EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I just have three questions for the Minister of Environment on I-4, Corporate Management.
On September 3, 2007, issues of News/North included a Request for Proposals from the Department of Environment to conduct an organizational review of your department.
According to your department’s business plan, a contractor has now been hired to undertake an internal review. Who was awarded the contract and do you anticipate that the results of this review will change your department’s organizational structure, mandate, or research allocations?
This is to be completed by March 31, 2008 and hopefully there will be some improvements within the organizational review of the Department of Environment.
Once it’s completed, then I’ll have to bring it to Cabinet and then we will find out what changes will be required.
Thank you, Minister. (interpretation) Please feel welcome. (interpretation ends) What is your department experiencing with its current organizational structure and mandate and what changes do you, as minister, want to see?
The wildlife section is where we would like to see most of the improvements and we need to review that. The structure can be improved with regards to wildlife staff.
This is my last question to the minister and thanks for answering that question.
When do you anticipate the reviews to be completed and will you commit to sharing the information with the standing committee once it is completed?
As I stated earlier, it should be completed by the end of March and then I’ll take it to Cabinet. From there, we should complete it and have a report by that time, and we will provide a copy to the committee.
Chairman (Mr. Evyagotailak)(interpretation): Thank you, Minister. (interpretation ends) Questions.
Welcome, minister and your staff.
I have a general question and perhaps I’ll speak in English.
(interpretation ends) As the minister may be aware, I wrote a letter to his predecessor, Mr. Netser, last year regarding concerns that have been raised to me by the residents of Arctic Bay.
As the minister is aware, sport hunting of polar bears is a major source of income for my community. I have received concerns regarding the ability of the local HTO to allocate tags to the HTO itself, rather than to establish commercial outfitters.
The minister’s reply to my letter, which was dated October 24, 2007 stated, “While the HTO does not, at present, have a big game outfitting license, if they apply for one, there appears to be no reason that the license would not be issued. Therefore, there is no legal impediment to them getting into the big game outfitting business.”
Can the minister indicate to me if the HTO has applied and received a big game outfitting license?
The Department of Economic Development and Transportation issues the licenses, so we would have to ask them, but the HTOs manage the polar bears in the communities on their own. The HTO is given a quota from NWMB, so it’s not up to the community how many they can harvest.
I recognize that MLAs and the minister do not have authority to interfere in a number of matters under the jurisdiction of HTOs. However, under Nunavut’s new Wildlife Act, HTOs are required to establish a dispute resolution mechanism.
Can the minister indicate how the GN can help ensure that all HTOs and their members are aware of this requirement?
We would probably have to go through the courts if we were to deal with that.
This will be my last question. (interpretation ends) On March 13, 2006, Minister Akesuk tabled a joint report by the GN and NTI on their review of the Harvesters Support Program.
Can the minister commit to tabling in the House an update on the status of implementing the recommendations in the report?
I will table it once it’s completed. We want to work closely with NTI, as I stated in my opening remarks, “to reduce duplications in our respective programs.” Once they are completed, I will definitely table them in the House.
Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $3,380,000.
I-5.
I just have a very short question for the minister.
In your department’s main estimates for 2008-09, there’s a decrease of over $1 million from last year and most of that appears to be in Contract Services.
Why has the department’s budget been reduced by $1 million and will there be any cuts in the main estimates this year for programs and services?
Chairman (Mr. Barnabas)(interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Mapsalak.
Part of the reason for that decrease is that we were given $5 million under the Northern Strategy and we have utilized that funding for proposed projects. Our programs and services will remain the same.
The GN’s latest Inuit Employment Plan statistics for March 31, 2007 indicates that your department had five vacancies in its Igloolik office.
What is the status of filling your department’s vacant positions to date?
I’ll have my deputy respond to that.
In our Igloolik office, they were filled for a while but there are now vacancies, not just in Igloolik but also some in divisions such as parks, environmental protection, conservation and others.
Some employees have left but at this time, I can’t give you exact numbers on the vacancies.
Mr. Mapsalak (interpretation): Are they going to be filled?
Yes, we will definitely try and fill those positions.
The positions have to be advertised and they have to go through Human Resources.
We will try and fill positions within the Department of Environment as much as possible in the future.
Nunavut’s new Wildlife Act was passed in 2003 and the regulations have been worked on for quite a while now. They have been negotiating for a long time but the organizations haven’t come to an agreement yet. What is the status of your department’s work on the regulations under the new Wildlife Act?
Have all the outstanding disagreements been resolved?
We work with the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board and we are still working on this issue.
Hopefully the regulations of the new Wildlife Act will be completed by this year. We will have to work with the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board so that it can be completed this year.
Does the minister know how long they will be working on the regulations?
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): I will have my deputy respond to see exactly what the status is.
The regulations that the government has to work on are completed and where they require decisions, last year, in the spring time and the fall, they were being worked on by the Nunavut Wildlife Management Board.
We didn’t deal with them all at once, but we worked on them for a month here and a month there.
Being that that is the case, I believe they were on the last stretch of making decisions and we expect that they will give those recommendations to the minister hopefully within 30 days. Once they are given to the minister, then he will be given 90 days to see whether or not he agrees with them because he will have to make this decision.
We expect it very soon because as long as no other obstacles come along, we were hoping that it would be enacted on July 1, 2008 but it’s kind of close. Hopefully the regulations will be completed by late summer or fall.
Mr. Mapsalak (interpretation): Thank you, Minister and Mr. Awa, for that answer.
Why is there a decrease of $745,000 in 2008-09 for Wildlife Research?
We are going to be looking for more funding from the implementation funding in the agreement to do research on wildlife. So we will be looking for assistance from them to do more wildlife research.
Do I understand that the funding for research is from a third party?
Yes, some of the funding comes from a third party and from the government. They allocate a certain amount of money in the area of about $939,000. We should also get help from others for about $3.1 million in total that we use for a year.
Lastly, when I was speaking in my opening comments, I mentioned the need for an elders’ committee. The Wildlife Act indicates that the elders’ committee will be in existence.
Has the committee been appointment yet?
Yes, we have more names now.
At the beginning, there were only a few that were given to us, so they have since added more names to the committee but not too many. Some of the hamlet councils have not submitted names yet, but I think it will be finished very soon. We are reviewing them and the appointments will have to be given to Cabinet.
I have no specific questions to ask, but welcome and breathe deeply.
For the past two years or so, we have heard that the musk oxen populations we hunt near the communities of Arviat and Baker Lake in the Kivalliq region were found practically everywhere and to have significantly increased over the past 20 years.
Hunters are seeing them everywhere and passing quite a few herds.
There are zones for musk ox hunting areas that are allotted numbers from MX 1 to 20.
Have you considered removing these management zones as per suggestions from hunters?
Have you ever considered that option?
We are currently working on this issue with the NWMB and the Kivalliq Regional Wildlife Organization to discuss our options regarding the musk oxen.
To that end, we are working with NWMB and the RWOs on this matter.
It’s obvious that you’re working with them but I was trying to ask what you have done with the musk ox management zones to date.
So what’s happening? That was my question.
We have to wait for NWMB’s recommendations on the issue we submitted, so it’s hard to say what will happen at this time.
Once we get the recommendations from the NWMB, then we will have a better understanding of the situation.
In my first line of questioning, I asked this question: are you working on this issue or has nothing been done at all?
As I stated earlier, we are working on this matter and our staff is proceeding with it.
With respect to the affected MLAs’ constituencies, we will clarify the situation as it relates to musk oxen in their areas.
I have another question under the same area on page I-5; I think it’s the last item on that page but not about musk ox.
We heard good news in Iqaluit that they’re building a bridge across the Sylvia Grinnell River.
Have you started the planning process and the various issues related to having a bridge in place, or have you identified issues when people start crossing the bridge?
When people use machines for harvesting, such as ATVs, crossing through the bridge, maybe Inuit already use that land and is the habitat used by wildlife to bear their young, such as shorelines for nesting birds and denning areas for foxes and wolves inhabit.
As most of you are aware, in our community, our land is very flat and people can use ATVs in practically all of the areas. There was a considerable amount of degradation of the tundra prior to trails being established.
Considering these concerns, what steps have you taken to start working on this and is anybody working on this to date?
Prior to any work on the bridge, we also have to keep in mind that there’s a proposed park in that area and it is in the proposed bridge area.
Our officials and staff will have to confer with the impacted residents of Iqaluit and tourists who want to use the bridge to visit the proposed park should it proceed to park status.
We are also trying to deal with those issues and further, we know that Inuit will have issues with environmental degradation since they do not want to contaminate their lands and our department will also keep those considerations in mind to the harvesters and they will take care of their wildlife.
This proposed project is one that many communities are interested in as it will be a project that can become a model for other communities and regions, especially when it proceeds and no one gets impacted detrimentally and one in which all of the concerns of the people are remedied when they are constructing the bridge. It is not that far off where the development will occur. The funds have already been allocated and it is set aside for only a couple of years.
This project will occur in the short-term future.
Which organizations are you going to be working with? Organizations such as the City of Iqaluit, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, NTI or NPC will have to be involved. Which organizations and how many of them will you be working with on this project?
Once you have involved all of these organizations, the consultation process will become quite long and the consultations may end up taking a lot of time.
So which organizations have you started working with on this proposed project?
If any of these organizations are going to be indicated, or if the waters and lands will be impacted, as well as the environment, then we would have to work with the Department of the Environment, as well as with the Nunavut Water Board, and we would also have to include all federal government departments that may be impacted so that this project can proceed smoothly.
We are just starting to work on collaborating with the affected organizations.
As well, we will have to adhere to all of the policies and related legislation also to review the bridge development project here in Iqaluit.
It’s only Monday, but we are shooting the breeze, so to speak.
I just have three questions and my first question is in reference to the $745,000 decrease in 2008-09 and it was a question that was posed earlier.
You stated there will be a corresponding transfer of $939,000 from the implementation fund, some of it from the federal government.
I think Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated stated in their suit against the federal government that the implementation process for funding is extremely difficult to access.
How will your department deal with this issue and how easy is it for your department to access this funding?
Our employees in Nunavut also find it difficult to access this funding from the implementation funds but they keep applying. It requires consistent follow-up by our officials and that’s how things stand at this time.
In 2008-09, do you think you’re going to be able to get those funds, and if not, will you have to get the $745,000 back to the budget through a supplementary appropriation?
If we don’t get those funds, we will have to look for funds within our existing budget.
I recall that DOE is planning a caribou study in the Mary River area in order to get population estimates.
If a mine is developed, a population count on the caribou will be undertaken to see if there’s a decrease or an increase in numbers.
In North Baffin, around Pond Inlet, Arctic Bay, and Igloolik, our caribou have migrated out of our lands and we have very few left.
Do I sound like Ikkarnaq now?
What if the numbers are too small?
Are you going to ensure that the biologists know these caribou migrate and they never stay in one spot?
They move, sometimes after 10 years, sometimes after 20 years. The biologists seem to only know zero, but it’s not over a nine-year period.
Will the data be disseminated to the communities?
Today, the caribou are not in that area.
I don’t want the people to state in 2008, with the mine developed, that there are no caribou around Mary River. Can you state that they are in their cycle? But I do not want to convey that to the mining company.
Once we have the information, we will find out and I will have my deputy make a supplement to my response.
It’s true. We will be collaborating with the company on a caribou study in North Baffin.
First of all, I want to say nobody recalls when the last caribou study was completed and we have no numbers to work with for Baffin Island.
They recently did a study in the Keewatin and Kitikmeot and on the different herds, but I don’t believe that there has been a recent caribou study on Baffin Island.
Once we start doing the study in North Baffin, we will be using the advice of the elders from that area.
We would like to know what the population was like in the 1920s, 1930s, 1940s, and 1950s.
We want a general idea from the elders of the caribou migration patterns, what years there was a huge influx of caribou, and what years of decline they recall.
We will have to use that as a beginning to gather our data and even after the mine is developed, we will have to do another caribou study in North Baffin and other areas.
Mr. Chairman, my response to the MLA is that we don’t have any numbers to go by at this point.
On the same subject, but it’s not about surveys or anything, I think the conservation officers know that during the summer, I think there are going to be four or five ships that will go through Milne Inlet to take some ore out for sampling. There’s a road now that can be used for vehicles in Milne Inlet.
Do you have any environmental protection plans in order to protect the land and sea?
We have conservation officers as well as park wardens in Pond Inlet. Are you going to be increasing the number of officers to ensure that the mining company adheres to the protection plan?
We will work with DFO and the Coast Guard if they are up around that area and it would be beneficial to utilize their expertise.
We have to work closely with the federal government to ensure that the project proceeds with the proper permitting, the land and sea are protected, and we collaborate on certain matters.
Mr. Arvaluk (interpretation): This will be my last question. However, it is contingent on a good response from the minister.
Is the Nunavut Government going to be managing the lands to protect the land from pollution from Mary River down to Milne Inlet? Is the Nunavut Government going to be responsible for the management? From Milne Inlet down to the water, it would be the responsibility of the federal government.
The reasoning behind this is from Mary River down to Milne Inlet, most of the roads are dangerous, even heavy equipment can topple over and it goes alongside the river which is very dangerous.
The river flows all the way from Mary River down to Milne Inlet and it flows down to Kangiqlumajuq and there’s a road that goes right along the side of the river.
Is the Nunavut Government going to be responsible for the management and protection of that land or is it going to be the federal government?
That’s Crown land, so it’s the responsibility of the federal government.
The regional Inuit associations, I’m sure, will want to be part and parcel of that because there are Inuit owned lands around that area.
The Nunavut Government is going to ensure that the land is protected, and the federal government and the Inuit organizations are going to be more or less responsible for that area.
Mr. Arvaluk: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation) If that’s the case, are you going to make sure that you tell the federal government to have qualified environmental protection officers working around that area?
We will definitely make sure that the federal government has conservation officers in that area and we will want to have our staff checking around that area to make sure that the environment is protected and that the regulations or rules are being adhered to by the company. So we will work closely with the federal government to protect that area.
Mr. Chairman, I have a question regarding polar bears.
First of all, I would like to welcome the minister. He is now back to his portfolio. Welcome back, Simon Awa and John.
First of all, I have a question for the minister about polar bears. The Members of the Legislative Assembly would like to know exactly what is happening with polar bears. We don’t have experts anymore or they never make an appearance.
My question is: what are your thought on this?
I believe we are going to be having our next session in May. I will ensure that my employees make a presentation on the polar bears, the management areas, and after further discussions with the members, we will set up a date and time for this update.
Even if you give a short report on an update, there are numerous concerns we have regarding the polar bears.
We only hear the activists’ side of the story out there in the global world. For that reason, we should ask our elders in our communities what they have to say regarding the polar bears. I’m not only thinking about the polar bear quota, I’m also thinking about the point of view on the polar bears at the global level.
My question is regarding a story that was on the CBC News and all the major national newspapers. We heard that the polar bear is a threatened species, the United States has been trying to designate the polar bear under the U.S. legislation for a year now, and they were supposed to consult with all affected parties from anywhere.
In January, the Act was supposed to be passed and this has been postponed.
I want to ask the minister what he thinks about the postponement. (interpretation ends) Thank you.
We’re anticipating the designation, but until the United States makes a statement regarding the polar bears, there is not much we can do.
After they make the statement, we will have a better understanding on areas requiring improvement but it would be better if we don’t make any changes. We are looking forward to finding out whether or not the polar bear is going to be listed as a threatened species and then we will take it from there.
The previous minister went to the United States to oppose the action of having the polar bears designated as a threatened species.
What is your view on polar bears being placed on the threatened species list?
I would prefer that they’re not listed as threatened and we would oppose it if they do so. I would like to see them not listed.
It’s very difficult to say why they’re taking so long. To respond to this, it’s been two months at the very least and I would prefer that they not be listed as threatened species.
I believe that this is a very important issue to be discussed further by organizations and I believe that the HTOs and wildlife organizations should be briefed more.
With respect to the United States, if they list it as a threatened species, right now, it’s before the courts by the animal rights activists who want them listed and it has been delayed three times, so the people would have to be charged every time an individual breaks the law. The United States would put them into court right away and they will go to the very end.
It’s possible that Canada might follow the United States listing and our minister already went to the United States. Are you now working to make sure that Canada doesn’t follow the same listing as the United States, and if you haven’t started already, why not?
What have you done to date on that?
The Honourable John Baird is in Iqaluit. I met with the minister and had dinner with him, the Premier, Mr. Netser and Ms. Brown.
We discussed the listing of the polar bear issue and asked him not to support the polar bears being listed under threatened species. It would be better to correspond formally with the Honourable John Baird to make our position known.
Mr. Curley: Thank you. (interpretation) They’re very difficult to work with. It’s already evident in the United States that if polar bears are listed as threatened, they cannot do any oil exploration in the sea, especially in their habitat.
The wildlife managers prohibit any exploration where it affects polar bears, especially their breeding and denning sites on the land.
It seems Canada will eventually follow.
There are many laws we must follow and this is in respect to wildlife habitat, whether it is a territorial park. Even if it is not designated as a wildlife area, the minister has the jurisdiction to stop all activity. If the polar bear’s habitat is identified, then they can no longer exploit the minerals or land in that area.
There are numerous breeding sites for polar bears in Nunavut that would be impacted.
For that reason, I believe Canada should proceed expeditiously.
Hon. Olayuk Akesuk (interpretation): Yes, we will continue to press hard on this issue and send correspondence regarding the matter to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. If the correspondence identifies any issues, then we will work hard to deal with it.
We will proceed with the necessary work and I informed them that we would work with them.
This is an urgent matter and it would be prudent to inform them prior to their decision about the negative impact on Nunavut’s economy and Nunavut is not as developed as provinces like Ontario.