EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
At the moment, I cannot really speak about whether or not we would replace these positions because those will more than double what we’re asking for the public to spend.
So in that regard, what I say to my colleague here from Arviat is that Arviat will remain a district office. As a district office, the region will continue to grow.
Therefore, there is a chance that these positions that we have moved will eventually, in the end, within a number of few years, there will probably be some increase, but we don’t want to speculate how many would be the case.
Arviat remains the headquarters of the Nunavut Housing Corporation, despite the fact that the directorate was moved by the previous administration long ago.
But during the exercise we had, we already did create one new PY and that has to do with a finance position. As well, as a result of this position being moved, there was also another position created in Arviat.
So that’s just like an improvement on that.
That gives me hope because if that is possible, then hopefully we would be able to get some Government of Nunavut employees coming up to the High Arctic to work for us up there too.
I would like to go back to this document, the Nunavut Housing Corporation contracting report. On page 14 of 19, there is a table at the top and it talks about methods of selection. If you look at it, it’s kind of surprising that out of the $1.1 million that was given out in contracts or consulting, $870,000 of that was sole source contracts and public request for proposals was only $193,000 and then negotiated contracts, I’m assuming, were $87,000.
I’m just wondering: why is that so high?
The answer to that is basically the same as to the previous question. Many of these consultant contracts are for very specialized work and there are limited people available with those skills.
So until we can fill those positions as indeterminate positions within the housing corporation, we are and remain reliant on these consultants.
In terms of being accountable and the access of money, who actually makes the decision on this in terms of whether it’s a sole source contract?
Is that the president’s sole choice or is there a process that you follow through to decide who gives out these contracts?
The president of the Nunavut Housing Corporation would sign off and make the final approval for sole source contracting.
There is a process that is followed to ensure that the sole source contracting is justified and the sole source contracts are only issued when other tendering or contracting options are not conducive to the work that we are trying to do.
So I guess we give you a lot of power to spend a lot of money.
Is this going to be addressed with some of the… ? I was going to have questions later in reference to some of the changes that are happening, but will this sort of amount of power that you have to spend close to a million dollars on sole source contracts, with the board that is supposed to be set up, will that take away some of that?
Currently at the moment, I think you have to appreciate the fact that the amount of sole source contracting certainly has improved right now because many of these were due to the fact that, as my staff has indicated, in view of the lack of capacity at that time, specialized skills were required.
But I think the member has to understand that sole sourcing contracts is not only the prerogative that is used by the housing corporation; it isn’t only restricted to the housing corporation.
The ADMs or DMs have that authority to sign off on sole source contracts.
So there are provisions that, if permissible, may not be the best tools to use. Therefore, in my opinion, we either should tighten up the contracting administration or NNI Policy.
I use that reference because GN’s NNI Policy, the Inuit land claims related policy, prior to division, had a provision in there, that Article 24 provision, at that time, which this Nunavut government did not use.
They had a provision where if it’s related to sole source with Article 24, the GNWT, at that time, was still required to provide a notice publicly that it intends to sole source contracts and invite the public out there or Inuit owned companies to agree or disagree.
So if there is a disagreement, the government immediately had to put it out to public tender. That has now been left out of the current GN NNI Policy.
I know it because I was the negotiator for the Article 24 contracting policy with the GN through NTI.
So that’s why there is a lot of these sole source contracts going on, because it’s not tied in with the NNI Policy provisions.
I’m very aware that deputy ministers are able to sign off on sole source contracts.
I’m aware of it because I remember I took a mental note when we were doing the procurement and you had made the commitment to decrease the number of sole source contracts within your department for the other hat you wear at Health and Social Services, so I am very aware of that.
But with the explanation that you just gave, where I get concerned is in the table just beside that where it actually says NNI classification, zero dollars from that year was allocated to people who were either sole source contract or any type of contract given.
The percentage is zero NNI under that year, so that’s why it was a concern for me.
If we’re going to promote NNI and if we’re going to continue to have Inuit businesses be successful, we need to make sure that we’re either working with those companies to have it happen.
The next question that I wanted to move on to was on page 15 of 19.
From about item 65 onto the next page, onto page 16, there are a lot of contracts, which again are sole source contracts for technical services, but there is one that stood out in my mind for two reasons: one, it was because the location of the winner was in Morrisburg and that location seems to come up many times in our discussions, it’s Nimiqcon Consultants, technical services provided, but the second reason it jumped out at me is it was the one that received the most money in terms of about $55,000 but it wasn’t one contract at $55,000, it was a number of them.
I was wondering if the minister could explain what that person was consulting about or what technical skills they were bringing to the housing corporation.
Nimiqcon Consultants Incorporated is a company owned by Bill Gofton, who was a previous director, LHO manager, LHO maintenance manager, and filled a number of positions with the NWT and Nunavut Housing Corporation over decades, I believe.
Nimiqcon Consultants was contracted by the previous administration to provide services to the Nunavut Housing Corporation basically due to a lack of capacity, is my understanding.
So operations needed to continue, so this person who had that knowledge was contracted.
Each of the lines on this report, by the way, is payments rather than individual contracts.
That actually helps with my next question because 73, 74, and 75 are consulting contracts negotiated that were given to Aarluk Consulting and I thought there were three separate, but I’m assuming it’s just one contract. Was it for this document, the Review of Delivery Strategy Implementation Stage 1?
It’s marked down as NHT Review Project Report. I am wondering if that’s what it was for.
The document that the member held up was indeed contracted to Aarluk Consulting. I’m also aware that Aarluk Consulting was contracted to provide the Nunavut Housing Corporation’s corporate strategy document around that time as well. So I’m not certain if those payments relate to that specific document or to some other work performed by Aarluk.
Mr. Elliott, you have 29 seconds left, so I will remind you that I will move on to the next person who was to ask questions, but I’ll let you have the last 29 seconds.
We’re here for three weeks, so I can go around again for another 10 minutes.
On the next page, on page 16, on 91 and 92, there are two payments for $49,767 paid to Nuna Burnside Environmental Engineering for professional services. One is in September of 2008 and the other one is for October 2008.
I was wondering if you could clarify what that was for.
I’m trying to find that information for you as we speak in my papers. Nuna Burnside had originally been engaged to start the work on the hosing strategy. However, there was a switch in contractors at some point and this was before my time.
The strategy was then completed by Aarluk, I believe.
I believe as well that Nuna Burnside provided some environmental consultations that may have been related to some oil spill remediation as well.
So that’s something, if the member required it, that we could get details to him.
Perhaps, Mr. Elliott, I will recognize you at some point later. I have other names that I wish to move on with. You will have your full 10 minutes again whenever that comes up.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you. In Gjoa Haven, they are currently working on constructing these multi-plex units, and with the approval of the funding to finish these units, they are trying to finish them as Nunavummiut drastically require housing.
One of the workers spoke to me about his concerns and he asked me while I was there on a tour about the need for better care of Inuit workers by the contractors.
According to the worker, the contractors tend to hire Inuit at a certain number at the beginning of the contract, but during the life of the contract, it seems that more Inuit workers are released as the finishing becomes the focus. Sometimes at the end, they only have one Inuit worker.
Some are fired and some are released.
The person felt that the reason for this practice was that the contractors usually have their own workers who are brought in from the outside.
They arrive into the community but they seem unhappy to be in the community as they become belligerent to their Inuit workers, and all of the hard work that the contractors are unwilling to do is given to the Inuit workers.
Even though it hurts him, that particular Inuit employee doesn’t make a big issue of this because he needs the income. Usually when you are hired, most employers have to comply with a code of ethics.
I doubt that we will have new contractors in the future.
If we are to keep these contractors, then we should require that they implement a code of ethics, especially in the communities. All contractors should treat Inuit properly since they are the ones who live here. If we are going to hire contractors that mistreat their Inuit employees, then most Inuit at the local level lose interest in working for these contractors.
If the contractors are going to be hiring at the local level, then a code of ethics should be enforced so that they can be penalized.
I wanted to comment on this matter because once all of the housing funding was allocated, it seemed that only outside contractors were being hired. With respect to this Inuk from Gjoa Haven, whom I shall not name, he spoke about his concerns that he has experienced in this field. If contractors have the bad habit of belittling Inuit who are just trying to hold a job, then they should be penalized.
I wanted to inform the Nunavut Housing Corporation about this issue.
In looking at these figures, in Taloyoak, the contractors for two separate five-plex were paid $1 million while another contractor was paid $600,000 to construct the same type of unit. The local housing authority did the construction on the cheaper unit.
There is such a big discrepancy between these two figures. Why is it that there is such a big difference? Can you provide a reason?
Mr. Barriault: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
The contractors who are awarded contracts to perform construction for the Nunavut Housing Corporation usually are responding to a request for bids.
As such, they are requesting to win and be awarded a contract to go into those communities.
If some of their individual staff are not happy with the situations, then there’s not too much that we can do to control that.
Generally speaking, though, any contractor going into any community will find that there is a skilled workforce in every community, and it is to their advantage to treat those employees properly and to retain them as employees because they will save themselves the costs of having to fly in other workers. So it’s to their benefit to treat employees properly.
Employees, meanwhile, are paid according to an agreement that they have, which is an employment agreement directly with the contractor as their employer.
There are rules that regulate minimum wages within Nunavut. In terms of setting other wages and what those may be, that is an agreement directly between the contractor as the employer and the employee.
So I trust that has answered your issues.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Thank you.
I personally know that neither you nor I are overseeing the construction workers, so we don’t hear the harsh words being said.
I believed the individual from Gjoa Haven who stated that their foreman is very cantankerous and continually scolding them as if they were kids.
I think we should have a code of ethics included in the contract if these contractors want to be paid by the Nunavut government.
Currently the Nunavut Housing Corporation uses the standard contracting practices of the GN, so we’re using the standard conditions and terms for contracts, which do not include a code of conduct.
That is not something that has necessarily been entertained in the past to my knowledge. There are rules which are basically standing laws within Nunavut and within Canada that apply to any workplace, including labour standards.
The means at this point for any employees of any company, whether it’s a contractor or otherwise, if they feel they’re being mistreated in their workplace, is to complain through the Labour Standards Act, if I understand that process correctly.
Likewise, though, if there are any major issues with any housing corporation worksites, we would like to be informed of that so that we can investigate as well.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): Yes, my other question relates to Taloyoak, where there were a couple of five-plex units being constructed with a disparity between the final amounts by quite a large sum.
What is the reason for this discrepancy? There is a $400,000 difference between these two contracts even though the units built were the exact copies in terms of size and scope.
If I understand correctly, in Taloyoak, there have been a number of different buildings that have been tendered for construction at different times.
Depending on who is providing bids and a number of factors, different prices will be obtained. In some cases, we will get very competitive bidding between numbers of contractors and get a very good price.
In other cases, we may have less competition and contractors may choose to bid higher prices.
That is something that is outside of our control as, if you’re referring to five-plex construction in particular, these buildings are relatively identical from year to year as we tender them. So it’s just a matter that’s beyond our control. We still proceed to public competition to get prices, though.
Ms. Ugyuk (interpretation): I would like to refer to another matter related to Taloyoak and construction.
They are currently driving piles into the bedrock as the foundations for these SIP units.
Based on the outlines of the lot and the lack of gravel on the outside perimeter, the municipal trucks won’t be able to service these units.
I believe it will need additional costs to ensure the proper grade with gravel as most houses are provided with a gravel foundation.
When the piles are driven in, the telehandlers and heavy equipment trucks will not be able to reach around these piles.
Chairman: Thank you, Ms. Ugyuk. (interpretation) I wish to reiterate that when reviewing the tabled documents, members have to remember that we are talking about past projects within these documents.
I wanted to remind you to ask questions to the issues in the document, not past projects or projects currently underway.
Our decision on the foundation type in communities depends very much on the sites that are available to build on.
From what I understand in the Taloyoak situation, we were able to place piles for one of the seven houses that are to be built there.
Part of the problem then was accessing the terrain because some of the building lots were on very rough terrain, so the pile equipment could not be brought to the site without more gravel work being done to even access the site. So that’s caused a delay for the construction in Taloyoak.
We do look overall at what the site situation is and if we have to put too much gravel, then that becomes costlier than putting piles in.
So we have to look at the costs based on the site and make the decision accordingly.
Under the review of the Nunavut Housing Trust under the subheading “Opportunities for Improvement,” the review for the housing corporation has identified that one area is to improve skills in the system; limitations in the Nunavut Housing Corporation’s accounting system.
One essential point identified, Mr. Chairman, by the Auditor General’s office was the communication between local housing organizations and the headquarters of the Nunavut Housing Corporation.
As I made a statement earlier today, I would ask one more question to the minister of the housing corporation about what is happening in Repulse Bay and Kugaaruk, and the local housing association is very aware of these things, and this has to do with housing construction.
I have wanted to see that under the review, but it’s not here. It’s not under the Opportunities for Improvement. It’s not under Inherent Risks and Challenges of the housing corporation.
It’s not identified.
So I would ask the minister’s office to ensure they don’t lose sight of the work with the local housing organizations. Building affordable homes is under the mission statement of the housing corporation.
That is to do with working with the local housing authorities.
So I would ask the minister to be very aware that local housing authorities are very much part of the system.
It should have been noted under the Inherent Risks and Challenges because the communication between the local housing associations and the Government of Nunavut, in this case the Nunavut Housing Corporation, is an essential part of the system.
Will the minister ensure that your communication line with the local housing associations be improved as recommended by the Office of the Auditor General of Canada?
I appreciate the concern.
I think we don’t want to lose sight of the fact that in Nunavut, local housing associations are partners with the Nunavut Housing Corporation and they are pretty well dependent on each other for planning as well as for cooperation in getting kind of work plans developed with coming years, and so on.
The housing corporation continues to have a number of staff, including in each region, there are a number of positions that are being created specifically to take part in liaison with the housing associations.
They are called community development officers. They do hold consultations regularly with communities.
Managing large projects or a number of housing constructions continue to remain with the Nunavut Housing Corporation, unless it’s contracted out to a local housing association or organization for project management.
So we will continue to work on that.
We will continue to find ways to improve our communication and that is something that we are committed to do.
If there are any problems in the field or in the community, we need to be informed quickly so that it doesn’t go unnoticed or lost in view of time.
So it’s really quite critical that we be provided with information if there seems to be any problems associated either with our staff or the project management for all that matter.
Again I wanted to repeat that under the Opportunities for Improvement and under the risks and challenges of the review of the housing corporation, the housing corporation recognizes that there is limited staff capacity.
The housing corporation also recognizes that “There is limited staff who have the required skills and competencies to implement many of its planned processes.”
Housing also understood the limitations in the housing corporation’s accounting system and “the inability to track multi-year projects and easily export data into useful financial/operational reports make it difficult to effectively review performance.” We know that.
But again I wanted to go back to the Office of the Auditor General of Canada that repeated that there has to be better communication lines between local housing associations and LHOs. So I wish that was included in the Opportunities for Improvement. That’s the end of my statement on this particular issue.
There was no question, but does the minister wishes to comment on the statement made by Mr. Ningark?
Hon. Tagak Curley: Thank you. I think communication is not one way, communication is two ways.
That’s why I insisted that if there are any problems that communities are feeling that something is happening, we need to be informed from the other side and we are dependent on the information.
If there is anything that needs to be corrected and if there are any problems with the project management in terms of construction, in terms of performance of the contractor that gives the local housing association concerns, we need that communication from that community if they are concerned and/or the community development officers who come in from time to time be informed regularly.
Our office remains open and we will react and we will respond to try and improve anything that isn’t working right. We are committed to that.
We want it. Like I said earlier, these are our partners and we depend on pretty well each other to make things happen.
An idea that came into force is that the communication between the local housing organizations and the minister’s office be included in the mission statement of the housing corporation. That’s one way of ensuring that there is a communication line open between the government and the communities to improve opportunities for improvement.
We take that as a suggestion. I’m sure it’s heard.
We would like to move on to Mr. Schell.
Going back to this report here on the contracting and whatever, the Nunavut Housing Corporation contracting report, if we go to page 18 and you look at items 2, 3, and 4, they’re equipment for an oil spill and it’s to the Municipality of Qikiqtarjuaq, and that’s for different amounts there; $15,000, $107,000, and $50,000.
My question is: what is that for?
This was related to an oil spill remediation in Qikiqtarjuaq. The hamlet, in consultation with the Nunavut Housing Corporation, had to build a containment berm to put contaminated soil in until it could be treated.
So these costs are all related to basically isolating this material so that it wouldn’t contaminate the environment.
And then you go to items 6 and 7, it says, “Fuel Spill Cleanup” and it’s awarded to a company. There are two different amounts there, one is for $106,000 and the other one is for $105,000. What is that for?
Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Schell. Mr. Barriault.
From my understanding, Nunatta Environmental Services was contracted to actually do the cleanup, and ensure that the site where the original spill occurred was “remediated” in a manner satisfying legislation, while the work done by the Municipality of Qikiqtarjuaq was in the disposal and containment of the contaminated material.
Mr. Schell: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Going back to No. 2, 3, and 4, the president had mentioned that that was for building a berm, but on the project name, it says, “Equipment for Oil Spill.”
So could he explain: is it to purchase equipment to do this work or was it actually doing the work for building the berm?
The description may be not as comprehensive as it should be.
However, most of the work related to building the berm was the use of heavy equipment, so that’s why the description would have been put in that fashion.
On the same page, when you go to No. 9 and No. 10, there was some furniture for Iqaluit given to North West Company and it’s the same amount twice there.
I’m assuming that’s a duplication, but I’m just double-checking because it’s for the same location and the same amount.