The people of Nunavik will be just fine

I’m writing in response to your editorial about the recent referendum in Nunavik. I must acknowledge that there were definitely positive aspects of the agreement, increased accountability for the organizations being one of them.

I also want to say, in my own humble opinion that nothing was lost in rejecting this agreement, though we did gain one thing. The door is still open to negotiate something better, something the people of Nunavik can be comfortable with, an agreement that people understand, and I hope that understanding can come from direct involvement, rather than whirlwind consultations.

I also want to ask how, or why it’s “clear” that we voted no because of “fear and insecurity.”

I would say yes, fear was definitely factor in the rejection of the NRG final agreement, but not necessarily fear of ourselves. Fear of continual manipulation by the leadership was a major topic in discussions as well.

Fear of the Province of Quebec’s big powerful voice, the fear of being even more oppressed, financially restricted and culturally taken over were major sources of fear in Nunavik. Voters who spoke “no” were labelled fearmongers, while voters who pushed for “yes” were allowed to freely blend religion into politics.

It is constitutionally recognized in Canada that politics and religion should be separated; to establish a government in Nunavik with the foundation that the agreement was sent from God would not have been a healthy decision for the people of Nunavik.

And that “paralyzing obsession with identity” we have, could be, positively, twisted into “passionate urge to maintain distinct identity,” but of course it was not. It’s such a shame when people are chastised, insulted and have their intelligence questioned because they voted a certain way or have a certain opinion.

People are too afraid to speak out about anything in Nunavik. Wouldn’t you be, if your employment, housing, family and social life would be directly impacted if you did?

Many people in Nunavik face this reality and we need to break that cycle before we institute any new type of governance, considering we live in a democracy.

People voted “no” to this agreement because they had the democratic right to do so, and over half the population of Nunavik exercised that right. Unfortunately, we are now being questioned on our decision, we’re being told we’re wrong?

Don’t forget, there was a referendum because we were given the option to reject it, just as equally as we were given the option to adopt it. On April 27, 2011 the people of Nunavik spoke and they should be congratulated for it, rather than criticized.

Anyway, I just want to finish with a comment about young people in Nunavik. I’ve spent the last few years working directly with young people and I have no fear whatsoever in knowing my future is in their hands.

The youth of Nunavik, though plagued with issues like suicide, alcohol and drug abuse, under-education and lack of housing, display great courage and potential in facing their future. Almost every young person I spoke to leading up to voting day had something to say about the NRG final agreement, and the stark majority of those I spoke with were against it.

I think it’s clear here that youth in Nunavik are becoming more aware of their power as a demographic, which should be recognized. Despite all the negativity surrounding youth in Nunavik, there’s no debating that the young people of this region are intelligent, they are capable and ready to do anything.

I think we’re going to be just fine.

Janice Grey
Aupaluk

(Due to attempts to post abusive personal attacks that are irrelevant to this article, comments are now closed.)


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.