Nunavut’s new government: the first 100 days (Part 1)

ANNE CRAWFORD

The first 100 days of a new government are when the emerging administration reveals its first priorities, strengths and weaknesses.

Will the new government and leadership be decisive, innovative, calculating, or fumbling? After months of talk and promises, the 100-day mark is when we can take an early look at what they may actually accomplish.

In Nunavut, because of the time needed to choose our cabinet ministers, assessing a new government could be extended to about 120 days. To be fair, a few more days could be added for the pause experienced at Christmas time.

However, our government does not have more mandate days than any other, and an initial read on the fourth Nunavut legislative assembly should come due around the end of February or early March 2014.

Here are some markers to measure progress when that day comes:

1. Will social passing survive into 2014?

Social passing, and issues around the quality of education, were front and centre in the campaigns of many MLA hopefuls.

Currently, principals and teachers are bound by Program Directive CSS-2013 #1, a 15-page set of instructions signed by Education Minister Eva Aariak on Sept. 18, 2013. This directive makes it very, very difficult to “fail” a student.

Will the directive be thrown out or modified? What could replace it and who could be asked to participate in the development? Will the new government take advice from the public service, DEAs, strike out on its own, or find another way to act?

This will likely be the first test of a new education minister and will balance election promises against what the department deems best.

2. What will be the fate of the Iqaluit Airport P3 project?

Signed just eight days before the election was called, this $400-million — or $300-million — contract could be either a gateway project for transportation in a new era of development, or an abominable excess catering to the spoiled elites of Iqaluit.

We are told there is a termination clause in the contract, but it has a price tag. Will a new government accept, change or swallow hard and terminate this project? Is there a way to comfort voters in other regions without breaking the piggy bank? Will the ministers who signed off on this deal be praised by the new assembly as far-sighted or held to account for imposing on the capital plan choices for the next 30 years?

Not an easy decision, but within 120 days a new government will have to show its direction here, and we will see its first approaches to budgets and capital projects.

3. Where is the NNI headed?

The Nunavummi Nangminiqaqtunik Ikajuuti procurement rules were created in the early days of Nunavut, negotiated between the Nunavut government of the day and Nunavut Tunngavik Inc.

The NNI policy has recently been battered, the Auditor General of Canada described how useless its Inuit employment rules are, its appeals process has been ignored, the P3 project was removed from its scope, and NTI has advanced an alternate approach through the “BLG Report.” The policy may also face challenges based on the Canada-Europe trade agreement.

Many corporations and contractors are structured to capture the benefits of the NNI. These moneyed interests are unlikely to want change. On the other hand, much of the small business community has insisted that the NNI as currently written is bad for their survival.

This issue will show us the style of relationships between the new government and Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. and the extent that new assembly will involve, ignore or support Inuit organizations and the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement in its political decisions.

4. What will happen to human resources?

Late in its term, the last government made changes to the public service: legislation increased the powers of deputy ministers and made exempt employees more vulnerable to dismissal. A unique Integrity Act status was created for deputy ministers. The human resources portfolio became a branch of the finance department.

These changes drew some reaction from candidates during the election. Recent QEC lawsuits may have created some doubts about leaving HR decisions to individual corporations and departments, but it is too early to claim that changes have or have not worked.

And undoing all that re-structuring seems a futile way to address Inuit employment, which has not seen dramatic change under any government.

Will a new government reverse these decisions? Will they be quick and clean or adopt a “wait and see” or “muddle through” attitude? Will they address Inuit employment and the NLCA obligations or let the issue ride? The style and extent of changes will show us how reactionary, focused, distracted or accommodating the new government will be.

Next week, we look at three more markers for a 100-day assessment of the new assembly and anticipate some of the projects and issues we may see headed down the pipe in 2014.