EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
In the report on page 39, it states, (interpretation ends) “Department of Environment supports harvesters through their various Harvester support programs when needed, and the Nunavut Development Corporation has guaranteed a set price for purchasing country food from harvesters.” (interpretation) My question is: (interpretation ends) what is the set price?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. He just clarified his question. Minister Ell-Kanayuk.
Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I’m sorry. Although I understand the question, I don’t have the information on the (interpretation ends) set price, (interpretation) so I can’t respond to that question.
Perhaps you will get the information at some point. (interpretation ends) Income assistance is discussed in detail under subsection 2.6 of the annual report.
Benefits provided under income assistance programs cost the government close to $40 million a year.
Has any analysis been undertaken to determine whether the number of individuals and families accessing income assistance benefits is increasing?
It’s not a definite number. It goes up and down, so it varies.
I also thank the minister for his response. (interpretation ends) During our recent winter sitting, members approved an additional $6.8 million to allow the government to exclude federal child benefit income from social assistance calculations.
In other words, these funds would no longer be clawed back from low-income families.
Will the Income Assistance Division of the Department of Family Services be monitoring the impact of this decision on social assistance applications and, if so, how will it be measured?
On April 1 of this year, the Government of Nunavut tried to exempt the family income that families receive. (interpretation) I’m sure that it’s going to be very beneficial for low-income families regarding its exemption.
As the member indicated, it’s $6.8 million that they will benefit from.
I don’t know how we can monitor it, but we can say that it will be beneficial to low-income families.
That exemption wouldn’t be seen by Family Services as an income, so it’s going to be a benefit for low-income families.
That’s how I can respond to your question, but I’m sure that it’s going to be a little benefit to low-income families.
We have to decide what we’re going to be doing and we do have rules to follow.
We will take a five-minute break so that the regular members can discuss what they would like to do at this time.
>>Committee recessed at 17:34 and resumed at 17:39
We have arrived at a decision. Let’s proceed now.
I have a short question on the (interpretation ends) minister’s annual report (interpretation) related to poverty reduction.
I wanted to ask about the finances after checking the figures.
They seem clear, although I imagine changes will be made.
Keeping that in mind, the departments of Education and Culture and Heritage will be getting some funding towards this.
In thinking about the departments of Education and Health on poverty reduction, it seems difficult to respond to this question, but I want to know which department will receive the most funds under this initiative.
I am asking the minister that question.
I don’t have a breakdown of the funding in front of me, but Ms. Turner can provide a summary.
In terms of the budget that is presented in this report, NHC represents the largest portion of the budget, Family Services represents the second largest portion of the budget, Health represents the third largest portion of the budget, and Education is a little further down the list.
I have another question regarding the funding allocated to Nunavut Arctic College. I don’t know whether all those monies have been expended, but my question is on page 37 of the report.
It doesn’t indicate how much money will be used.
If I understood the question, looking at the chart, Nunavut Arctic College is somewhere in the middle.
It is neither the highest nor the lowest.
I don’t have the exact numbers, but I can say that Arctic College and the Department of Education are somewhere in the middle in terms of the budget.
This will be my last question regarding food.
Of course, we are trying to reduce food insecurity, and it costs money to buy food in this day and age.
Regarding the retail outlets, the Co-op or Northern stores, they are provided a subsidy to reduce the price of healthy food.
Does your department know if the retail outlets are using those subsidies properly?
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. That’s a good question.
Very briefly, (interpretation ends) Nutrition North Canada (interpretation) is a federal program and we have no say in it, so I can’t make any comments on it.
I don’t know whether they are being used to subsidize healthy food.
They’re the only ones who can respond to that question.
I will ask that question when we meet with the appropriate people.
I have no more questions, so I’ll leave it at that.
Let me recognize Mr. Joanasie.
Committee Motion 007 – 4(3): Motion to Extend Sitting (Joanasie)
Pursuant to Rule 6(2), I move to extend the sitting hours so that we can complete the item we are dealing with.
There is a motion on the floor to extend the sitting hours in order to finish the item we’re dealing with.
Thank you. We will continue dealing with Tabled Document 149 – 4(2) until it is concluded.
Thank you, Mr. Joanasie.
I can now proceed to my list of names. Ms. Angnakak.
One of the areas I wanted to talk about and an issue that I have raised in the House numerous times is the issue of school breakfast programs.
I’m somebody that really does support that kind of initiative.
One of the concerns I have raised in the past is the fact that the staff in the school, on top of their own jobs, have to do proposal writing and actively go after this funding.
Last year, I was very happy to hear that the Department of Health had given every school $10,000 that was put towards breakfast programs.
One thing I am unsure of, and perhaps this is my question to you, is what kind of conversations and discussions have taken place with the Department of Health and perhaps with Family Services and the Department of Education as to how this kind of funding can be an item in a budget and you don’t have to write a proposal to get it.
It’s an automatic thing that’s added to the budget to recognize how important it is that school-aged children have that opportunity to eat, if they didn’t at home, if that makes any sense.
Have you had those kinds of discussions and can we anticipate that that funding will continue to be available to schools over the next years to come?
Thanks for the question to my colleague.
Mr. Chairman, at this point, we are not in any discussions with the department that she is asking about, but we can.
We are open to discussions with any of the departments within the government.
When we talk about poverty in Nunavut, there are definitely different timelines that we can look at.
We have heard many people talk about the need to educate Nunavummiut so that they have more choices in life, where they could have the choice to either further their education more once they’ve got their grade 12 or if they want to have employment, then that means they will have more choices.
Some things are a little bit more longer term, but we also need to address the short term. We also need to address today.
What kind of help can we provide Nunavummiut who are in poverty right now, right today, so that we do have some programs and services?
I really do believe that the breakfast program, by being able to feed children at school every day, is something we can do right away.
I would really like to encourage you to have that conversation.
I don’t think that it would take too much to convince any of us that this is a really needed program, one that would be very useful, and one that provides a positive impact immediately.
It has spin-offs too by being the incentive to even come to school. We have a real problem in Nunavut in getting kids to come to school regularly.
That’s also a great incentive.
The other thing I wanted to talk about was, and I think it’s only in the last few years and perhaps because we have been looking over to Greenland, I would like to know if the department, in their research about poverty, has looked at the impact of country food markets.
In Iqaluit, that has just started, I think, over the last few years.
It means that you need some money to be able to buy, recognizing the fact that hunting costs a lot of money.
I understand that part, but what kind of impact has that had on Nunavummiut where, traditionally, meat was shared?
Thanks for the question and the comments that you made in regard to the breakfast programs.
I totally agree with you and I will urge my department to get into discussions with the other departments to at least come up with a short-term solution in terms of getting the kids a breakfast to start with before going into the schools.
The other ministers are here and I’m positive that they are in full support of the idea that you are discussing.
In terms of the other comment that you made on the country food, as you said, the project was to examine Greenland’s country food.
It was examined and it’s desirable and feasible in Nunavut.
It found that Nunavummiut believe a market system could improve availability of country food, provide economic opportunities, (interpretation) (interpretation) and furthermore, would allow them to get country foods and would lead to communities working together to combat poverty in their communities.
We will be implementing this in an effort to reduce poverty, so we will proceed with that.
We have started talking with the local HTOs. Additionally, we will be working with Nunavut Arctic College on further training of people who can hunt.
That’s my short answer and I hope it was clear.
I think, when we talk about the impact of country food markets, it could really go both ways.
You have somebody that perhaps wants to be a hunter, but it costs money to hunt, so they want to sell their food.
On the other end, you also have people that can’t afford and have no means to go out hunting, and then they want to eat country, but maybe don’t have the money to buy it.
It’s worth more discussion, I think, to see how best that could be supported.
The other area I really want to talk about with you, and I’m hoping that you can look at this, in the report, it talks about shelters. There was some discussion earlier about men’s and women’s shelters and that.
One of the things I have noted in Iqaluit is that with the men’s shelter, anyhow, I’m not 100 percent on the women’s shelter, where everybody is sort of tossed out at 8:30, “You’re going to have to leave.”
I don’t think they can come back ‘til the evening.
I feel, if this is case, there is an opportunity being lost here where, perhaps, the government can work the residents of the shelters to look at some counselling, either in addictions or even encouragement to go to school or encouragement to do volunteer work or whatever.
Your department is responsible for shelters. Have you looked at that?
By doing that, you could give that person more incentives, “If you want to stay in the shelter, we want to be able to work with you in these areas” sort of thing?
Has the department looked at that?
Mr. Chairman, as to how the department can further support the shelter programs for the people of Nunavut and absolutely homeless people, the department is always assisting financially (interpretation ends) to support for the operation of the men’s Oqota shelter and Sivummut House, (interpretation) the women’s shelter, and for the youth in Iqaluit.
Our department works hard with the communities as well.
We consult with the communities and other departments, such as the Department of Health and the Nunavut Housing Corporation. We work with many departments with our programs to see how else we can help the absolutely homeless people.
It’s not just our department that has the responsibility. It’s not possible for one department to handle that issue alone.
In particular, the Nunavut Housing Corporation and the Department of Health have collaborated closely with us on this matter.
I guess what I’m getting at is there are opportunities there.
Most of the people who are using the shelters don’t have jobs and most of them are in real poverty. How can we get them so that we can help them to become more self-reliant and not only reliant on the shelters? What is it that we could be doing?
They’re already in the shelters.
There are different opportunities that could happen, counselling opportunities, I don’t know, just to encourage those that are in those kinds of situations that there is help out there. Sometimes it’s very hard to reach people who are in shelters and so that’s a great opportunity when they come to stay there and in the mornings and that. I don’t know.
I’m just thinking that you provide a contract to the different entities running the shelters. Maybe that’s something that, working with the other departments, you can look at developing. Maybe there is an opportunity there.
Is it something worthwhile to look at? I believe it is; I think it is. I think there are opportunities there to help people.
The other thing about shelters, and I have brought this up in the House before and I want to bring it up again here because, again, when we’re talking about shelters, we’re talking about predominantly people who don’t have jobs or even perhaps families.
That’s poverty to me in my mind.
I had somebody who came to me that had been thrown out of the shelter because of an alcohol issue.
I began to think about this a little bit more because, in the shelters, they have zero tolerance that if anybody is under the influence, they are kicked out.
If you think about it, who is using the shelters? Why do people get to those states?
A lot of times, addictions make you lose your job. Addictions make you lose your house. Addictions might make you lose your family.
That’s why they’re at the shelter.
When you kick them out, what are you really saying?
I look towards Yellowknife and they have wet shelters.
Because somebody is under the influence doesn’t mean they automatically kick them out.
They actually have shelters that can accommodate those who are down and out with addictions.
I think we need to look at this.
Iqaluit is getting larger and larger, more people, and that’s an issue that I think as a department, I would like to encourage you to look at.
That’s just a comment and I’m done.
I believe that’s just a suggestion and I didn’t hear a question at all.
Perhaps the minister will take it into consideration, but if you would like to comment on that, I would like to give you the opportunity, Minister Kuksuk.
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): I’ll make it short as that’s very clear.
My officials understand you fully and this can be considered. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
Moving on, for the second time, Mr. Mikkungwak.
I’ll go right into the question here.
The Nunavut Anti-Poverty Secretariat commissioned a study called “Poverty and Prosperity in Nunavut,” which was released in November 2013.
That report proposed that a basic income could replace income assistance as a type of guaranteed income.
What consideration, if any, has been given to initiating that practice in Nunavut?
I don’t want to read and respond at the same time, so I’ll get Ms. Turner to respond to that question.
Ms. Turner, if it’s okay with you.
Basic income is not something that has been considered at this time up until now for the Income Assistance Program.
At the Department of Family Services, we have been working over the last year on a review and reform of the Income Assistance Program that will propose important changes to the program that will help to support Nunavummiut and social assistance clients.
When we look at poverty reduction across Nunavut and all of these meetings that have been occurring and you have a lot of people involved in these meetings, what kinds of indicators are being considered to evaluate the progress and effectiveness of poverty reduction initiatives?
Again I want Ms. Turner to respond to that question as she has more knowledge on the indicators that the member is asking about.
We’re working with departments to finalize the list of indicators that will be incorporated into the second Poverty Reduction Action Plan.
These indicators that we’re looking at are going to measure the different things in the Makimaniq Plan; indicators that will measure our strength and support for healing and well-being; indicators that will measure whether or not the Income Assistance Program is more supportive.
We are working to finalize this list of indicators and it will be included in the next Minister’s Annual Report on Poverty Reduction.
I understand that you will be identifying indicators.
Like any other department or organization or anything, as the poverty reduction meetings and whatnot are occurring, will whatever you find that is not effective and not working be identified in the report and cease to continue?
I don’t know if we will be pinpointing what is not working or included as a report that “This does not work,” but we will have in the report what we find will help in reducing poverty. That’s what we’re working on.
If it was already asked, please stop me, Mr. Chairman.
(interpretation ends) On page 62, “The Poverty Reduction Fund was officially created on May 16th, 2013, when the Collaboration for Poverty Reduction Act came into force.”
In your annual report, it states that in 2013-14, no investments were made to the fund and no initiatives were funded.
Can you explain why this is the case?
Hon. George Kuksuk: Thank you. Ms. Turner has that answer.
Chairman: Ms. Turner, please give the answer.
When this report was drafted, we were just in the initial stages of developing the policies and the accounting structure around that fund. We are close to finalizing those policies.
In the coming year, we will be developing communications materials to create awareness about the fund, which will hopefully increase donations into the fund.
Mr. Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) How much money is currently in the Poverty Reduction Fund account?
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): We can say there is $l.4 million. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
Mr. Sammurtok: Can the money from the Poverty Reduction Fund be used to help individuals or families who are in desperately poor circumstances?
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): Unfortunately I was reading something else and I missed his question.
I would like him to restate the question and make it short.
Mr. Sammurtok, ask your question and make it short.
Can the money (interpretation ends) from the Poverty Reduction Fund be used to help individuals or families who are in desperately poor circumstances?
Can that fund be used to help individuals or families who are in desperately poor circumstances?
For his first question about the fund, I apologize to my colleagues and the audience that I made an error in quoting the figure.
It is not at $1 million. I erred in quoting the amount.
Through donations, it is only $1,405 right now.
Can it be used to help individuals or families? Ms. Turner can summarize how these funds can be used. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
The Collaboration for Poverty Reduction Act specifies how this fund can be used.
It is meant to be used to support community-based projects that are consistent with the goals and objectives of the Makimaniq Plan.
I guess it didn’t take long to run out of money.
I have no more names on my list. Members, do you agree that Tabled Document 149 – 4(2) is concluded?
Minister Kuksuk, thank you and your officials for being in attendance because this is very useful for Nunavummiut.
Minister Kuksuk, if you have any closing remarks, I would now like to give you the opportunity.
Hon. George Kuksuk (interpretation): Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman and my officials who were here in attendance today. My colleagues asked very good questions.
If we weren’t able to respond to certain questions, we can get back to you at a later date. There are many issues to deal with.
I will just say “thank you” to everybody, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
As we have completed the item, I will now rise to report progress to the Speaker.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Mr. Speaker, your committee has been considering Tabled Document 149 – 4(2) and would like to report that we have concluded the consideration of Tabled Document 149 – 4(2).
A reminder that there is a meeting of the Regular Members’ Caucus at 9:00 tomorrow morning in the Nanuq Boardroom.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) This House stands adjourned until Thursday, June 2, at 1:30 p.m.
>>House adjourned at 18:20
Thursday, June 2, 2016
Pages 1936 – 1995
Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery 1945
Oral Questions 1945
Tabling of Documents 1960
Consideration in Committee of the Whole of Bills and Other Matters 1961
Report of the Committee of the Whole 1994
Orders of the Day 1994
Thursday, June 2, 2016 1936
113 – 4(3): Rocket Launch Debris (Savikataaq) 1936
114 – 4(3): Public Consultations on the Education Act Amendments (Quassa) 1937
115 – 4(3): Loan of Nunavut Art to Winnipeg Art Gallery (Kuksuk) 1937
116 – 4(3): Department of Environment Risk Planning Tool (Mike) 1938
117 – 4(3): Northern Premiers’ Forum and Western Premiers’ Conference (Taptuna) 1939
118 – 4(3): Inquiry on Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls (Ell-Kanayuk) 1939
119 – 4(3): Student Enrolment (Quassa) 1940
251 – 4(3): Nunavut’s Snowboarder on Top of the World (Angnakak) 1941
252 – 4(3): Announcing the Birth of Great-grandson (Qirngnuq) 1941
253 – 4(3): Successful TASK Program in Baker Lake (Mikkungwak) 1942
254 – 4(3): Stanley Cup Visit to Kugluktuk (Taptuna) 1942
255 – 4(3): Upcoming Fishing Derby in Igloolik (Quassa) 1943
256 – 4(3): Governor General’s Visit to Cape Dorset (Joanasie) 1943
257 – 4(3): 2016 Pangnirtung Music Festival (Mike) 1944
330 – 4(3): Remuneration for Members of the Board of Directors of the Nunavut Housing Corporation (Mapsalak) 1946
331 – 4(3): Grise Fiord Sewage Lagoon (Shooyook) 1947
332 – 4(3): Need for Early Childhood Education Facilities (Joanasie) 1948
333 – 4(3): What is Being Done to Curb Smoking in Nunavut?
(Angnakak) 1951
334 – 4(3): New Family Resource Worker Position for Sanikiluaq (Rumbolt) 1953
335 – 4(3): Medical Transient Centre in Churchill (Sammurtok, T) 1954
336 – 4(3): Rocket Launch Debris (Enook) 1955
337 – 4(3): Public Consultations on Education Act Amendments (Okalik) 1957
338 – 4(3): GN Contracts for Medical and Duty Travel (Mikkungwak) 1958
339 – 4(3): Rocket Launch Debris (Shooyook) 1959
143 – 4(3): Office of the Fire Marshal 2015 Annual Report (Savikataaq) 1960
Tabled Document 073 – 4(2): Human Resource Strategy 2014-2018 – Consideration in Committee 1961
Tabled Document 116 – 4(2): Public Service Code of Values and Ethics – Consideration in Committee 1961
Tabled Document 140 – 4(2): Public Service Annual Report 2013-2014 – Consideration in Committee 1961
Tabled Document 070 – 4(3): 2014-2015 Public Service Annual Report – Consideration in Committee 1961
Speaker (interpretation): Good afternoon, my fellow Nunavummiut, members, ministers, and (interpretation ends) Premier. (interpretation) Welcome to the House.
Member for Community and Government Services, Mr. Joe Savikataaq.
Minister’s Statement 113 – 4(3): Rocket Launch Debris (Savikataaq)
I rise today to advise the residents of Nunavut that the Russian government is planning to launch a rocket on June 4 or June 5 as an alternate date, which will result in debris falling in the ocean between Ellesmere Island and Greenland.
It is expected that the debris will fall outside of Canada’s territorial waters into northern Baffin Bay.
As a precaution, the Government of Canada Operations Centre is working with NAV CANADA and the Canadian Coast Guard for marine communications and traffic services during this event.
My immediate concern was if there may be a harmful effect on a community, the environment, or animals near the impact area.
I have been told that the overall risk associated with this event is very low.
The Russian rocket in question is fuelled by hydrazine, which is a toxic substance.