EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I am pleased to see my wife in the Gallery and I would like my colleagues to welcome her. Sally, who was able to arrive today, is one of my most trusted helpers. We had an opportunity to visit our relatives here in Iqaluit and I wanted to take this opportunity to introduce my wife and have her recognized.
Quite a number of people come to Iqaluit to take courses, or to work, or to learn on the job, or to be trained as managers.
However, because Pond Inlet is such a scenic and beautiful area, quite a few people return to Pond Inlet.
I would like to recognize an individual who returned to Pond Inlet after living in Iqaluit for quite a few years, Tim Innualuk.
I, too, would like to recognize someone who lived in Grise Fiord and is now living here.
I want to recognize Russel Akeeagok, whose parents are good friends of mine. I knew him since he was going to school in Grise Fiord.
Question 655 – 2(4): Renovations for Inuksuk High School (Tootoo)
I would like to ask a question to the Minister responsible for Education.
Mr. Speaker, I know and he is fully aware of something that I have raised for some time now and it has to deal with renovations for the Inuksuk High School.
And I know that there was an article in the paper over the summer indicating that a decision has been made on how to go about doing the renovations based on community feedback.
I would just like to ask the minister if he could give us a timeline as to the plans for those renovations to take place.
I would like to thank the member for the question. Mr. Speaker, this past summer, we actually had a public meeting here in Iqaluit at the Parish Hall and we had a good turnout with the DEA members, me, and the public at large, and went through several options that we had presented for the high school.
At the end of the day, the DEA, as well as the departmental officials and I felt that the renovation program would be the least disruptive to the students and indeed to the staff of the high school. The renovation will begin in the summer of 2009 and should take place over the next several summers, culminating in the completion of the program by 2012.
As the minister pointed out, I would like to thank him because I know a big question in a lot of parents’ minds was: when are they going to have this public meeting? I think the first time it was supposed to happen was early in the spring, but I’m glad it came about and the minister indicated that they did get some good feedback from the community and the DEA on that.
Mr. Speaker, my question for the minister is: the project, as he had indicated, is going to span over three years and I just want to get a confirmation from the minister that the funding for this project over those three years will be there to ensure it from start to completion.
That was part of the issues that we were trying to deal with.
We looked at three possible scenarios and one was of a renovation of the school, and that meant doing it within a year and a half timeframe, taking the students out of the school, closing the school down, and then trying to reallocate around different classrooms in the school.
The price tag of doing that was about $52 million to bring in portables, and so on, or build a new school, which was about $54 or $55 million, and we did not have those capital monies available.
We have, however, as the member is aware, passed in this House about $21 million that’s available to the high school project that has already been approved by the Assembly.
So that money has been approved by the Assembly and indeed is in place to be able to do the renovation of the high school.
I know, over the summer, they came up with that option, but can the minister give an indication as to what’s going to happen first, a little bit of an idea of the scope of the project over the next three years?
Over the next several months, there will be some very complex programs put in place looking at the actual renovation of the school, what the capital requirements are, the health and safety issues surrounding that type of program, and then to look at an actual timeframe and scheduling for the different renovations that will take place in the school.
Again, we want to make sure, at the end of the day, that any type of work that goes on in the high school is the students and the staff at the school are least affected by that. The DEA has been monitoring that very closely. So in the coming weeks and months, that timeframe, schedule, and everything will be outlined through Technical Services of Community and Government Services, or CGS, as well as our own capital planning people in the Department of Education, and then that information will be brought forward to the local Iqaluit District Education Authority so that they’re concurrent with it, and an update done for the parents.
I would expect, by probably early in the New Year, that most of those scheduling issues would be dealt with and we should see the contracting tenders out in the New Year so that the work on the school, the renovation itself, can begin in earnest as soon as school finishes, which is scheduled for the end June around the 26th, around there.
The minister indicated that they would share that outline through Technical Services people or develop as to what’s going to be done when with the DEA and the community.
In a lot of cases, when decisions are being made, the people that they should ask for how things should be done are the people that are right there on the ground. In this particular case, it would be the staff at the high school.
Can the minister indicate if they’re planning on getting input from the staff at the high school on the best way to approach those renovations?
Any type of work that goes on in the school needs to be done in cooperation with and with the advice of the faculty and staff of the high school and indeed the students also, and that will be carried out as we move further into the project.
This project itself, Mr. Speaker, on a single individual program, I have never seen as much consultation that has been done and indeed I have now met with the staff and principal at least three times on the processes involved and with the full staff last spring at least twice to discuss the issues, and I believe that will continue with the department.
So I want to let the member and the public at large be rest assured that they will be taken into account and their advice sought when the renovations and the plan itself is brought forward and before the renovations begin next summer.
Question 656 – 2(4): Update on School Issues in Sanikiluaq (Kattuk)
I’m not sure which minister my question should be directed to, probably the Minister of Human Resources or Education.
I voiced a concern last spring in regard to our school in Sanikiluaq and today, our school is closed due to odorous emissions.
I’m not exactly sure which minister will respond to this question, but I would like to ask some questions with respect to this matter.
The school was going to be renovated once school was over for the summer.
I would like to know if the renovation proceeded, whether or not it was completed, or if it required further work. Can I get some notification as to the status of this renovation from the minister?
First, let me say that I really enjoyed being in Sanikiluaq this past June with the Premier and as usual, the people of Sanikiluaq were most hospitable.
They indeed donated and gave to myself and the Premier some wonderful gifts.
They gave me a mounted wolf that was done by a class in the community with taxidermy work in the class by Mr. James and his people, so I want to publicly thank the people of Sanikiluaq for that. That wolf, by the way, Mr. Speaker, is now taking habitat and living space up at the Joamie School here in Iqaluit. The Minister of Education donated that to Joamie School, so I want to thank the people of Sanikiluaq for that.
Mr. Speaker, the issue around the school in Sanikiluaq, when we had a chance to look at some of the areas of concern, there were some minor renovations that needed to be carried out in the school itself, there were problems with the doors being locked, and so on.
It was my understanding that some of that work has actually been carried out.
There was also the issue with odour in the school and indeed I think we have solved that with the help of CGS.
I’m not aware of why the school was closed today and that’s something I will have to find out, Mr. Speaker. I don’t know if it pertains to those ongoing issues or if it’s something new.
This is not a new issue. I received an email from the DEA chairperson stating that when the wind blows, the smell probably emanates from the generator beside the school.
Can the minister let me know what kinds of renovations were made at the school?
It is closed today due to the odour in the school. Can the minister tell me if and how this problem was rectified?
When we had an opportunity to be in the school in June, I had an opportunity to talk to the principal and some of the staff there.
What occurred was there were actually three different issues occurring that caused the odour in the school in Sanikiluaq.
One was that it was felt that when, I believe it’s the water or sewage truck, they came to the school and they were doing their fill-ups, that the motor was running and that because the air intake vent was located adjacent to the water fill pipe, there was diesel smell going into the school, and we actually had specialized equipment brought in to find the odour and so on.
A lot of work was done by the CGS staff.
Secondly, as the member has indicated, there was some confusion with the diesel smoke or smell that was coming out of the adjacent power plant.
And what happened was there was a problem with the reheat in that plant and then when the boilers actually came on in the school, it caused another different odour. I had an opportunity to talk to the Minister of Energy about that issue, with the Power Corporation, and had an opportunity to find out that indeed that had been rectified because they had solved the problem with the reheat.
The third issue was with the septic issue, which is a septic tank and the odour that was permeating from that area.
It is my understanding again, Mr. Speaker, that that was a very minor inconvenience and was solved very quickly.
So those are the three issues but they were compounding and happening around the same time, and as one got rectified, it seemed like we were having a problem with the other one.
I am not aware currently, as of today, if this issue has occurred, but I do know, with the power plant, there was an issue when the wind was in certain prevailing ways that there were some diesel fumes that flew toward the school and then went through the air intake vent.
But that wasn’t the real issue, the real issue was because the heat from the power plant heats the school and when that failed and wasn’t working properly, the school boilers had to come on and because they hadn’t been on in a while, that caused an odour in the school.
That was a long-winded response to a short question.
Perhaps if I just say this: can I get a commitment from the minister to provide an update on the buildings that were constructed over the summer before the end of this session or prior to the members travelling home?
Yes, as soon as Question Period is over today, I will be speaking with our staff to find out has something occurred again in Sanikiluaq and find out exactly what has occurred.
Again, I’m not aware of anything as of right now.
That’s not to say it hasn’t occurred and so on, but I will give an update to the member and to the House as soon as we break or after Oral Questions.
Question 657 – 2(4): Impact of MOU on IIBA Negotiations with Baffinland (Peterson)
Mr. Speaker, on Friday, I was interested when the minister made a speech entitled “Training Partnership with Baffinland Iron Ore Mine and Nunavut Arctic College.”
Mr. Speaker, I applaud the minister for taking the initiative with Nunavut Arctic College and Baffinland to develop that agreement.
It shows that the government is serious about working with mining companies that are making serious investments in Nunavut.
My question for the minister, Mr. Speaker: will the minister explain to the House how the Memorandum of Understanding would be implemented within the context of negotiated Inuit Impact Benefit Agreements and the available funding from the Government of Nunavut?
That was exciting news when we made the announcement with Baffinland and indeed we had an opportunity to meet with Baffinland on Friday here and the key people, as well as investment bankers that have been here dealing with them.
Mr. Speaker, this MOU is an exciting opportunity that brings forward the work on behalf and for Nunavut Arctic College. We have moved forward, as the members know, and we actually increased our capital budget to include fast-tracking the community learning centre in Pond Inlet. So we’re actually going to be able to deliver some better vocational programs in that new space to be able to train people in Baffinland.
What we’re looking at is, through the Nunavut Skills Inventory, or NCSIS, matching skills at the community level with what are needed by Baffinland, whether that’s heavy equipment operator training or any of the other different positions that will be available, and then identifying people across North Baffin and indeed Baffin and Nunavut at large to be able to provide and fill those positions.
We will provide the seats for said programs.
Baffinland will come in with some fiscal as well as administrative resources.
We will provide, more or less, logistics resources, as well as tap into other opportunities that may present themselves.
I want to say that we have also done this type of an agreement with our partners in the Kitikmeot, also looking at opportunities for training.
Mr. Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank the minister for that answer. I appreciate the details he gave and also the announcement that he’s working with the Kitikmeot mining companies.
Mr. Speaker, the Kitikmeot has several major resource development projects in various stages of development. Newmont is constructing the Hope Bay Mine and we hope that will be open next year; Zinifex is involved at Gray’s Bay; Sabina Minerals, I heard this morning, had just received their part 5 approval for their silver project down at Hackett River.
We appreciate their significant investments in the Kitikmeot and to date, the employment that they’re generating for our residents.
Just to follow up with the minister on his comments about the Kitikmeot, can the minister tell the House what stage the Government of Nunavut and the Nunavut Arctic College are at in negotiating similar MOU instruments with mining companies in the Kitikmeot?
The member is correct and I think this is one of the good news stories that we’re probably not doing a good enough job of communicating to Nunavummiut.
Indeed, in the Kitikmeot region, we have signed off an agreement, as I stated earlier, with the KIA, with KEDC, with Newmont, Miramar, and Nunavut Arctic College before Christmas in 2007.
And indeed that has resulted in the development of a hard rock mine training opportunity for the Kitikmeot, which is turning out to be quite successful.
Again, we’re also under discussions right now with the Kivalliq Inuit Association to do a similar MOU for training and so on.
And we’re moving forward with the new trades school in Rankin Inlet, as well as looking at opportunities to put a mine training facility specifically for the Millwright Training Program in Cambridge Bay.
So we have been aggressive as a government, over the last 12 to 17 months, to ensure that there are not only opportunities for training but there are also facilities in place so that people can actually go to a facility within Nunavut to do that actual training.
It’s good to know that the department is proceeding to support training in the Kitikmeot and I look forward to eventually seeing a mine training institute in Cambridge Bay.
The minister mentioned the millwright program, but until then, Mr. Speaker, Nunavut requires a huge investment in training for careers in mining.
We recently heard that the Northwest Territories Mine Training Society received $9 million from the federal government to be invested over three years in their territory.
My question for the minister: can the minister explain to the House if Nunavut has received or will receive similar training funds for mine training in Nunavut, and if not, why not?
This member from Cambridge Bay should be congratulated in how he can slip four questions into one - if not, why not, and explain - so I commend him on that.
Mr. Speaker, firstly, to say that I have no control over what the federal government does and indeed what the Northwest Territories sign off, we congratulate the Northwest Territories and the Mine Training Society for being able to facilitate and indeed receive several million dollars in training, and indeed the Prime Minister was in Inuvik and made that announcement.
Mr. Speaker, I would love for the Prime Minister to come to Nunavut, to Rankin Inlet, to Cambridge Bay, to Iqaluit, to Clyde River and make an announcement like that.
I have no word right now that that’s going to occur but, Mr. Speaker, this is an opportune time.
We do have some people out on the hustings with the federal election and maybe if we can impress on them that maybe mine training-associated dollars should be brought up and brought forward by our federal people who are on the hustings for positions with our federal partner.
I can say that we’ve had discussions with the federal government about opportunities to look at our Labour Market Development Agreement, or the LMDA, to be able to use some of those dollars for mine training and we have been successful in that.
We have not, however, been in a position to receive the money that the Northwest Territories have done. There is a little bit of a difference there because they actually have a Mine Training Society in place that can actually receive the money.
That’s something that, right now, is in the preliminary stages here in Nunavut.
I think it’s important also to note that there has been 50 years of mining in the Northwest Territories and they’re a little bit further ahead on the societal status, but that’s something that we are working towards.
I thank the minister for that answer and his earlier comment about my question, so I will try to limit this question to one question.
Mr. Speaker, the Northwest Territories Mine Training Society that the minister discussed has been very supportive of the Kitikmeot and is interested in working with the Kitikmeot on some mine training programs that will likely require some Government of Nunavut investment.
My question for the minister: can the minister tell the House if the Department of Education and the minister himself would be supportive of the NWT Mine Training Society to work with Kitikmeot organizations to develop and offer mine training courses to our Kitikmeot residents?
One of the exciting things that we had an opportunity to do, when we were in Inuvik in June for the ITC meetings with Mary Simon and her people, was an opportunity to speak with our old friend, Nellie Cournoyea. Nellie, of course, as the members know, is the CEO and Chair of the Inuvialuit Development Corporation.
The Inuvialuit Development Corporation and the Inuvialuit Land Claims settlement area actually went out themselves as beneficiaries and actually bought a mobile training rig and put it in Inuvik. It cost about $4 million and they did that on behalf and for the Inuvialuit beneficiaries in that region.
So we congratulate them and see that that group has had some foresight in doing that because government can’t do everything.
What I suggest to you, Mr. Speaker, is if there is an opportunity for joint training or any type of development between the Northwest Territories and Nunavut, between the Inuvialuit or any other land claim organization or group in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut, in this case being the KIA, then we will welcome that because we think it’s a good way to do things.
There are economies of scale, Mr. Speaker, when we have our groups within the territories working together on these types of training initiatives and indeed putting some of that training infrastructure in place, like we saw happening in Inuvik and indeed with some of the good discussions that are happening with the Kitikmeot and the Northwest Territories.
Question 658 – 2(4): Who is Reviewing GN Fuel Policy (Curley)
I would like to direct my question to all ministers responsible for petroleum products as I believe there are three, sometimes four of them.
I will start off with the Minister of Community and Government Services. We have heard in previous committee meetings and in our sessions that the government is reviewing the price of gasoline. Is that the case?
Did you look into the price of oil and whether or not the pricing is following the market prices? Have you concluded the study and have you reviewed the fluctuation? Is it going to be an independent study or is it done by the government?
I’m not exactly sure if there’s going to be a review at this time or if there will be a study done. However, I do know that our departmental staff keep abreast of the price of gasoline and what the price was in the last year, and I know that these are issues that are monitored.
I’m not aware of any study that will be done by this government.
During our committee meetings, we were informed that there would be a review of the price of fuel.
This review is due to the fact that it’s transported from southern points to our communities.
Yesterday, during our committee meeting, we were told by your officials that they’re currently looking at petroleum products and whether they will provide subsidies to the mining companies or other development companies here.
I can tell you as the minister that the government ought not to even look at subsidizing the price of fuel for the mining and exploration companies.
If that was the case, the price would increase and it would affect all Nunavummiut.
So this requires a review.
Would the minister agree that there should be a study done to look at the fluctuation of the price? You should task your officials to look at the best method to price fuel.
This requires a comprehensive review so that the residents of Nunavut pay the lowest possible price for the fuel that’s transported to their communities.
The mining and exploration companies buy their own petroleum products; they buy and ship their own fuel for their usage.
If the member would like to see a study done, I could direct my staff to look into this issue. However, it would require assistance from other government departments and I would have to include the Department of Finance and the other government departments in conducting this study.
One of the reasons why we would like to see a study done is because there’s going to be an instant increase that the consumer will have to pay.
This summer, you bought the fuel when it was $132 per barrel and now, it’s under $100 per barrel.
There was a 22 percent increase and a 15 percent fuel rider without having any studies done.
You should inform the consumers out there because they’re not able to keep up with the prices at the pump.
There’s also a surcharge that you should get rid of because the federal government should be paying for it.
Could the minister indicate to me if they could take the surcharge off the pumps?
Around June or July, we had no choice but to buy the fuel at $130 to $140 per barrel because that’s when the Petroleum Products Division buys their fuel.
We were trying to buy the fuel while it was still relatively cheap and we knew that we had to make a purchase before the price increased further.
The pundits were thinking that the price of fuel may reach $200 per barrel.
And in the midst of the uncertainty and the precarious situation, we had to buy the fuel.
Yes, the member is correct that the current price is now under $100 per barrel, but we cannot predict whether the price of fuel may increase because the main oil refineries are in the United States. There were 26 refineries but 14 of them were damaged due to severe hurricanes, so this affected the price of fuel.