EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
It is something that we will have to follow as Members of the Legislative Assembly and as leaders.
I think the Inuit would be very interested in what's in the Act.
I just wanted to express my appreciation for the work that has been done.
I will also be asking questions at the appropriate time.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Madame Williams.
The comments that are being made by the members, I think the members are being repetitive, so while we are on general comments I would like to have the Member for Kugluktuk be the last one before we go on to questions.
The people that I am thinking about are our youth because they will be using this.
We are to use the elders because we were elected on this basis.
I don't want to forget our youth because they are going to be our leaders.
If they see a person elected into office doing dishonourable things, we have to be role models.
We want to listen to the young people because they are going to be our leaders.
I just wanted to make these brief comments to make the young people aware that they are going to be our leaders.
I was going to have you as the last person to make general comments but I now have Mr. Picco. He is the next member on my list.
I would just like to start off by saying how very pleasing it is to see such an excellent turnout here tonight in Cambridge Bay.
It is almost ten after eleven so I really appreciate the general public showing up for this important Bill in committee of the whole.
Mr. Chairman, first of all I would like to start off by saying that as a new government we have a chance to reform government and to bring about legislative change and to create and bring into force unique legislation that reflects Nunavut.
But it is also a standard, Mr. Chairman, I would suggest to you that it is a standard that needs to be achieved, has to be achieved and seems to have been achieved nationally with what we have done with the Integrity Act.
This Act is uniquely a made in Nunavut approach and as mentioned, even the name Mr. Chairman, Integrity Act is a drastic departure from the generic conflict of interest legislation that you find in every other jurisdiction in this country.
I think the incorporation of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit within the Act itself, if you have an opportunity to read it over, you will see that's reflected throughout the legislation that is before us.
I think it is important also to note also Mr. Chairman, that Mr. Stanbury is an old friend of Nunavut having been the genesis, and I say that without fear of contradiction. The genesis of the funding of ITC, the forerunner of NTI and the reason why we are here today from over 30 years ago when he was the Federal Minister with the Federal Government of Canada that actually sponsored and gave the first funding to Tagak Curley and the ITC to begin Nunavut.
Mr. Stanbury is a founding member of the Nunavut Arbitration Board, he is a member of the Canadian Council of Administrative Tribunals.
He is a former politician and I think all that background with Nunavut and his legal background is reflected in this Act.
The committee that had an opportunity to select Mr. Stanbury as the Integrity Commissioner did an excellent job in that selection.
I have been pleased and privileged having known Mr. Stanbury for many years and having worked with him on the Nunavut Arbitration Board and some of the other boards and agencies that we have just discussed.
I would like to finish my opening comments, Mr. Chairman, by saying that this piece of legislation today is something that I believe that in two years from now when the term of this legislature is over, it is something that we will be able to look back on and be proud of.
The fundamental role of any MLA is to pass legislation and hopefully your legislation is to enhance and help the electorate and the people that have elected you.
So the people that you have voted for represent you in the legislature, it is not simply standing up and answering questions, the rhetoric that we hear a lot of times from politicians.
An Act like this Mr. Chairman, I would suggest to you lays bare the involvement that the member has not only in his public life but in his private life and I think that's what is important here tonight.
I do have a couple of specific questions also Mr. Chairman but I would like to thank you for the opportunity to address the Bill today.
I said a little while ago that Mr. Picco would be the last speaker.
But in view of the important legislation that we are dealing with and we are being taped at this time and because we are not going to be the only members, there's other members that are going to be coming in the future that will be elected to this legislature. If there are any more comments from the members, I will allow some more members to speak.
The Act that we are dealing with tonight is very important and I thank Mr. Stanbury and the people who put this Act together.
And the Act that we are dealing with talks about members and the ministers and what they have to go through as Members of the Legislature and we have to, we have to let the public know that as Members of the Legislature and as ministers we have a lot to follow.
Are we going to have to make it so that it is understandable to the public.
Say, for instance, the things that the RCMP have to deal with and what we have to follow in this Act and we have to make sure that the public knows about the Act and that we are not to be in conflict with the job that we presently do.
I just wanted to clarify that to the people that voted us in here, so that they could have an understanding that we have a law and this is territorial legislation, just to let the people out there know.
And to make sure that they are aware that members have a law that they have to follow.
Any further comments in regards to Bill 7.
If not we will continue with Bill 7, Integrity Act.
If there are no more general comments from the members we can get to questions on Bill 7.
Just before the members ask questions, I would like them to address the chair, so I could recognize the people at the witness table and to recognize myself as a chair.
I just want to find out about the family members that are mentioned in the Act, maybe if you could clarify this to me.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Mr. Chairman the main purpose for the reference for the member’s child or family or spouse or anybody dependant on that member that's living in the same household as a result of those private interests are deemed basically or hoped to be the same as the members.
So, I think it's important that these private interests, I think we all felt that it's important that these private interests be disclosed to the public on the disclosure forms because of that relationship with the member and those in his or her immediate household.
And thank you for the response and my other question relates to the family.
Not all of household members usually have jobs in Nunavut, there could also be a conflict within a family in regards to them being in a wage economy.
Perhaps if you could explain to me what kind of conflict they would encounter as a family.
I'll ask Mr. Stanbury to give some examples for the member to speak on that particular issue.
Chairperson (interpretation): Mr. Stanbury go ahead.
Mr. Stanbury: Thank you for the question.
It does go to the heart of the question of including members of the family in the disclosure requirements in this Act.
I would be reluctant to give you examples because I don't want to try to anticipate things on which I might have to rule.
But it is not only being recognized in this Bill in Nunavut that any dependant members of the family might have interests which could be favoured by a legislator but this is a growing recognition across Canada in similar legislation.
You asked me in preparing proposed legislation of this kind to take into account not only the conditions and environment of Nunavut but also the trends in this kind of legislation across Canada.
And while you want to be very Nunavut specific and make sure that it's relevant to the environment of Nunavut, I recognize that you also want it to be at the leading edge of the developments of Conflict of Interest legislation in Canada.
And the definitions that we have put forward here are consistent with those of the most recent legislation in provinces and territories.
For instance it is very similar to Ontario, Prince Edward Island, Newfoundland and the Yukon.
So that there is a growing recognition that there is potential for favouring, a potential for legislators being perceived to favour any dependant relative living in their household.
Now, this proposed legislation would not prevent any of those people from for instance contracting with government or being employed by government, that would be impractical as some of you have pointed out, in this jurisdiction.
But it does oblige you, it would oblige you to be open about who those people are who are dependant in your family so that the public can make a judgement of whether or not they are being favoured.
One of the main principles of this proposed legislation is openness.
So what is being proposed is that the people who are related to legislators, who might be perceived by the public to be potentially favoured by the legislators, are known to the public.
As a number of other provisions in this bill, the opportunities are not restricted but the information available to the public is expanded, so that the public can make a judgement, so that you can make a judgement yourself, about whether or not the actions of a Member of the Legislative Assembly are fair to the public as compared to his or her actions in relation to his or her family.
The family, not just in Nunavut, but across Canada, is being perceived in a larger context and I think the definitions in this bill take into account not only the conditions in Nunavut in a practical way, but take into account the trends across the country.
I stress that it does not limit the opportunities of members of the family, it just obliges the legislator to make clear in public who those dependant members of his or her family are so that everyone can be open and can make their own judgement about the fairness of legislators' activities.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Stanbury.
Just before I recognize Mr. Iqaqrialu, I just want to let the members know that when we are dealing with legislation all the members are given the opportunity to ask questions.
This Act relates to the members, whether they be minister or ordinary members.
The ministers can also ask questions about the act because it is related directly to the ministers and the members.
We are making a foundation with Bill 7 for ourselves as members and as ministers and this is going to be our Act.
I just wanted to let the members and the ministers know that they can ask questions as well.
Being a Member of the Legislative Assembly, when you live in your own community we want to treat all people the same.
There are usually grants of money that are given to the public when they request it and they usually approach members to assist them.
It seems like there has been a problem for me when members of my family want to be provided with assistance from the government for example, and I assist the people that are not my family and it has been a problem whereby I am not able to help my relations.
This probably has to be amended by this Act, or addressed in some manner.
Chairperson (interpretation): I didn't hear a question, but if there are any comments from the witness table.
Mr. Stanbury.
Mr. Stanbury: Thank you.
It should be clear that there is nothing in this bill that would prevent the member from treating his family members in exactly the same way as any other constituent.
It is perfectly acceptable under the proposed statute to assist members of your family in accessing the same kind of benefits as are available in the same way to all your other constituents.
So certainly there should be no misunderstanding in the general public that a member cannot assist his own family or a member of a legislator’s family cannot be assisted in the same way as any other citizen of Nunavut.
Thank you for noticing me right away and giving me the opportunity to ask questions.
In regards to the bill I wish to ask a question of the minister.
Of course this bill if it is passed will affect all of us as Members of the Legislative Assembly and if the member or his child or one of his immediate family members should have a conflict, is it only applied then.
Is there a punishment or sanction.
Hon. Kelvin Ng: Mr. Chairman, if it is deemed that there is some form of contravention where a member would be deemed to be in a conflict of interest, then the Integrity Commissioner can recommend sanctions against any member, if that were to be the case.
I would like to thank the minister for responding to my question.
The reason I asked is because I wanted to get the information. I will just use this as an example, to clarify the meaning of my question.
For example, if an elected member had a fight or assaulted his spouse or acted inappropriately in any way, would this Act be applicable as a contravention and would there be a sanction.
Mr. Stanbury: Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for that question.
That's important I think to understand that this proposed Act would not in any way interfere with or duplicate the criminal law.
What is does is to recognize that you have accepted obligations that go beyond the criminal law.
This is a very special kind of law as has been pointed out because you are usually, as people who have been elected to govern the territory and govern your people, you are usually passing laws to govern others.
This is a law in which you have chosen to make rules to govern yourselves.
It is a very fundamental law for the Legislative Assembly as has been pointed out.
But it does not in any way venture into the area of criminal law or moral law, except to the extent that it sets probably the highest standards of any such law in Canada for the conduct of your public duties.
This is a law which you are passing to govern yourselves in the performance of your public duties.
That is the focus of this law.
We are under questions.
Mr. Chairman, I have a question that I would like to pose about the opening comments.
It is about this comprehensive bill that incorporates four important elements including the use of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit as its foundation.
It considers the realities that we must deal with in Nunavut and in our communities.
It incorporates approaches being taken on these issues in other jurisdictions within Canada and it says here that you are using Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit as the foundation.
Could you elaborate further and tell me if you worked with any elders in order to have this designed using Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit.
Did you use elders to incorporate Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and who were they.
What Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit are we talking about when we say it is used as a foundation.
Mr. Chairman, if you go to the report "For A Culture of Integrity", which was the review of the conflict of interest legislation that the Speaker tabled earlier today.
On page 8 there are documents that were reviewed and there are significant references on Inuit traditional knowledge.
There were a half a dozen reports that were reviewed in detail by the research staff of the Conflict Commissioner in drafting some of the legislation that is before us today.
Also in discussions with members as you may recall, in various caucus briefings and Management and Services Board briefings that the Conflict of Interest Commissioner had with members.
Chairperson (interpretation): Thank you, Minister Ng. Mr. Irqittuq.
You probably didn't understand my question.
Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, when we say that and we say that it is incorporated, what did you use to incorporate Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit into this bill.
I am asking this question, for myself I am not quite sure what Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit is.
But I do agree with the contents of this bill, I am in agreement with everything in this bill.
But when we include Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and the incorporation of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit I disagree at that point.
I believe in traditional knowledge.
If I go back forty years for example, and if you worked with elders between the ages of 60 and 80 I would believe that Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit is being used as the foundation and that is why I am asking this question.
What Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit is incorporated into this bill.
What is included.
Mr. Chairman, I don't profess to be an expert on Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and I know there are different interpretations even amongst my Inuit colleagues in this House when we speak about what Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit is or what it means.
I can say, as I said earlier, that the staff that were supporting the Conflict of Interest Commissioner and the Conflict of Interest Commissioner himself reviewed the documents.
There were extensive reports and I can read them out for the member.
The report from the September Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit workshop in Nunavut September 29 and 30, September 1999 that was held by Culture, Language, Elders & Youth.
There were interviews with Inuit elders volume 2, perspectives on Inuit traditional law by Nunavut Arctic College in 1999.
There was various internal discussion documents and presentations prepared by individuals and departments in the government on Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, which included Human Resources and Sustainable Development again in 1999.
There was the major justice retreat and conference that took place in Rankin Inlet in 1998.
The report from the Nunavut Social Development Council on that retreat.
The Inuit Way; A guide to Inuit Culture, 1989, by Pauktuutit Inuit Women's Association and again another major elders' conference that was held outside of Rankin Inlet from April 25 to 28 in 1983 by the Inuit Cultural Institute.
Those are some of the main documents that were drawn upon to get a sense of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit.
Now at the same time Mr. Chairman, if the member is referring to what specifically is in the legislation as far as trying to recognize Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, there are provisions that the Integrity Commissioner in this case, when the bill passes, will be able to draw upon elders for consultation on specific cases.
Even to go as far as, providing the member allows it, for a member who may be in a position of being reviewed, allows that they can discuss the circumstances of his or her situation with elders provided the confidential matters on the specifics of what is being reviewed.
So that process has been laid out in this legislation.
We are hoping, you know there is nothing formally laid out in procedures on how to do that yet, but we know in our current judicial system, there have been developments where elders can participate in judicial proceedings.
We are hoping and are confident that the Integrity Commissioner once this bill becomes law will be able to work with members and with others that will involve elders in the proceedings of the work that the Integrity Commissioner has to carry out.
Of course, you can't respond to my question.
It is quite hard when you ask questions about Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, because of course none of us know fully about Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit.
You said that there were a few meetings here and there to discuss Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit.
You mentioned Pauktuutit Women's Association and other organizations that had various meetings and so on but there is nobody who knows all of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit.
I am not saying that I am opposed to this bill.
But what I don't like is paying lip service to Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit.
A lot of people say that they are going to put it together basing it on Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and to myself it is just paying lip service, without really meaning anything.
It is like a declaration, it is usually just there without really meaning anything.
I would like to emphasize that I am not opposed to this bill, but what is in there that is Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit.
If somebody out there hears Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, of course, they are going to be pleased but the problem is we just pay lip service.
Mr. Chairman, I am really glad to hear some of the comments and answers that I have heard so far especially on the idea that this legislation is at the leading edge of this type of legislation in Canada.
I think that can remind us all of the opportunities that we have to be able to pick things from other jurisdictions and integrate them into our legislation.
I am really pleased to hear that and it is something that we have an opportunity to do with the creation of Nunavut and integrating those types of processes into the development of our legislation.
Dealing with this specific legislation I know that there has been a change and it is now called the Integrity Act and the main thing that it was before was a conflict of interest.
I am just wondering if the definition of conflict of interest itself has changed within this new legislation or has it remained the same.
Mr. Chairman, obviously if there is deemed to be a personal benefit to a member it is a conflict of interest, but in fact from that perspective it hasn't changed.
In fact with our legislation, the Integrity Act, we feel that it has actually been broadened from the perspective that right now, as long as a member knows or reasonably should know that there is an opportunity to improperly further his or her own private interests, if that situation were to happen, that he or she should reasonably know that language.
It is not good enough to say that he or she didn't know, if something were to happen and that individual were found to be in a conflict of interest situation.
So from that perspective it has been broadened from the current conflict of interest legislation.
I believe, Mr. Chairman, if I may, Mr. Stanbury would like to add to that as well.
Chairperson (interpretation): Mr. Stanbury.
As the minister has said the conflict of interest definition has been broadened in this bill.
The words, "knows or reasonably should know", are an important addition to the definition in section 8, as the minister has pointed out.
That was recommended by the NWT Review Panel, which is analyzed in my report entitled, "For a Culture of Integrity".
But this bill goes one step further and it draws as the honourable member has pointed out, it draws from other advanced legislation in the country to add the words, "or improperly to further another person's private interest".
In other words, it recognizes that there can be a conflict of interest not only if a member were to unfairly favour a member of his or her own family, but if the legislator were to favour anyone's interest improperly.
So this is the strongest definition of conflict of interest in any legislation in Canada.
Mr. Chairman, I am really pleased to hear that and I think that will go a long way in the public perception that we now no longer have a Conflict of Interest Act, they may have had some concern as to whether it was still an Integrity Act, not just another Conflict of Interest Act.
I believe that it does, with that.
Another thing that I would like to ask Mr. Chairman, is in the minister's opening comments, he talked about including a wider range of sanctions that could be imposed by the Commissioner if an MLA is in violation of the Act.
I am just wondering if he could give some examples of some of the types of sanctions that have been added.
Either one of you can respond.
One example which responds to the member's interest in the potential use of Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and traditional knowledge, drawing on the principles of Inuit values that are traditional, is that the member might be required to publicly acknowledge his or her conduct.
There is, I think even found on the wall of this room, as an example of Inuit values, the willingness to apologize and to recognize and take responsibility.
I think other members have mentioned that here tonight.
So that is one possible sanction which is unique to Nunavut in laws of this kind in Canada.
The minister mentioned that compensation or costs could be ordered to be paid by a member or to a member.