Critical letter is “prejudiced?”

Let us follow, for a moment, the trajectory of Janson Bigg’s thought as it is expressed in his recent letter to the editor of Nunatsiaq News, published March 5.

Biggs begins by distorting Carmen Levi’s statement about the qualifications that will now be considered by the GN when hiring new employees. Levi was mapping out a new policy whereby Inuit fundamental values, — e.g., the importance of the land, family, hunting, fishing, etc. — will be factored into the hiring decision.

At no time did Carmen say that “living on the land” and “raising a family” would be the only criteria for deciding who should be hired by government. All of the usual, standard considerations — education, experience, skill, etc. — still apply.

Not content with twisting Levi’s words into something she did not say, Biggs proceeds to take a swipe at “questionable senior management trainee and internship initiatives,” and then goes on to launch an attack on “a law school program made up of students who don’t have the academic qualifications to get accepted even into a third-rate undergraduate program in southern Canada.”

Biggs fails to state why, in his opinion, senior management trainee and internship initiatives are questionable. The inescapable implication of his letter is that these initiatives are questionable because they result in the hiring of Inuit.

The reason for Bigg’s contempt for the law school initiative is also vague. How does he know the students in the law program wouldn’t get accepted in a southern college? What does he mean by a third-rate undergraduate program? Biggs doesn’t give any examples. By failing to do so, he does across not only as a bigot, but also as a snob.

In his letter, Biggs argues that the GN bureaucracy has been “dumbed down.” However, Biggs fails to back up his argument with any evidence. In what ways has the bureacracy been dumbed down? What departments have been affected? What programs have suffered? Without any evidentiary basis, Bigg’s argument reduces to a whine that Inuit are getting more and more of the top jobs.

In governments in the South, the qallunaat bosses have their speeches, letters and documents drafted by assistants and lower-level employees. There’s nothing unusual about that. Biggs doesn’t appear to like it though when, in the GN, the masters are Inuit and the servants are qallunaat. The unavoidable conclusion to be drawn from Bigg’s letter is that he is prejudiced against Inuit.

Like every prejudice, Biggs’ prejudice disfigures him, not the people he’s sneering at. Inuit will continue to build a government that is of Inuit, for Inuit, and by Inuit.

The Nunavut land claims agreement mandates a government that employees Inuit to a “representative level.” The NLCA defines representative level as meaning “a level of Inuit employment within government reflecting the ratio of Inuit to the total population in the Nunavut Settlement Area.”

Biggs says that it is not the GN’s responsibility to meet the terms and conditions of the NLCA. He is wrong. The NLCA has the force of a constitutional provision. In the face of the NLCA, the Biggs of this world are powerless, and it is a good thing that they are.

Terry Audla
Executive Director
Qikiqtani Inuit Association