EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
If there are more communities in the Baffin, they will do it in the Baffin in one of the communities, maybe a close-by community, maybe Iqaluit. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
When this is all said and done where you’ve got the hiring done and you’ve got the training completed and these employees return to their communities, will the social workers that are in our communities become their immediate supervisors?
Each region or so many communities have social workers that are supervising these communities and we also have regional offices. There’s a regional office for the Baffin in Pangnirtung, Kivalliq in Rankin Inlet, and Kitikmeot in Cambridge Bay.
Some of the communities are divided up to have one social worker supervising them.
We are envisioning that these people will be reporting to the director of children and family services in Iqaluit.
There are two things. One, let’s say for example, Arctic Bay, Grise Fiord, and Resolute Bay, if they’re supervised by one social worker, maybe that social worker could supervise that.
If not, then the alternative would be for them to report to the director of children and family services.
Maybe I’ll ask the question in a different way and I’ll use my own community as an example where we only have one social worker in our community.
When you fill this position and this person is trained and placed in the community, what will the working relationship be between this new person and the current social worker? Will the social worker be the supervisor of that individual?
My deputy minister will also respond to that question.
We are only talking about seven positions in Nunavut when there are 25 communities.
There are only seven positions and I will use whom they would report to as an example.
If I use Sanikiluaq as an example that the member uses, it would be better if that position didn’t report to the social worker because the social worker already has so many duties.
Perhaps both the social worker and the new position would report to the director of family services.
Mr Rumbolt.
If I’m understanding the department correctly, when these positions are filled and placed in our communities, it is basically two separate departments, they work independently of each other and they report differently.
My deputy minister will also respond to that question. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
What I’m trying to say is that, for example, Sanikiluaq is supervised by somebody.
If there’s a position in Sanikiluaq, a family resources person, they will report to the same supervisor.
We wouldn’t want to put extra work for the single social worker that is in that community because they’re very busy. Sometimes they go on holidays.
Sometimes when they go on holidays, maybe the resource person would be somebody to call so they could get help, but what we envision right now is that the social worker in that community does not supervise the family resources person.
They make it sound like they’re going to be run like they’re totally... . How’s the best way to say it? One can work out of one building, one works independently out of another building, and they both report to a supervisor, but not necessarily working together.
In the same breath, she says, “If the social worker is out of town, then that person can perform some of their duties.”
It’s kind of confusing to me how exactly the two positions are going to intertwine within our communities.
I’m wondering if the minister or his officials can explain a little better how both these offices will work together in providing better services to the community.
My deputy minister can respond to that question.
As a social worker, we see them working very close together. Whether they report to somebody else and if they are working in two different buildings, they are doing two different jobs.
One is a social working doing a lot of the children and family services duties, which they are doing now.
These family resources people are to do prevention work, to prevent family violence, including suicide prevention, working a lot with the community.
They have two different jobs, but they are connected very well.
With that being said, again we’re in communities where we only have one social worker. These social workers go on vacation, go out for training and for other various reasons.
In their absence, how much of the social workers’ duties are you expecting these new positions to perform when they are in the communities on their own?
Chairman (interpretation) Thank you very much.
When the social workers are training or on holiday or there’s no social worker right now, there would be somebody that people could call to where they would know where they can call to get help.
If we could use an example, first aid, somebody could call somebody and maybe they can find ways to find somebody else to help.
When they’re on holidays, these family resources people are not going to be doing apprehensions that the social worker does.
Their jobs are different from each other.
The community would be able to call on them for something where they would be able to know where to go get help. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Branch Summary. Children and Family Services. Following the list of names, Ms. Angnakak.
I finally get a say.
There has been a lot of talk this evening and this afternoon, actually, about social workers in the community.
In looking at the job of the social worker, the social worker has a very difficult and challenging job, especially in the community.
It can be very complex with family relations. What kind of support does the department provide social workers, if any, let’s say, in terms of counselling?
They have to deal with a lot of dramatic events sometimes in the community.
How do they get help?
Minister Mike,
For the communities that have one social worker, they sometimes work with mental health and they have somebody to talk to for support. We have a director of children and family services in headquarters.
The staff there can assist and support.
We had a few that one of the social workers had to sleep over at the RCMP’s house. Not too long ago, one of the social workers had to be relocated to a hotel because of the situation going on in the community where they were getting threats.
This is a real situation that we get into.
They support each other if there is another social worker in the community. If there’s two of them, then they can support each other.
A lot of times, the headquarters director is on the phone over the weekends if they need support.
We are doing what we can with the resources that we have.
I would imagine it would be one of the hardest jobs, I think, in the government.
The kind of support that you were talking about like counselling and mental health, is it something that automatically happens or does it have to be requested?
Sometimes I think workers often don’t know how stressed they are, I think, in situations like that.
I’m wondering: which way does this work? Do you wait for them to come and say, “I need to talk to somebody,” or is this something that sort of happens automatically or is this something that you check up on as a department?
Maybe you can elaborate a little bit.
With social workers and people who need their assistance, we don’t want anyone to be in an unsafe situation, either anyone who is seeking assistance or the social worker. It is clear that they work in dangerous situations.
This is an area of concern, especially when a troubled person is involved.
The workers and those who need assistance are supposed to be in a safe environment, but that’s not always the case.
I would like to turn it over to my deputy minister to respond further to my colleague’s question.
Most of the time, we know what’s going on in some of these communities when there’s a situation going on.
Let’s say if there was a suicide or something else is happening in there, the director or the supervisors will call them to support them and support them along.
It’s better when there are two social workers in the community, but many of our communities have one worker.
When there is that one-worker situation, we would check to make sure that they’re okay and we don’t wait for them to call if we know the situation is happening.
The director is on call with them and the supervisor is calling them as well.
Sometimes they will call for help.
Some of them would ask for stress leave or some help that they need.
What’s the turnover rate like for your social workers?
We have a high turnover. There are vacancies in the communities.
We also have social workers that have been there and they like the community, even though it’s difficult. Some of them are there quite a long time.
We have a director of children and family services who has been up here about 15 years in different communities.
Now she is in headquarters. There are a number of people that want to stay here. They love being in the community.
We would like not to have a high turnover, but we do have a high turnover.
It’s less of an issue when there are two social workers in the community because they can share the work.
What is the reason why you don’t have two social workers in every community?
Is it a resource issue? Are people not applying? What is the reason for having only one in a community?
They apply and… .
(interpretation) I forget the question now.
The social workers want to live up here because they consider their careers very important. Some communities have only one social worker, as the member says.
That has been the case for a long time now.
Nowadays, there are far more problems that crop up which are also more difficult to deal with. For example, I was a single social worker in a community for 14 years.
I found that to be very difficult.
Normally in a community, there would be two RCMP officers, three or four nurses, and one social worker. Their job is similar to the police and nurses.
That’s why we want to increase the number of staff we have in the communities. To do that, we want to hire those seven workers that can help with social work in the communities. Their duties as frontline workers will hopefully alleviate the demand for social assistance.
Once these workers have been working for a year or two, we will be able to see how effective that approach is.
It’s preferable to have two social workers in a community, but it was normal practice to just have one social worker in a community for a long time.
I would like to say that I totally agree. I think there needs to be more than one social worker in a community.
Some communities obviously are less complicated than others are, but I think it’s a good idea to do that and it’s an idea I would support.
The other thing I want to go on to now is about shelters.
I know that it was discussed when it shouldn’t have been before, but I want to ask my own questions about them.
One of the things that have come to my attention and it was because of one of my constituents that brought about the fact that our women’s shelters, if they suspect you of being under the influence of any kind of alcohol or drugs, you’re thrown out.
The lady that I was helping was thrown out on one of the coldest days that we had.
She came to me the day after that had happened after the spending the night at the RCMP because she had absolutely nowhere to go.
When I began to look at this in a little bit more detail, in Yellowknife, they’re starting to have something called a “wet shelter” where people who are under the influence can go.
Many times, people are homeless and jobless because of their addictions.
That’s why they are in that predicament, yet that’s the very reason why you’re thrown out of a shelter.
In one sense, it just doesn’t make sense at all.
I’m wondering if the department has thought about this or looked into it or have you heard about this.
Can you elaborate a little bit on what you know about it?
We have been meeting with the people who run those shelters for women or homeless women.
As the member mentions, if a client has been drinking or has taken drugs or are otherwise not sober and no longer acting normal, we are provided with a report saying that they are referred to mental health workers to try to help them.
However, with respect to the member’s story, we have dealt with that situation. We have learned from that. When we tried different solutions, we were told that at the shelter in Apex and the Sivummut shelter, which is another women’s shelter, many clients have children.
That is why they don’t allow intoxicated people there.
It would not be appropriate to have an intoxicated person with children in the shelter or anyone who is drunk or on drugs. They become abusive, start throwing chairs against the walls, and it sometimes results in verbal or even physical abuse towards the workers. When this happens, there are children witnessing it.
We are given that reason for not allowing drunks and drugged people there.
As the member says, this is something worth examining, as the people who take these actions also have to do something.
At the present time, the shelters are not equipped to deal with intoxicated people when there are children on the premises.
I guess I understand in one sense the fears, but on the other side of things, I think those with addictions don’t want to have those problems. They’re still people and we still need to help them.
We can’t say one is more important than the other. I think the department really needs to look at this.
We need to find a way to help people that suffer from addictions, especially when it comes to homelessness, and people who have no family to look after them.
We need to show dignity and looking at the police barracks and that is really not the answer, especially if you are under the influence.
It’s even more dangerous to be thrown outside when it is minus 40. If you’re drunk, you know, it’s a very dangerous thing to be left alone outside.
Anyway, that’s something for the department to think about. I hope that we could have this conversation, perhaps, a year from now and hopefully developments would have been made.
In regard to shelters once again, you did touch up on it about programs and services for those in shelters.
I find that most people are told to leave by, I think, it’s like 8:00 in the morning or 8:30, and then they hang around all day in Iqaluit anyhow at NorthMart and that.
There’s so much work that could be done with people who are homeless. For example, just looking at maybe working even with Arctic College to kind of see what can be done or career counselling or mental health counselling or addictions counselling.
When you review the contribution agreement that you have with the shelters, do you set goals, goals that you want to see happen or responsibilities that you would like to see carried out by the shelter?
It’s a long-winded question, but you can give it a try. Ms. Williams.
It’s a very good point.
In the past, in the men’s shelter, we just provided beds and we didn’t have any programs.
Since I have been in Family Services, we have wanted to have programs, as the member is talking about.
They would get income assistance. From there, they are streamed out to career development people because they are in the same office. We’re trying that.
As you know, some people don’t want to do that, but there are a few who can get into the workforce or maybe even get a house.
There are a couple of people in Iqaluit that got units.
They are very proud of it and they have been on the radio about how it is good to have a house.
We could do a lot more programming right now with the men’s shelter.
We don’t have programming there, but we are working on contribution agreements. We are designing them a little bit differently to make sure that the people or agency or society that is getting the contribution agreement is going to be doing the program.
Even though it’s at a small scale, we need to start somewhere. That is for the people at the men’s shelter.
For the people who are in the violence shelters, it’s a little bit harder to do that.
Some of them are just visiting here and are fleeing from violence.
If we are mainly talking about the men’s shelter or a homeless shelter, we could do more programming with people who are living there and not just giving them a place to sleep.
I thank you, Ms. Williams, for your answer.
I totally agree and I think all of us could do a lot more and be more supportive.
I would like to go on to another area and that’s the Child Protection Services. I see that the budget has gone up a fair amount.
Maybe you might want to elaborate why the budget has gone up.
Are you having to provide more services? Does that reflect the budget?
Our other official will respond to that.
The budget for Child Protection Services has gone up about $1 million because of the additional positions we added there.
It’s 11.7 for family resources workers and for social workers. That is new funding.
As well, we also re-profiled some money from other areas within the branch to support foster parent payments.
That’s why there is an increase of over $1 million on that line.
The other budget that has certainly gone down is the one for Adult Support Services.
Can you elaborate why there’s such a significant drop?
The person who has that responsibility will respond.
As the minister alluded in the opening comments, we made a lot of changes in our budgetary amounts within programs to make sure that we are reporting properly of our expenditures and also making sure that we have the budget requirements for our planned services.
The reduction of $3.7 million in adult support services, guardianship, and adoptions, all three of them were moved to Children and Family Services Headquarters.
Some of them were moved to Child Protection Services, as explained earlier for those new positions, as well as we provide contribution funds to residential care facilities and that’s where the money should go to make sure that we’re properly reporting the budget against the planned expenditures.
That’s the next section.
I don’t have any more questions now.
Chairman: I have a motion on the floor to report progress and it is not debatable. (interpretation) Sergeant-at-Arms. (interpretation ends) I will now rise… .
Mr. Mikkungwak: Mr. Speaker, your committee has been considering Bill 13 and the main estimates, and would like to report progress. Also, Mr. Speaker, I move that the Report of the Committee of the Whole be agreed to.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) There’s a motion on the floor.
A reminder for meetings for tomorrow, there’s a meeting of the Standing Committee on Legislation at nine o’clock, followed by a meeting of the Regular Caucus, both meetings in the Nanuq Room.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) This House stands adjourned until Wednesday, March 9, at 1:30 p.m.
>>House adjourned at 21:01
Wednesday, March 9, 2016
Pages 1278 – 1353
Opening Prayer 1278
Ministers’ Statements 1278
Members’ Statements 1279
Recognition of Visitors in the Gallery 1288
Oral Questions 1288
Tabling of Documents 1312
Report of the Committee of the Whole 1352
Orders of the Day 1352
Wednesday, March 9, 2016 1278
083 – 4(3): Caribou Habitat and Restricted Development (Taptuna) 1278
181 – 4(3): Literacy Initiative at Jonah Amitnaaq Secondary School (Mikkungwak) 1279
182 – 4(3): Lip Service to Nunavut Elders (Shooyook) 1280
183 – 4(3): Speaking Out Against Discrimination (Joanasie) 1282
184 – 4(3): Problems with Medical Travel for Elders (Keyootak) 1283
185 – 4(3): Inuit Language Preservation (Qirngnuq) 1284
186 – 4(3): Coral Harbour Peewee Hockey Team (Mapsalak) 1285
187 – 4(3): Team Nunavut Curlers (Ell-Kanayuk) 1286
188 – 4(3): The Ongoing Success of Nunavut Speed Skating (Angnakak) 1287
189 – 4(3): Constituent Wins Gold Ulu at Arctic Winter Games (Sammurtok, T) 1287
236 – 4(3): Strategy for Nunavut Elders (Angnakak) 1288
237 – 4(3): Government Boat in Arctic Bay (Shooyook) 1289
238 – 4(3): Commitment to Smaller Communities (Joanasie) 1291
239 – 4(3): Jurisdiction over Franklin Expedition Artefacts (Akoak) 1293
240 – 4(3): Law Enforcement Initiatives (Mikkungwak) 1295
241 – 4(3): Elders Accommodation at Boarding Homes (Keyootak) 1296
242 – 4(3): Update on Coral Harbour School (Mapsalak) 1298
243 – 4(3): Reviving the Mamisarvik Healing Centre (Sammurtok, T) 1300
244 – 4(3): Search and Rescue Contributions Policy (Rumbolt) 1301
245 – 4(3): Medical Travel Escort Policy (Enook) 1303
246 – 4(3): Activities of the Nunavut Business Credit Corporation (Angnakak) 1304
247 – 4(3): Caribou Habitat and Restricted Development (Okalik) 1306
248 – 4(3): Medical Travel Escort Policy (Enook) 1308
249 – 4(3): Dogs at Sylvia Grinnell Park (Okalik) 1309
250 – 4(3): Search and Rescue Contributions Policy (Mikkungwak) 1310
251 – 4(3): Piqqusilirivvik Civil Servants Medical Travel (Keyootak) 1312
090 – 4(3): Correspondence and Other Items Concerning the Hudson Bay Consortium (Rumbolt) 1313
091 – 4(3): Correspondence to the Members of the Legislative Assembly from the Kivalliq Wildlife Management Board (Sammurtok, T) 1313
021 – 4(3): Extension of Question Period (Okalik) 1304
Bill 13 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2016-2017 – Family Services – Consideration in Committee 1314
Bill 13 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2016-2017 – Finance – Consideration in Committee 1346
Mr. Tony Akoak, Ms. Pat Angnakak, Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk, Mr. Joe Enook, Hon. George Hickes, Mr. David Joanasie, Mr. Pauloosie Keyootak, Mr. Steve Mapsalak, Hon. Johnny Mike, Mr. Simeon Mikkungwak, Mr. Paul Okalik, Hon. Keith Peterson, Mr. Emiliano Qirngnuq, Hon. Paul Quassa, Hon. George Qulaut, Mr. Allan Rumbolt, Mr. Alexander Sammurtok, Mr. Tom Sammurtok, Hon. Joe Savikataaq, Mr. Isaac Shooyook, Hon. Peter Taptuna.
Speaker (interpretation): Good day, my fellow Nunavummiut. Members, ministers, (interpretation ends) Premier, (interpretation) and visitors, welcome to the House.
Minister’s Statement 083 – 4(3): Caribou Habitat and Restricted Development (Taptuna)
Mr. Speaker, in 2014, as Members of this Assembly, we had our Full Caucus retreat in Kugluktuk.
By consensus, we agreed upon the vision for this government.
Mr. Speaker, we agreed in Sivumut Abluqta that we would apply sound regulatory processes to development and ensure that a sound wildlife management system is in place to benefit Nunavummiut.
We want to safeguard harmony and balance in this vision.
Mr. Speaker, the Government of Nunavut does not and will not support projects that have a negative impact on our wildlife that cannot be mitigated.
We want to engage the regulatory process and ensure regulators are able to do the job they are tasked with under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement.
The regulatory process would include environmental, wildlife, and socio-economic assessments by Nunavut’s regulatory agencies. It also includes the federal licensing process.
Mr. Speaker, the Hudson Bay roundtable has stated that they would like to move forward on feasibility studies for an electrical transmission line in the Kivalliq region.
If, for example, this project were to fall within calving or post calving grounds and corridors, we would expect a full regulatory review of the project and sound decisions on restrictions in order to protect the natural habitat.
That process would include public consultations. There would be input from affected communities.
If the concerns of the regulatory agencies are not met by the developer, then there would be no transmission line permit and the project as proposed would not be approved.
Prohibition on calving and post-calving grounds with seasonal restrictions would rule out any kind of review of a project.
It means there may be no transmission line for the Kivalliq region.
Mr. Speaker, restrictions ensures a full project review takes place. Mr. Speaker, prohibition means there would be no review and no potential for development. I want to make it clear that restrictions ensure a complete project review is conducted.
Prohibition means that there will be no review and we want to follow the intent of our regulatory agencies.
Mr. Speaker, no development is not the purpose of our land claims agreement. The purpose is to have regulators involved. Development projects can ultimately be rejected by the regulatory bodies and that is why it is important to allow for developers to engage in that process.