EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Now, a study was recently commissioned on sewage lagoons to be undertaken by Dalhousie University, as they are specialists in studying sewage lagoons.
This includes wastewater and how the lagoons can be self-cleaning via the design of sewage lagoons.
This study will encompass all communities, although some communities have had their infrastructure studied, and the study can only be undertaken in the summer months when the land has melted.
I cannot state at this time when this study would commence in [Grise Fiord] and when a new sewage lagoon could be constructed. However, this study will include all communities. Upon completion, it will become easier to determine which communities should be prioritized.
When we have the information about the type of sewage lagoon recommended, the project would commence.
Is this project eligible for federal funding under the Building Canada Plan?
Just recently, the Nunavut government announced the funding from the federal government of $51 million for Nunavut for a three-year term for quality of water and for sewage lagoon work.
At this time, there’s funding available for sewage lagoon and water qualities.
Therefore, we’re now doing a study in all Nunavut communities so that we can utilize the funding adequately.
At this time, we have not identified which communities will be receiving funding from the Building Canada Fund, which was just recently announced.
Although funding to address solid waste management at the landfill in Grise Fiord had been provided through the federal Gas Tax Fund in previous years, it is not clear to residents of the community if funding to address the sewage lagoon was part of this support.
Will the minister commit to writing a letter to the mayor and council of Grise Fiord on this issue?
We’re still using the Gas Tax Fund.
I believe the federal Gas Tax Fund is to be used for 10 years.
The funding we receive through that program is being utilized and we will continue to use it.
We’re looking at all the communities and the hamlet infrastructure capital plan.
Once the hamlet and the government review their capital plan, we look at the community’s capital plans, needs, and requirements. We do review the needs and requirements of each community. They will look into Grise Fiord again as to what their needs are for infrastructure and capital needs.
Question 332 – 4(3): Need for Early Childhood Education Facilities (Joanasie)
I would like to direct my question today to the Minister of Education.
Mr. Speaker, there is a great need for early childhood education across Nunavut. Many Nunavummiut are left to fend for themselves and rely on family or friends for babysitting.
It is well recognized that early childhood education provides important developmental support for children entering the school system.
I would like to ask the minister if he can provide an update on what steps his department has taken to support the opening of new early childhood facilities in Nunavut and how many have been opened in the past two years.
I also thank the member for that question. I concur with my colleague’s assessment of the importance of this programming. With respect to preschool aged children, we also have to be diligent in looking after their needs here in Nunavut.
What I can state at this time is that within Nunavut, there are 49 licensed facilities listed as daycares in Nunavut, but out of these 49 licences, 16 licences are not in use as the facilities are closed.
In adding up the various types of early childhood programs in use, there are currently seven daycares using the (interpretation ends) Aboriginal Head Start preschool programs, (interpretation) which are specific to aboriginal groups. To reiterate, there are seven daycares funded under this program.
Out of the total, 27 daycares operate on a daily basis and eight facilities are only open for part of the day. Also, one licence holder operates a daycare out of their home in Nunavut and six facilities use the after school programs made available after school closes.
In total, as per my previous comments, there are 49 licensed facilities here in Nunavut. Further, regarding the numbers of children eligible under the program, we have 1,044 spaces available for preschool aged children.
To reiterate, there are 1,044 spaces available currently.
However, as per my early references to the 49 licensed facilities, it includes preschool aged children on the waiting list as there are numerous children waiting for openings. We also check these figures as part of our review on the numbers of children on the list.
As an example, the total numbers in Nunavut encompass 905 children on the waiting list. Now, if I were to break it down further, 199 of the children are newborn or infants and this includes 580 children just shy of school age. This includes 126 children who have attained school age of five years and over.
This is the breakdown of the numbers overall.
Specific to Iqaluit, we have numerous names on the list as well.
There are 758 names collected that want to be put on the waiting list.
To break it down a bit further, 146 are infants, 486 children are of preschool age, and 126 children in total who have attained school age, but are still on the waiting list.
However, in the past year, the federal government made an announcement about children-specific programming, particularly funds to provide preschool programming, that they were going to introduce specific to (interpretation ends) early childhood education. (interpretation) This is what we are focusing on at this time.
Due to the importance of this program, we are looking at alternative support mechanisms that we can provide from the new program that the federal government announced.
Mr. Joanasie (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also thank the minister for his proper response and detailed information with the numbers.
Mr. Speaker, under the current Education Act, district education authorities have an obligation to provide early childhood programming in Nunavut’s communities.
Can the minister clearly describe how his department supports the DEAs in meeting this objective and how many new early childhood daycare facilities are planned to be opened over the next two years?
DEAs are allocated funding annually specific to daycare centres for early childhood education. Our legislated requirements outline these funds and we provide the funding that the DEA will utilize.
However, we have also found that most DEA boards don’t take advantage of these funds, perhaps due to the lack of clear understanding of the operational requirements.
Sometimes on an annual basis, the funding has lapsed due to not being expended, so it returns to the Department of Education coffers.
Now, just this past year in 2015, a division called the (interpretation ends) Early Childhood Division (interpretation) was created to provide support to the DEAs in operating daycare centres in order to improve access to these facilities.
We have created two positions. For the upcoming 2016-17 fiscal year, we have identified funding specific to early childhood programming and daycare facilities.
Approximately $5,261,000 for 2016-17 has been identified for this sector.
Nonetheless, we have to also know that the Department of Education has no role in constructing facilities for the programs, as the onus is on the community to identify a facility that can be converted and opened as a facility wherein the department would provide O&M funding for this building.
We do not have the mandate to establish facilities. However, the community itself would have to identify a building and we would provide O&M funding for these early childhood programs.
I had a last question to ask, but he referenced the subject I wanted to ask about, so I would now like to ask him this question.
We are all aware that we have a shortage of daycare spaces and, as the minister stated earlier, there are over 900 names on the waiting list. Even though that is the case, the government provides funding for O&M, but they will not provide buildings for daycare centres.
I wonder if funding could be set aside on the issues I mentioned related to people turning to family and friends to provide babysitting services due to the lack of space at the daycare centres.
I wonder if specific funding for this scenario could be set aside to assist the DEAs in supporting people who have no choice but to use family members to provide this service.
Hon. Paul Quassa (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also thank the member for asking about this further.
I am quite pleased to announce that recently as well as last year, there were two new daycare facilities opened specifically for early childhood programming.
The first one is for French families and hopefully I don’t masticate the pronunciation, which is the Centre de les Petites Nanooks. I hope it was understandable.
This was the first facility that opened to provide this service to our French residents. Further, the Pururvik facility in Pond Inlet was opened and it was quite pleasurable to note that this initiative was able to be completed.
As per my earlier statement, yes, private homes can also be used as daycare facilities. I stated before that I only know of one example called a (interpretation ends) family day home, (interpretation) which is someone’s home that’s used as a daycare. That is allowable in our laws.
I can tell my colleague that there is another Act, the (interpretation ends) Child Daycare Act. (interpretation) We are starting to review it to see how the district education authorities can take over the responsibility of creating and managing daycares.
That’s what we’re starting to look at.
We know that they can’t find buildings or spaces for daycare.
We’re reviewing that other legislation where we can allow more daycares to be opened for the benefit of children before they start going to school.
Question 333 – 4(3): What is Being Done to Curb Smoking in Nunavut?
(Angnakak)
Mr. Speaker, the most recent Statistics Canada report on smoking shows that, in 2014, Nunavut had the highest smoking rate in Canada at 62 percent, nearly twice that of the NWT, which had the second highest rate in Canada.
I note that our neighbours to the south in Nunavik and in the province of Quebec have brought forward changes to their legislation which will further restrict the public areas in which people can smoke.
Can the minister provide an update on whether the Government of Nunavut has considered bringing forward any legislative amendments to help curb smoking in Nunavut?
It is said that we have the highest percentage of smokers and tobacco users in Nunavut and that is worrisome, especially for those people who abuse tobacco and cigarettes.  There’s not much work being done with legislation.
However, it is being done more through the work spaces. My department is trying to come up with new initiatives on that. We’re expecting to do a pilot project soon at the Qikiqtani General Hospital to designate a smoking area and ban smoking at the front of the hospital.
Statistics show that 9 out of 10 pregnant women in Nunavut smoke.
Smoking can affect the health of an unborn child; it will.
Can the minister provide an update on what initiatives are currently in place to help women quit smoking when they are pregnant?
Pregnant women and people in general who smoke too much are our targets, including underage smokers.
Those are all of our targets for the pamphlet campaign and TV ads. If you watch Igalaaq, we have advertisements on that TV show.
People who want help are shown where they can get help. They just have to indicate that they need help.
It’s good to hear of those initiatives that the GN is doing.
Speaking about some of those initiatives, the Department of Health promoted the “NU Quits” campaign to encourage Nunavummiut to quit smoking.
Can the minister provide an update on the success of this campaign and whether it will resume in the future or not?
This campaign has been continued and new reading material is being developed.
I was recently informed that these materials will be made available. Further, the new site will be delineated to outline the smoking area outside of the Baffin Regional Hospital on June 30. This area will be highlighted at that time, Mr. Speaker.
Question 334 – 4(3): New Family Resource Worker Position for Sanikiluaq (Rumbolt)
Mr. Speaker, during the winter sitting, this House approved $837,000 in the Department of Family Services’ 2016-17 O&M budget to establish seven new positions for family resource workers in a number of communities, including my community of Sanikiluaq.
Can the minister provide an update on whether the new family resource worker positions have been advertised and, if so, at what stage of the hiring process they are?
Minister of Family Services, Mr. George Kuksuk.
Mr. Speaker, with respect to the member’s question about the status of these positions and whether they have been filled, I still haven’t received the status updates.
I can commit to looking into that matter and inform him of my findings later.
I’ll try my next question and maybe he will get back with this information later too because it’s along the same lines.
During our Committee of the Whole debate on the department’s 2016-17 budget, the minister and his officials indicated that once the new family resource workers were hired, they would be given up to six months of training.
Can the minister provide some detail on what specific types of training will be provided and where the training will be delivered?
Speaker (interpretation): Thank you. (interpretation ends) The Hon. Minister of Family Services, Mr. Kuksuk.
As I stated before with respect to the opening of these positions under my department, whether the positions are filled, and related to the subject of my colleague’s question about training, we have different types of workers and we will provide the funding to conduct the training.
This will commence first with our office workers or rather (interpretation ends) our frontline staff (interpretation) who will receive the training where they are managing particular roles.
There are different types of training that we manage.
The issues the member raised in his question will require further review of the job duties. Once I have been briefed fully by my departmental officials, I can provide that information later on.
Question 335 – 4(3): Medical Transient Centre in Churchill (Sammurtok, T)
(interpretation ends) Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank the minister for responding to the question that I posed during our previous sitting regarding the medical transient centre in Churchill. As the minister will recall, I asked why we operate a medical boarding home in Churchill.
Her response indicated that the Department of Health is undertaking a review of the use of this facility. Can the minister provide an update on the status of this review and when we might expect to receive the results of the review?
This review is still ongoing, so I can’t say exactly when it would be completed.
However, the Iglualuk Boarding Home in Chesterfield Inlet is still usable, especially when people are sent out for medical treatment, such as dental appointments, or in the event that connections cannot be made from Rankin Inlet to Churchill due to flight cancellations or delays.
Sometimes the aircraft has to stop in Churchill, where patients board at the facility awaiting better weather prior to continuing.
I appreciate that it takes time to undertake reviews of the operations of facilities and programs.
Can the minister confirm whether or not her department’s review of the use of the medical transient centre in Churchill - I wish that the facility was in Chesterfield Inlet - will also compare the costs of transporting clients and their escorts to Churchill to receive oral health care to the costs of establishing and operating a full-time dental health clinic in Rankin Inlet?
I did say Chesterfield Inlet, but since I have not practised interpreting lately, I apologize for making that error.
The community has an existing hospital and transient centre, and patients for the dental appointments are not just from the Kivalliq, as sometimes they are sent down from other parts of Nunavut to attend to that dental facility.
With respect to the work ongoing in Rankin Inlet, I believe I spoke to it earlier this week when you directed questions to me about the subject.
It is still being deliberated on, as my officials negotiate funding arrangements with Health Canada. Negotiations are ongoing with the department on these issues, but we are currently required to identify the purpose of the funds being requested and the number of communities being served.
Mr. Tom Sammurtok (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. (interpretation ends) The minister’s previous response to my question on the use of the medical transient centre in Churchill indicated that the facility is also used to accommodate clients who are stranded while travelling to and from Winnipeg.
Can the minister confirm whether the results of the review will include information on the numbers of clients who are stranded during travel to and from Winnipeg and how often this occurs?
Yes, these are the types of issues that can be the subject of a comprehensive review. I will discuss what is happening in regard to this review with my officials.
Question 336 – 4(3): Rocket Launch Debris (Enook)
Mr. Speaker, I wish to direct my question and a request for clarification to the Minister of Community and Government Services.
The basis of my line of question revolves around the Minister’s Statement announced earlier today about rocket debris possibly landing in our waters.
I would like more information on this issue.
Lancaster Sound and the North Water Polynya comprise one body of water, which we are all aware of, and it is recognized globally as a place of high biodiversity.
With one of the richest ocean environments in the entire Arctic region of the Earth, it is inhabited by diverse species of animals.
Although I note it states here that “the debris will fall outside of Canada’s territorial waters,” to me personally, this body of water is one and the same.
Even if it lands outside of our boundaries, due to the heavy currents prevalent up there that people should already be aware, any pollutants that land there will travel into Canadian waters and to Lancaster Sound. If any hazardous materials were in the water, they would be transported into our waters.
This is especially disconcerting to me, so I want to ask a question regarding the communities that are closest to this projected falling debris.
For the information of the minister, the North Water Polynya and Lancaster Sound are recognized globally for their rich biodiversity.
Due to this recognition, just recently in April, the High Arctic communities of Grise Fiord and Pond Inlet were visited by representatives of the Inuit Circumpolar Council.
This working group was investigating how the North Water Polynya and Lancaster Sound would be used and protected.
That is how important this body of water is, as it is recognized globally.
My first question is: when was our government first notified about this event that may occur on June 4 or 5?
I thank the member for bringing up his question and concerns because the people of Nunavut, I’m sure, are all concerned and interested to hear about this rocket fuel canister that will fall.
As the member stated earlier and as I stated, it will likely fall out of Canadian waters, so we have no jurisdiction over it.
As to the member of when we found out, the federal government just informed us, I believe, two days ago that this was occurring, so we haven’t had much notice either.
You indicated that you heard about it two days ago. The closest communities to the landing site are Grise Fiord and Pond Inlet.
You have government liaison officers in the communities. Did you at least inform the two closest communities of the event that’s about to happen?
We notified Grise Fiord and Resolute Bay, the two smallest communities, this morning.
The reason we didn’t notify anybody earlier was that we had nothing really to notify them of. We want to get as much information as we can from the federal government before we tell people.
If we just tell the communities, “There’s a rocket falling close to your area,” they wouldn’t know more and there would be more questions asked.
We wanted to get as much information as we could from the federal government and that’s the reason for the delay in informing the communities, to get as much information so that if we were asked questions, then we would have answers.
They have been informed that a fuel canister is predicted to fall 158 kilometres from Grise Fiord.
That’s where it’s predicted to fall. Their predictions are usually very accurate.
Yesterday, I listened to the radio where the HTO chairperson of the High Arctic community of Grise Fiord was speaking, actually it was last night on the Toronto CBC News where they stated that there had been no notifications about this event.
I believe it would have been beneficial to at least inform the members or even notify us that the government is trying to determine the facts about the event.
When you hear about events indirectly, it really causes consternation amongst community members about what exactly is predicted to happen.
When you hear from other news outlets or countries without any notification from our own government about events, perhaps it is just for consideration now, but sometimes it seems our communities are the last to be informed by our government whenever anything newsworthy occurs, at least sometimes that is the situation.
Now to move to my last question, as it has to be the last now, let me ask about the North Water Polynya. It rarely freezes over due to the heavy currents prevalent in the waters. How exactly will we know where the space debris returning to Earth will land in the ocean or if it lands on sea ice?
As per my earlier statement, the North Water Polynya changes on a daily basis. Would we be informed about the debris landing on sea ice? That would be very concerning to people.
How will we know where it lands?
Nunavut doesn’t have the facilities to observe stuff falling from space, but we will be working and communicating closely with the Government of Canada to keep us informed of where the debris will fall.
If it should fall on land or on ice, which is not likely, it will be communicated to us and there will be contingency plans to clean it up.
As I stated earlier, it’s predicted to fall in the ocean.
This is a Russian rocket and we have very little control of it, but I agree with the number that it’s toxic and hazardous and it shouldn’t fall in Nunavut waters. Nunavut is not a place to dump hazardous waste.
If a ship was dumping hazardous waste, then they would be in trouble. Whether it’s dumped from space or from the ocean, it’s still hazardous material.
We are monitoring this closely.
There’s not much we can do, but we will monitor it and we will be working closely with the federal government to make sure that things fall into place.
Question 337 – 4(3): Public Consultations on Education Act Amendments (Okalik)
He said that they are listening and that they extended the consultation period.
That is good news and we want them to have a full opportunity to be heard.
We all know that throughout Nunavut at this time of the year, people are drying meat, gathering eggs and other things.
Board members are not employees and there’s no doubt that they’re busy with family events because springtime is family time.
Can the minister let us know if they can defer the consultation tour to the fall instead of this spring?
Hon. Paul Quassa (interpretation): Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I also thank the member for requesting further information on this matter.
As per my earlier statement about the extension of the dates, it has been added and we have thought of extending the consultation period to September 2, 2016.
Part of the reason for this is to ensure that our residents are made fully aware of the issues and we need feedback from the public. Furthermore, within the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, we have to comply with Article 32 as part of our requirements.
In June, the Department of Education will just be informing the public about the consultation process.