Did KIA negotiate bad deal on Meadowbank?

I read with interest the story on the first gold brick to come out of the new gold mine in Baker Lake’s back door in the Kivalliq region. It is good indeed to celebrate this occasion.

I was concerned with the absent Inuit impact and benefit agreement components that the Kivalliq Inuit Association negotiated on behalf of the Inuit.

They seemed to have agreed to a 30 per cent level for Inuit employment, which is very low when the land claim agreement strives for a representative level of 85 per cent.

Why did they agree to such low levels? Their profit sharing scheme with the company seems weak and minimal, at very low levels. It seems the mine got everything it wanted.

It is sad that Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. did not see fit to share the various IIBAs negotiated before the Meadowbank IIBA with the Nunavut Inuit associations that have a higher level of benefits for their peoples.

The QIA have a much better deal with Mary River than KIA with Meadowbank and those gains made in that agreement should be the standard.

Why did the KIA shoot so low?

Abraham Tagalik
Iqaluit
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.

All letters are edited 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.