Current ads
Jobs
Tenders
Notices
General

Click below

Editorial

August 1, 2003 - Nunavut and legalized dope
August 8, 2003 - Cruel to be kind
August 15, 2003 - A crucial decision for Iqaluit
August 22, 2003 - KIA should worry about the right issue
August 29, 2003 - Education for citizenship

Education for citizenship

Most Nunavut students are now back at school, or ought to be.

After several years of headaches, embarrassments and controversies, the Nunavut department of education can report at least one piece of good news. Teacher recruitment is getting easier for them. Every teaching job in Nunavut's K-12 system is now filled, and after years of declining interest, the number of people interested in Nunavut teaching jobs is growing.

So far, so good.

But the system within which those teachers are working is in desperate need of reform, in many ways, and at many levels.

That's not news. Everyone in Nunavut with an interest in education already knows that. We've already witnessed the painful demise of the Nunavut government's first education bill, endured a confusing debate on standardized testing and heard numerous Nunavut residents complain incessantly about the school system and its numerous shortcomings - whether real or perceived.

One of the most common complaints is that there is not enough money to pay for all of the new things people want - such as an Inuktitut curriculum, materials for use in teaching an Inuktitut curriculum, and more teachers so that class sizes can be reduced.

Those people are right, basically. There's no question that Nunavut's school system is short of money.

But it also lacks an even more precious resource - ideas.

The most dispiriting feature of education debate in Nunavut since 1999 - when work on a new education act began - is that throughout that entire time, hardly anybody said or thought anything about the issue that hasn't been said or thought a hundred times before over the past 25 years.

Remember the "consultation" campaign that the Nunavut government launched at the beginning of its attempt to design a new education act? It was done in cooperation with the Nunavut Social Development Council and Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. It consisted of a community tour, featuring loosely organized public meetings where people were invited to talk about education.

Predictably, people lined up at the microphones and said the same things that people in Nunavut have been saying about schools for more than a generation. They mostly said things that education officials and political leaders already know, or ought to know.

Those expensive "consultations," and others like them done by MLAs, failed to produce a coherent vision of education in Nunavut. Without such a vision, any future attempts to reform education are doomed to failure.

Why? Because unless you can agree first on what a school system is for, you'll never succeed in fixing it.

To that end, here's a new idea. Actually, it's not new at all. It's just an old idea dressed up in new clothes. But it's a new idea for Nunavut - because hardly anyone talks about it these days.

That idea is this: education for citizenship.

By "education for citizenship" we mean a form of education where people learn things that not only give them real power over their own lives, but also the power to participate fully in the various political and social institutions that act on their behalf.

Take mathematics, for example. In 2002, the results of a national mathematics test showed that Nunavut students know far less about simple arithmetic than students anywhere else in Canada. Only eight per cent of 13-year-olds in Nunavut met or exceeded "Level 2" - considered to be the minimum acceptable level of difficulty.

What does this mean? It means that when they grow up most of those students won't have the basic arithmetic skills to understand their hamlet council's budget, skills such as fractions, decimals, ratio and proportion. They won't know how to do their own income tax returns. They won't understand the simple arithmetic that goes into the setting of wildlife harvesting quotas or the creation of budgets for the various Inuit organizations. They may not even understand the simple arithmetic that lies behind the reporting of election results.

In other words, they won't be able to participate within the new territory that was created to advance their rights and aspirations. Despite all the institutions that have been set up to advance their rights, as individuals, they will remain utterly powerless, dependent on a small elite to make decisions for them. The creation of Nunavut will have been a waste of time and money,

Unless of course, the department of education incorporates education for citizenship into a new vision for Nunavut's schools. If education for citizenship were to become a priority, then the learning of basic arithmetic would also become a priority.

Similarly, language education - whether French, Inuktitut, or English - would take on a new significance. If you can't read, speak or listen effectively in any known language, you will never be able to fully perform your duties as a citizen.

Schools ought to have a higher purpose than to simply turn out job-holders to meet abstract Inuit hiring targets for the Nunavut government. Learning is about more than economics. It's about giving people the knowledge they need to acquire more knowledge on their own - because it's knowledge, not land claim agreements and acronymic organizations, that represent the source of true political power.

And no democracy can survive for long without a well-educated citizenry. That's why Nunavut should get serious about education for citizenship. JB

TOP

KIA should worry about the right issue

The Kivalliq Inuit Association has decided to celebrate the creation of Nunavut's fourth national park with a time-honoured Nunavut tradition - a good, old-fashioned bitch-off.

Its nose is out of joint because Prime Minister Jean Chrétien won't go to Repulse Bay tomorrow to sign an agreement that creates the Ukkusiksalik National Park in and around Wager Bay.

We understand why politicians and other public officials love signing and ribbon-cutting ceremonies. They're easy-to-organize events, always good for a bit of cheap publicity, and a chance for Nunavut's professional meeting-goers and honorarium collectors to strut around in front of their constituents and pretend they're working hard.

But given the political problems that Chrétien is facing this week, including a revolt staged by a large group of his own backbench MPs over his government's plan to introduce a bill legalizing same-sex marriage, we're lucky to see Chrétien at all. We can only assume that it's Jean Chrétien's much-professed love of the North that has inspired him to come to Nunavut and sign the deal himself, rather than send some cabinet underling.

In any event, the KIA is making a lot of noise about a trival issue.

If it wants a serious issue to worry about, it should turn its attention to the actual agreement that it will sign tomorrow - an Inuit impact and benefits agreement. Under the Nunavut land claim agreement, such deals, also known by the acronym "IIBA" must be signed before any new national or territorial parks are created.

In exchange for agreeing to the creation of Ukkusiksalik National Park on behalf of the Inuit of the Kivalliq region, the KIA will get about $1 million, guaranteed subsistence hunting rights within the park, commercial char-fishing rights on one river, arrangements allowing for the extraction of carving stone, and Inuit-preference provisions for any jobs and contracts associated with the park.

So far, so good.

But a quick look at the development of national and territorial parks and conservation areas in Nunavut reveals that few land claim matters have been slower to implement than parks issues.

For example, an IIBA on territorial parks - which are administered by the Government of Nunavut - wasn't concluded until May of 2002, at least four years after it was supposed to have been done.

And that agreement had no money in it to provide any economic benefits for Inuit. That's because Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., and the territorial and federal governments have been unable to agree on a new 10-year implementation contract for the Nunavut land claim agreement - to replace the one that expired on July 9 this year.

Those talks are bogged down over a disagreement on how to implement the Inuit employment provisions of Article 23. NTI and the GN want millions of new spending on job training every year, while the federal government is dragging its feet on the issue.

Another example is the protracted negotiations for an IIBA to cover the Igaliqtuuq marine sanctuary near Clyde River, and other proposed conservation areas. Those talks have come to a complete halt.

The Ukkusiksalik park negotiations themselves took nearly 25 years to complete. Despite the agreement that will be signed tomorrow, the people of Repulse Bay and the Kivalliq may have to wait a long time before they see the economic benefits they hope to achieve as a result of the park's creation.

We presume that the KIA's negotiators worked hard to get their Ukkusiksalik IIBA. They should be prepared to work even harder to ensure that its provisions are carried out, rather than worry about trivialities like the location of a signing ceremony. JB

TOP

A crucial decision for Iqaluit

The last time Iqaluit's ratepayers were asked to approve a borrowing proposal put to them by the municipality of Iqaluit, they said no, emphatically.

That vote, held in the mid-1990s, was to approve the borrowing of a mere $500,000 to pay for a small piece of road-paving. At that time, Iqaluit ratepayers simply did not trust the municipality's ability to manage its finances well enough to handle the debt, and they voted against it by an overwhelming margin.

Who can blame them? It was around that time that the territorial government removed Iqaluit's mayor, senior administrative officer and entire council for financial incompetence, and replaced them with an appointed administrator.

But that was then, and this is now.

On Sept. 11, Iqaluit's municipal government, now a "city," will ask ratepayers to approve the borrowing of $4 million, to pay for improvements to Iqaluit's dilapidated water supply system.

It's part of a five-year, $50 million package of badly-needed infrastructure upgrades that city council approved last year, which they will undertake between now and 2008. The package includes street-paving, water and sewer improvements, and some recreational facilities.

The Government of Nunavut will give the city $31 million over the next five years to help pay for all that work. But the GN's deal is conditional on Iqaluit raising $19 million of its own. By dipping into its reserves, and raising taxes and municipal service fees, the city has found $15 million, but must borrow another $4 million.

Should Iqaluit ratepayers now approve this request when they cast their votes on Sept. 11?

Despite the many legitimate concerns that ratepayers may have about the city's ability to manage such a debt, the answer must be yes.

The entire package of infrastructure improvements that the city has worked out over the past two years could come unravelled if they are not able to borrow the last $4 million.

Those improvements aren't frivolous luxuries. They're intended to support public services that are essential for public health and safety - such as water supply and treatment, sewage treatment and paved roads. Although Iqaluit's rapid growth over the past five years has produced some economic benefits for some groups of people, in other ways the community has become almost unliveable for many residents. And that's partly because of Iqaluit's recent infrastructure crisis.

Any ratepayers who are leaning towards a no vote should consider all that before they cast their ballots.

After all, it's understandable that some ratepayers will find it hard to trust the municipality of Iqaluit, with its long history of bungling and incompetence. For example, many people haven't forgotten the $7 million sewage treatment plant fiasco.

To be fair, though, this is a different council than the one that presided over the sewage plant disaster. Many senior staff positions within the city's administration are now held by new people. There's no evidence that the city, with some prudent financial management, can't service the debt over the next 15 years.

They have promised to provide ratepayers with the information they will need to make an informed decision. Ratepayers should hold the city to that promise, naturally, but city officials now appear to be so eager to get a positive outcome on Sept. 11, they're likely to co-operate willingly with all such requests.

Another problem, of course, is the process. On Sept. 11, a relatively small group of residents will be asked to make a crucial decision that will affect the well-being of the entire population of Iqaluit, whether or not they are affluent enough to own property.

For the future, there has to be a better way of approving major municipal borrowing decisions. The city of Iqaluit is a 21st century institution hampered by a 19th century method of financing its operations. That's a problem that Iqaluit shares with most other Canadian municipalities.

No matter how wealthy they may be, few municipalities in Canada are able to raise the revenues they need from property taxes alone, and must also depend on grants and other transfers from provincial and territorial governments. At the same time, the Liberal government's highly touted Canada infrastructure program has simply failed to meet the infrastructure needs of small-population municipalities like Iqaluit.

If more senior levels of government were providing municipalities with the support they really need, Iqaluit wouldn't have to beg its ratepayers for permission to borrow $4 million.

But that's no reason to oppose the request. On Sept. 11, we urge ratepayers to support the city's proposal - the benefits simply out-weight the potential risks. JB

TOP

Cruel to be kind

The City of Iqaluit made only one mistake in its handling of property owners who can't or won't pay their municipal taxes.

They waited far too long to take action against them.

Apart from that, Iqaluit's municipal government is doing the right thing. To do otherwise would perpetuate an injustice against the hundreds of homeowners and businesses who have always paid their property taxes in full, and on time.

Taxation is the means by which governments collect the money they need to pay for things that serve the common good. In Iqaluit, it's property taxes that help pay for road maintenance, firefighting, bylaw enforcement, municipal planning, public transit, recreation, and other municipal services that we all use.

Those who have decided not to pay their fair share of tax have, in effect, decided on their own that they deserve to get those services for free. That means those who do pay must carry an unfair proportion of the cost.

Whether Iqaluit's municipal council spends its tax revenue wisely is a subject of legitimate debate. So is the issue of whether tax rates are too high or too low.

But one issue is beyond debate. Everyone must pay.

This is not a new issue. It's been a subject of public debate for years. Iqaluit's municipal council has wrestled with it since at least 1997, when the territorial legislature gave tax-based municipalities the power to seize properties and sell them to recover unpaid tax revenues.

Instead of cracking down hard, the municipality took a soft approach, a combination of gentle persuasion and public shaming. The municipal council published its list of tax deadbeats every year to humiliate them into paying up. For years, the municipality warned that property seizures and tax auctions would follow. For many tax delinquents, it worked.

But a small group of hard-core refuseniks never got the message. Some appear to have never paid a cent of property tax for the entire time they've owned their properties, and now owe astronomical amounts.

Consider the case of Iqaluit's reigning tax deadbeat champion, Jonah Kelly, who owes nearly $162,000. That's probably more than the re-sale value of the house. Because of the 18 per cent annual interest rate that the city applies to unpaid accounts, that figure will jump dramatically from one year to the next.

Another man, Jeetaloo Kakee, owes nearly $132,000. Akeeshoo and Alicie Joamie owe more than $46,000. Others owe amounts ranging from $12,000 up to $30,000.

In such cases, where people have been unwilling to pay for years, seizing the property and selling it to pay the tax bill is not an injustice. It's an act of mercy. Sometimes you have to be cruel to be kind. The city should have taken action years ago to stop the bleeding.

Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. has now waded into the debate with all the mushy-headed ignorance it can muster. This week, the organization asked Iqaluit City Council to delay its Sept. 15 tax auction until they can discuss the issue with city councillors.

The city should ignore this request. The process has been delayed already for years. Another delay would cause even more financial damage to the tax deadbeats that NTI is claiming to protect, since it would cause even more interest to be piled on top of their already staggering tax bills.

To be fair, NTI is likely acting upon the honest belief that the City of Iqaluit may by creating more homeless people by evicting them from their homes and turfing them onto the street. However, this belief is founded upon an ignorance of the facts and an ignorance of the context.

This is not a land claim issue in any sense. It's the structures built on top of the land, not the land itself, that are taxed. In any case, the Nunavut land claim agreement gives municipalities fee simple title to nearly all lands within municipal boundaries. Except for a few Inuit-owned lots controlled by QIA, and a strip along the beach, there is no more Inuit-owned land in Iqaluit. This is a municipal government issue and NTI should butt out.

Besides, for more than a decade the Nunavut Housing Corp. has been routinely evicting deadbeat tenants from housing units all over Nunavut, including people who owed tens of thousands of dollars in back rent and damage costs.

City officials have already said they are willing to be flexible with those who owe large delinquent tax bills. They say they are willing to accept small installment payments spread over lengthy periods of time. And yet a small core of delinquents refuse to make even the smallest gesture toward paying their bills.

Since last week, about eight of the 17 tax deadbeats whose properties were slated for auction have either paid their arrears in full, or arranged payment plans with the city. That, more than anything, shows that the city is doing the right thing. JB

TOP

Nunavut and legalized dope

It's a great irony that those who have likely profited the most from distributing marijuana and hash to Baffin and Nunavik Inuit over the years include at least some members of a blatantly white-supremacist organization — the notorious motorcycle gang known as the Hell's Angels.

So one of the strongest arguments that can possibly made for the eventual legalization of cannabis is that society's thugs, low-lifes and bottom-feeders would no longer get rich by selling a substance that many believe is less harmful to human health than tobacco or alcohol.

To be fair, les motards are having a rough time in Quebec these days. Numerous members of that and other outlaw biker clubs are awaiting trial on a variety of criminal charges, including murder. There are plenty of other scum-bags who are likely taking their places already.

In any event, no matter how you feel about the recreational use of cannabis, one thing is clear: legalizing its sale and possession would remove a major source of profit for criminals — in Canada, and in Nunavut.

But don't hold your breath. The federal government isn't close to doing any such thing. The highly publicized cannabis control bill, which received first reading in the House of Commons in March, and will likely go before a parliamentary committee this fall, does not "legalize" marijuana possession.

The proposed new law would remove the possession of small amounts of cannabis from the Criminal Code, and replace the current penalties with small fines. The possession of cannabis would still be an offence, but not a crime, and those who are caught with small amounts would not get a criminal record.

This cautious measure, however, has prompted some people in Nunavut to worry.

One of them is Terry Young, the principal of Iqaluit's Inuksuk High School. Last month, Young told Nunatsiaq News that he fears what might happen if young people in Nunavut were to gain easier access to cannabis.

Since Young works with teenagers every day, his views are worth heeding. The 1996 NWT Alcohol and Drug Survey showed that in the three Nunavut regions, 41.8 per cent of people aged 15 to 24 admitted smoking grass or hash within the 12-month period before the survey was taken. That age group includes most high school students. This is also a fairly old survey, but it's likely that, if anything, those numbers have increased.

So if cannabis is to be decriminalized, and eventually legalized, the Nunavut government cannot stand idly by.

No one knows how cannabis affects the still-developing brains of children and young people, who are supposed to be learning large amounts of material in school. And simple common sense will tell you that no teacher is ever going to work well with students who come to school in a state of drug-induced stupefaction. We also know that many emotionally unstable young people have made suicide attempts while high on cannabis.

Cannabis use raises other serious public health issues. Last month, the president of the Lung Association of Saskatchewan, Dr. Brian Graham, had this to say about the issuance of marijuana to people who need it for medical purposes:

"The Lung Association regards marijuana smoking as a public health hazard. Health Canada should not be supplying marijuana in a form that will be inhaled into the lungs with dirty, irritating, toxic, carcinogenic smoke. The Minister of Health should never condone smoking of any substance," Graham wrote on July 11.

Studies have shown that a person who smokes two or three joints a day will consume the same amount of cancer-causing material as a pack-a-day cigarette smoker. Researchers believe this is partly because dope smokers tend to hold smoke in their lungs for as long as they can, and because joints are unfiltered.

We know that large numbers of Nunavummiut, of all ages and backgrounds, smoke dope on a regular basis. In some communities, it's almost universal. This means that Health Minister Ed Picco's vigorous campaign against cigarettes may not produce fewer lung cancers and other respiratory diseases. Even if every single cigarette smoker in Nunavut were to kick their habit tomorrow, large numbers of Nunavummiut would continue to ingest large amounts of cancer-causing smoke into their lungs - in the form of grass or hash.

Quttiktuq MLA Rebekah Williams may have been thinking about that when she made the following comment in a series of questions for Nunavut's health minister:

"I find it very strange that while our minister of health has introduced a bill in this House to impose restrictions on tobacco use, he has not said a word about marijuana, which is also a dangerous drug."

Picco responded by saying that he supports the use of marijuana for medical purposes - but he said nothing about the public health implications of widespread dope-smoking.

The legalization of cannabis in Canada will occur, slowly and gradually. There are ardent propagandists on either side of the issue, and the views of pro- and anti-legalization proponents should each be treated with healthy skepticism. Right now, the federal government is taking a cautious approach, which is wise, because public opinion is still divided on the issue.

But it's inevitable that the sale, possession and cultivation of cannabis products will one day be made legal in Canada, especially when obviously dangerous substances like alcohol and tobacco are already legal. This will remove control of the cannabis industry from criminal degenerates - but it will create serious public health issues that Nunavut had better be ready to deal with. JB

TOP

Advertising
Specs, rates,
& maps
Multi-paper
buying services
About the market
E-mail ad dept

More Information