EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I am pleased to provide opening comments on behalf of the Standing Committee on Oversight of Government Operations and Public Accounts on its review of the proposed 2016-17 main estimates and 2016-19 business plan of the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
The standing committee notes that the department’s proposed 2016-17 operations and maintenance budget of $27.88 million has increased by approximately 1.2 percent since the introduction of its 2015-16 main estimates.
The number of positions in the department is 139. That is an increase of one position from the 2015-16 main estimates.
In 2015, the government awarded a contract for its “operational audit” initiative.
The department’s draft 2016-19 business plan indicates that “Phase one of the external review has been completed.
The department will provide government-wide guidance with regard to the recommendations from the final report of Phase One.
The department, in partnership with the department of Finance, will identify the scope of review and issue the Request for Proposals for Phase Two of the external review. The Second Phase of the external review will take place between January 2016 and October 2016.”
The department’s draft 2016-19 business plan indicates that it is “Currently planning for the next cycle of the Food Price Survey to be conducted in March” this month, 2016.
In light of the Auditor General’s recent report to Parliament on the Nutrition North Canada Program and the new federal government’s commitment to its “expansion and improvement,” it is important for the department to work closely with federal authorities to share data that could lead to improvements in this important program.
Section 8 of the territorial Statistics Act requires that the annual report of the bureau of statistics be tabled in the Legislative Assembly. The standing committee notes with concern that the 2012-13, 2013-14, and 2014-15 annual reports of the Nunavut Bureau of Statistics have not yet been tabled in the Legislative Assembly.
The department’s draft 2016-19 business plan indicates that it has been “working with the Deputy Ministers’ Committee on Quality of Life to coordinate Government of Nunavut services to Seniors provided by all departments.
The department is also working with the Department of Health to coordinate GN’s participation in the Ministers’ responsible for Seniors Secretariat. The department is working to conclude an internal MOU to streamline services for Seniors.”
As members will recall, a number of interventions have been made in this House concerning the need for the government to address this issue, including the question of whether to harmonize the age at which residents are considered to be seniors for the purpose of eligibility for certain programs and services.
The Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs has assumed a number of functions and responsibilities that were previously exercised by the Department of Human Resources, which was dissolved on April 1, 2013.
It is important to acknowledge that progress has been made in increasing Inuit employment in the Government of Nunavut. Information that is contained in the government’s quarterly employment reports indicates that a total of 1,272 beneficiaries were employed by the government in September of 2005.
By September of 2015, that number had increased to 1,643. This constituted an increase of approximately 30 percent over the course of a decade.
On average, the government gained approximately 37 new Inuit employees each year.
It is important for the government to develop realistic and achievable timetables for achieving full representativeness across all occupational categories in the government, which is commonly understood to mean a public service that is composed of 85 percent beneficiary employees. This is a significant challenge.
Information contained in the government’s December 2015 quarterly employment report indicates that there were a total of 4,655 positions across the government’s departments and Crown agencies; 3,342 of these positions were filled, of which 1,673 were filled by beneficiaries. Assuming that the government could fill all of its positions, it would need to hire 2,283 new beneficiary employees to achieve full representativeness.
The standing committee notes that the government’s proposed 2016-19 business plan indicates that its current government-wide Inuit Employment Plan target is 51 percent Inuit employment by March 31, 2017.
The 2014-15 Public Service Annual Report indicates that approximately 38 percent of the public service is composed of beneficiary women. Approximately 26 percent of the public service is composed of non-beneficiary females and an additional 24 percent is composed of non-beneficiary males. However, beneficiary males compose approximately only 12 percent of the public service.
The 2014-15 Public Service Annual Report indicates that 2,300 employees were receiving a bilingual bonus.
The Government of Nunavut’s new Human Resource Strategy, 2014-18, which was tabled in the Legislative Assembly on November 4, 2014, indicates that “A Language Incentive Program will be introduced in 2015-2016 to actively encourage employees to improve their oral and written proficiency in Inuktut.
The 2014-15 Annual Report of the Inuit Uqausinginnik Taiguusiliuqtiit (Inuit Language Authority), which was tabled in the Legislative Assembly on October 21, 2015, indicates that the authority has “collaborated with the Government of Nunavut’s Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs and the Pirurvik Centre on developing [Inuktut] competency levels for the government’s proposed language incentive. (…) As part of the project, three levels of Inuktut proficiency have been proposed.”
The standing committee supports the introduction of standardized language proficiency testing that is objective and consistent.
The Decentralization Action Plan states that “The current model can be strengthened by shifting focus on the number of positions and communities they go to and maintaining a commitment to allocating and maintaining over 60% of the public service outside of Iqaluit.”
The department’s draft 2016-19 business plan indicates that it “reviewed the Action Plan that was initially developed by the (former) Department of Human Resources. A revised draft was developed to update timeframes and clarify lead departments for action items.
Departments are currently being consulted to finalize the revisions.” The standing committee urges the minister to table the revised action plan in the Legislative Assembly at the earliest opportunity.
The department’s 2015-18 business plan indicated that one of its priorities for the 2015-16 fiscal year was to “…work to finalize the devolution Agreement-in-Principle for transfer of authority over, and administration and control of Crown lands, water, and resources from Canada to the Government of Nunavut.”
The department’s draft 2016-19 business plan indicates that “[Devolution] Agreement-in-Principle negotiations commenced October 3, 2014 and [were] suspended during the federal election period.”
The standing committee encourages the government to publicly clarify the number of federal positions that are envisioned to be transferred to the territorial public service as part of the devolution process.
It is also important to be mindful that the transfer of significant numbers of federal positions and personnel may not necessarily have an immediately positive impact on the government’s efforts to achieve a fully representative workforce.
The standing committee supports Nunavut having a strong voice concerning such issues as the need to enhance federal search and rescue capacity in the north.
Mr. Chairman, that concludes my opening comments on the proposed 2016-17 main estimates and 2016-19 business plan of the Department of Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs.
Premier Taptuna’s opening comments are covered in the pages we are going to deal with. You can ask your questions as we go page by page.
I would like to ask if there are any general comments on the opening comments.
I don’t see any. Let’s go to page B-4.
Good afternoon, Premier, staff, (interpretation) and those people watching in Gjoa Haven. If my grandchild is watching, I love you.
(interpretation ends) In 2015, the government awarded a contract for its operational audit initiative. The department’s draft 2016-19 business plan indicates that “Phase one of the external review has been completed. The department will provide government-wide guidance with regard to the recommendations from the final report of Phase One.
The department, in partnership with the department of Finance, will identify the scope of review and issue the Request for Proposals for Phase Two of the external review.
The Second Phase of the external review will take place between January 2016 and October 2016.”
How many recommendations were contained in the final report of phase 1 of the operational audit?
I will just get that figure right now.
The phase 1 report, which I am tabling on Monday, does not have any recommendations.
It’s leading up to phase 2 to lead into recommendations. At this point, phase 1 was to determine how these programs are actually functioning.
On November 4 of 2015, you announced in the Legislative Assembly that the recommendations from the final report of phase 1 of the operational audit were being reviewed.
What were the main recommendations in the report and how is the government responding to them?
I thank the committee member for that question. There are five focuses on attention to key groups of programs to improve effectiveness.
That’s one of the things that we are trying to action item out.
Again, improve on how programs are administered to increase efficiency is more or less to determine if the investment we make as a government has actually done some things on the positive side for the people of Nunavut.
To explore our opportunities to deliver some programs and services differently is all about the opportunities to improve our programs to benefit Nunavummiut.
These are the things we are trying to find out.
Four is to plan strategically and report on the results of Government of Nunavut programs to Nunavummiut; Nunavummiut have to understand these programs that are available; and strengthen the strategic capacity to deliver commitments and obligations.
In 2013, the Government of Nunavut underwent a significant restructuring, including the division of the Department of Health and Social Services into two different departments.
Will phase 2 of the operational audit include a review of the government’s current organizational structure?
The Sivumut Abluqta mandate statement, which was tabled in the Legislative Assembly on March 20 of 2014, indicates that one of the primary goals of the government is to “Review government programs to determine what is working well, what needs improvement, and what we should stop doing in order to focus our resources on enabling Nunavut’s success.”
Did the final report from phase 1 of the operational audit recommend the ending of any specific programs and, if so, what were they?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Premier.
Your department’s draft 2016-19 business plan indicates that “The Second Phase of the external review will take place between January 2016 and October 2016.”
The government’s 2017-18 main estimates and business plans will be introduced in February or March of 2017.
The next general election will take place in October of 2017.
We do continue on work, even throughout the general elections.
On completion of this work, we should be able to set the baseline work, but we are going to continue on.
As you know, Mr. Chairman, we do have strategies and policies out there that carry on from government to government.
We see if there are effective changes that we have made, I’m sure that there’s no reason going into the next election that these will be changed once we establish the programs that are doing well.
Mr. Chairman, we see that throughout every government where we inherit programs, we try to improve them and it’s no different. We will put in our improvements for efficiency and we have found that most of the programs have actual ownership from departments, so there are reporting structures that are in place already.
Again, we will ensure that some of these changes are communicated to the members.
Mr. Joanasie (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Good afternoon, Premier and your officials.
The other day, I was trying to ask the Minister of Finance a question that was under your portfolio, apparently, that had to do with the operational audit that Mr. Akoak was questioning. I’m going to ask it here again.
Last week, Minister Savikataaq was introducing his budget in front of us and explained that there are so many PYs they need for IT.
He was explaining that it was a result of the operational audit. I believe it was the first phase.
I understand you indicated that you will be tabling that portion on Monday.
Why has it taken so long to table this report?
Before this year’s main estimates, you could have maybe got advance copies of the first audit.
Why are we seeing that there were action items coming out of the audit before any results were tabled? We haven’t seen them yet.
Hon. Peter Taptuna: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the committee member for that.
We have many programs within the government and, of course, through our Crown agencies. There’s a lot of work put into that. Again it’s phase 1 of the audit review.
We want to ensure we cover all the programs. It does take time.
There are over 300 programs that the Government of Nunavut administers. With that in mind, there is still a lot of work to be done. We want to ensure that it’s done right.
The second phase will come up with more action items that will ensure that our programs and the money we invest in Nunavut have actual benefits to Nunavummiut. I guess, at the end of the day, we talked about best possible bang for our buck, simply put, to ensure that our programs are working effectively to ensure our programs are working effectively, efficiently, and actually benefiting Nunavummiut.
I guess I was taken aback with the announcement when Minister Savikataaq was talking about that.
It’s a response, as a result of the operational audit/program review, that they had to put in 21 new PYs.
You indicated there are five key areas that there will be recommendations on.
Can you elaborate on what those five key areas would include?
Again I thank the committee member for that question.
I am glad we are spending some time on this to ensure that our investments are worthwhile for Nunavummiut.
The five key things we are focusing on are to ensure that we align responsibility to, of course, improve effectiveness.
These programs have to have ownership within the departments. We’ve got to ensure that there are correct evaluations on the reports and we’ve got to take action on, of course, the program deficiencies.
We also have to improve program administration. We do have to ensure that all the financial contributions that are given out there are accounted for, and explore opportunities to deliver some programs in other, different ways.
As you know, Mr. Chairman, we have to make plans to strategically report on results of these programs to all Nunavummiut.
That’s a key component of this audit, to ensure that funds invested out there are transparent and benefiting Nunavummiut.
In your business plan on page 3, you talk about exploring “options regarding municipal access to information and protection of privacy legislation.”
I’m just wondering if you can update us here today of where your talks are at when it comes to engaging them and all municipalities at the community level.
Mr. Chairman, with your permission, I would like my deputy minister to respond to that question.
We continue to have discussions with the communities. We know that the municipalities have a huge workload.
They have told us that they want to work with us under a less stressful arrangement. We’re still in talks with them and we haven’t really settled anything yet.
Ms. Akeeagok.
My apologies, Mr. Akeeagok.
Ms. Angnakak: It’s the A’s; too many A’s.
When we talk about compliance in regard to information and protection of privacy, what are the major areas or should we all be concerned of the sharing between government and municipalities?
Which kind of programs, for example, are we doing that with the municipalities at this point where we really don’t have legislation in place with them?
Maybe you can talk about that and some of the challenges that you’ve had in ensuring that information is being protected.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Premier Taptuna.
I’ll defer that question to Deputy Minister Akeeagok.
Chairman: Mr. Akeeagok
Mr. Akeeagok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) The municipalities, by right, are their own standalone governments and they have their own records management systems and protections for the work that they do.
We do communicate, on our side, our roles and responsibilities for access to information and requirements for protection. We have a good working relationship from what I would consider and they have good protections.
It would be the municipalities to respond to the specific question, but from our standpoint, we are working to ensure and provide training to those who want training on access to information and privacy protection. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The reason I asked that is because I know there has been sharing of information on some more sensitive types of programs, such as through adoption. I know the regional Inuit associations are also quite involved in this, but I think also the hamlets.
When you talk about, let’s say, adoptions, social services, and income support, that is a lot of very private kind of information that the government provides as a service.
That’s why I’m bringing that up.
How do we ensure that kind of protection to people’s information without this legislation?
It’s not mandatory about ATIPP, if communities want it, and you were saying that they have their own way of dealing with things.
I think it’s also the government’s responsibility to give those kinds of responsibilities to the municipality to ensure that they do really have proper mechanisms in place to ensure that privacy is protected at all levels.
I understand that it must be a challenge, but I would like to know how you are dealing with that.
Mr. Akeeagok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) When the municipalities or any organization is going to provide service on behalf of the government, where there are contribution agreements or service contacts, within each of those agreements, there are certain protections that we provide through our agreements and directions and instructions on how to keep the privacy for those individuals.
In every agreement, there are components on access to information and protection that we provide guidance to.
Each of those agreements is within the sponsoring departments and to the municipalities or any organization.
That is paramount in providing the privacy and protection.
Within our department, we do have the privacy manual that we provide to the departments to ensure that if we are going to outsource, there are protections in place for individuals or organizations. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
One thing that comes to mind, if there was such a breach and somebody felt that there was a breach, how well do communities know where to call?
If I feel that my information was not protected and somehow my private information was leaked out, even if it’s not on purpose, how would somebody know what to do with that?
Do you have like a hotline that somebody can call? How do they go about doing that?
Mr. Akeeagok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) All of our ATIPP coordinators within every one of the departments are listed in our Government of Nunavut forms. Also, within our department, we do inform our government liaison officers of who to contact if there are any concerns, specifically to a department, if there are any breaches. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
How many phone calls have you received?
Mr. Akeeagok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Each of the breaches that are identified, we do it through our annual report and that gets tabled in this House. I don’t have this year’s current numbers in terms of how many are breached or potentially breached, but we do report it through our annual report that is provided to this House on an annual basis. (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to go to something different that was referred to earlier by my colleagues about the audit.
I understand there are two phases, but I’m wondering if you have any thought now as to whatever the outcomes are, if there are programs and services where, through the audit, you become aware that it’s something that you should not be doing, the government should be stopping this right away; we’re wasting money.
How are you going to deal with the staff or people who work in that area?
Would they be able to go to other jobs? Have you thought along that line yet of how you are going to deal with the changes due to the outcome of the audit?
Mr. Chairman, the phase 2 audit will determine that.
If there are any programs identified that may require a change or even deletion of that program, we will certainly have to come up with a transition plan to ensure that, as Ms. Angnakak has said, the employees of the department running the program will certainly have to come up with an acceptable transition plan.
Ms. Angnakak: Again in regard to the audit, when phase 2 comes out with its recommendations, is this something that cabinet will say, “Okay, this is a recommendation, so we’re going to do it,” or is it going to be, “This is the recommendation; we need to talk about this”? Would you go against certain types of recommendations?
Mr. Chairman, there are always many recommendations.
As elected cabinet members, we do have to scrutinize and determine which is the best option that is suitable to the people we serve in Nunavut.
Of course, there are many recommendations that do come.
As the cabinet, we do have to ensure that the best possible option, whether it’s a program change or any other type of recommendation, that we pick out the best option that is most suitable for benefiting Nunavummiut.
Just while we’re on the topic, is the review also covering arm’s-length entities of the government?
Welcome to the Premier and his officials. (interpretation) Good day, residents of Baker Lake and Nunavut.
(interpretation ends) My first question will be on page 2 of your business plan regarding the Utility Rates Review Council.
In looking at that, the Utility Rates Review Council does make recommendations to the minister responsible.
In looking at and reading the whole paragraph, URRC, I believe, is under EIA.
At the same time, there is another minister who oversees another department; the Qulliq Energy Corporation is under another minister.
When you look at the recommendations that are submitted by the committee, who has the final say on the recommendations as to what recommendations are going to be followed through?
Mr. Chairman, the Minister of the Qulliq Energy Corporation has that.
As we all know and it has been brought up in the House here, when we look at general rate applications that are submitted by URRC, after they have reviewed and after having some meetings, are there any meetings that are held by the Utility Rates Review Council within Nunavut?
Yes, there are discussions and meetings for the Utility Rates Review Council in Nunavut.
On page 4 of your business plan, Priorities (2018-19), the second bullet, “The URRC expects to review Qulliq Energy Corporation’s next General Rate Application.”
My question here would be there are some communities within Nunavut that have received energy audits and other communities within Nunavut that have not received energy audits.
When we look at the next general rate application in 2018-19, will that be taken into consideration and how will the adjustments be made?