Fiscal responsibility and “fixing the budget” are two goals James Arreak, the Conservative candidate for Nunavut, hopes to address if elected on April 28 to address the cost-of-living crisis in the territory. (Photo courtesy of James Arreak)
Arreak champions Conservative approach to economic growth in Nunavut
Candidate talks ‘fixing the budget’ and supporting the middle-class in lead-up to election
Nunatsiaq News is profiling candidates in the April 28 federal election. In Nunavut, incumbent NDP MP Lori Idlout is running against Liberal Kilikvak Kabloona and Conservative James Arreak.
James Arreak says Nunavummiut are facing a cost-of-living crisis — and that’s a big reason why he’s running for the Conservatives.
Arreak, 58, who grew up in Pond Inlet and has lived in Iqaluit since 1996, said his experience in managing to live with limited resources drew him to the Conservative party’s fiscal policies.
“I was raised to be a hunter,” Arreak said. “It’s a big part of how I put food on the table, support my cultural skills, and also support the greater community in terms of providing traditional food.”
This understanding of resource management, he said, aligns with the Conservatives’ approach to fiscal responsibility and “fixing the budget.”
“The last government has overtaxed [middle-class families], and it’s not fair,” Arreak said.
“People are struggling to put food on the table, and overtaxing isn’t helping hunters or those trying to make ends meet,” he said, drawing on his background in finance, which includes a master of business administration degree.
Arreak also pointed to the carbon tax and gun regulations as other obstacles hunters face when trying to put food on the table. (Liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney eliminated the consumer carbon tax last month).
When asked why he decided to run for MP now, Arreak pointed to the lessons instilled in him by his father.
“My father brought me up saying that I have to be educated, have experience, develop myself and gain strengths to one day help people and serve the community,” he said.
Arreak served as CEO of Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. for almost six years and was an assistant chief negotiator with the Qikiqtani Inuit Association.
Most recently, he worked as vice-president of corporate services for Qulliq Energy Corp. for two years.
“I feel like at this point, with the amount of experience I have now and the education I have achieved, I’m ready to play a role in government, particularly in Ottawa, and give a voice to Nunavut,” he said.
That voice will be in Inuktitut, as Arreak said he hopes to deliver his speeches in Parliament in his first language.
Given the “tight schedule” with election day fast approaching on April 28, he said he is trying his best to visit every region and community, with Rankin Inlet and Cambridge Bay the next stops on his campaign tour.
After recently visiting Igloolik, Arreak highlighted the importance of infrastructure.
“Supporting the building of small craft harbour development infrastructure is a party priority and is something I want to support, if I’m elected,” he said.
Arreak said he hopes to be a voice for Nunavut in Ottawa, whether he gets “voted as part of the opposition or part of government.”
“The reason why I’m pushing people to vote for me is because I want to be in the inner circle of government, which is where the influence is,” he said.
“We only have one vote, one voice in Ottawa, and we gotta make it count.”
Thank you James for giving us a choice of anything besides the NDP or LIBS in this coming election!
I believe the majority of middle -class families, in Nunavut, are non-Inuit. Latest Statistics Canada defines ( in monetary-terms) middle–class families earning between $52,875.00 – $142,000.00 per year. So, James Arreak will put his financial support to the middle-class and no mention of how he will help the majority of Nunavummiut.
I would suggest there are more middle class Inuit families in Nunavut than non-Inuit.
Many many more in the Iqaluit area, that’s for sure.
You can see lots of thump down on that comment that main lots of local have not understand nothing it mean than James will help the richest people and not the poorest Inuit family in Nunavut, it also proves then Nunavut doesn’t have a clue of what going on in the world mostly here in Canada but where i’am happy its Nunavut have only one seat in Ottawa.
Looking at a 2022 study on poverty in Nunavut, it states that as high 69% of Inuit population in territory could be living in Poverty. If we know that 85% of the population of say 40,000 is Inuit, that means 34,000 Inuit of the population of NUnavut is Inuit. Even with 69% of them living in poverty, there are still more Inuit who are likely middle class and higher compared to all non Inuit population, including non inuit living in poverty. There would be double the amount of Inuit (~13000) not in poverty than total Inuit(poor or not). I would say there are more Inuit Middle class families than non inuit on that basis.
I read an article where Saskatchewan is going to need 13,000 mine workers of all sorts.
🤘🎵🎵🥳🥳🥳
Mr. Carney did not eliminate the carbon tax, he reduced it to zero, meaning he can raise it again as soon as he’s elected. Printing money, and living beyond our means (higher debt), results in inflation, which is a tax on top of all of the other taxes. The Liberals have done an awful job over the past ten years, but they dog whistle, they gaslight, and they pretty much scare folks into voting for them again. You have my support, Mr. Arreak, but I think we’re stuck in a “devil you know” situation.
Loyalty as great a value as it is will be to the Conservative Party of Canada should J.ames be elected. There is not much wiggle room permitted. As we saw with Jody Wilson-Raybould when she defied the PM, ministers even are forced to toe the line. To remaining silent on #enocide is bad; It does not get worst than that. Think, vote Green.
BRING IT HOME!!!!
LIBERALS WANT NET 0 , NUNAVUT RELIES ON FUEL FOR ENERGY IN EVERY COMMUNITY…. YOU THINK ITS EXPENSIVE NOW?
VOTE CPC
I think James should be asked to re-address his statements on same sex marriage and the 2SLGBTQIA+ community. He has made statements in the past have been dismissive of this community, and he has used Inuit cultural values as an excuse. But, I think he is mixing up his religious beliefs and Inuit culture, thinking they are one in the same, which they are not. It would be good to know where he stands now on the issue. If he holds the same values, having someone like this represent Nunavut on a national stage would not be good for all Nunavummiut.
Here is the article I am referring to: https://nunatsiaq.com/stories/article/mps_bring_gay_rights_debate_to_iqaluit/
LG-HDTV people have taken up too much of the governments time and money.
“Canada’s Aboriginals need to learn the value of hard work more than they need compensation for abuse suffered in Residential Schools” – Pierre Poilievre, Conservative MP and Parliamentary Secretary, June, 2008
As an Inuk, I agree with PP 100%. Imagine where Nunavut would be now if my fellow Inuit weren’t expecting handouts. We could have Inuit nurses, teachers, accountants, and the list goes on.
As an Inuk I agree, we are too dependent and the Libs want us that way. Out of all the residential school survivors who got settlements in my community, none of them have anything to show for it. Some people got hundreds of thousands of dollars, each, gone in less than a year.
…“(Liberal Prime Minister Mark Carney eliminated the consumer carbon tax last month). “
No law was changed as the prorogation of Parliament is still ongoing. Farmers and truckers still must pay the carbon tax, so prices are not lowering.
It was the federal consumer carbon tax which was suspended, meaning was dropped to zero and can instantly be put back in place. Axed, it was not.
Remember back to 2019, and Catherine McKenna, the Liberal environment minister at the time, stated the Liberal government had no intent to increase the carbon tax past 2022. It would be capped at $50 per tonne.
But by 2020, after the election, the tune changed, and the Liberals sung they’ll keep increasing the carbon tax each year up to $170 per tonne by 2030.
And don’t forget, if the Liberals elected, they are talking during this election campaign that they’ll bring in a Carbon Border Adjustment tariff (tax) on any country who does not have a carbon tax. Who knows how much?
The forecast is… food, clothing and massive number of products will cost much more in Canada when implemented. Possibly everything from the USA.
Maybe if they ditched Pierre.
That won’t happen, so the Liberals have my vote this time.
I am utterly amazed that James Arreak would be running for the Conservative Party, given the Conservatives’ poor track regard with regards to Indigenous relations and reconciliation.
Poilievre’s 2008 quote, as given by a previous respondent, is well worth remembering. In that quote, Poilievre shows his true colours: he expects the survivors of decades of horrific abuse in the residential schools to simply shrug it off and live with it! (How can someone be so insensitive?)
With that in mind, how on Earth can James Arreak, an Inuit person himself, feel comfortable running under Poilievre? Poilievre should very clearly be persona non grata here in Nunavut. Poilievre is very clearly the Canadian version of Donald Trump. And yet, Arreak has chosen to run under Poilievre.
Also, I find it disconcerting that Arreak complains about the carbon tax. The carbon tax is not a significant cause of the high-cost-of-living problems here in Nunavut. The high cost of living in Nunavut is due to a multitude of factors, including long distances, spread-out services, high airfares, high costs of food, cold climate, lack of business competition, difficulty attracting and retaining skilled professionals, and many others. Entire books can be written about all these aspects and how they interact. But the fundamental reality is that the cost of living here will remain high, irrespective of the carbon tax.
Moreover, as was already noted, Mark Carney has made the carbon tax zero anyway. So, right now we effectively have no carbon tax on consumers. (To be clear, there is still a carbon tax on industry, but that modest incentive remains appropriate given that climate change is still a problem and will continue to be a problem for a long time. And even if that industrial carbon tax were eliminated, the cost of living here in Nunavut would still be high.)
In short, what infuriates me about the Conservatives is that they have simplistic answers to complex, multifaceted problems. (The same simplistic-answers approach can be seen in other right-wing parties too, such as the Republicans under Trump, the AfD party in Germany, and many others. Simplistic answers appeal to simple-minded people.)
On another note: I agree that the federal government needs to “fix the budget”, in terms of reducing the deficit (and ultimately the debt as well). However, given the high importance of public services, the only intelligent way to work towards a balanced budget is to ensure that the rich people pay their intrinsically fair share of taxes, including on capital gains. Here it is worthwhile to look at a bit of Canadian history.
Way back in the 1960s, Canadian accountant Kenneth Carter wrote the Carter Commission Report. (It is still available online.) The essence of that report is that capital gains should be taxed on the same sliding scale as earned income. (Carter himself said “a buck is a buck is a buck”.) But when the Carter Report came out, the business lobbyists pushed hard for it to be kept under wraps.
As we should all be aware by now, the rich tend to get most of their earnings from capital gains, for example from being landlords or having huge amounts of stocks and other investments. In contrast, ordinary people get more of their income from actual wages for everyday work (e.g. schoolteachers, engineers, nurses, office workers, tradespeople, and so on). Why should people’s wages be taxed more heavily than capital gains? The answer is, quite simply, that the rich have relentlessly lobbied for this to be the case.
Although it is now 2025, the Carter Commission report continues to be a timeless classic. Today, the rich continue to find cunning ways to get even richer, while ordinary people continue to fall further behind. To give just one example of why this is so, consider the example of “trickle-down economics”. This is the idea that giving money or other financial incentives to the rich will hopefully end up creating jobs in return. But instead, when money is given to the rich, they tend to find ways to divert it as dividends or other shareholder benefits. Poilievre, with his deep ties and fealty to the rich, will no doubt continue this trend.
All I can say is that Poilievre would be my absolute last choice for prime minister. I would vote for any other party first.
I just can’t stand the modern conservative movement. It really relies on them just outright lying to the public in order to get elected.
The liberals overtaxed the middle class? They actually decreased the income tax rate on the middle class and middle class families received more in carbon tax rebates than they paid because of the tax.
If you elect conservatives they’ll cut taxes on the very wealthy and then cut programs the middle class relies on for cost of living. Make no mistake, Conservatives give away our money to the super rich and make life harder for everyone. It’s really ironic since they claim to speak for the every day man, but they really govern for the elites with more money than brains.
And there are already income tax credits that exist for people who live north of 60 or in isolated communities. Between that and only having GST I don’t see us as overtaxed in NU at all.
this is such an informed and educated comment that i barely ever see. thank you sir!
I’m avoiding voting for the Conservatives because they seem so preoccupied with Trump’s agenda. For Arctic sovereignty and defense they are great, it’s just the other things that they’re copying from Trump supporters south of the border.