April 7, 2006
IPG funding deal may
be less than meets the eye
No firm funding commitment
from Ottawa yet
JIM
BELL
When is an "agreement"
not an "agreement?"
For officials at Nunavut
Tunngavik Inc., it's when one side says they'll do something - but without checking
to make sure they can pay for it.
NTI says that's what happened
last December and January, when federal government negotiators "agreed"
to a new multi-year funding deal for Nunavut's family of environmental co-management
boards, known as "Institutions of Public Government," or "IPGs."
Under it, Ottawa would
give the IPGs about $15 million a year between now and 2013 - an increase of
about $2 million a year over what Ottawa now gives the IPGs.
But until the federal government,
through the Treasury Board, approves that extra million, NTI says there's no
deal.
And in a letter to Nunatsiaq
News this week, NTI even says that conciliator Thomas Berger was "misled"
last December and January when federal negotiators created the impression that
a done deal exists.
"On the basis of my
recommendations, the parties have found themselves able to agree to funding
for the work of these boards in the sum of $15 million per year for the balance
of the 10-year implementation period, 2003-2013," Berger said in a March
1 letter to Jim Prentice, the DIAND minister, attached to Berger's final report
on the implementation contract talks.
Berger was appointed last
year to help revive failed talks between NTI, the Government of Nunavut and
Ottawa aimed at producing a new implementation contract for the Nunavut land
claims agreement.
Berger's interim report,
issued last fall, recommended various ways in which the three parties could
reach agreement on IPG funding.
And after a meeting on
Dec. 21, held with Berger's encouragement, the three sides worked out the basis
for the IPG funding deal, which was refined further in a meeting of the Nunavut
Implementation Panel on Jan. 24 and Jan. 25, and then attached to Berger's final
report.
But NTI says that by the
time the IPG agreement was finished, DIAND negotiators inserted a set of words
that, in effect, amount to an escape clause:
"All recommendations
are subject to approval of the Parties and their respective internal approval
processes."
The federal government's
"internal approval process" for the spending of new money is an agency
called the Treasury Board. Federal government departments are not allowed to
spend new money unless the Treasury Board says yes.
And Treasury Board approval
can't happen without the prior approval of the federal cabinet.
NTI officials told Nunatsiaq
News this week that DIAND has not yet sent a submission to cabinet to ask
for the extra money, and that if that happens at all, it may not be occur until
the fall.
And they also say that
DIAND has instructed the IPGs - organizations such as the Nunavut Wildlife Management
Board and the Nunavut Water Board - to plan their 2006-07 budgets on the basis
of their old funding arrangements.
Yet another issue that
worries NTI is the status of Berger's recommendations on a little-known, but
important body called the Nunavut Arbitration Board, and another body called
the Nunavut Implementation Panel
The job of the implementation
panel is to monitor the implementation of the land claims agreement. The job
of the arbitration board is to help solve disputes over how the agreement is
implemented.
Berger recommended that
a dispute resolution process be built into the implementation panel, and that
a binding arbitration process be created for the arbitration board.
The last implementation
contract for the Nunavut land claims agreement expired March 31, 2003. Talks
aimed at creating a new one fell apart in late 2004.
Berger's final report on
his conciliation efforts was submitted to NTI, the GN and the federal government
on March 1, and leaked last week to Nunatsiaq News.
TOP
|