Current ads
Jobs
Tenders
Notices
General

Click below

February 27, 1987

On January 15, 1987, Nunavut and western leaders signed the Iqaluit agreement on division of the Northwest Territories — setting a tentative land claim boundary between the Inuit and Dene as the political line dividing Nunavut from the Northwest Territories. But some Nunavut MLAs still clung to the idea of including the Inuvialuit in Nunavut. Though the Iqaluit agreement's boundary fell apart after Dene chiefs refused to ratify it a month later, the final Nunavut boundary approved in a1992 plebiscite was close to the line drawn in 1987.

Curley says No to boundary agreement

KELLY CURWIN and JIM BELL
Nunatsiaq News

IQALUIT — Kivalliq South MLA Tagak Curley says he's going to vote "no" to the Constitutional Alliance's boundary agreement signed in Iqaluit last January.

Curley said he won't settle for anything less than the boundary suggested in the Inuit Tapirisat of Canada's original Nunavut proposal made in 1975. That proposal put the Beaufort Sea region in Nunavut.

But another Keewatin leader, Peter Ernerk, president of the Keewatin Inuit Association, says he supports the Alliance's boundary, which, to the dismay of Inuvialuit leaders like Nellie Cournoyea and Roger Gruben, leaves the Beaufort region in the west.

Curley says that people in his region are waiting to see what other people say — such as mayors and other leaders — before they'll support the boundary agreement.

"People from the Keewatin are not shaken and rattled by all the good promises," said Curley, referring to the boundary deal that is being debated in the Legislative Assembly this week.

"They don't jump to the bait that quickly. Once all the cards are laid out, I think then people will be for the proposal the way it is set out now, or for the 1975 proposal," Curley told Nunatsiaq News in an interview Tuesday morning.

Curley says that he is "not at all in favour of the boundary agreement because the original intention of the Nunavut proposal when we put it forward in 1975 was to leave the Inuit people in one geographic area and to have that strength and unity among the Inuit people. That was the foremost goal — to keep them united and strong. We are not achieving that with the new proposal. What we are achieving is something symbolic rather than strong. I don't agree with it at all."

Although Curley says he is not lobbying other Nunavut MLAs to vote "no" to the proposal, other sources say a great deal of lobbying is going on behind closed doors.

Earlier this month, John Amagoalik, chairman of the Nunavut Constitutional Forum, declared after a meeting with the Nunavut caucus in Yellowknife that the capital of Nunavut would not be located in Iqaluit.

This has upset many Iqaluit residents, business people especially, who fear that the capital will be located in the Keewatin, most likely Rankin Inlet.

The Iqaluit chamber of commerce requested an emergency meeting with Iqaluit MLA Dennis Patterson and Iqaluit's town council has said they feel the question of the capital shouldn't be dealt with until after the boundary has been ratified.

Some people have suggested that Amagoalik, in his earnest wish to ensure support for division from members of the Nunavut caucus in the Legislative Assembly, may have bowed to political pressure from the Keewatin.

Curley and Kivalliq North MLA Gordon Wray have said they are opposed to the agreement, along with Nunakput MLA Nellie Cournoyea and Kitikmeot West MLA Red Pedersen.

Curley says Amagoalik came out with his remarks following some tough questioning from Nunavut MLAs about things like financing and the economic base of the new territory.

Ernerk, who is also vice-chairman of NCF, told Nunatsiaq News that he didn't think there was any pressure put on anybody (during the caucus meeting). "But I am not ready to make any comments about any questions that might have arisen out of private meetings. This is not my place and I am not going to point it out."

Curley admits that while he will never support Iqaluit as the capital of Nunavut, "Obviously, the capital of Nunavut means a lot more to the people of Baffin than the spirit of Nunavut, trying to keep people in one geographic region. Their intention is that the capital remains in Baffin. For me, there is more to division than having the capital right next to your town. That's where the difference lies. People in the Keewatin and Kitikmeot regions realize that they will likely lose a lot. Nunavut should not go ahead just for the sake of dividing the territories at any cost. That is dangerous."

Meanwhile, the Legislative Assembly's visitor's gallery in Yellowknife was packed on Tuesday for the beginning of the boundary debate. The opening presentation was made by NCF chairman John Amagoalik.

On Wednesday, former NCF chairman Dennis Patterson attacked Curley and pleaded with MLAs not to kill the idea of Nunavut.

And more questions have raised been about the Dene/Metis-TFN land claim line — which the division boundary follows.

Recent statements by Dene and Inuit community leaders living near that proposed line suggested that the two land claims organizations may have difficulties getting it settled for good.

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

More Information