Okalik's reaction lukewarm, but he says it's a good start

Canada should adopt a careful, step-by-step approach to the devolution of new responsibilities to the Government of Nunavut, says a report issued June 12 by Paul Mayer, the federal government's ministerial representative for Nunavut devolution.

"I suggest that the GN and the federal government take one step at a time in the devolution of responsibilities. Given the enormous challenges faced by the GN in assuming its current responsibilities, I would recommend a phased approach to devolution," Mayer said in his report.

Mayer began work on the report in November 2006, when Jim Prentice, the northern affairs minister, appointed him to study the idea of negotiating a devolution agreement with Nunavut.

Such a deal would give big new powers to the GN: the power to manage public lands and natural resources, with a share of royalty money generated by oil, gas and mineral production.

Mayer suggests this will not occur soon.

But he said in an interview that an agreement-in-principle on devolution may still be possible by 2008 and that a final agreement by 2011 or 2012 is still "doable" if the two sides can agree on a negotiating process and what issues ought to be on the table.

But he says the biggest problem that Canada and Nunavut must tackle is Nunavut's shortage of skilled professionals, which damages the quality of governance in the territory.

"Bluntly said, if this issue cannot be satisfactorily dealt with, then the right conditions will not be in place to transfer federal responsibilities," Mayer said.

Mayer found that the GN already has trouble handling its current responsibilities, raising the question of whether Nunavut is ready to take on more.

"In light of the significant challenges identified in this report that the GN faces in assuming its current responsibilities, the easy answer would be no," Mayer says.

But he also says that answer is unnacceptable, because devolution is a top priority for the Nunavut government and enjoys widespread political support.

He points out that the federal government, under Paul Martin's Liberal government, committed itself to a devolution agreement with Nunavut in December of 2004, and that Stephen Harper's Tory government continued that commitment in repeated statements.

"In fact, the devolution train left the station in December 2004," Mayer said.

Mayer went on to say that "many conditions are in place to begin devolution negotiations."

For example, unlike the Northwest Territories, Nunavut has only one land claim agreement, one aboriginal people, and one land claim settlement area, simplifying the process.

He also said the GN and Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. have "properly analyzed" the issues that would be on the table.

As for NTI's role, Mayer said NTI must be at the negotiating table so they can ensure that Inuit rights are protected. But he said NTI should not get a veto and that Nunavut and Canada are legally permitted to negotiate and sign a bilateral deal.

In looking at Nunavut's ability to handle more responsibility, Mayer pulls no punches.

In discussing Nunavut society, he lists many of the well-known social ills that plague Nunavummiut: high crime rates, widespread substance abuse, family violence, poor health status and overcrowded housing.

He says Nunavut's education system must do a better job: "An appropriate education system is essential to the success of Nunavut. The one now in place is currently failing."

As for the quality of government, he said Nunavut faces a "significant governance challenge," mostly created by high staff turnover and numerous unfilled jobs.

Paul Okalik, the Nunavut premier, does not like these sections of the report, but he said he "remains optimistic" and is willing to work with Jim Prentice to move the devolution process into actual negotiations.

"I don't neccessarily agree with all the contents of that report, but I must say it's a start and I look forward to good discussions with Minister Prentice and his government," Okalik said.

But he said Mayer's characterization of Nunavut's education system is unfair.

"We are seeing record numbers of Inuit graduating from our high schools. There's no mention of that in the report. We're developing the expertise and with time, it will be there," Okalik said.

Okalik said he "doesn't necessarily disagree" with the idea of a phased approach to devolution, pointing out that some government services were contracted back from the NWT until 2001, and that a similar approach could be used in devolving land and resource management.

That, he said, would give Nunavut time to build capacity and develop expertise.

As for the issue of whether control over oil and gas resources lying under the seabed in Nunavut's internal waters should be devolved to the GN, Okalik said he believes the "will is there" to resolve the current disagreement between Nunavut and Canada.

Right now, the federal government is unwilling to include Nunavut's lucrative seabed resources in devolution talks. Okalik insisted that they must be included, and he said that giving those resources to Nunavut would strengthen Canadian sovereignty in the High Arctic.

"We want to do our part to ensure that we assert Canadian sovereignty in our waters," Okalik said.

It's expected that Prentice will study the report, then decide when and how to move forward on Nunavut devolution.