EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
Would that lower the costs, especially when you look at the number of contracts with the Department of Health and Social Services?
Can you clarify that for me, Mr. Chairman?
We are trying to develop ways of trying to streamline some of those processes.
One of the things that we are trying to do is reviewing the whole issue of how many people we are sending out of the territory for care, how much we are spending sending people out, and how much we are spending on an annual basis to have them cared out of the territory.
All of that is being reviewed during the development of a residential care strategy.
As well, we have plans of trying to move most of these services to Nunavut where we can look after our own people here and move some of those economic opportunities for people to work at these facilities as well as bid on some of these contracts that may come up.
We do have a long list of residential care contracts, a whole list of them. Again, it’s on a reactive basis.
When referrals are made, we do have staff call around to see who is available and where we can place clients and we send them there.
A long-term strategy of the government, I think, at least for the department, is to try and find a way of caring for our own people here.
The continuing care facilities in Gjoa Haven and Igloolik are a good example of how we can repatriate some of our residents back to Nunavut.
I don’t have any other names on my list here.
I knew that was going to happen. Mr. Elliott.
The Department of EIA has contracted out a review on the social safety net, while government funding has also been allocated to work on the poverty reduction action plan.
How will the Department of Health and Social Services be involved in these activities?
I think all of the departments pretty well are putting pieces of their ideas into the whole poverty reduction stuff.
I know that there is an interdepartmental committee, in one committee aspect, chaired by my deputy minister, Mr. Campbell. In some cases, each department is asked to pretty well take the lead in funding. In this case, we have done that with the school breakfast program.
We increased that allocation. For further information, I’ll have the deputy minister comment on that because he is still chairing that group on behalf of the whole government.
Just to add on to the minister’s response, we do have a deputy ministers’ committee called the Quality of Life Committee.
The minister is correct, I chair that committee.
It involves various departments; the Department of Education, the Department of Justice, EIA, and Economic Development as well is involved as part of the committee.
Each of those departments has a responsibility to develop their own initiatives under different banners on the agenda. One of them is the social safety net.
Our DMs group is supposed to monitor the progress and provide some initial direction to staff in developing this on what we do in government, as well as consultation at the community level.
The same process is used with the poverty reduction. The other agenda item on there is the Suicide Prevention Strategy.
So there are a number of social agenda items that are discussed at our deputy ministers’ group, and they facilitate the process to make sure that there is coordination and integration among departments to make sure that we’re not running over each other and duplicating processes.
Is there two-way communication going on here?
By two-way, I mean your representatives who go and work on these committees, do they report back to and obtain information from social workers and mental health workers to provide the frontline workers’ opinions on how this is going to affect and come up with a very good plan?
Do they go both ways?
I don’t know exactly who they consult with, but I think when the government sent out a broad policy to reduce poverty and to also try and develop programs and priorities for those vulnerable individuals, as well as the youth, and so on, the government, through the Tamapta program, the broad statement, and the Qanukkanniq initiative, is focusing on areas that have been underfunded, not particularly funded by the government.
Therefore, these departmental committees coordinate each other to ensure that they’re not creating a duplicate of existing programs.
Each department, like our case, we then have had to request for additional funding from the Financial Management Board to at least implement that part of the school breakfast program, our contribution towards that.
The deputy may have further information on exactly how the consultation initiative works out.
Under the deputy ministers’ committee, the Quality of Life Committee, we do have various committees, as well inter-departmental committees, established.
Those committees are chaired by the appropriate department leading that initiative.
They do supposedly go away, in common terms, and do the consultations across the department, across the government to make sure that the frontline people are also consulted on some of these initiatives that are being addressed at the government level.
There are some initiatives like the poverty reduction process, which is more a public engagement process. That also is happening through the consultation engagement process and the Department of Economic Development and Transportation is leading that side, but the coordination of this is through the Quality of Life Committee.
In the department’s business plan, on page 131, the second bullet talks about developing an electronic case management system for social services.
I’m wondering if you could give us a bit of an update as to how that system is going to work.
The Department of Education has been working on a new case management system for their income support workers and is very hopeful that it will be a cost-saving measure and a time-saving measure for their income support workers.
Is that the same idea in terms of what will be happening with our social workers, providing them more time to be with clients instead of doing the bulky paperwork?
This initiative is going to involve the social services unit and the IT unit. So I would view the start of that process would be in needs assessment. During the needs assessment, they would consult with the people who will actually be using the system.
That would be the frontline people.
So you would develop the needs assessment, and then a search would take place for an appropriate electronic case management system that would be compatible with our electronic health records system.
One of the big questions that different members have mentioned and talked about… . I admit that I was so focused.
The question was actually about the Child and Family Services Act review. My focus has always been on the review of that legislation, getting the legislation into the House, and then having the child and youth representative follow through in terms of an independent body.
I kind of overlooked the fact that it was actually a social services review for all of the Government of Nunavut.
In terms of all of the talk and discussion about possibly having the Department of Health and Social Services split, what is the opinion of the department on that? There have been a lot of regular members who have talked it.
It was sort of alluded to in the Budget Address and the Commissioner’s Address, but I was wondering if the minister would be able to share some views.
One of my personal views, really, is we don’t have a policy exercise on that yet.
I think what we’re focusing on is to make sure the programs that are available to Nunavutmiut for social services are effective and also cost effective.
That’s a priority. If certain program areas, and we need your input on those, are not working we would like to fix them.
One area that we’re focusing on was the Child and Family Services Act and there may be other areas of the program.
I have indicated to my colleagues that probation is not our responsibility, and as soon as that eventually transfers to Justice, it will improve the effectiveness part of my first introduction.
I think the turnover of staff would improve if the workloads and caseloads are lessened.
That’s what we want to hear. We want to hear from each of you where isn’t it working.
Is it from the top down that is the problem?
By putting more overhead, will it solve the problem or will improving the service of the program and make it more effective?
Which is more justifiable: spending more on overhead, introducing more computers, finance, and accounts receivable separately from Health, creating infrastructure requirements, office buildings for ADMs, and how many finance positions will it have?
You need to think of it.
That’s your call, not mine.
Ours is we need to make social services work for people in Nunavut and I believe it’s possible.
Sure, we need more training dollars.
I have indicated to my colleagues privately that the Child and Family Services Act may be a useful tool to try and acquire more funding for social services.
They will have a component with respect to that because there will be additional training required.
That is something I look forward to and is something that I want to share with our MP in Ottawa to make sure that they do have that report.
The funding, in many cases, is part of the problem; lack of training initiatives and support services that we have for social workers.
These are the areas that I put my personal views on, but we are not charged with putting an issue with respect to whether or not we should split the department or not.
That’s the call of the cabinet as a whole.
Thank you, Minister, for the comments.
You mentioned about probation officers and the extra duties by social workers to carry out the duties of probation officers within the community and how the separation would actually help.
I have heard from frontline workers that that would be something that would help as well in terms of sometimes, they wear two hats where they are providing services and counselling as a social worker in the position as a social worker to a victim and then at the same time, providing probation services to the person who actually instigated the assault or whatever that had happened.
I know that would help.
Do you know when you foresee this transition happening? Will it be by the end of 2011, when it will be sort of separated totally?
There is an MOU between the departments of Justice and Social Services in place that has not been completely severed yet.
It will require the coordination between the two departments.
My colleague and I have met on more than one occasion on that, but there was a delay in implementing changes or to that effect in view of some cost pressures that the whole government was facing.
To further explain the whole concept, Mr. Chairman, I would like the deputy to add comments to that.
I don’t have much to add to the minister’s response, except to say that we do have that MOU, we do have a working relationship with Justice but we’re slowly phasing out of that.
I think we’re looking at a three-year process to make that happen.
In terms of personal views of health and social services, I think, definitely for my three communities, the biggest concern is the same as the member from Nattilik in terms of getting social workers in the community.
We have Grise Fiord, Resolute Bay, and Arctic Bay all without social workers at this time.
As well, they were under the contract with probation, so that is not happening. I think they are being serviced through Pond Inlet and Iqaluit for probation services.
At the same time that I am lobbying you for social workers I am lobbying the Minister of Justice for probation officers as well.
My next question is actually in regard to some of the public service announcements that have been out.
There was an email, I think, on the help desk through the GN. There was a local community radio talking about the idea of looking for foster parents within Nunavut.
I’m just wondering: how successful has that campaign been?
Right now, I don’t have an update on how that’s going, but we certainly can provide that information to the member.
Any body else have any questions?
I would like to briefly ask this question.
Throughout this week, we have heard many comments, and during Minister Taptuna’s Minister’s Statement earlier today, he informed the House about the Anti-Poverty Secretariat and the Poverty Reduction Action Plan.
The Department of Health and Social Services is also a partner in this initiative.
I would like to get clarification on this issue.
What level do they have to reach in order to be considered above the poverty line? What do they have to have?
I mean, I can’t grasp the meaning behind the word “anti-poverty.”
I would like that term defined.
However, I’m unsure as to who has that answer.
In the departmental business plans, almost all of them mention their anti-poverty measures, but I haven’t been able to wrap my head around what they mean in that context. I don’t know who exactly to direct my question to because each department discusses the Poverty Reduction Action Plan.
If I had total understanding of the definition, then I would be able to provide more assistance to the government.
When one does not comprehend the term or context behind the initiative, it really causes one to think hard.
What exactly are they trying to accomplish here?
Hon. Tagak Curley (interpretation): Yes, I can respond first, but in my opinion, the Premier should respond firstly to the question.
During our retreat to develop the Tamapta Mandate, we had to deal with what is known as poverty, which means poor people in my dialect. We all have to try to reduce the number of people living in poverty and we have to do it in partnership with regular members.
It also has to be undertaken in the communities.
Therefore, when the review of the government priorities was undertaken with the Qanukkanniq Report Card, every department was asked to come up with their departmental positions.
For example, Alex responded on our departmental position.
They evaluated each department to see how to improve our service provision and support.
ED&T was involved in this exercise, with a budget developed and priority given to community freezer projects. If we provided community freezers, then some of the foods wouldn’t spoil as fast and there would be less wastage.
I believe that the Premier has to respond to the question on behalf of the government, so I leave it at your discretion, Mr. Chairman.
We debated this matter previously and questions were posed as to the meaning behind the term, especially when you talk about reducing poverty in the communities.
In looking at Canada, all of the provinces have a poverty reduction strategy and Nunavut is, I believe, the only territory that doesn’t have a strategy geared towards poverty reduction.
We keep voicing in this House that there are children who go hungry, that there’s a lack of nutritious food available, and that many families can’t purchase all of the foods they require. These are the types of people we have to assist within our communities.
Government can’t reduce poverty all on its own; everyone has to play their part.
The government can’t just throw money at poor people and say, “Here. You will not be poor anymore.”
We’re consulting with the communities to see how each community can work towards reducing poverty with their resources because they know best what skills and resources they have to put towards the fight to reduce poverty. They are also best able to determine how to battle poverty in their community.
To cite an example, during our consultation with the communities, some hamlet councils made statements about certain ways to ensure proper nutrition. There were such recommendations as subsidizing healthy foods since pre-packaged foods are very expensive and most young people buy prepared foods which are less nutritious. If they were taught how to cook a proper meal at home, then they would be better able to provide for themselves.
Furthermore, when people get funding, another good suggestion was to teach them how to budget so that their limited funds can last throughout the period that they are provided assistance for.
I’m just using that as an example because each community will have separate priorities in trying to reduce poverty.
We also have to include private businesses and to see how they can provide their benefits to those who are needy and require assistance.
We can look at various committees and regional organizations. I believe that one of the examples that my colleague, Minister Curley, mentioned was if we upgraded all of the community freezers, then it would allow the people in the community to ensure that the food is not wasted and spoiled.
If we tried to come to a common understanding of the meaning of poverty reduction, then we would not be able to meet all of the needs of the community because they all want to be consulted, they all want to know what this means and what kind of initiatives we will undertake to implement this strategy.
When the consultation tour is complete and the review has been completed, we can provide a report and identify the terms and define the words. I expect that we will be able to move from there.
At this time, what we’re trying to do is consult the communities to see what their needs are and what their priorities are.
A lot of these activities are in the planning stage.
Hopefully that clarified it.
I’ll be looking for a raise there.
I’m the Chairperson, not the Speaker.
Mr. Tapardjuk (interpretation): Thank you for your clarification as I know it’s a difficult and complex issue.
I recall that Aupilarjuk had composed an Ajaajaa song when he had been to New York City.
In it, he mentioned seeing panhandlers and feeling pity for them.
He describes them as living in abject poverty, receiving no help whatsoever.
I believe that the story speaks for itself, but the comment outlines what I wanted to voice to the Department of Health and Social Services, as the term is mentioned in the report.
I look forward to hearing about future developments on this front.
When the majority of our population is no longer on social assistance, does that mean that we have reduced the level of poverty and that our residents live above the poverty line? Alternatively, with the rising prices of goods, such as snowmobiles, boats, and outboards, if we’re able to still purchase them due to our increased income, does that mean that we’re no longer poor?
There are other extenuating factors that place people in poverty, so we need to define it in order to combat it.
It’s more of a standalone comment, but I’ll withdraw my question from the Department of Health and Social Services as I know now that it’s a multi-departmental initiative.
Mr. Ningark: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. (interpretation) I don’t recall exactly when, but it was when this issue was first brought up for discussion that I raised a question to the government on the definition of the term “poverty”. (interpretation ends) Can you define poverty?
(interpretation) Unfortunately the government was unable to define the word.
If I have three square meals a day, does that mean that I’m not in poverty? If I’m able to provide for three meals a day, then I’m not poor. At least that, to me, seems to be a definition of not poor.
If I’m not going hungry and my children can have a proper breakfast, lunch, and supper, and they can snack on foods throughout the day, whether that be country food or store-bought food, does that mean that I’m not living in poverty? Some kids prefer eggs in the morning or cereals. Furthermore, if we’re talking about supper, if you’re able to order an expensive dish like surf and turf, which is steak and lobster, does that mean that I’m not in poverty?
Hon. Tagak Curley: Thank you. (interpretation) We’re not being asked to define it, but we must keep in consideration that not all people are in the labour force and many people can only survive with social assistance in our communities.
Other people are physically challenged and can’t work. We have many widows who don’t have a husband to hunt, while others don’t have hunting equipment.
These are people we need to keep in mind as those needing assistance.
We are not discussing our own situation as members in this House, as we are nicely remunerated for representing our constituents.
However, most Inuit still wish to eat their country food and for some of us, we can never abandon our country foods.
The people whom we are targeting are the poor members of our society. As per the Tamapta Mandate, the people we are targeting are the abject poor, those with no support or assistance.
We are talking about the most vulnerable members of society, such as children and orphans, who have never been taught about surviving on the land and the hunting skills one needs to survive.
This can be defined in various ways.
However, we have to go back to the Inuit custom of sharing and providing assistance to those in need. I believe that if we repatriated that mentality, it would really help youth to understand.
We have to show them how to survive on the land and to hunt. If they had an alternative, more people wouldn’t depend entirely on social assistance.
Further, more people have to be reminded and encouraged to practice our cultural practices because many Inuit are no longer as passionate about hunting and many youth have a lackadaisical attitude, which is the largest obstacle.
We are lazier than our ancestors, but sloth and laziness will never improve your life.
It’s also the reason why people can get stuck in life.
We need to find answers to these questions and we have to encourage others to become more self-reliant or to educate themselves so that they can be self-sufficient.
I just wanted to speak to that, although there was no question, Mr. Chairman.
We really want this to be developed. I believe all of the members here are in the same boat, as well as all of our constituents, including employees of the government.
It has different meanings to different people. It may mean certain things to certain people.
Perhaps some people may want to get assistance, but some people may be turned away.
What I would like to see is a proper definition that everybody would agree and this would ensure that there is no confusion.
Again this is just a comment, Mr. Chairman.
I don’t have anybody else on my list here, so we will try this again here.
We will go to Branch Summary. Health and Social Services. Social Services.
Total Operations and Maintenance, to be Voted. $42,450,000.
Chairman: Move on to H-6.
One of the questions in terms of part of what the Public Health section is doing, if you turn to H-9, it has the breakfast program and the allocation of $500,000.
Again I’m getting a little confused because I know I have asked questions to the Minister of Economic Development and Transportation, I have asked questions about the breakfast program and I can’t remember who answered it now, whether it was Mr. Curley or Mr. Taptuna, or it might have been the Premier herself who answered it.
In terms of breakfast programs, when will this be rolling out?
I seem to remember there was talk of a study being done and the analysis of what needed to be provided for the communities and rolled out in that manner.
Maybe if you could explain the breakfast program.
The $500,000, what is that going to go for when we allocate that funding?
Currently we have funding that comes in under Brighter Futures and currently every community chooses to spend some of its Brighter Future allocations on breakfast programs for children. They also undertake other fundraising and other initiatives to support these programs further.
Most existing breakfast programs are not able to provide a nutritious breakfast every school day of the year to every student as current funding doesn’t permit them to do that.
Also clear program guidelines do not exist since there is no formal GN breakfast program, so communities are designing individual programs.
The actual cost breakdown for the school breakfast programs will be: the total amount of funding that we’re requesting is $665,000; $500,000 of that would be going under grants and contributions and the remainder of the funding, that’s $165,000, is for developing guidelines, training, and tools to support the existing breakfast programs or for future expanded programs.