Failed palace coup leaves Akeeagok stronger than before
Premier’s critics blew their chance to oust him by not securing the votes they needed
Premier P.J. Akeeagok, right, speaks to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in January. Akeeagok and Trudeau have something in common — they have both fended off challenges to their leadership in the past month. (File photo by Jeff Pelletier)
You’d expect an Inuk hunter to know that if you’re going after big game, you need to kill the beast. Otherwise, the consequences could be dire.
Aivilik MLA Solomon Malliki, whose bio says his “personal interests include hunting and other outdoor pursuits,” went after Premier P.J. Akeeagok this week, attempting unsuccessfully to remove him from office.
Not only was Akeeagok left standing at the end of Wednesday’s dramatic showdown, he likely emerged stronger than he was before the palace coup.
Jaws dropped at the legislative assembly, a Nunatsiaq News reporter said privately, when Malliki announced Monday he would make a motion calling for Akeeagok to be removed from the job he has held since 2021.
It led to a dramatic, tense week with grim faces and, no doubt, a lot of people at the legislature wondering what their own futures held.
In the end, it fizzled. Malliki didn’t have the numbers to topple the premier. His motion failed with eight members voting to turf Akeeagok, but 10 lining up to keep him. Three MLAs were absent, raising the prospect of a different outcome had Malliki waited for them to return.
Akeeagok loyalists spoke so glowingly that not only should his leadership be safe for the rest of this term, he’s well-positioned to continue as premier after the next election.
Education Minister Pamela Gross said Akeeagok navigates the challenges of the job with “grace and humility.”
Iqaluit-Manirajak MLA Adam Arreak Lightstone read a pile of pro-Akeeagok emails he said he received after asking his constituents how he should vote on the motion.
Iqaluit-Sinaa MLA Janet Pitsiulaaq Brewster called the premier a dedicated family man whom she respected. She criticized him for bending some rules in order to get photo ops, but made a “last-second” decision to back him.
Malliki said a lack of transparency in the premier’s office was the reason Akeeagok should be removed. But he didn’t convincingly make his case.
So, a chastened Akeeagok emerged unscathed, acknowledging there are things he can do better and “thankful to be entrusted in this role.”
“I heard, yet again, that there’s improvements that we could make, so I really appreciate all the comments that were presented,” he said.
He took a page from the playbook of his buddy, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who weathered a challenge from within his Liberal caucus. Appear contrite. Accept some criticism. Insist you’re in the best position to lead. Live to fight another day.
Such a feeble attempt to topple Akeeagok must end leadership questions for the time that remains until the next territorial election in October 2025.
Since the last election, there have been rumblings of discontent from some regular MLAs, especially Arviat South’s Joe Savikataaq, a former premier, and George Hickes, the Iqaluit-Tasiluk MLA who was a cabinet minister before the last election.
Despite Nunavut officially having a consensus government, Savikataaq and Hickes have acted like an unofficial opposition party.
One recurring message from this week was that there’s lots of work for MLAs to do.
The failed attempt to oust Akeeagok should remove the leadership distraction and allow them to focus on that work. At least for another 11 months.
That was one premature attempt by some regular MLAs, especially Solomon Malliki. No substantial evidences of any justifiable reasons to back the
motion. Not even a simple request was made for our position on the motion, here in Coral Harbour! This motion was doomed from the very beginning and the outcome resonated that. Time for more meaningful collaboration!
will he make Nunavut Great Again? or better?
Sure, but really “meaningful collaboration” is a meaningless, bromide isn’t it? I’m sure it feels good and smart to say it though.
As an Inuk, Solomon made us proud to hold the government accountable for the premier hiring more non-Inuit to the deputy minister offices and giving Inuit walking papers. This was never explained by the premier’s office. Each MLA swears an oath to Nunavut, not to a single community Johnny, perhaps you did not read that part when you were a one term MLA for this very reason. Keep up the good work Solomon as the chair of all MLAs.
This seemed more like a personal attack than anything. Malliki’s irrational reasoning and “no comment” afterwards says it all. We don’t need to agree with everything he does, but PJ might be the best Premier this territory has ever had.
Can you tell us what PJ has done that would make you say he “might be the best Premier this territory has ever haf”? I can’t be the only who.is curious about this.
Getting over $2 billion dollars for housing and 3000 new houses
We have had the least amount of residential builds across NU in what almost 20 years? His sole source is a huge failure. There’s been no major community infrastructure additions to my knowledge granted I only have my region which isn’t the Baffin to really go by outside of news here.
Education stats are not better, crime is not better off, jobs are not better off given there’s been little additional economic interest in NU and of anything the biggest employer outside the GN is falling off just recently laying off staff.
I don’t see how things have been made any better at all under PJ. I’m not saying he’s made it a ton worse either.
It’s basically just been par for the course, NU is, has been and always will be a welfare state where actual progress is near impossible to make because you already have an entire population that is happy to live off handouts from harder working people who pay tax dollars.
I don’t see what he’s done any more than the last one.
I don’t have a dog in this fight. But I would like to make an observation. The vote of 10-8 does not represent a resounding vote of support. Especially when Janet Brewster was going to vote against the Premier, but changed her mind at the last minute. Had she not changed her mind, the vote would have been 9-9. Not sure, but I assume then the Speaker would have to cast a deciding vote. When viewed that way, this does not look like “a feeble attempt” at ousting the Premier, but one that might very well have succeeded.
Strongly agree.
I was thinking something similar, not sure why Corey has so many blind spots to nuance like this. He could just have easily written a piece on how precarious PJ’s support in the legislature is, which I think is true and should be talked about also.
I’m not sure if it’s specifically in the rules, but it is traditional in parliaments descended from the British system that in a vote of this nature, in the event of a tie the Speaker votes to maintain the status quo. So a 9-9 vote would have resulted in Akeeagok staying premier, thus not as close as it appears. Malliki would have needed a minimum 10-8 majority to pull it off regardless. I don’t know if Brewster had done this math, realized the vote wouldn’t succeed, and switched to be on the winning side.
Arrest , the coup leader and put him on trail .
He needs to add some strong minded businessmen or women to his executive not just the same old boys, some businesses in the Kitikmeot have figured out how to operate in the arctic and are crushing the competition., while controlling prices and actually lowering the cost of living in the north. How are they doing this when others are failing and raising the cost of living for Nunavut residents, good question if I was in Govt I would be strongly checking into such businesses there not really hidden, he just needs to open his eyes.
palace? what palace? they should be re-aligning their policies instead of turning against someone else to do their jobs .
For Nunavut to succeed, we need major investments in infrastructure,
Yah yah yah, we need housing of course, airports, runways, power plants, medical boarding homes, sea lift beaches, small craft harbors etc…. basic community community infrastructure that everyone talks about but ……
Nunavut to have an economy we need to be exporting not just gold, iron, nickel, we do not have trees so lumber is out of the question, we cannot farm to keep live stock so that is out of the question but What Nunavut does have is the longest coast line in the world, vast quantities of fresh water lakes.
Bottom line is Nunavut need to invest in fisheries Nunavut can be exporting fish to the rest of Canada and the world. White Fish, Trout, scallops mussels etc.
It is all fine and dandy Nunavut is investing in mining but when the resources dry up and the mine’s shut down what will the fall back be? Gold Mine in Baker Lake is on a verge of shutting down as they cannot get enough fuel to the mining camp with all the road closers making it an unprofitable operation.
This is a pretty nonsensical post Hunter. Further developing any kind of economically viable inland fishery is a pipe dream dude. It costs two to three times as much money to catch/process and ship the fish than it sells for so no one is interested. The failed fish plants in the KIvalliq and Kitikmeot are symbols of Nunavut’s inability to compete in this market. The fish plant in Pangnituq survives only because it heavily subsidized by the Baffin Fisheries Coalition. And lets not even mention the negative impact that past commercial inland fisheries have had on the sustainability of regional white fish and char stocks.
Nunavut needs to become economically viable one day to survive or we will always just be wards of the state waiting for the next hand out.
People with your attitude are part of the problem, become part of the solution figure out ideas how Nunavutmiut can become economically independent and self reliant.
Maybe you just have to see it in a different light, from a different view point and stop being so megative.
The Pang fish plant may be losing money annually but you fail to only see the finaical loss of the organization. The plant provides 30 seasonal jobs and employs more than 70 fishermen.
These 100 people are gainfully employed and not just collecting income support and welfare.
In 2008 Pang Fish plant actually reported a profit, as of then the GN would provide an economic grant of $270,000. cheep compared to the amount they would have to dish out to100 people employed by the fish plant were collecting come support and welfare.
The economic spin offs of these 100 people employed, they buy new fishing equipment, they buy boats, they feed their families.
So actually the Pang fish plant is very profitable for the community and community from my point of view when compared to the $250,000 government grant they receive annually.