Nunavik looks to self-government meeting

“Next step” up for discussion in Kuujjuaq Nov. 15 to 17

By SARAH ROGERS

A voter marks his ballot April 27, 2011, when Nunavik voted against the proposed Nunavik Regional Government model. Now, Makivik Corp. will host a three-day meeting Nov. 15 to 17 to decide what happens next. (PHOTO BY SARAH ROGERS)


A voter marks his ballot April 27, 2011, when Nunavik voted against the proposed Nunavik Regional Government model. Now, Makivik Corp. will host a three-day meeting Nov. 15 to 17 to decide what happens next. (PHOTO BY SARAH ROGERS)

Members of the Inuit Citizens Assembly of Nunavik hope an upcoming meeting on self-governance will produce a clear “bargaining position” for the region to return to the negotiating table with Quebec.

The assembly, made up of a group of Nunavimmiut who voted down the proposed Nunavik Regional Government last April, requested the meeting to clarify the region’s position on any future negotiations.

Now, Makivik Corp. has agreed to host a three-day “special meeting on the Nunavik Regional Government” in Kuujjuaq starting Nov. 15.

“We’re going to be there to discuss what is the next step,” said Jobie Epoo, a spokesperson for the Inuit Citizens Assembly of Nunavik, which goes by the acronym, I-CAN.

I-CAN has a few key points they want addressed in any future negotiations for more regional power: one is the preservation of the Inuit language and culture; another concerns fair revenues for local resource development.

And the group hasn’t ruled out separation from the province of Quebec as one option to gain more autonomy, Epoo said.

“We had some serious difficulty accepting the presented agreement last April, so I-CAN will push for harmonious discussion between the governments and Nunavik on self-governance.”

Two-thirds of eligible voters in Nunavik voted April 27 against the proposed NRG, a model that would have merged regional organizations under an elected Nunavik Assembly. The agreement’s second phase provided for negotiations for new powers for the region, but many Nunavimmiut said they felt that provision was too vague.

I-CAN has said Makivik can’t continue any negotiations on a proposed Nunavik government until it receives a renewed mandate from its members.

The meeting will happen “with respect and on equal footing,” Epoo said.

“We’ve never had that in the past,” he said. “We feel strongly that we’ve never had a bargaining position and we’re going to explore with an open mind what we can use as one. We’ve got nothing to lose.”

Epoo and two other Inukjuak-based I-CAN members will attend the upcoming meeting, but other participants have yet to be determined.

Makivik recently sent out invitations to the landholding corporations in each community, as well as to representatives for Killiniq and Chisasibi.

In each community, landholding corporations will collaborate with municipal councils to chose three people plus one youth to attend the meeting.

Representatives from Makivik Corp. and other major regional organizations like the Kativik Regional Government, the Katiivk School Board and the Nunavik Regional are also expected to be there.

Those details were hammered out at a technical meeting held in Kuujjuaq last month, which Epoo attended.

“Basically, we said we wanted as many ordinary people as possible to attend, to make sure the communities were well-represented,” he said.

So it’s not clear how many of the meeting’s participants will be I-CAN members.

Epoo said he couldn’t put a number of the group’s membership.

Once I-CAN is incorporated – a process that has begun – the group will be seeking official membership from Nunavimmiut.

Nunavik beneficiaries who live outside of Nunavik and voted in the NRG referendum last April should also be included in Makivik’s upcoming meeting, some say.

In a letter addressed to Makivik president Pita Aatami, Inukjuak resident Johnny Kasudluak said Nunavik beneficiaries living in southern Canada should be included in the special assembly.

“Involvement to these Inuit beneficiaries is not a privilege, but a right,” Kasudluak wrote.

Share This Story

(0) Comments