EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
There have not been any commitments made for long-term leases for the Baffin Hospital, or for Cambridge Bay Facility.
As you know the Rankin Inlet Facility will definitely be owned because we have taken that on ourselves now.
It is a Government of Nunavut project.
In respect of the other two there are negotiations that continue to be ongoing.
We have given out the authority for the Cambridge Bay Facility for the developers to award a construction contract.
As we do that, we are still finalizing the terms of the payments and how we are going to structure, whether it is a lease and over what time period, or as it is finalized, our intent of whether or not we are going to purchase the facility outright.
In the end, Mr. Chairman, I will make it clear that the Government of Nunavut will own all three facilities, no matter what financing mechanism is decided upon.
I am glad the Finance Minister has assured me on that issue, because I do not want to mortgage the future of our children on long-term leases that we cannot afford.
On that, which gets to my final, I do not want to say final question, because it might not be.
My question on this is will the Minister assure me, or this House that those leases will be finalized before the mandate of this Government?
Mr. Minister.  Hon. Kelvin Ng: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Chairman, I cannot make that commitment today because of the fact of, quite frankly, with the magnitude of the hospital project here in Iqaluit.
We still are at preliminary stages, there has not been any development agreement finalized yet.
There are negotiations that still continue.
I can tell the Member that we will bring it as far along as we can, obviously, protecting the Government’s interests as we move forward.
I hate to ask hypothetical questions in the House, if after the next General Election the nineteen of us are gone, and there is a whole new group of eager young, and old politicians back, that may decide that the lease may be the best way to go, because of the current debt situation that we are forecasting.
Like I said it is a hypothetical question, but if the current people are not around the next time that someone could make a decision to lease those buildings.
Am I correct in assuming that?
Mr. Chairman, obviously that would be our control if none of us were here.
The Member is correct in that perspective.
I would think that any legislature, any government would look at all the facts. Take that into consideration.
There would be lots of documentation, as there is now.
Lots of capable individuals, right up to the Deputy Minister’s level, that has been involved.
That has a lot of continuity from that perspective and documentation that I would think would guide any Government, elected officials, or the legislature to make the right decisions.
Mr. McLean: Just a comment Mr. Chair and I don’t want to sound sarcastic but history has a habit of repeating itself up here many times.
Mr. Havioyak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) my mistake, I was on an earlier comment I made.
I was checking through some of the applications I was talking about.
I should have called it an application for shelter assistant programs.
I just wanted to say that I will try to information on this program for employees.
But anyway, I ask the minister in this regarding this application and I know the from what I gather, when you’re deciding as to what you will be doing with the application so you have to probably look at the gross monthly income.
Mr. Chairman, if they’re within the 30% or outside 30%.
So, my question is, can you consider the net income like the housing minister does in the when they’re pressing the house sets on the net income.
So, can you look at that way because I know some of my clients some of my constituents are saying, yes, we do get a gross pay of that much but by the time we get into the net income there is not too much left because of the high deductions in different places.
So, I’m asking the minister then, can you consider this, instead of using the gross monthly income use the net monthly income?
Yes we can look at that and I would say to you that we will probably put in place based net income similar though I could say to some of the qualifications that the housing corporation or using for some of their program because we do want to try to be consistent.
I’m not really clear exactly what we’re dealing with here.
The centrally administer funds; I’m not exactly sure what it means, Mr. Chairman.
What it means is that it’s not specific to the Department of Finance.
It’s broader for all government departments.
For example, the contract services, the NTC leases our buildings through all government departments all across Nunavut.
Not just one department.
The other ones like the fees and payments are actually for like WCB coverage for all employees across Nunavut; employee medical travel, insurance, for all government buildings, dental coverage for all employees.
That type of thing Mr. Chairman.
It’s not for finance employees.
Not just for the Department of Finance but it’s for all government in Nunavut.
Yes, I understand what the minister is talking but under grants and contributions $4 million, 750 thousand, is that for the communities in Nunavut or who do we give grants and contributions to?
That’s for the power subsidy program as I indicated earlier.
It’s for residents that operate in private homes in every community throughout Nunavut, all of the communities.
If it is a power subsidy for private homeowners, there must be a lot of private homeowners in the communities now and the money seems to be the same amount year after year.
Mr. Chairman, it would only go up if the power rates go up and we are hoping that is not the case, Mr. Chairman, but it goes actually directly that the consumers do not actually get the dollars themselves directly as a cheque or a payment, it actually gets applied against their Power Corporation bills, the money gets paid to the Power Corporation for the subsidy for the individual’s private home operator.
Under contract services on the same page in the amount of $9 million, 373 thousand, what types of contract services do you provide or do people provide you with?
Mr. Chairman, these are for the NCC, Nunavut Construction Corporation leases.
Which corporation?
Hon. Kelvin Ng: They are for the office buildings that we lease, Mr. Chairman, thank you.
Mr. Iqaqrialu (interpretation): Is that just for paying for those office buildings that and repay them to NCC?
Yes, the Member is correct.
Centrally Administered Funds. 3-9, $24 million, 544 thousand, agreed?
Going back to page, information item, 3-11, Ms. Williams.
I would like to thank Mr. Havioyak for asking the question in regards to liquor commission revolving funds and I feel the same way as the Member that the money that is being made by selling liquor should be turned back to help the people that have problems with alcohol.
Does the Minister have any other answers as opposed to the one that he answered on March the 27th?
As you know the Department of Health budget, so I consider them all for addictions treatments in all aspects with this residential sending people counselling, providing money for alcohol awareness, etcetera.
I am told by the Minister anywhere $10 million dollars and up of budget and I do not know how much they would spend on that, actually probably a little bit more, but having said that, Mr. Chairman, I think it is quite a significant amount and I mean the revenues from the Liquor Commission Revolving Funds, as you know, go back directly into the general revenues of the Government of Nunavut.
So, there is more than I would say there is more than the percentage, certainly, that is generated from the liquor sales that goes into the programs and services.
I brought that question up in the house three years ago about a surtax on all alcohol beverages to fund FAS and FAE programs.
I’m still a strong believer that there should be just a surtax on liquor in the territory and that surtax should go directly to alcohol and drug committees in Nunavut.
I hope the Minister considers that in future budgets or his future business plans that this would definitely help if they were funnel into community based programs.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: I would like to note for the official transcripts of the Hansard, that the member from Baker Lake is advocating for higher taxes for alcohol products and we’ll take that into consideration in future budgets.
I don’t know if my comments are going to be under liquor commission revolving fund, but the alcohol and drug committees in the communities, they are not longer provided funding and they have to approve the orders and they have to hold meetings when there are liquor orders and they are not even funded when they have responsibilities.
So how and where do you fund the community alcohol and drug committees?
Mr. Chairman, that’s normally through the hamlet contribution through Community Government & Transportation or from programs that would have been provided by Health and Social Services whether directly through a municipality or directly to an alcohol and drug aware society.
For example, in Pond Inlet the alcohol and drug committee doesn’t even have any funding.
Their committee doesn’t have any funding because that committee is the one that approves the liquor orders.
If the municipality isn’t giving any funding to the committee, that means that the municipality ended up using the funding which was supposed to be used for the alcohol and drug committee.
That’s the only way it might have happened.
When are you going to correct the situation to make sure the alcohol and drug committees at the community level are funded?
Again, Mr. Chairman, that’s more, really an issue that the Community Government & Transportation Department or Health and Social Services Department would be more able to address this.
The Community Government & Transportation and Health and Social Services Minister here, if they’re listening and they definitely have to rectify this situation.
Chairperson (interpretation): Mr. Nutarak, are you finished.
It states here that it says income.
Even though I don’t want people to smoke cigarettes, where would the tobacco sales revenue go?
They would be in the revenue schedules within the budget table.
I am going to say something similar to my Colleague from Tunnuniq stating that the money that is made from liquor sales should be funnelled towards the communities.
I think it is time that we do a review to make sure that this funding that is supposed to be used for alcohol and drug committees, we should make sure that they get the funding because they deal with the alcohol issues.
We are confused about the funding for alcohol and drug committees.
So, I urge the Minister for Health and Community Government and Transportation to look into this matter.
I was wondering if they are willing to commit to me.
My Colleagues have mentioned before, both Ministers here and they are taking in the comments and the concerns and certainly I think would follow up on that.
Mr. Iqaqrialu (interpretation): The Department of Finance, I think the Department came up with a legal council for the liquor commission, I think when Nunavut Government was just created, what has happened to those?
Mr. Chairman, the liquor board, actually, I have met with them about a month ago, I believe it was and they did actually put in a request or asked for some clarification on legal representation.
I said to advise them within their mandate and needs that get independent advice.
We had been providing advice and support for them and with the Department of Justice, but it’s their prerogative as far as I am concerned to get independent legal council and I believe they have gone out and gotten that.
Yes, I would like to see that Act go ahead, but it seems like the process is slow and it has been a long time since we have heard anything about those, even though they are the Government’s legal council, I wonder why that is?
I am not sure exactly what the Member is asking about.
I know that the board is certainly becoming more active now as of recently as of last week, it actually held the meetings that is being held for more than six week period and I believe the meeting in Rankin Inlet right now as well.
Yes, I would agree that they hold their meetings frequently.
I was wondering when you would be tabling the minutes?
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Tomorrow.
Going through Health and Social Services budgets, when the review was done on the program called alcohol and drug program for $949 thousand dollars and you get a surplus of $1 million 800 thousand a year.
Why is the Minister not asking for that full amount to run the alcohol and drug program?
Because it is a surplus related to alcohol and drugs.
So, when we are looking at it he is only asking for half of it, he should be encouraged to use the full amount of that surplus from the alcohol, from the liquor sales.
Mr. Chairman, I’m not sure if the member is talking about the surplus, I’m not sure what he’s talking about quite frankly.
He was referring to the Department of Health and I thought we were dealing with Department of Finance here.
Chairperson (interpretation): Please try and make it clear.
Mr. Havioyak: Earlier the Minister said the Minister of Health is responsible for delivering the program on the alcohol and drug program and in that the budget for $949 thousand annually for the program.
Now, when I made an opening comment about trying to use this amount to help those kinds of programs within the municipality, so, why isn’t this being used for those programs in those communities?
Just to address my comment earlier on.
I thank the member for clarifying that question.
Mr. Chairman, as I indicated earlier, there is more than this amount really gets spend within just the alcohol alone and minor rest of the programs within the Department of Health.
I mean he can say that this amount plus 5 times, 10 times over really it’s gone into alcohol and drug programs.
There is an information item.
Going back to 3-4.
Finance, department summary, detail of expenditures.
Total operation and maintenance on page 3-4. $44 million, 505 thousand.
Do you agree that the Department of Finance is completed?
While the minister is still there, we will review Bill 31 and Bill 32.
This document.
Capital No. 3. 2002/2003.
Supplementary Appropriation. Capital No. 3. 2002/2003.
Do you have your copy?
If you have that document, Minister, you can do your opening comments, Mr. Minister.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Mr. Chairman, we are pleased to appear before the committee today to represent two Supplementary Appropriation Bills for your review.
The purpose of the Supplementary Appropriation Bill is to provide additional spending authority to the Government of Nunavut, fiscal year ending March 31, 2003.
The total requested is for the total of $23 million, 407 thousand in additional appropriations made up of $15 million, 565 thousand for Operations and Maintenance and $7 million, 842 thousand for capital expenditures.
The operations and maintenance appropriations include 2 million 845 thousand dollars for the increased costs of compensation claims to owners of snow machines and outboard motors as a result of the supplied bad gas. 1 million 900 thousand dollars for costs incurred by the Petroleum Products Revolving Fund for loss of inventory and testing related to the bad gas.
$800 thousand dollars for increased costs associated with the legal services board, reimbursement of court services and increased costs to house inmates outside of Nunavut. $10 million dollars to provide funding to the Department of Health and Social Services for operations and maintenance shortfalls in the areas of health insurance and treatment programs and $370 thousand dollars to fund worker’s compensation benefits to eligible Nunavut harvesters for the 2002 calendar year.
The capital appropriation requirements, Mr. Chairman, include $350 thousand dollars transferred to capital in the Department of Public Works and Services to renovate the Igloolik Science Centre in support of decentralization of the wild life research division in the Department of Sustainable Development. $5 million 842 thousand dollars for the Department of Public Works and Services to complete the purchase of the Sivumut Building in Iqaluit.
$1 million 650 thousand dollars for the Department of Community Government & Transportation for the purchase of equipment and building design as a result of the fires in Clyde River and Repulse Bay.
Mr. Chairman, I would be pleased to answer any questions the committee may have.
Chairperson (interpretation): Let’s start from page 4, 2002/2003, Supplementary Appropriation, Capital No. 3, Public Works and Services, Capital.
Not previously authorized, Special Warrants, not previously authorized $350 thousand dollars.
Chairperson (interpretation): Operations, on the same page, total operations, 5 million 842 thousand dollars.
Ms. Williams: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 5 million 842 thousand dollars to purchase the Sivumut Building.
I don’t know how old this building is. I’m not sure if it’s in, up in the moon, or Iqaluit or I don’t where it is.
But anyway, I’ve been asking for a government office in Arctic Bay which is almost 45 years old.
If the government can put in 5 million 842 thousand dollars for building that is propped up, what can I do.
Can the Minister or the government help me to see what I could do for Arctic Bay, if they can do this for some other community?
I don’t know where this thing is.
Chairperson (interpretation): Before the Minister responds, I forgot to welcome Sue to the assembly.
Mr. Chairman, just to briefly summarize why this request is there.
As you know this was a building that we had entered into a lease agreement for.
It started on September 1, 2000.
It’s a fairly new building.
This is the one that the auditor general pointed out to the Government of Nunavut that really made a bad deal in entering on this lease and that there was a significant premium.
So when the opportunity arose for us to purchase it because someone else, we had to write a first refusal to purchase it if an offer was made on it.
That’s what took place.
So, we exercised our right, really to save a considerable amount of dollars for the Government of Nunavut.
That is why this is before us today.
In respect of the issue the member raises about other office requirements of the Government of Nunavut, in some of the other communities and in particular hers, I’m certain that the Minister of Public Works and Services would be happy to address that issue.
I will make sure that he is made aware of that issue that the member raises.
And another item that I want to bring up is a number of months ago, we welcomed a Minister of Justice along with the Finance Minister on the Supplementary Appropriations for them to put forward a plan or building to purchase or a women’s facility who are currently placed in other jurisdictions other than Nunavut.
The Minister of Justice has been in indicating that it is so expensive to keep inmates out of the territory.
So, I just wanted to assure that we did welcome if they could come forward with Supplementary Appropriations for women’s facility in Nunavut.
Mr. Chairman, I know that the Minister of Justice is aware of the issue and continues to look right into that and make the appropriate decision based on the needs.
I cannot tell you right now whether or not the Minister of Justice would be bringing forward a Supplementary Appropriation or not.
Normally, they are for unexpected circumstances.
So, if there were plans to be made, I would think that it would be probably be more appropriate to be put into the normal course of the capital planning process.
On this page, Operations, page 4, Total Operations, $5 million 842 thousand, agreed?
Total Department, $6 million 192 thousand, agreed?
Page 5, Community Government Capital, Mr. McLean.
I see there is $1 million 650 thousand dollars put aside for a new fire hall in Clyde River, water truck, fire truck, including freight, the fire hall contents, fire alerting systems, and to form a design of the new fire hall for the Hamlet.
Is this enough money to take care of all of this?
Is it just into the design stage for a new fire hall, will this $1.3 million and $150 thousand cover everything?
We know that is in the situation for Repulse Bay that certainly there will be another appropriation that comes forward.
That is also right off from discussions on the insurance coverage and the insurance proceed being assigned back to the Government of Nunavut as we move forward trying to set these to Municipality or replace the fire damage.
Mr. McLean: The Clyde River fire was that an accidental fire or was it arson? Has that been decided yet?
Mr. Chairman, I understand that it was furnace related start to the fire.
Was that caused by maintenance problems?
Mr. Chairman, I was just trying to ask my colleague on whether or not the Fire Marshall’s Report on the incident has been received or not yet?
I am not sure if it has or not, so I will commit to having the Minister certainly is aware of it.
So we will provide that information as soon as it is possible.
If it is available already, if not, then once it has become available.
It is just that I have never heard of a Fire Hall burning down in my life.
Whoever is responsible for checking the furnaces and maintaining them should be watched a bit more closely.
How much insurance is it going to be recovered from this tragedy?
Mr. Chairman, we are not certain of that yet.
With all insurance claims there has to be appraisals and assessments done depending on the coverage at the time.
Those are the kinds of issues that we are trying to work through with the Municipalities that are involved.
The Government of Nunavut is trying to assist in getting these projects off the ground by providing the supplementary funding with the assurance that any insurance proceeds that would be coming would return to the Government of Nunavut.
When we are insuring buildings, do we get full coverage on them?
If we build a building this year, we know like in the capital projects, I am just taking on an example, a School, $10 million dollars, and it is built in 1999.
Ten years from now, say in 2009, is there sort of an escalator clause in there that the insurance from the building goes up?
Or is it insured for the initial construction costs back then?
It is not insured for a replacement costs?
Mr. Chairman, I do not know if the Member is asking about the Government of Nunavut Buildings.
I can certainly try to answer that.
As you know because of the significant fire damage to the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Government of Nunavut, that our premiums were quite astronomical to the point where some Insurance Companies were talking about not covering us.
We made a decision to basically, be self insured for the first $10 million dollars worth of damage, in order to minimize what our insurance costs would be.
So basically, anything that is $10 million dollars of values or less, is self insured by the Government of Nunavut for our own buildings, as far as property goes.
As you know the insurance industry continues to be under stress.
The September 11th incident certainly did not help insurance rates, as you know, have skyrocketed.
It is a trend that has been in the works for years now.
There is more and more need to reassess what we go for insurance coverage in respect of how we deal with it in trying to minimize risk for ourselves.
From the perspective of municipalities, they are supposed to have their own insurance coverage through the Nunavut Association of Municipalities; they have member coverage for all the municipalities.
Now there is a question about whether that is adequate insurance or not.
Certainly these two incidents have proven to us that it has to be something that the Government of Nunavut works more closely with the Nunavut Association of Municipalities on it, and the municipalities to make sure that they are adequately covered.
I know that the Nunavut Association of Municipalities and the Government of Nunavut, through the Community Government and Transportation and the Department of Finance is responsible for Risk Management.