EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I would like more information about Iqaluit about why they’re not on the list.
Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) We can look at what we can do in terms of reaching out to the communities if we don’t hear a response from them.
We can also look into whether this is part of a training aspect of the community economic development organization when they’re doing their training and whether it’s discussed at the community planning stage as well.
I like your response. I think that’s a great idea. I would like to see that happen.
Just one more question in regard to access road projects. One of the things I think and I could be wrong, but I’m thinking the way that they developed the Sylvia Grinnell Park here was very well done with the roads, little roads, and stuff. I know it’s different; we’re not dealing with parks.
I understand that. Sometimes people build access roads. I understand it’s because it’s a place that people can go camp or it’s like for traditional use or what.
To me that could go together with park development almost.
Is there a way of ever putting the funding together so that part of the funding is for park development that you could further that money through using access roads as well into it to make that project go further than what you give it funding for, for that specific cause?
Just your thoughts on that.
I’ll have Mr. Hawkins answer that.
The access road program is built at the community’s wishes generally.
Part of the criteria, though, would be if they’re leveraging other resources into them, we would score that highly in the evaluation process. Those other resources would be considered their assets.
I wonder if the department would consider maybe... . I don’t know.
Maybe you already do that where you sit down with communities and tell them about tips on how to access it, just to give a bit of support and maybe even advice on “You want to do this. Have you thought about doing it this way so we could further the dollars?”
We usually give presentations at the mayors’ meetings and other meetings that we go to.
I will go on to something else.
The current air terminal that we use now in Iqaluit, for the record, can you tell us what is going to happen to that building once the new airport opens?
The second and third floors of that building are going to continue to be used for aviation purposes. The need for the building is a little bit less certain, although it has to stay there. It is important that because of its location and that it’s not replaceable as an airport asset.
We can’t build an airport asset somewhere else.
It has to be adjacent and straddling the land site, ground site. It’s important that it be used for airport purposes or at least that it could be converted back into an airport purpose in a fairly short period of time, five years, ten years, or something like that. A long-term purpose for something other than an airport would not be in accordance with the best use of the land.
Can the department tell us just a little bit... ? I’m looking at 216, Priorities (2018-19).
When you talk about commercial development of airport lands, what do you mean by that?
What kind of commercial development?
We will have Mr. Hawkins answer that question.
Chairman: Thank you. Mr. Hawkins.
We do lease a lot of land throughout the airport systems all across the territory. As I said in my last response, they are primarily for airport users. The land is best used that way.
For development of hangars, office space for air carriers, and hangar and expediting space. There are also a lot of licences involved, the advertising licence, telephones, and things like that. It could be a little bit more efficient than it is.
Ms. Angnakak, and be mindful of the interpreters.
Can only businesses that have anything to do with the airport, such as airlines, secure lots on airport lands? For example, you said for hangars.
If somebody wanted to build a hangar and then rent it out, could they do that?
The objective is to protect it for aviation purposes.
If that seemed to be the best aviation purpose that this land could be used for, then it would be. Somebody would be able to do that.
It’s possible that would be on a shorter term than an air carrier that came in and built their own hangar just because the air carrier actually being involved in the space and ensuring that it would be used that way is a priority to us.
I just wanted to do an example. I’m interested in this because with the new airport there might be some interest.
Let’s take a look at either NorthMart or Arctic Ventures. They bring in a lot of food.
They bring in planeloads. They have a charter that comes in. If they want to build a hangar to accept all of this food coming in, I’m just using it as an example.
Would that be something that would be looked at?
They would look at it, but it would be a lower priority.
I want to ask something about the sequence strobe approach lighting system. I think there are some challenges to that and I’m wondering if you can just give us an update on the status of what’s going on with that.
There are some challenges with that. It projects out into the water farther than the shoreline, so there are some challenges with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.
I think the largest challenge that we likely have with that is with the sealift landing site because it is going to go out into what would be their normal barge landing/shipping lane or the approach into the beach. We think we have a solution for it. We think that we can sort that all out, but that is the challenge that we have at this moment.
Chairman: Thank you. (interpretation) Following the list of names, second round of questioning, Mr. Qirngnuq.
I wanted to ask a couple of questions yesterday.
In Kugaaruk, there’s called a position called a GLO in English, who has a camera which could be used for driver’s licences and other IDs.
We need passport photos too. Maybe because the camera’s focus is not sharp enough or that it is too big, it appears the camera cannot be used to take passport photos.
Can we expect a new camera for Kugaaruk suitable for taking passport photos?
The GLOs are not part of the Department of Economic Development and Transportation as they are under the Premier’s Office and (interpretation ends) Executive and Intergovernmental Affairs (interpretation) will be appearing before you later on, perhaps. When he is at the witness table, that question can be raised with him as his officials are responsible for that equipment, if I am not mistaken.
We only deal with the driver’s licence camera equipment.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) Economic Development and Transportation. Transportation.
Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $28,462,000.
Chairman: Thank you. Back to page K-3.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Mr. Chairman, I would like to get approval to go back to page K-5.
Chairman (interpretation): Do members agree to go back to K-5?
I have one question on K-5.
Mr. Chairman, you asked a question in regard to the development partnership agreement.
I know that you don’t have that development partnership agreement, but I know that you are now working on the new development partnership agreement.
Perhaps you can elaborate what the contents are going to be and what changes will be in there. Since you’re working on that, maybe you can elaborate on some of the few changes that will occur in the new one.
I can’t have your question responded to today as I can’t bring in the witness who deals with economic development and we finished that department. I apologize for that.
I can say that we will inform all members in writing afterwards.
Is your deputy minister involved or do you have any information regarding the DPA?
Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk (interpretation): I do not deal with day-to-day activities, Mr. Chairman.
It’s usually the people who are responsible that deal with that matter.
We can get the information, but the individual who answered that question the last time is not here and will be able to give the information to you on Monday.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) As a minister, you don’t give direction (interpretation) on what should be in the agreement?
Are both you and the deputy minister not involved with the agreement?
Although I’m involved in the overall DPA discussions, it’s not at the level of detail that you’re asking.
Are you and the deputy minister saying that you will approve what is presented to you?
Your deputy minister indicated that you get information on it, but you’re not involved with the agreement.
Are you just going to approve of it once it reaches your level?
I will refer this question to my Deputy Minister, Ms. Rowe.
We have a lot of issues going on in the department. This one is a work in progress.
Once it gets to the level that it’s ready to be reviewed, then it comes to my attention. Of course once it has been reviewed by myself, then it would go to the minister for her review. That is how our system works.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Thank you for that response.
My question was if you know anything about the contents of the agreement as the minister and as the deputy minister.
Once it reaches your level, you’re going to review it.
Yes, I am aware of the overall picture of the DPA, but I am not in a position here today to discuss any details on the DPA.
We have been hearing the same thing for a long time, that it’s in the works or it’s in progress.
When are we going to see this agreement?
We don’t know yet.
That’s too bad.
You were just saying that it’s almost completed. Now you don’t know when we are going to be able to see it.
You indicated earlier or some days ago that it’s almost completed.
We’re talking about the same agreement and now which stage it’s at.
It gets me confused if you don’t know when we’re going to be able to see it when you said it was almost complete.
Chairman (interpretation): Thank you very much. (interpretation ends) Mr. Premier.
Hon. Peter Taptuna: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to try to answer the member’s question.
The DPA is connected to the fuel tax rebate and as of January the DPAs and the fuel tax rebate were changed where in the past there was one DPA that included mines that are in production.
Mr. Chairman, the change was to exclude mining companies that got into production.
The fuel tax rebate is to assist the exploration firms and that was changed in January.
One of the things that we see there is that if a mining company goes into production, they’re supposedly making profits, but the fuel tax rebate is still there, not necessarily under the DPA.
The fuel tax rebate is for harvesters and exploration firms.
As you know, exploration firms’ income and investments are given to them by investors, but once a mining company is in production, they are generating their own revenue and profit.
That was changed to better reflect the real, actual situation. The fuel tax rebate also includes harvesters that are out there. Any harvester that qualifies for the fuel tax rebate can access the fuel tax rebate.
There are a number of communities that have done that.
In the original DPA there are eight principles where certain conditions have to be met by the company that held the DPA.
Of course in the past there was supposed to be some kind of discussions with affected communities where the mining production is actually taking place and work with the communities to try to build up the local employment rates, including building infrastructure.
I can’t recall the other six principles that are included in the DPA, but again this has changed to reflect where we put better use to our funds to assist exploration firms because they don’t get any assistance, but to take away that program from a producing mine. I hope that clearly answers the member’s question.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) I appreciate the Premier taking the time to answer what the department should have answered or tried to.
At the end of the day, because Minister Ell-Kanayuk has stated on a number of occasions that there’s a DPA being developed, a new one with, I believe, the Department of Finance.
On a number of occasions the minister has stated that “We’re very close to getting this DPA done.” Now the latest reply I get is, “Well, we don’t know.”
All I’m asking is on a number of occasions the minister has stated that “We’re close to doing this,” do we at least have a date? A month?
Now the reply is, “We don’t know.” If it was so close, we must have an idea as to how close we are.
Is that impossible to answer?
(interpretation) Thank you Mr. Chairman
The question earlier was, “What is in the new DPA?”
We don’t have that information at this time and also we don’t have the information as to an exact date when the new agreement will be in place, but we do know it’s soon.
Mr. Enook (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) And soon is when? (interpretation) Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Hon. Monica Ell-Kanayuk (interpretation): I just indicated that we don’t know.
I don’t think that’s how it is.
You’re giving us expectations when you say that it’s almost ready to be made public and that you’re working together.
On the other hand you don’t know when it’s going to be completed.
What kind of anticipation should we have as Nunavummiut or as stakeholders, those who are going to be affected?
How can Nunavummiut expect something to be ready and then suddenly we don’t know anymore? What then? I don’t think we should be told that by our own government.
If we can’t see it soon, then tell us or if you think that it’s almost completed, tell us perhaps we will be able to see it within this year.
That could be a better answer than “I don’t know” and just give us those answers.
Mr. Chairman, in English the word “soon,” I don’t know how to pin it down in Inuktitut, but to me soon can be within a month and to somebody else it might be in the fall.
Is there something less vague than “soon”?
My Deputy Minister, Ms. Rowe, will respond to that question. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
We are hoping to have it complete for the end of this government.
As per Rule 77(2), I will exercise my discretion and not recognize Mr. Joanasie, as you were recognized twice under this page.
Move on to K-3.
Economic Development and Transportation. Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $71,495,000. Agreed?
Chairman: Do members agree that we have concluded Economic Development and Transportation?
I would first of all like to thank the members for their excellent questions on specific details of the department’s operations.
I would also like to thank my staff, including Deputy Minister Sherri Rowe, Assistant Deputy Minister Bernie MacIsaac, and Acting Deputy Minister John Hawkins, as well as many others that work in the background, including the interpreters and translators.
Mr. Chairman, members understand that we cannot have all information with us at all times to answer every possible question.
We would need a larger table, as a colleague once observed.
That being said, I am committed to responding to the committee as fully and promptly as possible. In that spirit I would like to provide some additional information on specific details members requested over the two days of our review.
On Thursday Mr. Mikkungwak asked about how many people participated in the NNI community workshops and specifically the one held in Baker Lake.
Mr. Chairman, my officials have located this information, which I am happy to share.
Mr. Chairman, staff of the NNI Secretariat have visited seven communities with GN offices, including Cape Dorset, Rankin Inlet, Pond Inlet, Arviat, Baker Lake, Iqaluit, and Cambridge Bay.
In total staff met with 130 members of the public and the business community, as well as 85 GN employees.
In Baker Lake the NNI Secretariat met with 10 employees of the Qulliq Energy Corporation involved in procurement. Separately they also met with two Baker Lake businesses.
Also on Thursday I committed to sharing the available details on the number of proposals received in 2016-17 under the Country Food Distribution Program.
Mr. Chairman, we do not specifically track the number of proposals received.
In accordance with the Country Food Distribution Program Policy, we track the name of each successful applicant, amount of each contribution, the type of investment being supported, and the community.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to inform you that the Country Food Distribution Program Annual Report for 2015-16 has now been posted on the department’s website.
I invite my colleagues to review the report and I can say that, as detailed in the report in 2015-16, the program funded 25 different projects proposed by 25 different applicants.
Yesterday I committed to sharing more information on the cost of completing the system to measure the economic impact of tourism in Nunavut.
Mr. Chairman, phase 1 of the project included the development of the Nunavut Economic Impact Model for Tourism.
That phase is complete and cost $105,610.
Phase 2 of the project includes the development of an integrated tourism data collection and management system. For this phase we have $230,000 available over the next two years to be 80 percent funded by CanNor and 20 percent by the department.
Also on Friday Mr. Mikkungwak asked about the status of the renovation of the Baker Lake Air Terminal Building. Mr. Chairman, the design is complete and all necessary work required to go to tender has also been completed. The construction request has been prepared and once this document is approved internally, we will vote to tender.
We expect that to be done by the end of the 2016-17 fiscal year.
This concludes my closing remarks, but Mr. Chairman, I would also like to thank you for presiding over the review of the 2017-18 main estimates and business plan of the Department of Economic Development and Transportation. (interpretation) Thank you.
Chairman: Thank you. Madam Minister, please provide a copy of your statement to the Chair. Thank you. (interpretation) Sergeant-at-arms, please escort the minister’s officials out.
(interpretation ends) We will have a 15-minute break prior to proceeding to Nunavut Arctic College.
>>Committee recessed at 14:52 and resumed at 15:09
Bill 34 – Appropriation (Operations & Maintenance) Act, 2017-2018 – Nunavut Arctic College – Consideration in Committee
In Committee of the Whole I would now like to ask the Minister responsible for Nunavut Arctic College if he has officials that he would like to appear before the committee.
Yes, indeed, I would like to have officials with me at the witness table.
Today with me to my right is the President of Nunavut Arctic College, Joe Kunuk, and to my left is the Vice-president and Dean, Eric Corneau.
Hon. Paul Quassa (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation ends) Mr. Chairman and members, I am pleased to present to members today Nunavut Arctic College’s 2017-2020 main estimates and business plan.
As members know, one of the priorities of Sivumut Abluqta is self-reliance and optimism through education and training. Nunavut Arctic College has a key role in advancing this priority.
The college’s total budget for 2017-18 is $51.6 million, which is a $6.1 million increase from the 2016-17 total budget of $45.5 million.
The majority of this increase is from third party sources, increase in the base funding for the Law Program, Social Works Program, Early Childhood Education Program, and additional person years for student support services, including the federal funding for the Iqaluit Community Learning Centre and Campus.
Third party funding is $14 million for the fiscal year. For 2016-17 it was $12.2 million.
The college is actively working to review, renew, and expand these funding agreements.
The contribution from the Government of Nunavut of $37.6 million is up from $34.4 million.
The balance of the college’s revenues is from tuition and other sources of $5,441,000.
The total number of PYs will increase by eight person years from 222.6 to 230.6.
This is a result of an increase of three PYs arising from third party funding, three PYs in student services, and two PYs in the instructors.
In 2017-18 the college will be investing $1.3 million of core funding to continue the delivery of the early childhood education programs.
This offsets the loss of previous funding delivered by the federal departments of Public Health Canada and INAC, which phases out at the end of 2016-17.
With this funding, the college aims to graduate 70 students with a diploma in early childhood education and certify an additional 150 child care workers over the next five years.
In doing so, this government is taking clear action in support of Sivumut Abluqta’s priority of promoting and recognizing the importance of early childhood education to prepare children and their parents for a successful start in life and school.
As the college moves forward, it will continue to work with communities towards addressing needs at the community level.
One such direction it has taken with respect to listening to communities’ needs is in the area of environmental technology.
In 2017-18 we will look to expand on the delivery of the Environmental Technology Program through partnership funding and once again deliver this program in Pond Inlet.
The college is investing through 2017-18 and beyond in the Social Services Worker Program so that it can guarantee sufficient students to make a material impact on services that are offered to clients who need access to social services.
In doing this, this initiative supports many of Sivumut Abluqta’s objectives, including:
Supporting labour force training, development and employment through strategic alliances with sector partners;
Ensuring clinical expertise is available to Nunavummiut;
Working with our partners, renewing and strengthening our efforts towards suicide prevention; and lastly
Incorporating Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit in the learning materials and course content.
In fiscal year 2017-18 the budget increases to $1,400,384 to cover the costs of hiring an additional two full-time instructors and pay for the expansion of program delivery.
Going forward this would decrease to $1,220,884 of annual funding as one-time costs associated with expanding the program phase-out.
Nunavut Law Program
In 2017-18 the college will deliver the next Law Program as a priority stemming from our current mandate.
In accordance with Article 23 of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, the college will make every effort to ensure Nunavut Inuit are given priority to this and all of our programs.
The delivery of a law program through the University of Saskatchewan will give Nunavummiut the best opportunity to learn about and engage activity in the legal profession.
The Nunavut Law Program is designed as a four-year program.
The first year of the program will be dedicated to equipping students with adequate skills and knowledge to undertake the subsequent three law-intensive years of study.
The focus of the program as a whole will be on leading students to understand, examine, apply, and critique legal doctrine, systems and processes.
It will provide opportunities to students to explore both traditional and southern perspectives on law and to consider the role played by both systems in our society.
Nunavut Arctic College and the University of Saskatchewan will accept a maximum of 25 qualified applicants in the program starting in September 2017.
In 2017-18 the college will continue to deliver on its core programs, including the Nunavut Teacher Education Program, the Bachelor of Arctic Nursing Program, the Environmental Technology Program, cultural programming at Piqqusilirivvik, the heavy equipment operator and trades and pre-trades programming, including identifying options for moving carpentry programs in Iqaluit to Rankin Inlet to have all trades delivered out of Sanatuliqsarvik, Inuit language instruction programming, as well as the jewellery and metalwork programs, and the Office Administration Program.
It will continue to deliver its continuing education programming, including the Pathways for Adults Secondary School, the Nunavut Adult Basic Education, and the Getting Ready for Employment Training programs.