Nunavut candidates share approaches to Nutrition North, better infrastructure
Improving access to food listed among top priorities for all three vying for federal seat
All three Nunavut candidates call for airstrip infrastructure improvements to enhance food security in Nunavut. From left are Conservative James T. Arreak, New Democrat Lori Idlout and Liberal Kilikvak Kabloona. (File photos)
Improving access to food in Nunavut is a priority for all three of the territory’s federal candidates, but the question is how best to tackle the issue.
They all shared concerns about the Nutrition North Canada food subsidy program, currently under review by the federal government.
“We all know that Nutrition North is not working,” said Lori Idlout, the incumbent NDP candidate in the April 28 federal election.
“We need to make sure that Nutrition North is supporting people, not for-profit companies like the Northwest Company.”
Idlout said Nutrition North should be replaced with a new system that enhances communities’ ability to harvest country food.
Conservative candidate James T. Arreak said any continuation of Nutrition North after its review will require changes to the way the program is delivered.
“The Liberal government has dropped the ball,” he said. “I would want to push the government to review Nutrition North.”
The Liberal candidate, Kilikvak Kabloona, said she trusts the review process that’s currently underway.
“I value getting expert advice and working with communities on solutions,” she said. “I don’t think it’ll take too long, but I think it’s important.”
The federal government created Nutrition North in 2011 to make essential foods more accessible and affordable in the North. But over the years, concerns were raised that retailers take the subsidy but don’t pass the savings on to consumers.
Kabloona highlighted the success of the Harvesters Support Grant, a program run through Nutrition North designed to support hunting, harvesting and food sharing.
“I’m really pleased to hear from community members that that program is doing some important work, and I would advocate additional funding,” she said.
Idlout identified country food as the foundation for food security in the hamlets.
She advocated for a new program that would provide hamlets with community freezers and processing plants to assist with storage and distribution of country food.
“It has to be a well-rounded program that allows for Inuit culture to be used by all Inuit,” she said. “It has to be better reflective of the Inuit world view and how Inuit thrive in the Arctic.”
Arreak added that he believes hunters need tax breaks to decrease their cost of living.
“Hunters have been also exposed to carbon tax, escalating gas prices, making it even more daunting for hunters to put traditional food on the table,” he said.
The three candidates all agreed that a major component to reducing the cost of living in the North means investing in infrastructure.
“We have to ensure that we have the adequate infrastructure to support the supply of food through airstrips,” said Arreak.
Some hamlets simply need airstrips to be extended by a few metres in order to accommodate larger planes with more freight, said Idlout, adding increasing money to improve infrastructure has to be a “huge” priority.
Kabloona agreed with her rivals’ sentiments.
“There’s just so many things that are more expensive in Nunavut because of our lack of infrastructure,” Kabloona said.
All three candidates also emphasized the need to continue the Inuit Child First Initiative as necessary to improve food security for Nunavummiut. The Liberal government has said it will extend funding for the program for another year, however that still needs Parliament’s approval.
The food voucher program provides $500 per month for every Inuit child or youth under 18 for food, with an additional $250 for diapers and baby formula for families with children under the age of four.
BLUE WAVE!
Will be “BLUE WAVE BYE-BYE” – Remember these are the guys that created Nutrition North for their corporate buddies.
There is a lot more to the Inuit Child First Initiative than the food voucher program. The Liberal program states that a renewed Liberal government will “Continue to fund Inuit Child First Initiative.” ISC officials have stated in writing that the food voucher program has been terminated. The Liberal candidate in Nunavut may be trying to convince voters that a vote for her is a vote to continue the food voucher program – but the Liberal Party has NOT committed to that.
On the topic of the Nutrition North program, Lori Idlout gave very good insight. And, Kilikvak Kabloona also made a number of very valid points. All three candidates agree on the need for better infrastructure, which is a federal realm. The Inuit Child First Initiative is also something that is valued by all as well.
I really like Idlout’s idea of community freezers and processing plants to support the storage and preparation of country foods. Incidentally, I have seen freezers in a few communities, but there seem to be a lot of communities with no such freezers. Furthermore, having facilities to support the preservation of fish and meat would also be helpful. Idlout gets top marks for proposing a “made-in-Nunavut” solution.
Meanwhile, Arreak’s call for tax breaks strikes me as being more of a repetition of Pierre Poilievre’s simplistic “axe-the-tax” mantra. Although I agree that a tax rebate on fuel for hunting and fishing is a great idea, such a rebate should be targeted specifically towards Indigenous hunting and fishing and other food-gathering activities, and not the fuelling of enormous gas-guzzling monster-size pickup trucks that seem to be almost exclusively used to ferry individual commuters in the small communities that we have here in Nunavut. (Iqaluit, for example, is already overrun by huge pickup trucks and SUVs, the vast majority of which always seem to be carrying just one person. And, it is extremely rare to see these vehicles to be actually carrying bona-fide cargo of quantities meriting such vehicle sizes. The same, of course, can be seen in cities down south.)
(Incidentally, Canada had a well-designed carbon tax that worked very effectively to tax the gas-guzzlers and put the money as rebates into the pockets of those who are less well-off, therefore who do not drive monster vehicles as daily commuters, or who simply use nonmotorized transportation or other solutions. But thanks to Poilievre, the carbon tax is gone, thus taking the carbon rebates with it. Carney effectively had no choice but to follow, given that the simplistic power of Poilievre’s megaphone appeals to people who do not take the time to think critically.)
So, if someone can set up a tax-rebate system for hunters who actually go out on the land to hunt (with ATVs and snowmobiles) and who go out on the water to fish (with powerboats, which granted need to be towed by pickup trucks), that would be great. But it should not become a tax rebate for monster gas-guzzling vehicles clogging the streets of Iqaluit and other communities on an everyday basis.
On another note: arguably the biggest cost of hunting and fishing tends to be the cost of owning and maintaining snowmobiles, ATVs, and fishing boats, and not the fuel itself. With this aspect in mind, why has Arreak not touched on this topic? For example, does it really cost $70,000 to produce and deliver a simple welded-aluminum fishing boat? (This is something that can easily be made from recycled pop cans, if they were actually collected diligently!) And, does it really cost $20,000 to make and deliver a snowmobile? And, why does it cost $10,000 in parts to overhaul a snowmobile? These are all topics worth exploring in the context of country foods, food security, and food sovereignty.
Other topics include the effects of climate change on food sources, and so on. Those are topics for another day.
On the topic of the Nutrition North program: Indeed, as all three candidates have noted, this well-intentioned program has been taken advantage of by grocery companies that jack up prices in order to compensate for the subsidies and thus pad their margins. This has been extensively documented in past news articles. (Incidentally, the same type of profiteering has occurred with other government-subsidy programs, including various energy-efficiency programs offered by the Federal Government. The prices of the upgrades got jacked up by greedy vendors because they knew that their customers were getting rebates.)
Unfortunately, protecting the Nutrition North program (or any similar program) against corporate profiteering will not be easy. The only way that I can think of would be along the lines of a rigorous accounting system that actually mandates specific maximum end-user prices, while taking into account independently verified wholesale pricing (e.g. what the grocery company pays for a bag of carrots or red beets) as well as the cost of transportation, and while also allowing for reasonable profit margins to cover the cost of running the store (i.e. the store need to be operated and maintained, staff need to be paid fair wages, and so on). Perhaps some kind of profit-margin stipulation would be needed (and this would be needed on a per-food item, therefore literally a per-SKU level).
I would be wholly in favour of a 1% margin on healthy foods like fresh fruit and vegetables and other non-processed foods, but a 100% profit margin on junk foods and pop and sugar-added items and ultra-processed foods. Granted, the Nutrition North program does already have a graduated scale that roughly reflects the healthiness of food choices, but this could use further amplification.
Yes, it’s expensive to own and operate ATVs, Snowmobiles and Boats. 70K for a boat is the cheaper end of a well equipped boat. Outboard motor’s alone is 25K plus (Cheaper models). A lot of marine goers up north are going for the bigger boats, bigger outboard motor’s for the obvious reason is safety.
As a nunavutmiut I would want my marine medical to be fit to work. I’ve emailed health care workers, talk to lawyers, how do I get my marine medical to be fit so I may return to work.
No work just being on income support is really boring.
For freezers to work, they need power. Spend money on stable power and paved roads to support keeping the power on.
Creating impediments by doing it the cheap way, will only cost later in the end.
Saying “we know that nutrition North isn’t working” without qualifying is nothing more than a dog whistle to Ms. Idlout’s base. Food prices are up everywhere, in part to the Lib/NDP .72 cent dollar, for example. Did she mention that? Doubt it. There’s several issues impacting Nutrition North, but in order to address a challenge, it is important to have an open, honest and frank discussion about it, and most importantly, deal in FACTS. If the Northwest Co. is guilty, then fine, we deal with it, but these off the cuff statements solve nothing.
One candidate vote multiple times to increase the carbon tax, one candidate’s party implemented the carbon tax.
There is still carbon tax on marine diesel and aviation fuel making everything in our communities more expensive.
Want to pay less taxes vote Conservative.
Ever more – want a better and more just country and society – vote Conservative.
If we elect a Liberal they will do everything in their power to take away our hunting firearms, while they allow the criminals to shoot up our cities.
Crime is just getting worse. Liberals are pretending to do something by banning more and more hunting firearms but they are doing nothing to lock up the criminals who are smuggling and selling illegal firearms, who are shooting up our streets.
Go after criminals, make tougher penalties for possession, selling, smuggling illegal firearms, no bail, automatic sentences
NDP and Liberal solution tax tax tax and more taxes. Canadians are already taxed enough.
Liberals have proven they cannot manage our tax dollars effectively and always looking at ways to funnel our tax dollars to Liberal insiders. How many scandals in the past 10 years Billions upon Billions of our tax dollars in the pockets of the Liberal elite.
Sick of this system
Who is the better candidate for Nunavut.
Take away the party, take away Red, Orange and Blue, Forget, the party leaders, PP, MC and JS, just forget them all and pretend these three people all independent.
Our of these these three people who represents your views the best. Who will speak best for you?
Now go vote for them, vote for the person who you think will represent you the best.
Personally I am torn and will end up making a last minute gut decision who I want representing me.