EdinburghNLP/nunavut-hansard-plusplus huggingface dataset:
I’d like to ask the Minister if they can start, when they hire social workers, not only the social workers, but other government employees as well, I’m sure I’ll ask the same question to a specified Minister, when they’re not actually Inuit, give them orientation about culture.
Mr. Speaker, as the member knows, all hires through the Government of Nunavut go through the Department of Human Resources.
The only positions the Department of Health and Social Services actually hires itself are the nurses.
I believe Education retains the right to hire teachers.
My understanding is, Mr. Speaker, when we put out an ad for social workers, we request through Human Resources for the positions and Mr. Speaker, it is my understanding that the Department of Human Resources does do an employee orientation program which gives up to date and relevant information on Nunavut culture, language and so on.
Obviously Human Resources people are not doing enough of a job to at least orientate the social workers when they come up here because we’re still getting social workers who really have no time for the utilization of justice committees, who really have no time for the norms of that community.
They just think that because they have qualifications on paper that they know better than the community.
So, I’m asking is there a way to do a complete orientation if a person is hired from the south on the different environment up here where Inuit are predominant, to at least tell them, through that orientation that they have to have a fair amount, a lot of respect for the mores of that community and the culture, because we’re not getting those people yet.
We’re getting people that think they’re in charge with no need to utilize the community.
Mr. Speaker, I appreciate the comments as well as the question.
Mr. Speaker, I have had an opportunity to speak with the Minister for Human Resources on this issue and the Minister for Human Resources has put in place a pretty strategic plan on orientations for all employees.
I have also had an opportunity ask in this case, social service workers who have to work in the community, who should be culturally accessible as well as understand what is happening in a community, had maybe extra help through Human Resources on that orientation program, as well as working with the Department of Health and Social Services in doing the recruitment with Human Resources to put that in place.
So, Mr. Speaker, the Member’s comments are well taken and my understanding is that Human Resources is working on that with Department of Culture, Language, Elders and Youth to ensure that Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit as well as languages are incorporated in the both the CD-ROM, which is also available for the new employees.
If you are going to, perhaps we are four years late.
If it is going to be the same situation, however, it is going to take some time before these things can actually happen.
While you are a Minister today, you can tell your staff, because if the social workers are Qallunaat, let them respect the people of the community, either with the Hamlet or Justice Committee or our community counsellors and Elders as well.
Can the Minister issue a directive to the staff, to his own staff and to utilize the people of the resources in each community and perhaps he can go through with that Deputy Minister and the social workers can do a lot in the community if they get the resources from their own community.
Mr. Speaker, I agree with the Member and I think, Mr. Speaker, that the Government has been trying to be more proactive with employee orientation programs under the Department of Human Resources.
My understanding is, for example, Mr. Speaker, that seminars were recently completed in Kugluktuk, Gjoa Haven, Taloyoak, as well as Kugaarjuk.
So, you are talking about larger communities, smaller communities and so on.
And those seminars continues as Human Resources brings on new employees, but again, Mr. Speaker, I will work specifically with Human Resources to make sure that indeed orientation programs, Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit in all of its relevancy are put forward.
I believe, Mr. Speaker, we have been trying to do that over the past several hiring sessions and I think Human Resources is trying to demonstrate that.
I do not want an agreement.
I do want to be just agreed with, I want action by the Government and a simple action would be giving a directive to the Department to say, look you are in Nunavut, you are amongst Inuit, you
have to respect the fact that it is a different culture, there are different ways of doing things.
Couldn’t the Minister send a simple directive to his social workers to say, look, you are in Inuit land, respect the fact that you are.
Cannot he send that directive?
Hon. Ed. Picco: Mr. Speaker, I think it has been sent.
Members will note that by the clerk’s clock, question period is now over.
Before we return to, or continue with the orders of the day, we’ll break for 20 minutes.
>>The House recessed at 3:35 p.m. and resumed at 4:11 p.m.
Speaker: Returning to Orders of the Day. Item 7.
Committee Report 004 – 1(6): Report on the Review of the 2002 Report of the Auditor General of Canada to the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut
Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the Standing Committee of Government Operations and Services, I would like to report back on the committee’s report on the review of the 2002 Report of the Auditor General of Canada to the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut.
Mr. Speaker, as we go through this, along with my committee colleagues, we’ll be reading it into the record, or I’ll be reading it starting off with part of it and then passing it on to the next committee member to read and everyone’s going to read a little bit in.
So bear with us Mr. Speaker.
Mr. Speaker, the second annual report of the Auditor General to the Legislative Assembly of Nunavut was tabled on November 28, 2002.
This followed the tabling of Nunavut’s second set of public accounts for the 2000/2001 on May 16, 2002.
Under the Nunavut Act, the Auditor General of Canada is responsible for auditing the Government of Nunavut’s financial transactions and financial statements.
The Auditor General also performs this function federally as well as in the Northwest Territories and the Yukon.
Each the year the Auditor General prepares a report to the Legislative Assembly in which management issues that arise during the course of the annual audit are brought to the attention elected Members of the Legislative Assembly.
The government is given the opportunity to make management responses to the Auditor General’s observations and recommendations.
The Legislative Assembly Standing Committee on Government Operations and Services is mandated to review the public accounts in the report of the Auditor General.
Standing committee reviews of such annual reports of those printed by the Auditor General, the Information and Privacy Commissioner and the Languages Commissioner provide an opportunity for the issues raised by each independent office to be examined in a transparent manner.
Government accountability is fostered through the requirement of the rules in the Legislative Assembly that the government table a comprehensive response to the standing committee’s reports and recommendations within 120 days of its presentation in this house.
On October 30, 2002, the Government of Nunavut tabled it’s response to the Standing Committee’s report and recommendations within 122 days of its presentation in this House.
On October 30th, 2002, the Government of Nunavut tabled its response to the Standing Committee’s March 2002 Report on the review of the 2001 Report of the Auditor General.
The Standing Committee held meetings on February 20th and 21st, 2003, to review the Auditor General’s 2002 Report.
These meetings were open to the public and media to observe in addition to providing an opportunity for the Auditor General to appear before the Committee to speak to the issues raised in her report.
Committee Members were able to post questions to senior Government of Nunavut officials on their management responses to the Auditor General’s recommendations.
Inuktitut and English transcripts of the meeting are being prepared and will be made available on website of the Legislative Assembly.
The Standing Committee would like to express its appreciation to Ms. Sheila Fraser, the Auditor General of Canada for again, appearing in person before the Committee to present and discuss her second annual report.
The Committee would also like to thank the following officials from the Office of the Auditor General, Mr. Dale Shrier, principal and Mr. Roger Simpson, principal.
The Committee would also like to acknowledge the Witnesses from the Government of Nunavut who appeared before the Committee and stayed in order to respond to the questions posed by the Members.
Mr. Speaker, at this time, I would like to pass the floor over to Mr. Iqaqrialu to continue on with the next part of the report.
Speaker: Mr. Iqaqrialu, continue.
The Auditor General’s 2002 Report represented a number of specific recommendations directed to the Government of Nunavut.
The Standing Committee undertook a chapter review of the Auditor General’s Report posing questions and comments to appropriate Government of Nunavut’s Witnesses at each stage.
Members also took the opportunity to follow up with Witnesses on the contents of the Government’s October 2002 response to the Committee’s March 2002 Report.
During the Auditor General’s appearance before the Standing Committee, the Committee again, enjoyed a productive exchange with her on the number of broad themes related to the financial management practices and capacity of the Government.
In particular, the Committee noted with concern her comments regarding the need to significantly improve the timeliness of the production and tabling of the Government’s financial statements and other related documents such as annual reports of certain Crown Corporations.
It is important to recall that the production and tabling of such documents is not a matter of discretion.
Section 44 of the Nunavut Act states: The Commissioner shall on or before December 31 of each fiscal year lay before the Assembly a Report called the ‘Territorial Accounts’ for the preceding fiscal year of Nunavut an Assembly shall consider the Report.
As of May 31st, 2003, the public accounts for 2001-2002 have not yet been tabled.
As of May 31, 2003, the annual financial statements of the Nunavut Power Corporation had yet to be tabled for any of the fiscal years since the establishment of the entity.
The Committee also noted with attention, the Auditor General’s comments regarding the desirability of financial statements being produced in such a way as to allow Members of the Legislative Assembly and the public to better compare the Government’s actual financial result with its budget plans.
This has been an ongoing issue for the Committee.
The Committee also took serious note of the Auditor General’s concerns regarding the Government’s failure to obey its own laws with respect to departmental over expenditures.
While the committee recognises the expenditure pressures facing, in particular the Department of Health and Social Services, it is none the less unacceptable for the government the government to spend more than it is authorized by the Legislative Assembly.
The committee is also concerned about the frequency with which the government brings forward requests for supplementary appropriations.
As of May 31, 2003, the Legislative Assembly had considered 17 supplementary appropriation bills since April 1, 1999.
The committee is hopeful that as the government’s process matures, it will do so with less frequency.
The committee was very concerned with the revelations regarding the government’s failure to submit documents to the Federal Government in order to receive monies under certain programs, most notably in the area of health.
The Government of Nunavut began tabling annual business plans of departments and other entities for the 2000/2001 fiscal year however there has been very little evident progress made with respect to implementing a government wide system for evaluation it’s performance and results and for making this information public in the Legislative Assembly on annual basis.
The committee remains convinced of the need to move in this direction and reiterates its call for the government to move performance measurement that reflects not only expenditures and outputs but results and outcomes.
At this point, I’ll pass it onto James Arvaluk.
The Auditor General made some recommendations in the 2002 report.
The Auditor General’s recommendation number one, the government administrative policies should clearly state whether they apply to crown corporations.
The Government of Nunavut’s management response was the government agrees that the administrative policies should clearly state if they apply to crown corporations.
We will be reviewing this issue and considering the various options available to comply with this recommendation.
The committee engaged in extensive dialogue with Government of Nunavut officials on this issue and raised such informed questions as whether the example the Government of Nunavut’s hiring policy will or will not apply to such entities as recently established, Qulliq Energy Corporation.
No conclusive answer was forth coming.
The committee was interested to learn that one of the options under active consideration by the Government of Nunavut is the establishment of so called Crown Corporation’s Counsel, in other words, of a senior Government of Nunavut official, this entity would be charged with the overall mandate of at least accountability of a crown corporation.
The standing committee’s recommendation number 1, that the Government of Nunavut table at their earliest opportunity, their terms of reference of the Crown Corporation’s Counsel and that the government make public, any decisions that it takes with respect to the issues of crown corporation’s accountability.
The standing committee’s recommendation number 2; the Government of Nunavut table at their earliest opportunity a comprehensive list of policies that have been formally adopted by the executive council since April 1, 1999 and that the list indicates which policies applies to Crown Corporations, Boards, Agencies and other entities and which do not.
The Standing Committee recommendation #3, that the Government of Nunavut table of the various opportunity, copies of in administerial directives to Crown Corporations made since April 1, 1999.
The Committee recommendation #4, that the Government of Nunavut direct the Crown Corporation’s Council as a component of its work to examine the issues of how enhanced transparency in the reporting practices of the business credit corporation and any other public body which makes loans to individuals or businesses.
Auditor General for recommendation #2, the Government should continue to work towards implementing basic financial controls within all parts of the Government by 2004.
The Government of Nunavut’s management response, the Government is working towards essential financial controls and financial capacity development.
The Government has initiated several training programs to train senior staff and we continue with efforts to recruit senior accountants, auditors and financial managers.
Much of the Committee’s dialogue with the Auditor General and the Government of Nunavut Witnesses revolved around this theme.
The Committee recognizes that capacity building is an ongoing process and stresses the need for continued efforts in the area of training for Beneficiaries.
The Committee was pleased with the offer made by the Office of the Auditor General to assist in the area providing opportunities for Nunavummiut and urges the Government to work with the OAG in this area.
The Standing Committee recommendation #5, that the Government table regular updates in the Legislative Assembly on its plans and progresses in the area of financial capacity development.
The Auditor General’s recommendation #3, the Government should address specific financial management issues in the sport.
These include, Mr. Speaker:
a) Ensuring budgetary control operate effectively
b) Implementing good reports management
c) Ensuring key reconciliations are completed promptly
d) Submitting revenue claims promptly
e) Billing revenue promptly
f) Merging accounts receivable and collecting them when due
g) Analysing revenues needed through formula financing agreement calculations
h) Ensuring signing authorities operate as intended
i) Ensuring that employment leave records are accurate
j) Completing and tabling annual financial statements promptly
The Government of Nunavut’s management response: the Government agrees that these specific financial management issues need to be addressed and will work towards compliance.
The Department of Finance has made changes to its organizational structure to allow for better coordination of accounting issues on responsibilities.
The Government is in the progress of improving the revenue monitoring system, which will enhance the accuracy, timeliness and reporting within the revenue and receivable cycle.
The Standing Committee concurred with the Auditor General’s observations in this area.
The Standing Committee recommendation #6, that the Government table regular updates in the Legislative Assembly on its plans and progress in the specific financial management areas identified by the Auditor General.
Now, I would like to pass the continuing of the report to Ms. Williams.
Other issues and outstanding matters from previous reports and government responses: debt authority and the government’s financial health.
The standing committee has noted with interest the government’s frequent assertion that it did not incur any direct debt during it’s first two years of operation however, the committee is aware that the government has since 1999, guaranteed debt on behalf of other entities such as the Nunavut’s Power Corporation.
The government’s power to borrow and lend money derives from section 27 of the Nunavut Act.
Although there is no specific requirement for the government to disclose its annual financial statements, the amount of debt it has guaranteed on behalf of other entities, the committee is of the view that such information is important in order to provide the Legislative Assembly and the public with the most complete possible picture of the government’s financial position.
The Government of the Northwest Territories which operates under a similar statutory framework as Nunavut with respect to borrowing and lending has recently a commenced a practise of including it in it’s annual public accounts comprehensive information on it’s debt authority position.
This information also includes a very important indicator of the government’s financial position, its available borrowing capacity.
Standing committee recommendation number 7; the standing committee recommends that the Government of Nunavut include in its annual consolidated financial statements, comprehensive information on its lending and borrowing activities under section 27 of the Nunavut Act and that such information include the government’s available borrowing capacity.
(interpretation end): The Auditor General’s 2001 raised a number of issues related to the government’s leasing practices.
The standing committee pursued this issue in its review and recommended that the government table range of information related to its leases.
The committee has been extremely disappointed with the government’s response on this issue.
According to the most recent set of public accounts, the government has committed tens of millions of dollars in public money to leases in coming years.
However, the government has taken the position that it requires the consent of the parties with whom it has entered into leasing arrangements in order to make public such basic information as the length of value of the leases in question.
Given that the government has at various times, taken the initiative to issue press releases, and the sole purposes of announcing the dollar value as specific contracts for specific capital projects, it’s reluctance to make public similar details with respect to it’s leasing arrangements in both inconsistent and troubling.
The committee is not persuaded that continued secrecy in this area is in the public interest.
The committee was interested to learn that Government of Nunavut officials and the new leasing policy was considered by the financial management board on February 20, 2003.
The committee stressed the need to ensure a much greater degree of transparency than presently exists.
Standing committee recommendation number 8; that the government table at the earliest opportunity, it’s new leasing policy and that the policy includes strong provisions in the area of transparency and disclosure.
Standing committee recommendation number 9; that the government re-examine it’s position with respect to the tabling of a comprehensive list of leased properties and that such a list include information on the entities from whom the properties have been leased, the length of the leases and the values of each lease.
(interpretation) Financing of construction of regional health facilities.
The committee was somewhat surprised to learn that a final decision has not been taken with respect to the financing arrangements for the construction of new regional health facilities in Iqaluit and Cambridge Bay.
In particular, the question of whether these two facilities will be constructed through some form of leasing arrangement still appears to be an open one.
Standing committee recommendation number 10; that the government make public its plans with respect to the financing of construction of regional health facilities in Iqaluit and Cambridge Bay.
Over expenditures by the Department of Health and Social Services.
The committee appreciated the commitment made by the department’s witness to provide a detailed breakdown to the committee of where funds were over-expended in 2000 and 2001.
To date, this commitment has not been fulfilled.
Standing committee recommendation number 11; that the government fulfill it’s commitment to provide a detailed breakdown of where funds were over expended by the Department of Health and Social Services in 2000 and 2001.
(interpretation end) Assessment of the financial management and funding requirements of the Department of Health and Social Services. The committee learned that the Department of Finance in consultation with the Department of Health and Social Services recently conducted a detailed assessment of the department’s financial management and funding requirements and submitted these findings to the Financial Management Board.
The committee has noted with concern that the fact that the 2003 and 2004 main estimates budgeted almost $10 million dollars less in total Operations and Maintenance for the department than was provided through and main and supplementary estimates in 2002 and 2003.
The committee is concerned that the continued over expenditures in this department may occur in part because of unrealistic budgeting in the long term improved provision of medical services at the community level with help to reduce the need for medical travel and medical evacuations.
Members recognised the expenditure pressures placed in the department with respect to medical travel and medical evacuations.
The committee noted in it’s hearings that progress in this area appears to be dependent to an extent on the results of Community Government & Transportation air services study which was announced on August 27, 2002.
The study was expected to have been completed by the end of 2002.
To date, the results have not yet been tabled.
The government’s announcements indicated that the value of contract awarded to LPS Aviation Incorporated for the conduct of the study was $349 thousand, 920 dollars.
Standing committee recommendation number 12; that the government table the Department of Finance’s assessments of the Department of Health and Social Service’s and the results of the Department of Community Government & Transportation’s Air services study.
Mr. Speaker, at this time, I will pass on to my colleague Mr. Tootoo.
Mr. Speaker, presentation of financial information to the Legislative Assembly.