EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I would like to ask how the government is going to deal with the possibility of tax liabilities that the government could be taxed with due to personal use of vehicles.
The NNI Policy, as I understand it, is a policy of NTI and we try to adhere to it.
As for the use of the government vehicle, if the municipality has by-laws, Acts, and policies, they write their own policies up and we can’t tell them what policies they can or can’t have, Mr. Speaker.
I hope that clears the matter that the municipality chooses how they want to administer their motor vehicle policy and, in this case, it’s totally up to them.
In ours, it’s very clear.
It says that the vehicle must be used for government purposes only.
Now, in cases where the government vehicle is used by, let’s say, emergency measures, they are on call 24/7 and they need the emergency vehicle to be parked at their house, so be it.
For those cases, they need to do that. There will be cases in some communities where the vehicle has to be taken home by an employee because there may be a) no parking space or no place to plug it in at night. So there are those things.
The rules for each department in control of the vehicle are that the head of that department is responsible for ensuring that the staff of that department are adhering to the GN policy.
I hope that clears it up for my colleague.
Question 510 – 3(2): Application of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit in Nunavut Courts (Ugyuk)
I would like to direct my question to the Hon. Keith Peterson.
We were informed that the Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit Committee met this week. They stated that they were unhappy with the court system and that they felt they weren’t involved properly in the justice system.
Is the minister working with the Department of CLEY to see how they can include or incorporate more elders in the court system?
I know that sometimes there are elders in the courts and I would like to find out about that.
It’s the first time I have heard that the elders are concerned; it has never been brought to my attention, but there is that concern and I will look into it and I will speak to my colleague from Culture, Language, Elders and Youth.
Question 511 – 3(2): PPD Contracts in Nunavut Communities (Elliott)
My questions are directed towards the Minister of Community and Government Services, the Hon. Lorne Kusugak.
How often are PPD contracts negotiated and renewed with organizations and individuals in our communities?
Hon. Lorne Kusugak: Excuse me, Mr. Speaker.
I don’t know the exact length of time that they expire of each contract with PPD off the top of my head, Mr. Speaker, but there are contracts with every municipality in Nunavut for the PPD delivery.
My second question is: once the contract is received, how often does PPD or your department check up on the contractor to ensure they are living up to their obligations?
Our department of petroleum products within CGS is in regular contact with the contractor to ensure that the services that are supposed to be provided in that contract are adhered to, so it’s on a regular basis.
They are definitely in touch with them at least once a month and, in some instances, more often. There is regular communication from our staff with each contractor in the municipalities to ensure the delivery of services to that standard of CGS or to the government.
There have been concerns brought to me by constituents in Arctic Bay repeatedly in terms of the contractor that is currently holding the PPD contract. They have been having difficulty in maintaining their fuel truck.
It has resulted in planes being missed on a regular basis. It extends the flight times to the community because the planes are landing in Hall Beach to refuel there.
Who is responsible for maintaining the fuel trucks and ensuring delivery of the fuel?
The responsibility of the equipment is that of the contractor, but there have been instances where they were not able to maintain their vehicles.
They have been in contact with our department and we’ve had to go in and try to help them. It’s happened in a few other communities where proper maintenance and upkeep of vehicles wasn’t done.
It’s actually not a joking matter, but it’s held within the contractor.
Where they can’t pull through, we have often stepped in and tried to help them resolve the problem.
More recently, in terms of discussions I’ve had with some constituents, it is not really a laughing matter in terms of medevacs and emergency situations when a plane has to be called out right away to evacuate someone.
Last Sunday was an example in terms of bad weather in different communities and landing situations in the alternate communities.
It not only puts the individual who is being medevaced in a situation that is not safe, it also puts the pilots and flight crew in a situation that is not very safe.
If situations like this continue, what procedures are in place, I guess as an MLA, to ensure that this doesn’t continue?
I believe, in Arctic Bay, our department is working with the contractor to ensure that vehicle maintenance is caught up. The vehicle was in with the local mechanic.
The wear and tear on that vehicle has been extensive because it’s had to go such a long distance.
Our department will be working with the individual to ensure that the vehicle is able to operate efficiently and sufficiently.
The good thing about this is that my colleague just announced that in mid-January, there will be a new airport right in the municipality.
That will take a lot of strain off of that vehicle.
So we will ensure that the vehicle is in good working order as soon as possible.
By January, the wear and tear on it will decrease dramatically.
Hopefully that will ensure that is it’s operable at least until the next sealift arrives in the municipality, where we are hoping that they will be a new vehicle to be able to deliver fuel to that community.
Committee Report 006 – 3(2): Report on the Review of the 2009-2010 Annual Report of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Nunavut (Schell)
I rise today to present the report of the Standing Committee on Oversight of Government Operations and Public Accounts on its review of the 2009-2010 Annual Report of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Nunavut to the Legislative Assembly.
The Information and Privacy Commissioner of Nunavut appeared before the standing committee on October 1, 2010.
As members will recall, the committee held hearings on her 2007-08 and 2008-09 annual reports on October 1 of last year.
This year’s appearance was again held in the Chamber of the Legislative Assembly and was open to the public and news media to observe.
The timing of the standing committee’s hearings were very appropriate given that they took place during the fifth annual Canadian celebration of Right to Know Week, which reflects an international effort to raise awareness of people’s right to access government information.
*See Appendix for full text of Committee Report 6 – 3(2).
The Information and Privacy Commissioner has submitted a total of 11 annual reports to the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut since her initial appointment in 1999.
In each annual report, she has presented a number of recommendations.
Following our hearings of last October, the standing committee presented its own report to the Legislative Assembly on December 2, 2009.
This report contained 10 formal recommendations.
The government’s response to the standing committee’s report and recommendations was tabled in the Legislative Assembly on March 22 of this year.
Both the standing committee’s report and the government’s response to it are available to the public on the Legislative Assembly’s website.
Mr. Speaker, members engaged in a productive dialogue with the Information and Privacy Commissioner during her appearance before the standing committee earlier this month.
The hearings provided an opportunity to review the progress made by the government over the past year in addressing the recommendations made by the Information and Privacy Commissioner and the standing committee.
While the government has made progress on some issues, the standing committee notes that more action is required in other areas, such as amending the legislation to provide the Information and Privacy Commissioner with clear authority to investigate privacy breaches, moving towards establishing an access to information and protection of privacy regime for municipalities, and addressing the issue of health-specific privacy legislation.
The standing committee’s report provides a number of observations concerning the issues and themes that have emerged during the committee’s recent hearings on the Information and Privacy Commissioner’s annual reports.
Mr. Speaker, the standing committee’s report presents eight formal recommendations.
A number of these follow up on issues that we brought to the attention of the House last year.
Access to information in relation to disclosure of Crown agency contracting, procurement and leasing activities;
The disclosure of information in relation to communicable diseases;
Communication practices of community health centres;
Amendments to the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act in relation to the Information and Privacy Commissioner’s discretion to extend the time for requesting a review;
The development of health-specific privacy legislation; and
The provision of information to Members of the Legislative Assembly pursuant to subsection 48(v) of the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to take this opportunity to thank my colleagues for their thoughtful interventions and questions during the standing committee’s deliberations.
The increasingly complex world in which we live requires governments to ensure that their practices in the areas of access to information and protection of privacy are up to date.
In Nunavut, we must also ensure that Inuit societal values are respected in our approach to these challenging but critical issues.
The standing committee appreciated her candid replies to our questions and suggestions.
The standing committee also appreciated her taking the initiative to invite the federal assistant information commissioner of Canada to accompany her on the occasion of her trip to Iqaluit earlier this month, which included a meeting with the Iqaluit City Council to discuss access to information and protection of privacy at the municipal level.
Mr. Speaker, I would also take this opportunity to revisit an issue that was raised during last year’s hearings on the Information and Privacy Commissioner’s annual report.
At that time, members discussed the issue of the Information and Privacy Commissioner’s role and mandate.
Members raised the idea of the government being open to expanding her office’s role to also address such matters as whistle-blower protection.
The standing committee notes that the government’s most recently tabled public service annual report indicates that “work is continuing on the development of a Code of Values and Ethics for Nunavut’s public service” and that “a comprehensive developmental plan has been launched for the revitalization of the Public Service Act.”
The standing committee also notes that in a recent response to a question asked in this House, the Minister of Human Resources indicated that the issue of whistle-blower protection would addressed as part of this process.
Mr. Speaker, I would note for the record that the standing committee is requesting that the government provide a comprehensive response to this report, pursuant to Rule 91(5) of the Rules of the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut.
With that, I move that the report be received by the House and that it be entered into the record as read.
Do members agree that the report of the standing committee be received by the House and that it be entered into the record as read?
Tabled Document 249 – 3(2): Lease Activity Report 2009-2010 (Kusugak)
Tabled Document 250 – 3(2): FPT Ministers responsible for Local Government (Kusugak)
Tabled Document 251 – 3(2): 2009-2010 Procurement Activity Report (Kusugak)
Hon. Lorne Kusugak (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) I would like to take this opportunity and I am pleased to table three documents.
The following documents, Mr. Speaker: the Lease Activity Report for Fiscal Year 2009-2010 for the Department of Community and Government Services; I would also like to table the FPT Report for Provincial/Territorial Ministers responsible for Local Government; I would also like to table the Procurement Activity Report for Fiscal Year 2009-2010 for the Community and Government Services.
Tabled Document 252 – 3(2): Nunavut Status of Women Council Annual Report 2009-2010 (Aariak)
I am pleased to table the Qulliit Nunavut Status of Women Council’s Annual Report for 2009-2010.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you, Premier. (interpretation ends) Tabling of Documents.
Tabled Document 253 – 3(2): 2010-2011 Letters of Expectation for Public Agencies (Peterson)
I am pleased to table the 2010-2011 Letters of Expectation for Public Agencies.
Tabled Document 254 – 3(2): 2009-2010 Annual Contracting Report for the Office of the Legislative Assembly (Speaker)
Thank you, Members. I am pleased to table the 2009-2010 Annual Contracting Report for the Office of the Legislative Assembly.
Tabled Documents 207 – 3(2), 209 – 3(2), 210 – 3(2), and 212 – 3(2) with Mr. Ningeongan in the Chair.
I ask members to remain at their desks so that we can immediately proceed to the Committee of the Whole.
In Committee of the Whole, we have the following items to deal with: Tabled Documents 207 – 3(2), 209 – 3(2), 210 – 3(2), and 212 – 3(2).
We would like to commence with the concurrent review of the following tabled documents: 207 – 3(2), 209 – 3(2), 210 – 3(2), and 212 – 3(2).
Are we in agreement to deal with Tabled Documents 207 – 3(2), 209 – 3(2), 210 – 3(2), and 212 – 3(2)?
Tabled Document 207 – 3(2): Nunavut Housing Corporation Contracting Report for the Year Ended March 31, 2009 – Consideration in Committee
Tabled Document 209 – 3(2): Statement of Expenditures for Nunavut Housing Trust as of April 1, 2006 to February 28, 2010 – Consideration in Committee
Tabled Document 210 – 3(2): Nunavut Housing Corporation Review of Nunavut Housing Trust – Consideration in Committee
Tabled Document 212 – 3(2): Nunavut Housing Trust Project Status Summary, September 30, 2010 – Consideration in Committee
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) I would now like to ask the Minister responsible for the Nunavut Housing Corporation to make his opening remarks.
I don’t have opening remarks.
We will answer questions and maybe the officials would be permitted to enter the witness chair with me.
Chairman (interpretation): Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort Minister Curley’s officials to the witness table.
On my right is Alain Barriault, (interpretation ends) President of the Nunavut Housing Corporation, (interpretation) and on my left is Lori Kimball, (interpretation ends) Chief Financial Officer for the Nunavut Housing Corporation. (interpretation) Thank you.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Curley. (interpretation ends) By now, members are aware of Rules 77(1) and 77(2).
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I just want to get some answers, if you don’t mind.
First, there is a reference to SIP designs in one of the tabled documents and I would like to know where the eventual contract was awarded.
That’s my first question. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The contract for the SIP design was awarded to Kott Lumber.
Mr. Okalik: Yes, I want to ask: where is the corporation located?
Kott Lumber is located just on the outskirts of Ottawa.
Mr. Okalik: I would like to know where outside of Ottawa, what community, so that I can ask further questions on this matter. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I’m not the most familiar with the geography outside of Ottawa.
If I recall correctly, I believe it is Nepean that it’s called.
It’s just on the western edge of Ottawa and it’s about a 20-minute drive from downtown Ottawa.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I’m getting mixed messages here because there was a reference to Merrickville, if memory serves, or Morrisburg.
One of those communities, I think, was awarded the SIP contract.
I just want that clear before I proceed. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Morrisburg is actually about an hour’s drive due south of Ottawa and that is not where Kott is located.
Kott has their manufacturing plant, I believe it’s still within the confines of Ottawa proper, if I recall correctly.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I’m just trying to get a picture here.
We have first the award for the marshalling in Morrisburg, then we have an award for farming equipment in Winchester, all within the vicinity of the Ottawa area, and then we’ve got an award for Kott, the larger one, for the structural insulated panels just outside of Ottawa as well.
We seem to be quite focused on awarding contracts for housing to this one vicinity in our entire country. So is there some connection to these locations for housing specialists for everybody else?
Why are they so close together in this vicinity?
Is there something going on there?
Hon. Tagak Curley: I think it should be pointed out before we respond to the detail or attempt to provide detail for the reasons for having all of these various companies closely to the vicinity one city or one major city, let us be clear right from the outset that the decision to establish marshalling services at that time were really, for instance, out of our current mandate. They were done in the previous administration and a decision made by the previous administration.
As to why they did that, I cannot respond to that.
I just wanted to caution you, Mr. Chairman, that they we may not be able to satisfy with those reasons why they chose to contract that particular Illamar contract.
I believe it was about 2007 or 2008, which was beyond this current minister’s mandate as well as the corporation’s mandate, the current executive, but we will try to do our best to respond to them.
Having introduced that, I’ll let Mr. Barriault explain possible reasons.
As I can understand it, there is a lot of manufacturing and retail sales, and so on, that have developed probably in that general area because of the closeness or proximity to the St. Lawrence Seaway as being a major shipping means.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I’m not questioning when these contracts may have taken place.
Regardless of either government, whether the past or the present, these contracts appear to have been signed to the Housing Corporation and they are all in the vicinity of the Ottawa region, so that’s why I was getting curious.
Is there a special connection with the Housing Corporation to this area?
My next question is in relation to the SIPs that are referenced as designs in these tabled documents.
When was this decision made to go with the structural insulated panels?
From my understanding, the decision would have been made around the time that the announcement of Canada’s Economic Action Plan funding would have come out, which I believe would have been in possibly spring of 2009, if not before. That predates me, so I’m not quite sure as to the exact dates.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) From what I understand, this is a practice of doing the labour somewhere in Ontario, where the president can’t locate the actual place where they do this work.
Somewhere in Ottawa they do this work. Was it a way to try to reduce costs? It’s transferring the labour from Nunavut to Ontario.
So can the Housing Corporation explain what the rationale was?
The SIP panels, or structural insulated panels, are a fairly common building component.
Now it’s becoming a less of a new technology. The assembly and production of those components is something that should be done in a specialized plant.
The labour component for the assembly of those components is still being tendered separately.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) From what I understand, a lot of labour was taking place for the actual construction and building of those units in Nunavut before in the former trust.
Now it has shifted that type of labour to Ontario. I just want to find out how they arrived at that. Was it a cost-cutting measure that was used as a rationale to take away jobs from Nunavut and transfer them to Ontario in this situation?
As I noted before, I was not part of the decision-making process at the time.
However, the main reason that SIP panel technology has become popular as a construction method is energy efficiency and it can result in much lowered heating costs.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I am not an expert in that area, so I will defer that opinion to another expert who can attest to that.
From my examination of the actual costs, the housing trust’s per unit cost out of 725 units was about $360,000 per unit and with these structural insulated panels, the average cost per unit is now $525,000.
Can the corporation explain why there is such a price difference on a per unit cost basis with the latest overruns in this case?
The average cost, which I believe the member is referring to, would include all of the Nunavut Housing Trust construction, which included five-plexes and other multi-plexes, which are cheaper on a per unit cost to build.
Definitely single family detached houses are the most expensive type of houses to build.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) We are trying to build houses, and I cannot get an explanation as to why a single family unit has to be $525,000. That’s over half a million dollars.
My own house doesn’t even come close to that. So why is the amount so high under the latest cost overruns?
The cost estimates are based on what the market labour costs are that we have been receiving as a result of public tenders.
Those are things that are beyond our control, but it is effectively reflecting what the market is showing us.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) From what I understand, these structural insulated panels are already pre-constructed; it’s pretty much a matter of putting those structures together.
I am puzzled as to why the price became so high when you are trying to put these pieces together. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
We had, in fact, expected to get somewhat lower costs on labour.
However, as a result of public tenders once again, the market did not reflect what our expectations had been on that.
Mr. Okalik (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I’m at a loss at this point and I’ll defer to my colleagues on any further questions for the time being. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In terms of general comments, when I brought forward the motion, to me, one of the things is I know, probably, a lot of the answers we are going to receive, similar to what Mr. Okalik was just getting in terms of “We are under new management and we don’t know the answer to that.”
So I’m hoping that we will get some concrete answers as we continue over the next couple of days asking questions.
I know again, as MLAs, we do have certain tools to bring the individuals who, in the past, were involved in the hiring and tendering of contracts and things, to bring them here to maybe answer questions if these are referred to a committee.
Some of the concerns I have and hopefully we will get answers to is not necessarily who is at fault or to blame but to make sure that different mechanisms are in place now to make sure that overspending doesn’t continue and make sure that the houses are actually built.
I know, when Minister Curley was speaking to the motion, that was one of the things he was mentioning is the fact… .
I don’t think any of the regular members are saying that we don’t feel housing is one of the number one issues and one of the priorities for what we want to see happen in terms of getting more of our Nunavut residents out of overcrowded houses.