Current ads
Jobs
Tenders
Notices
General

Click below

Improving the legislative assembly

About five weeks from now, the first Nunavut legislative assembly will become part of history.

On Jan. 9, the assembly will dissolve, and on Jan 12. writs for Nunavut's second general election - to be held Feb. 16 - will be issued.

The assembly will likely sit just one more time, when MLAs reconvene in Iqaluit on Dec. 2 to finish their sixth session. We hope, for their sake and for ours, that they get their work done before the Christmas break.

So how well have they done?

All things considered, not as bad as some were predicting after its first real session, in May of 1999. That's when it became obvious that this body was going to be dominated by inexperienced rookies, unused to the ways of modern government.

But some of those rookies, such as Peter Kilabuk, Olayuk Akesuk, Hunter Tootoo, and Glenn McLean, have matured into fairly effective politicans. And we've only lost two MLAs to criminal convictions. Given the drinking and dope habits of many Nunavut politicos, these embarassments could have got a lot worse.

Too many MLAs, however, have failed to mature. They're not serving themselves, their constituents, or the people of Nunavut in any capacity.

As a result, the Nunavut legislative assembly is still in the same state as the Nunavut government - a weak, fragile institution in need of development and careful nurturing.

When Nunavut's MLAs are in session, they can can be infuriating and sometimes frightening in their ignorance. We've seem them fritter away hours of valuable time asking and answering trivial questions that could easily have been settled by a phone call or two. At the same time, we've seen little discussion of Nunavut's real social and economic issues.

But this is not the time to throw our hands up in the air and give up. Like Nunavut, the legislative assembly is a work-in-progress.

So what can be done to make it better? The best solution, of course, is for the public to elect better MLAs on Feb. 16.

But the electoral system isn't perfect, and the best candidates don't always win.

Nunavut may have a small population, but we can take pride in the large numbers of talented, educated people who live here. The problem, however, is that many of them aren't interested in electoral politics. Many of Nunavut's most talented people are either pursuing careers as non-elected government officials, or in private business.

So until better people can be attracted to territorial politics, we can expect to see inexperienced, under-qualified MLAs sitting in our legislative assembly.

But after the election, the legislative assembly should invest much more in MLA orientation and training than it did the first time.

And the Nunavut legislative assembly should be treated as a continuous, long-term exercise in political development.

To that end, we humbly recommend the following for the next legislative assembly:

• Hire more and better staff people, especially members' assistants, to provide research, political advice, and other forms of support to MLAs, especially the rookies.

This is because many MLAs, and even some cabinet ministers, get terrible political advice from their executive assistants and constituency workers - and it shows. In particular, many regular MLAs need help doing research and preparing questions. Some don't even understand the legislation they're asked to vote on.

• The assembly should contract someone to do a long-term series of workshops to explain where the government gets its money, where it goes, how the tax system works, and how statistics are used to guide policy. This ought to include explanations of not only the formula financing agreement, but the many other intergovernmental agreements used to fund important programs such as housing, health and language development.

This is because many MLAs are especially weak on budgetary issues.

Right now, few ask good questions about budget issues, and they are not performing the watchdog role that the public expects.

• The assembly should also contract someone to do series of workshops on Nunavut's economy, and on business in Nunavut, perhaps using Conference Board of Canada materials as a point of departure.

This is because Nunavut's first group of MLAs, with some exceptions, have failed to display any understanding of Nunavut's economic problems. Many MLAs do not understand business, and many Nunavut business people do not have confidence in their MLAs. Over the next four years, however, Nunavut's economy will become an unavoidable issue, and MLAs had better be prepared to deal with it.

• The assembly should sponsor educational trips to give MLAs a chance to observe how other, more effective, consensus-based public bodies do their work, such as the Northwest Territories Legislative Assembly in Yellowknife, or the Kativik Regional Government in Nunavik. JB
  

November 28, 2003

The good, the bad, and now, the Prime Minister

We now know that on December 12, Jean Chrétien will finally make way for the Liberal party of Canada's new leader, Paul Martin.

When that happens, Canada will get a new prime minister.

If, as expected, Martin appoints a new cabinet, Nunavut officials will find themselves dealing with a brand-new federal government. Same party, different government.

In a strange way, Martin will face on that day the same problem that Nunavut faced on April 1, 1999: he has nowhere to go but down.

Like Nunavut four years ago, Martin is now surfing a wave of impossibly high expectations, mostly of his own creation. He promises a different kind of government, and vows that he will forge a "new national will" - but he has yet to reveal exactly what he means, how he plans to do it and how he will pay for it.

He does an excellent job of telling people what they want to hear, promising to spend more and cut more all at the same time. His honey-coated rhetoric, combined with piles of money and the help of an expert team of seasoned political operators, helped him make all other contenders for the Liberal leadership look like pygmies.

His intelligence, energy and leadership abilities, however, are undeniable, and he carries the distinction of being Canada's best finance minister in at least 50 years. If anyone can pull it off, he can. But sooner or later, and probably sooner, Martin will have to piss somebody off, and he'll end up as just another tarnished political survivor.

In the meantime, what does the prospect of a Paul Martin government mean for Nunavut?

If Paul Martin, the prime minister, treats Nunavut in the same manner as Paul Martin, the finance minister, then a Paul Martin government is not good news for Nunavut.

When Martin visited Nunavut in March of 2001 to sign a three-year extension of Nunavut's first formula financing agreement with Ottawa, the deal contained no increases in the growth-rate of Ottawa's annual transfer to Nunavut. This was only a week after Nunavut's finance minister, Kelvin Ng, warned in his budget speech that the government of Nunavut was beginning to exceed its financial limits.

Three years later, the government of Nunavut is indeed exceeding its financial limits, and is expected to produce an operating deficit of at least $50 million by March 31 next year. The only factor that's kept the GN from going either into long-term debt or being forced to make unpopular program cuts is the cash they save every year in unspent salary money - because many Nunavut government jobs still sit vacant.

So Nunavut's ability to meet the territory's urgent social needs over the next four years or so may not improve.

On the other hand, if Paul Martin, the prime minister, turns out to be the same Paul Martin who delivered that brilliant acceptance speech to last week's Liberal convention in Toronto, then Nunavut's propects may turn out to be a little brighter.

In that speech, Martin portrayed himself as a defender of Canada's health and social services network, and as a friend of the downtrodden - an old-fashioned, idealistic liberal. There were moments when Martin actually appeared to mean what he was saying.

If that turns out to be the Paul Martin who Nunavut must deal with, then Nunavut officials have something to hope for when they head to Ottawa with begging bowls in hand.

But one thing is clear. Nunavut officials who wants more from a Paul Martin government must be prepared to do their homework and provide properly researched substantiation for their demands - because Martin is not known to suffer fools gladly. JB

Praise the law

"The hatred, contempt and vilification of God's gay and lesbian children that claims the name of orthodoxy today is not condoned nor blessed by Jesus Christ. It has more to do with those forces of religious fearfulness that crucified Jesus than with the love for which he gave up his life."

So said Bishop Michael Ingham, head of the Anglican diocese of New Westminster, British Columbia, at a conference in England last month organized by the British Gay and Lesbian Christian Movement.

Whether you agree or disagree with his words, you cannot deny that Bishop Ingham, whose diocese permits the blessing of same-sex marriages within its member parishes, now speaks for millions of people who call themselves "Christian."

Pause for a moment and think about that.

Then consider these words, from the Rt. Rev. Andrew Atagotaaluk, head of the Anglican diocese of the Arctic. They're taken from a letter written to Paul Okalik, the premier of Nunavut, and tabled in the Nunavut legislative assembly Nov. 3, the day before MLAs were to debate Nunavut's human rights bill. They express his thoughts on same-sex marriage.

"There are many people within our jurisdiction, including myself, who see this as another step toward increasing disobedience to God's holy ordinances. It is encouraging and paving the way for increasing immoral behaviour and it goes against the traditional and doctrinal teachings of our Christian faith and the Word of God."

Whether you agree or disagree with those words, you cannot deny that Bishop Atagotaaluk also speaks for millions of people who call themselves "Christian."

Ingham and Atagotaaluk are both Anglican and Christian. Yet they hold diametrically opposing views on same-sex marriage.

It's worth noting that Canada's largest Protestant denomination, the United Church of Canada, with three million members and 3,677 congregations, has allowed individual ministers to bless same-sex marriages since 1990. The United Church officially affirmed its support for same-sex unions in 2000, and is now campaigning for same-sex marriage to be recognized in federal law.

Other denominations, especially the Roman Catholic church and various fundamentalist groupings, are on the other side.

Our purpose here is not to endorse one Christian position over another. It's simply to show you that there is little agreement on the recognition of gay and lesbian rights, or same-sex marriage, among Christians. The Christian world is as divided on those issues as the rest of society.

That's how religious freedom is supposed to work. The right to religious freedom lets churches hold their own internal debates and adopt their own internal positions on doctrinal matters without interference from government, or other churches. At the same time, churches must not interfere with the work of government.

But try telling that to Manitok Thompson, the MLA for Rankin Inlet South-Whale Cove, who seems to think and act as if the Nunavut legislative assembly is a branch of her particular church, and not a secular institution.

This is what she had to say in the Nunavut legislative assembly last week, while explaining why she is opposed to protecting gays and lesbians from discrimination in Nunavut's human rights bill:

"Are we going to change the laws of God? That we are going to accept the same-sex marriages and give it a blessing? Is that what we want? I do not think that we are going to change the laws of the Bible."

Nanulik MLA Patterk Netser, who put up a sign in his office window saying "Jesus is Lord over the Kivallig" went one step further in confusing the issue. He suggested that the views of one narrow Christian tendency are supported by "Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit."

"I believe that the laws we pass in Nunavut must also reflect our values and to include Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit in the process as people feel that it is an important tool. We are proud and we are happy with Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit," he said.

So there was a huge amount of confused garbage spouted in the legislative assembly last week about religious values, Inuit culture, and so on. And a lot of clear thinking too, led by MLAs like Jack Anawak, Ed Picco, Kelvin Ng and Hunter Tootoo.

But at the end of the day, all that is irrelevant.

There is only one reason why any person would oppose a law that makes it illegal to discriminate against gays and lesbians. And that reason is simple: they want the freedom to continue practising such discrimination.

They want the freedom to deny jobs, promotions and accommodations to gay and lesbian people whenever they feel like it. They want the freedom to practise the "hatred, contempt and vilification" that Bishop Ingham described in his speech last month.

Some fundamentalist denominations now active in Nunavut, as well as many Nunavut Anglicans, simply don't want the law to change. They are prepared to manipulate and intimidate legislatures into ensuring that the power of the government is used to force their values upon all of us. Thankfully, though, the law did change in Nunavut last week, and the forces of hatred, fear and superstition were defeated.

They will be back, however. When they are, right-thinking people must remind them that we live in a secular state, not a theocracy. Praise the law.

JB

November 7 , 2003

To live in hope

No one, absolutely no one in Nunavut will be happy to hear that with nearly two months left before year’s end, more Nunavummiut have died by their own hands in 2003 than in any other year.

And no one will be happy to hear that five of this year’s 31 suicide deaths occurred just last month. Given all the suicide prevention activities that we’ve seen over the past two or three years in Nunavut, this news is especially dispiriting.

But that is no reason to give up. Despair is not an option. For those who value life over death, the only option is hope.

Human life may be full of pain and struggle, especially in Nunavut — but no problem is big enough to be worth dying for. Now, more than ever, every resident of Nunavut must do what they can to carry that message to their friends, neighbours and family members, and especially to the young.

Nunavut residents should take heart from the work of the nine members of Inungni Sapujjijiit, the Government of Nunavut’s task force on suicide prevention and community healing.

This group of ordinary people, representing all regions of Nunavut, have produced a report that should be required reading for all government officials, especially the large numbers of non-Inuit who work in the helping professions. That’s because their report, Our Words Must Come Back to Us, contains honest and accurate descriptions of how Inuit really feel about the services they’re getting from government. Whether they want to hear it or not, this is information that non-Inuit need to hear.

It should also be required reading for all MLAs, hamlet councillors, and all members of local committees whose work is concerned with mental health and social well-being. That’s because it contains many recommendations that only communities themselves, not the territorial government, can carry out.

The Inungni Sapujjijiit task force includes members who know how it feels to lose a loved one to suicide. And yet, they haven’t given up. If they can still find a way to hope, then so can we.

JB

November 7 , 2003

Nunavut avoids embarrassment

This week, by a narrow margin of only two swing votes, Nunavut barely avoided the shame of becoming the only jurisdiction in Canada without a human rights law.

Luckily, those of us who believe that Nunavut residents deserve a good law to protect them from discrimination on the basis of race, religion, gender, disability — and sexual orientation — have something to be pleased about this week.

But those of us who are concerned about the quality of Government in Nunavut, especially within the legislative assembly, still have much to worry about, based on the spectacle that MLAs put on for us this past Tuesday.

Because the real division in the legislature this week was not between those who wish to protect gays and lesbians from discrimination and those who don’t. Nor was it between those who oppose same-sex marriage and those who don’t.

The real division was between those MLAs who read and understood the bill they were about to vote on, and those who had not.
“I can say that I don’t know much about the contents of this bill…” admitted one MLA, Jobie Nutarak of Pond Inlet.

There is no reason why this should be so. The purpose of Bill 12 is simple.

It’s to protect people from being denied jobs, housing and retail services because of how they were born.

Like all other provincial and territorial human rights laws, it’s list of grounds for discrimination includes “sexual orientation.” That means that you cannot deny a job, an apartment or service in a restaurant or store to a person simply because they are gay or lesbian.

And that’s all it means. It does not contain an endorsement of same-sex marriage, an important but entirely separate issue that is not even within the jurisdiction of the Nunavut government. Neither does it represent an endorsement of homosexuality. It simply means that those who are born gay or lesbian should not be forced to live their lives in a state of fear and degradation.

If MLAs — who have access to research staff, interpreter-translators, and many other forms of support — are incapable of working hard enough to understand the simple meaning of simple words that have been put in front of them to be voted on, then they were never fit to serve as MLAs in the first place.

JB

TOP

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

More Information