised estimate from last year.
This 8 million 965 thousand dollars, it’s actually 8 million 965 thousand dollars.
There was confusion on the funding of District Education Authorities in Kitikmeot and the Kivalliq due to fact that the District Education Authorities fiscal year ends on July 1st and the fiscal year of Nunavut Government is April 1st.
So their fiscal years differ from each other and because they didn’t realize they had made that mistake, we were unable to make that adjustment in the main estimates, but only under the revised estimates from last year’s 2001/2002 revised estimates was it corrected.
But I would like to clarify to you that if all the District Education Authorities in the communities of Nunavut to receive their funding for 2001/2002 also, on the agreement, it stated how many dollars were given to them, but I apologise that we were unable to correct this figure from last year’s revised estimates.
Perhaps the minister is trying to say that in the year 2001/2002, it was a reduction for this fiscal year.
For 2001/2002 the revised estimate is 8 million 965 thousand dollars but the money we’re requesting now for 2002/2003 is 9 million 315 thousand dollars.
That’s an increase for this 2002/2003 fiscal year.
On the District Education Authority contributions, I want to get some clarification how they’re handled.
I think we’ve figured out how much the Government of Nunavut is handing out to District Education Authorities.
On the contribution agreements for the District Education Authorities, is it given out based on how many students are enrolled in each school or is there a secret formula we don’t know about?
I take it, it’s handed out based on how many students are in the schools.
I’m going to take a break and let my Deputy Minister take this question.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Kilabuk.
It’s no wonder you’re tired, it’s been four days. Mr. Rich.
There are several different components to the funding formula and I’ll give you not only what we used in the past but what the increases will be with the increases in funding this year.
There’s a District Education Authority base formula.
That gives each District Education Authority 15 thousand dollars no matter the size of the community in the past.
That’s being increased to 25 thousand dollars for each District Education Authority.
There’s a substitute teacher base.
That was formerly 98 dollars for each fulltime equivalent student.
That’s being increased to 120 dollars per full time equivalent student because the District Education Authorities had some substantial concerns about running out of money for substitute teachers.
The base formula also has a student component to it, so in addition to that base formula of 25 thousand dollars they get 86 dollars per full time equivalent student.
I already mentioned the substitute teacher base.
Then the other thing that we’ve added additional funding for is in order to allow the District Education Authorities to have an annual regional meeting.
So there’s 350 thousand dollars estimated of what that cost would be.
So then in each region the representatives of the District Education Authorities could get together, because they said they were having great difficulties of not having that contact they used to have.
So, that funding will pay for the travel costs and accommodations costs to do that meeting on a once a year basis.
Mr. McLean: I take it then that every District Education Authority in Nunavut is treated the same way and that everybody’s funding for a District Education Authority whether it’s in the Baffin, the Kitikmeot or the Kivalliq, they’re all treated exactly the same on that.
On that one, forced growth in the schools, like our student population increases about what, I know the Kivalliq, especially Arviat, it is increasing faster than I think most places, and I know that Baker Lake is increasing too.
So is that school population taken into consideration or do we have to wait another year before we get the District Education Authority contribution?
Yes, the funding the teachers receive, they are separate and the DEAs do the figures, but I will ask my DM to respond.
Chairperson (interpretation): In regards to your response, can you say it again because the interpreter was on the wrong channel.
I’m sure they won’t be the same exact words in either language, but as I have stated earlier the funding for the teachers is separate from the DEA funding but I will ask my DM to respond.
Mr. Rich: Qujannamiik, Mr. Chair.
As the minister has indicated the funding for teachers goes directly through regional school operations to the schools.
And you’re correct; it is done on a per capita student basis based on the number of students.
We take the enrolment in September 30th and use that to project for the next year.
And the reason for that is actually quite simple.
Teachers have to be hired in the spring.
And the schools and the principals and the DEAs need to know in the spring how many teachers they are going to have so they can do the class placements and the hiring.
So we provide the estimates to them in the spring so that they can do their hiring.
There may be an unanticipated jump in numbers in September.
Usually it’s a fairly small jump in numbers but there can be a difference a little bit from year to year.
So the regional office tries to work with the school to adapt to that situation if there is an extraordinary situation.
It also can go down sometimes too but we don’t penalize the school if the enrolment goes down unexpectedly.
They live with that benefit, if you will, for another year.
Mr. McLean: You’re doing a great job there Chair.
I really like it when you’re chairing Committee of the Whole.
You give us lots of freedom, so keep up the good work.
Mr. Chairman, my next question is, I thought I would get that plug in for you.
My next question is here, would you make that information available of how DEAs get their funding for me, for my own interest.
I think the rest of the members would probably like to see it also just so it’s a little education for us.
Now, the next question I want to ask you and I don’t want to blind side you minister but it’s been, I’ve been wondering about it all weekend, when we were doing the income support page.
Where we had 22 million dollars in the education budget and we hear that the education budget is the highest.
And I’m sure, I don’t want to put you on the spot but I have to.
If we took the income support budget out of the education department and we look at what per capita spending on education in Nunavut and if we took the income support budget out which is roughly 22 million dollars and then we got the budget for education.
What is that on a per capita basis compared to the rest of Canada?
Is that a fair question to ask you?
Can I ask that question and if you can’t answer me I’d like to have the figures later but I’d like to say that, I know each territory, each province in Canada spends X number of dollars per capita on health, education and stuff and I don’t think there is a lot of provinces or territories have that income support in their base funding in education.
So where are we on the map if we take the 22 million dollars out?
I’m sure it’s a hard question to ask but just for my own piece of mind because we are last in this country in education when it comes to students, where are we.
Do we know where we are today if we take that income support out?
Hon. Peter Kilabuk: Oh yes, Mr. Chairman.
Our per capita spending is about the highest and that relates to teachers’ salaries and the higher cost of living in Nunavut but we do, our spending per capita is the highest.
I’m a little taken aback by hearing that.
I thought if we took the income support out we’d probably be the lowest in Canada.
I’m glad I asked that question, that we’re the highest when we take out the income support.
Thank you for your answer on that.
That’s about all the questions I have today.
I apologise, there was no question so I don’t think I need to respond.
Mr. Arvaluk, no.
There are no other names on my list.
Total operations and maintenance, 84 million 564 thousand dollars.
Chairperson (interpretation): Now we’ll go back to 9-5.
Just briefly, under 9-5, I didn’t bring this question up under the Labour Market Development Agreement, I’m wondering how well it’s working.
Are there people getting jobs through the program because some of them go through the Kivalliq partners, some go through Arctic College, I’m just wondering how all of this is being used.
I am happy with development of the Labour Market Development Agreement, a lot of students are benefiting from this and you see more students working.
For last year there were 270 students that were receiving assistance through this program.
We are very pleased with the development of this to date.
I apologise, I wasn’t here at the beginning when this department was being discussed.
Under capital there is 19 million.
I’m wondering what this would be used for and what jobs will come out of that.
Before I give the mike to the minister, the capital was dealt with in the fall.
We are presently dealing with the operations and maintenance, 152 million dollars under Education.
Education Program Summary.
Total operations and maintenance, 152 million 549 thousand dollars.
In the pie chart have there been changes to the percentages, has it been revised under income support.
In the pie chart, the percentages are accurate.
Mr. Nutarak (interpretation): When we met with the Education Minister, he gave us the details of expenditures and the percentages were different and under income support, the percentage was different.
The 55 percent for school operations is different from what we saw previously to what is here.
Hon. Peter Kilabuk (interpretation): I apologise, the pie chart, I have noted where the changes are but the money that will be used for each division is the same.
It was only after those copies were made that these numbers came out.
There might have been a few changes but the first copies were given out before it was final.
The amounts stay the same though.
I thought that he might present the proper percentages, revised percentages.
Perhaps I am confused but the pie chart here is accurate, the one that you are following, my staff have informed me.
I think that’s pretty clear now.
I’ll go back to Education Program Summary.
With that, I’d like to thank the minister.