EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I also thank the member for raising that question with respect to whether consideration has been given by the Department of Health on being committed to working with the communities, local families, and to discuss the kind of medical treatment or services that can be provided to our elders to alleviate their situation here in Nunavut.
I believe that in July 2013, there were approximately 1,244 Nunavummiut aged 65 years or older. Compared to the number to our overall population size, the percentage of elders is fairly high at 3.5 percent. Obviously, as we are all aging, this group has continually grown larger ever since the Territory of Nunavut was created.
There are several facilities currently operating here in Nunavut. As an example, there are specific programs in Cambridge Bay, Kugaaruk, and Pond Inlet. However, we have to look at the priority placement of these facilities at the local level, as the communities have to prioritize them, and negotiations would commence between the communities, departments, and members representing these communities on the setting priorities.
Only through vigorous debate can we move forward on providing that which is needed in our communities, Mr. Speaker.
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) Your first supplementary question, Mr. Sammurtok.
Mr. Sammurtok: A need has been identified for a 24-hour care facility in Rankin Inlet.
Can the minister clarify what steps must be taken in order to have such a project included in the government’s capital plan?
I think a needs assessment would have to be planned with other government departments, such as CG&S.
The member would have to perhaps write a letter to my department requesting such a facility and discussions would have to take place to realize whether the need is available.
I can tell you right now that we have 24-hour care facilities, seven-day nursing, and personal care located in Igloolik and Gjoa Haven.
They have a 10-bed capacity for continuing care centres there. Both continuing care centres are operating at capacity, including respite care.
Health is planning to conduct a needs assessment to determine how best to meet the long-term care needs of Nunavummiut.
Your supplementary question and final question, Mr. Sammurtok.
Will the minister commit to reviewing the need for a 24-hour care facility in the community of Rankin Inlet?
Health will commit to looking at long-term care facilities that are currently in place in Nunavut and we are doing a needs assessment to see how we can address long-term care for all elders in Nunavut.
Member for South Baffin, Mr. Joanasie.
Question 003 – 4(1): Status of New Cape Dorset Power Plant (Joanasie)
The Qulliq Energy Corporation’s most recent publicly available annual report indicates that its application to replace Cape Dorset’s aging power plant was approved in June 2011.
However, as the minister will be aware, progress on this essential project has been stalled due to the corporation being “unable to secure an appropriate site to construct a new facility.”
Mr. Speaker, as the minister will also be aware, the delay in building Cape Dorset’s new power plant is having a serious impact on the government’s ability to construct urgently needed new housing in the community due to the current lack of power generation capacity.
Can the minister update the Legislative Assembly today on the Qulliq Energy Corporation’s efforts to resolve this issue?
Speaker: The Hon. Minister responsible for the Qulliq Energy Corporation, Mr. Okalik.
What I can say is that, unfortunately, the hamlet and the Qulliq Energy Corporation still haven’t come to a solution regarding the parcel of land to build the new power plant in Cape Dorset.
Speaker: Your first supplementary question, Mr. Joanasie.
As the minister is aware, section 16 of the Qulliq Energy Corporation Act provides that the corporation may, and I quote, “expropriate any land that the Corporation considers necessary for the purpose of enhancing energy services in Nunavut, in accordance with the Expropriation Act.”
Will the minister commit to reviewing this option in order to acquire the land necessary on which to build Cape Dorset’s urgently needed new power plant?
The expropriation of land can cause hardship on anyone, but we are willing to work with the hamlet council to see how we could arrive at the best solution for this problem.
Speaker: Your final supplementary question, Mr. Joanasie.
Mr. Joanasie: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Qulliq Energy Corporation’s general rate application was recently approved by the minister.
The application indicates that, and I quote, “The Cape Dorset power plant is an old plant, constructed in 1964.
It suffers from several deficiencies, including failing building foundation, unreliable superstructure and aging systems and equipment.”
Mr. Speaker, Cape Dorset’s current power plant is older than I am and might even be older than the minister himself.
The GRA also indicates that the corporation has had to install an emergency generator for the community until a new plant can be constructed.
Can the minister confirm if the QEC’s plans for the community’s new power plant include such features as residual heating systems and the potential for a wind-diesel-hydrogen hybrid power system?
This is the first of many steps to be taken, which is the identification of the area to be studied. Once a site has been identified, agreement has to be reached and upon agreement, the details would be ironed out.
Once the area is identified, we will have a better idea of the kind of plant that would be built to generate power for the community.
Question 004 – 4(1): Marine Infrastructure in Arctic Bay (Shooyook)
Arctic Bay’s integrated community infrastructure sustainability plan indicates that the breakwater, which was constructed over two decades ago, is “too small to accommodate all of the boats that need to be sheltered” and that it requires “an addition to accommodate and prevent damage to boats.”
In September of last year, the government announced that all Nunavut communities “were encouraged to submit proposals to the department for projects that would improve existing marine infrastructure.”
Can the minister indicate if his department is working with Arctic Bay to address the condition of the breakwater being too small?
Speaker: The Hon. Minister of Economic Development and Transportation, Hon. Kuksuk.
I also thank my colleague for asking a question about Arctic Bay’s marine infrastructure.
The plan the member referred to is the responsibility of the local hamlet council to produce.
As to the member’s question regarding the involvement of local residents, I can state that they were involved in identifying the need to upgrade their breakwater.
Speaker: Your first supplementary question, Mr. Shooyook.
Mr. Shooyook (interpretation): Arctic Bay’s integrated community infrastructure sustainability plan also indicates that the sealift area “needs to be moved as it poses a safety hazard in a heavy road traffic area.”
Can the minister indicate if his department will work with the hamlet and the shipping companies to address this issue?
Speaker: The Hon. Minister of Economic Development and Transportation, Mr. Kuksuk.
I also thank my colleague for raising that question on this issue.
For small craft harbours and marine infrastructure, we use an integrated community sustainability plan to incorporate that. I understand your question and I have not seen any plan to work on the shipping area to date, but I will look into this and get back to you.
Speaker: Your final supplementary question, Mr. Shooyook.
Mr. Shooyook (interpretation): My second question, Arctic Bay’s integrated community infrastructure sustainability plan also indicates that its long-term goal is to build a new small craft harbour.
This has the potential to contribute to the development of the fishing industry in the High Arctic.
Can the minister indicate if his department would be willing to work with the hamlet to develop a feasibility study for this project?
I would also like to thank the member for the good question.
I will have my department look into this and then I will provide him with my response.
Speaker: Oral Questions. (interpretation) Member for Iqaluit-Niaqunnguu, Ms. Angnakak.
Question 005 – 4(1): Federal-Territorial Relations (Angnakak)
My questions are for the Premier, my old boss.
Mr. Speaker, as all Members of the House are aware, the importance of having a positive, productive, and respectful relationship with the federal government is one of the most important responsibilities of our Premier.
Can the Premier update the House today on what meetings and discussions he has had with the Prime Minister of Canada since our recent general election?
Speaker: The Hon. Premier of Nunavut, Mr. Taptuna.
Mr. Speaker, I was asking tough questions for the past five years and it’s probably payback time now.
Mr. Speaker, I’ve had no discussions with the Prime Minister.
The initial meeting was just an introductory meeting with the Prime Minister, introduction of me to him.
At one point, the introductory meeting was going to be during Seal Day on Parliament, but the day after, due to uncontrolled circumstances, I did meet him in his office just for an introductory get-together.
Speaker: Your first supplementary question, Ms. Angnakak.
We all understand and recognize the fact that significant federal investments will be required to enable Nunavut to realize a number of strategic goals and projects, including a much needed marine facility for Iqaluit, a road link between the Kivalliq and Manitoba, and new investments in renewable energy, including hydroelectric development.
Mr. Speaker, we also understand and recognize that the federal government does not have a blank cheque for us and we need to be very clear as to what our key priorities are for federal investments.
Can the Premier indicate what specific projects and priorities he aims to push with Ottawa during our term of office?
Mr. Speaker, the infrastructure deficit that we have in Nunavut is significant.
I believe, at one point, there was a number being thrown out there in the amount of $6 billion just to catch up to the much needed infrastructure we don’t have here in Nunavut.
One of the things that we have been trying to move forward in is, of course, housing, marine infrastructure, and alternative generation for our communities.
As you know, we have 25 communities and none of them are linked by road, everybody knows that, and it’s very costly for the government to construct 25 of everything within this territory.
There is much needed infrastructure in all of our communities.
Mr. Speaker, all of these are priorities, but we will try and tackle things one at a time because throwing everything out there as a priority… . We know and we have learned from the past that it’s not going to work very well because in the past, there were way too many priorities. With my upcoming discussions with the Prime Minister and my colleagues down in Ottawa, we will be putting forth a couple of our priorities for infrastructure.
Speaker: Your final supplementary question, Ms. Angnakak.
Ms. Angnakak: Thank you. Mr. Speaker, our sister territories have made progress in recent years towards devolution.
Although devolution involves the territorial governments obtaining an increased share of revenues from natural resources development, it also requires them to take on a significant number of new administrative responsibilities, including the challenge of absorbing a significant number of transferred federal employees into their territorial bureaucracies.
Although Nunavut has been pursuing devolution talks with Ottawa, we also recognize that we are still a relatively young territory.
Can the Premier indicate what his government’s timeline is for negotiating a devolution agreement?
Mr. Speaker, devolution has been ongoing, negotiations are ongoing.
As members are well aware, October 16 of 2013, there was a statement from the Governor General through its Throne Speech that phase 2 of devolution negotiations will commence.
Also, Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada’s report is saying that we hope to complete the agreement in principle by March 31 of 2014.
Member for Iqaluit-Tasiluk, Mr. Hickes.
Question 006 – 4(1): Fuel Rebate for Homeowners (Hickes)
As the minister is very much aware, the government recently announced that rising fuel prices on the worldwide market have resulted in a significant jump in the cost of gasoline and other products for Nunavut consumers.
Over the years, the territorial government has helped Nunavut homeowners cope with the cost of heating their homes by introducing a number of home heating fuel rebate programs.
Mr. Speaker, as the minister will recall, the first such initiative was introduced back in 2001 and the most recent one-time program was in place just a few years ago.
Can the minister indicate today if his department is reviewing the possibility of introducing a new fuel rebate program for homeowners?
Speaker: The Hon. Minister of Finance, Mr. Peterson.
Hon. Keith Peterson: Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank Mr. Hickes for the question.
Mr. Speaker, as we all know, we live in fiscally challenging times.
I have been keeping a running tab of… . It has only been 30 minutes into question period and we’re [discussing] power plants, 24-hour care facilities, roads, breakwaters, and so we’re really challenged.
The Premier announced a number of $6 billion.
In fact, I mentioned that number to the Prime Minister of Canada himself a few years ago when I met with him in Cambridge Bay.
Mr. Speaker, we had a program a few years ago.
Actually, I was just reading my briefing note. In 2008-09, it was initially a one-shot deal and then we extended it to a second year, but we haven’t had that program since.
I am very cognizant of Mr. Hickes’ concern.
I have asked the officials in my department to look internally to see if we can find some funds within Finance itself.
I haven’t had a report back.
I know the high cost of fuel.
We hit Nunavummiut with the fuel increase on January 1. It was a necessary increase for our Petroleum Products [Fuel Stabilization] Fund.
Hopefully at some point, I will have to talk to my colleagues at the Financial Management Board.
It’s not a unilateral decision. If I can do it, I’ll have to get approval from FMB.
Speaker: Your first supplementary question, Mr. Hickes.
In 2011, the Minister of Finance informed the Legislative Assembly that approximately 1,300 Nunavut homeowners took advantage of the government’s most recent Fuel Rebate Program. The minister also indicated that the government spent between $600,000 and $700,000 on the program, and the program, which was not renewed, provided approximately $500 per recipient.
Mr. Speaker, the minister alluded to some math skills, and although I may not have the math skills as the finance minister, I can say with certainty that $700,000 amounts to much less than 1 percent of the government’s total operations and maintenance budget.
An extra $500 can make a real difference for many of our homeowners and families.
Can the minister indicate what criteria his department is using in determining whether a rebate program of this type is affordable and necessary?
I thank Mr. Hickes for his question.
He has obviously done his research. Perhaps he can have a copy of my briefing note.
Yes, indeed, a lot of Nunavummiut took advantage of the program and it was close to $700,000, perhaps a bit more.
There were a few applications that were denied.
The basic criterion would be if you were the homeowner, it would be the number one thing. Of course, we would have to look at the cost of fuel and that factor.
I am cognizant of our fiscal framework, what funds are available. I hope that if we can do it as a government, we would be able to fund within.
Again, I would have to go to the Financial Management Board and present them with all the options and all the information.
Speaker: Your final supplementary question, Mr. Hickes.
Will the minister commit to announcing his decision on this issue before the end of our current winter sitting, yes or no?
As Mr. Hickes knows well from following me over the years, I seldom commit to anything, not if I know absolutely that I can do it.
I will not commit, but I will assure yourself, your colleagues, and my colleagues that our department is working very hard to see if it’s possible. If it is, hopefully, there will be some good news.
Question 007 – 4(1): Revisions to Medical Travel Policy (Rumbolt)
Mr. Speaker, as I noted in my Member’s Statement, the Department of Health recently amended the Medical Travel Policy.
Can the minister provide an update on when the Medical Travel Policy was changed and why no effort was made to inform the public of changes to the policy?
The department introduced a revised Client Travel Policy and guidelines as of June 2013 and this is expiring March 31, 2018.
The travel policy is widely available on the website and the health centres are very much well aware of the travel policy.
Speaker: Your first supplementary question, Mr. Rumbolt.
I understand that the Medical Travel Policy was amended during the summer of 2013. Can the minister provide further detail on what specific changes were made to the policy and, if she cannot do so right now, would she be prepared to table a description of those changes in this House before the end of this sitting?
The purpose of revising the Client Travel Policy and guidelines is to ensure that client medical travel is applied consistently in each region across the territory.
Parts of the travel policy at this time and an escort, as an example, need to be authorized by a director when there is no need for a legal consent by a parent or guardian or a client who has a mental or physical condition of a nature that he or she is not able to travel without additional assistance or a unilingual Inuit language-speaking client requires travel to an approved centre where interpretive services are not available. The client only needs one of those criteria to be approved for an escort.
Speaker: Your final supplementary question, Mr. Rumbolt.
In comparing the old version of the Client Travel Policy to the new Medical Travel Policy, I note that the criteria for approving client escorts, especially for elders, no longer apply.
The new criteria give no special consideration to our elders and the focus has shifted to unilingual Inuit who are travelling to an approved centre where interpretive services are not available.
Can the minister provide a clear justification for this significant change to her department’s Medical Travel Policy?
To clarify that, a unilingual elder receives an escort if there are no interpretive services available at their destination.
Before the change, it was elders 65 and over who would automatically have had an escort.
I want to assure the member that if there’s an elder who is requiring a medical escort for any other reasons I specified earlier, such as not being in a physical condition or nature that they need additional assistance, and they are denied an escort, there is a provision for them to contact the Patient Relations Office to discuss the denial.
Member for Arviat South, Mr. Savikataaq.
Question 008 – 4(1): Hudson Bay Neighbours Regional Round Table (Savikataaq)
My questions are to the Minister of Community and Government Services.
In April of 2013, the Hudson Bay Neighbours Regional Round Table, which is co-chaired by the Minister of Community and Government Services, was held in Churchill.
The round table brings together leaders from the Nunavut and Manitoba governments, as well as a number of Kivalliq communities. My community of Arviat is one of them that participate at the round table.
Can the minister confirm when and where the Hudson Bay Neighbours Regional Round Table will be held this year if there is one?
Speaker: The Hon. Minister of Community and Government Services, Mr. Sammurtok.
Hon. Tom Sammurtok: Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
I understand that the next Hudson Bay round table is in the planning stage at this point. However, I am not able to confirm the dates or the location at this time.
Speaker: Your first supplementary question, Mr. Savikataaq.
One of the issues that were discussed at last year’s meeting of the Hudson Bay Neighbours Regional Round Table was the plan to develop a winter road between northern Manitoba and the Kivalliq.
At that time, there was a commitment made on the part of the Nunavut and Manitoba ministers to raise this issue with the federal government.
I’ll have to take that as notice, not having been involved in the previous Hudson Bay round table meetings. However, I will get back to the member with the information.
Speaker: The minister has taken the question as notice and I will move to the next member on my list.
Member for Aivilik, Mr. Mapsalak.
Question 009 – 4(1): Medical Travel Policy on Escorts (Mapsalak)
I was starting to think that you weren’t going to get to me. Mr. Speaker, I would like to direct my question to the Minister of Health.
Part of the question was already asked, but it’s a real concern and there are many questions about it. It’s always confusing as to how to answer about medical escorts for elders and also for people going for surgery.
They are sent to Winnipeg without an escort and then they just get sent home. There are a number of times that this has occurred.
Doctors refuse to perform surgery if the patient doesn’t have an escort.
I would like to ask the minister: who makes those decisions? Who is the actual person who makes the decisions? If that person is going to be sent south, who approves or denies the escorts?
May I get a reply on that, please.
Hon. Monica Ell (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I thank my colleague for asking that question.
The escort policy is for people going to medical travel.
In regard to your question, the nurses are the first ones to make a determination for referrals. They’re not the ones who make the decision on who is sent out for out-of-territory treatment. They do make recommendations, for example, when a person is to be sent out, the nurse will make a request if the patient needs an escort.
It is the three regional directors of health who approve requests for escorts.
Speaker: Your first supplementary question, Mr. Mapsalak.
There are situations like that where patients are just sent home without anything being done because they will not have anybody to help them after the surgery.
Maybe the people who put together the itineraries are aware of the patients’ needs for assistance down there. Are the medical travel people made aware of the patients’ needs?
When patients are to be sent out for medical treatment or to be sent back home, their needs are known and their travel itineraries are prepared accordingly.
As I stated earlier, in the new policy, if they fit into one of the criteria for having an escort, for example, if a person has physical problems and requires help, (interpretation ends) without additional assistance, (interpretation) that’s what it means when they need physical assistance and therefore require an escort.
The nurses make a determination on this and are required to report to the regional director to say whether or not the person needs an escort.
Speaker: Your final supplementary question, Mr. Mapsalak.
It has to be clarified. Whenever someone asks you a question, you don’t know what kind of answer to give them.
Do I understand that the nurses in charge are not responsible for the policy? So Rankin Inlet is the one that is approached for the Kivalliq region, not from the community then.
Community nurses or practitioners recommend escorts and directors of health are responsible for approving them.
Denials can be appealed to regional directors. Patient Relations also assists with complaints related to medical travel.
Question 010 – 4(1): Impact of 2014 Federal Budget on Nunavut (Enook)
Last month’s federal budget indicated that the Government of Canada will, and I quote, “work with territorial governments and local municipalities to develop transportation infrastructure in the North.”
Mr. Speaker, I firmly believe that adequate and appropriate marine infrastructure for Nunavut communities, especially for Pond Inlet, should clearly be classified as transportation infrastructure.