EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
After your department has conducted this review, what types of programs are you contemplating? This, I believe, will change based on this review, at least to try to introduce a better system for pricing furs. Does this apply only to sealskin and long fur sales?
Will this strategy you are currently using assist our future attempts to sell furs?  Further, you have asked for a marketing brand to be added to the pelts to identify the origin from Nunavut and there have been several brands discussed for various types of seal products.
Can the minister provide an update on exactly what is entailed in this strategy? Will you be tabling this strategy in the House down the road? When will this strategy be available?
Yes, the review process is slowly reaching completion. Once our review has been completed, we will provide the strategy to this House.
Indeed, the prices for long furs are high. These long fur prices are quite high.
However, with respect to sealskins, the prices have plummeted and when sold, the batches are quite small, with an average price of about $22 per pelt.
When our government buys these pelts, we pay $50 per pelt on average.
Even though this is costing money, we will not contemplate stopping this program.
Additionally, once we get the sealskins tanned and dyed from the south, we repatriate them and offer them for resale in the communities.
This is a program that is well used here in Nunavut.
What can we expect in terms of changes based on this review you have undertaken under your mandate related to sealskins or the sales thereof? What about the long fur program that is part of that review? What can we look forward to?
Hon. James Arreak (interpretation): Yes, we are trying to look forward to renewed marketing efforts to improve sales of sealskins. This marketing strategy is nearly complete, where we are looking at ways to improve sales of furs, and that is what we expect upon the completion of this program review.
Now, to turn to Greenland, what type of initiatives has their government undertaken and has your department ever tried to research their efforts to combat this ban?
Yes, we have undertaken research trips to Greenland, but they are also experiencing slow sales of their sealskins with low demand. The market for sealskins has also collapsed in their jurisdiction.
Do you have any more questions, Ms. Ell?
Ms. Ell (interpretation): I have no more.
Let me look at my list here.
This question I want to ask relates to page 151. Actually, it starts at page 150 of your business plan under Environmental Protection.
The question that I wish to raise relates to the proposed budgets for 2011-12 and 2012-13 and up to 2015.
For the proposed budget for 2011-12, the dust control budget is $563,000 and based on my review of these figures, it remains the same all the way to the fiscal year 2015.
Not just this line item, but the budget amounts for environmental protection remain the same, even though these are very important to us.
The budgets proposed don’t increase and that is the purpose of my question. I want to know why these figures have not changed. That is my question.
Protecting the environment is a very important value to Inuit.
Pollution control is something very important, obviously, to our department. It is increasingly important worldwide as well.
Department of Environment employees do have consultations with the federal government and the $563,000 annual budget allocated by the Nunavut government for expenditures is the result of our partnership with the federal government.
Mr. Oshutapik (interpretation): Thank you.
Are you saying that the operation of the Environmental Protection Division is the only area not increasing in costs?
The business plan outlines these figures, the line items within this budget. They are all different figures when they are placed in the annual budgets, such as climate change, which lists $140,000 as the annual amount. Is this due to having a light workload or is this because the division hardly does any work during the year that the planned budget is unchanged?
This is related to my first question regarding the pollution control budget, which is listed at $563,000. When it is already expended and no progress is made, the budget remains the same. Did the department consider that no progress would be made since the budgets are static?
The budget items the member is referring to aren’t the only amounts within our planned budget.
The budget line items we are reviewing are not static; everything is increasing in costs, so there is a built-in inflationary cost index.
At this current time, we are requesting the funding for this fiscal year. In the next year, we will also be asking for more appropriation funding.
However, these figures are set for a three-year period based on how we envision it panning out. These are only estimates of how much is required to operate that have been listed in the budget.
I think it was two years ago that I asked the same question and it’s in regard to the regional wildlife organizations. There has been no change in the numbers for several years now and they do have to keep up with the cost of living and everything else. I had asked the same question a couple of years ago and I would like to urge your department to reconsider the amounts that are allotted for regional wildlife organizations.
This funding the member is speaking to is specifically for core funding of these organizations. Additionally, when they request further funding, we can usually provide supplemental funding.
Our government is not the only funding body for these regional wildlife organizations. This includes Qikiqtaaluk Wildlife Board for the Baffin region and in the Kivalliq, the Kivalliq Wildlife Board that are provided core funding.
They also access other funds from other sources, not just from our government, since it is a joint effort to fund those organizations. We have not heard of any funding shortfalls at this time.
It has been the same amount for I don’t know how many years now, even though they want to expand some of their activities. Perhaps we can get that information either via correspondence or otherwise. Since you stated that the RWOs can request supplemental funding, that they can access more funding, you can provide this information.
I will take this information home with me. That is all for me.
Mr. Curley: Thank you. (interpretation) I think that these two are exactly the same that we will review on page I-4 and I-5.
I initially thought the questions would apply to I-5, but I will direct my questions to this page, as they seem to be interchangeable.
First of all, with respect to the comments made by my colleague from Nanulik regarding the HTOs in the communities, we have to acknowledge our partnership since they are undertaking a lot of activities related to issues not just in Nunavut but in other jurisdictions.
This is especially true to species requiring permits and scientists looking for permission to conduct research.
We have to appreciate these bodies.
In some cases, these organizations are constantly busy, especially during certain times in the communities, in dealing with wildlife concerns. They are extremely busy and sometimes require emergency meetings to deal with the issues.
Some Inuit volunteer to provide services since they are quite familiar with these species.
I wanted to thank the HTO in Rankin Inlet.
I wanted to make a comment on country foods, as the community hunt program is commendable, for which I wanted to thank the minister.
This program is utilized in Rankin Inlet and is carefully managed, especially with respect to caribou. The harvested caribou are butchered and the meat is carved up into pieces in the traditional manner for boiling, and then they are put into boxes for the elders and delivered to those in need. Although the freezer used is quite old, during the winter, it does not require power and it remains cold.
The elders are well looked after through this program and I wanted to express our appreciation of this exceptional program and in particular, the manager. Although he is not making a large salary, Norman Ford, the brother of Levinia Brown, who used to be an MLA here, manages this program.
He is conducting an excellent program and looking after the board’s needs.
I would like to thank them very much for all the help that they provide in our community, and members can send an email, which will be answered.
I wanted to say “thank you” to the organization.
Mr. Minister, I have a few questions. Just a few years ago, perhaps within the last four or five years, the HTO as well as the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board accepted the conclusions of a female scientist who insinuated that the western Hudson Bay polar bear population was in deep decline. With that type of scare-mongering, which was quite compelling reasoning at the time, she stated that the population may disappear due to this decline.
They used that argument to slash the polar bear quota of the communities, starting with Rankin Inlet, Whale Cove, and Arviat. The quota used to be quite high, for example, Rankin Inlet had a quota of about 20 polar bears per annum and it was slashed to four tags. This caused consternation and a huge problem for these three communities, Mr. Chairman.
This was a hurried decision.
Inuit kept maintaining that it was untrue. In hindsight, their assertion was true in that the polar bear population was not in decline.
As a matter of fact, they pose a huge danger, especially for Inuit who want to camp in the summer. People can no longer camp due to the dangers posed by the polar bears in the Kivalliq region.
It is far too dangerous nowadays. We have 24-hour a day polar bear monitors stationed at the beluga whaling camp when they are in their tents on the land.
In 2011, the previous minister stated that there was going to be a population study and it looked good and positive at that time.
In 2011, the study in western Hudson Bay was completed.
Can the minister provide a brief update on the survey results for the polar bear population study that I was referring to?
Is this population in decline?
We’re asking questions on page I-5.
I would like to thank the organization that you mentioned in Rankin Inlet.
We’re very proud of our hunters and trappers organizations in the communities. We work closely with them and they also work with other entities.
The polar bear population was counted and the Department of Environment has realized that there is an increase in the population. There are some organizations out there that say there’s a decline in the polar bear population.
They do that because they’re not going to get funding from animal rights groups otherwise. If they don’t say that there’s a threat or danger in the population, they can’t expect any money from those organizations.
The previous minister agreed and increased the quota for polar bears.
I thank the previous Minister of Environment for the decision to increase the quota.
We know that there’s an increase in the polar bear population in western Hudson Bay, which is in the Kivalliq.
Mr. Curley (interpretation): Thank you. Mr. Chairman, we didn’t mention Chesterfield Inlet because they hunt polar bears from Foxe Basin.
Rankin Inlet is with the Foxe Basin and part of it is western Hudson Bay.
With the increase in the quota, I don’t think it’s a temporary quota; I think it’s a permanent quota.
Can the minister give us the results of the study that was conducted in western Hudson Bay? I believe it was in 2007 or 2008 when the statements were made that there was depletion in the polar bear population.
We have that information with us as elected members.
Can the minister tell us if he could table the results of the survey that was conducted? I would also like to know where he stands on the recommendations that were made.
My sincere apologies, (interpretation ends) Deputy Akeeagok. (interpretation) Please go ahead, Minister Arreak.
I think it has been a long day, my Annuraaqatik, Mr. Chairman.
We can table the results of the western Hudson Bay study and make it available to the general public.
Mr. Chairman, I look forward to that document being tabled and I’m sure that this issue will be brought up repeatedly.
It’s something that hasn’t been resolved yet. There’s no depletion in the population size.
I would like to urge the government to be more vocal and make rebuttals to the wildlife activists because the government tends to listen to the statements that they make.
Time magazine and the World Wildlife Fund have made statements on their plan to make changes so that polar bears are not killed anymore, irrespective of an increase in their population in Nunavut.
That is their primary goal. What response do you give to the World Wildlife Fund given that they come here and do fundraising to save the cuddly polar bear? Can you talk about that?
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Curley. Minister Arreak.
I’ll have my deputy make a supplementary response to that question.
We are currently planning, particularly in the western Hudson Bay, to conduct community visits by our staff. My deputy can elaborate on the World Wildlife Fund and others, if you can let Mr. Akeeagok speak to it.
That is an excellent question. We try and promote our views on the polar bear in Nunavut on a regular basis. Over the past year, Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami has made preparations to hold a major conference in March 2014 on the global trade of polar bear products.
We’re taking that as a vehicle to put together a publication that explains the history of Nunavut in partnership with ITK, NTI, and NWMB. It will promote how well we are managing wildlife.
The recent study of the western Hudson Bay and Foxe Basin polar bears is being made public and Inuit in the Kivalliq are expected to benefit greatly from the findings of the study.
Those findings help us to make counter arguments against fear mongers. We also take your input in the House on the polar bear issue and discussions at the ministerial level so that we can make a multi-level case on that to the world and to show that no one else can manage wildlife better than we can.
It’s often impossible to approach animal rights groups, many of whom are very well funded and simply will not listen to any opinion different from theirs. Often, they will turn our arguments against us.
Our relations with the World Wildlife Fund have evolved to the point where we can have a productive exchange of ideas. They have come around to accept our interest and need for hunting and we can actually come to agreement, although not on every point. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to offer my support to the minister. Animal rights groups from around the world get invited to talk about the plight of the polar bear. I am now convinced that you should always bring a representative from one of the communities, either from the regional wildlife organizations or the hunters and trappers organizations or that type of organization.
In Maclean’s magazine, I didn’t believe the article that was brought out. It stated that we harvested polar bears because of the high cost of the fur and stuff like that. They stated that the polar bear skin used to be $3,000, but it’s now $12,000.
If a Qallunaaq reads it, they believe that article right away and they believe that we’re going to be harvesting more polar bears because of the high cost of the fur.
We have a quota system in Nunavut and we’re not going to over-harvest polar bears. In Northern Quebec, they don’t have a quota system, but still, it’s managed and they use the traditional method of management. That’s why there’s no depletion in the polar bear population.
Again, I support you, Mr. Minister, and if you’re going to be making presentations or if you’re going to be on a panel, I would urge you to bring a person who knows about wildlife at the community level.
It’s something we can consider.
Of course, not every polar bear skin is $12,500. The average is about $5,000 and they’re not all $12,500.
Polar bears that are harvested in Nunavut have a tag and we can’t sell the ones that don’t have tags.
We also make sure that we tell the world that polar bears are managed properly.
We recently had a meeting with a WWF representative and they’re stating their support to us.
We told them that we can decline their offer for financial support if it’s just for their own benefit and not ours.
Studies are usually very expensive.  We’re also able to have meetings with the regional wildlife organizations and the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board.
Yes, that’s a good suggestion you made about bringing an individual to those panels or meetings we go to.
I believe the minister and I am very pleased that they’re going to be considering that.
I know you understand, but people who say that there’s a decline in the polar bear population tend to be believed.
They’re saying that because of the ice conditions up here, they want the polar bear to be listed as endangered or threatened under the Species at Risk Act.
I would like to remind you that polar bear populations aren’t going to be declining due to the deterioration of the ice.
It’s only if the food that they eat, such as the seal, is declining, including walrus, narwhal, there would be a decline in the polar bear population.
Is it possible for your department to look at other marine mammals?
For example, near Repulse Bay, they had seen a narwhal on the ice that had been pulled out of the water by a polar bear.
I would like to hear what the minister thinks about attempts to put the polar bear on the endangered list under the Species at Risk Act. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
I thank the member for making those comments.
Polar bears will hunt other animals for consumption.
They also thought that because they’re running out of food, they’re now starting to eat eggs.
They have been eating eggs since time immemorial. They have always eaten eggs.
I had a discussion with an elder about polar bears. It’s not true that they only hunt on the ice.
They can catch seals and other animals in open water.
We have worked with Ontario and Manitoba on the issue of polar bears also.
In regard to polar bears listed on the endangered list, that’s not the case right now. They’re listed as a special concern and they’re trying to get the polar bear put on the list.
We believe that the polar bear population is increasing in the north.
Your time has run out, Tagak.
I would like to remind you that I had asked for general comments before we got into the page-by-page review.
We can ask detailed questions when we get to the page-by-page review.
If you have questions, please ask them when we’re at the appropriate page. Keep the responses brief.
There are some excellent questions that could be asked in question period, but in Committee of the Whole, we have been given direction by the Speaker to deal with these budgets.
I have repeatedly asked for general comments prior to the page-by-page review so that we can ask detailed questions at the appropriate time.
That’s just a reminder.
I will now recognize Ms. Ugyuk.
Last year, when we were dealing with this issue, I asked a question in regard to the McClintock Channel.
Residents of Taloyoak and Gjoa Haven were told that it’s very expensive to do a polar bear survey.
In 2011-12, (interpretation ends) “Initiate planning for establishment of polar bear management plan.” (interpretation) For the following year, (interpretation ends) “Conduct community consultations for the establishment of polar bear management plan.
Finalize polar bear management plan for Nunavut.” (interpretation) Is the McClintock Channel going to be included?
We’re working on that issue within this year.
They will do a consultation tour to the communities surrounding the McClintock Channel to discuss the polar bear survey.
There is a moratorium for 25 years. Do you believe that they can lift the moratorium depending on the results of the survey?
The moratorium can be lifted if the population is sustainable.
Following the results of the survey, they can make a decision whether or not to lift the moratorium.
I have one last name on my list.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for recognizing me.
If there was a mishap where a harvester lost their equipment, there’s a budget for 2012-13 of $80,000 for compensation.
The budget was the same last year and the budget is not changing.
Perhaps the minister can provide me with information for the last five years and whether they always deplete the $80,000.
This $80,000 that is provided annually for disaster compensation is sufficient.
As I stated yesterday, each individual can put in a claim for up to $10,000.
It has been sufficient and that’s why the amount for disaster compensation has not changed. When we realize that funding for this line item is insufficient, we can review it again.
I just want to ask if they can provide me with the information for the last five years.
Yes, we can provide that information and table it.
I just want to remind members that we still have six bills to deal with.
We have all night to try and finish all of the six remaining bills.
I’m fully aware of the pressing need to deal with those bills, but we should not be hasty either whenever there are questions to the government.
Perhaps the schedule that was set could be changed so that there is more time to adequately deal with them.
In the past, we have dealt with the polar bear issue.
I believe we shouldn’t always take a negative approach to dealing with polar bears in Nunavut. With respect to scientific expertise, if they are true scientists, they would seek facts and they’re aware of Inuit facts in addition to scientific facts.
There is no question that polar bears are increasing in population.
There are records that show how the whaling industry nearly wiped out whale stocks, beginning in the 1800s, within a 100-year period. It was a time when too many bears were taken as well.
The records are there, from Cumberland Sound all the way to Hudson Bay.
The Hudson’s Bay Company has archived records that show how many bears were taken and (interpretation ends) that is factual information. (interpretation) As well, Inuit have observed that areas that never had polar bears are now full of bears.
One elder once told me and I truly believed him that in the Kivalliq, it used to be virtually impossible to obtain bearskin.
It was rare to find bears then. Traders used to come looking to buy bearskins which Inuit used to make their sleds slide faster.
There is factual information out there. Why didn’t wildlife management study the history of polar bears that are contained in records written by local residents?
At Arctic Ventures, we can see books that show beautiful pictures of polar bears.
They’re written by southerners with no connection whatsoever to their history and only serve to present a romantic picture and suggesting that bears should no longer be hunted.
Mr. Chairman, I would now like to ask the minister a question that I have asked before. Instead of arguing pointlessly about bears, why not collect historical documentation which can be expertly presented by gifted writers?
Would that be something worth looking into?
At present, we have a staff member who is focused on polar bear issues whom we recently found from the Kivalliq.
We have subsequently started work on that particular question posed by Mr. Curley.
When we were discussing heritage today, we stated that we need to record Inuit.
Our elders are dwindling in number, especially those who possess a great amount of knowledge, but some of whom are now into their 80’s and 90’s and are well versed in the history of polar bears.
I have struggled hard to the point where it makes me emotional in my respect for the elders, and I want to thank you for saying that elders will now be a priority.
I just wanted to encourage the minister to continue with his efforts.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Curley. Minister Arreak, please respond to the question. Minister Arreak.
Hon. James Arreak (interpretation): As the member stated, he encourages us and we take that encouragement. We have a polar bear biologist who filled a position and it could be part of that individual’s duties. I thank the member for his encouragement.
Mr. Ningark (interpretation): I’ll be brief. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
My question is on page 158 of the business plan.