Nutrition North is a progressive policy

Why is it that in the article: “Nunavik co-ops not ready for new food scheme: ‘Don’t buy diapers from the retailer who didn’t manage his affairs’” only the people criticizing the policy get a voice?

Isn’t this a progressive policy, one that stops subsidies for junk food?

In a region that is increasingly struggling with health problems such as diabetes and heart disease, associated mainly with a change in lifestyle and diet from very healthy country food to low-quality store-bought food, isn’t such a policy addressing these very issues?

Isn’t it coherent with other policies that the region is trying to implement to address health issues?

And isn’t a policy that encourages better planning to reduce costs a progressive one? Shouldn’t we be encouraging more of these kinds of policies?

I am not clear on why the newspaper is giving so much emphasis to the few critics of the policy who have very very weak arguments on the subject.

Caroline Larrivée
Kuujjuaq

Editor’s note: We have published two editorials expressing gneral approval of the Nutrition North Canada program. However, in news coverage we attempt to report the positions of all stakeholders, including positions taken by the program’s critics.

Email your letters to editor@nunatsiaq.com.

Nunatsiaq News welcomes letters to the editor. But we are under no obligation to publish any given letter at any given time.

In our print edition, we usually print letters on a first-come, first-served, space-available basis. In our online edition, we usually print letters as soon as we are able to prepare them for publication.

We edit all letters for length, grammar, punctuation, spelling, taste and libel. You may withhold your name by request, but we must know who you are before we publish your letter.