Fast-track this, Mark Carney!
While the Liberal government focuses on ‘major projects,’ Inuit Child First Initiative languishes in uncertainty
Indigenous Services Minister Mandy Gull-Masty, centre, poses with members of the Kativik Regional Government council on Feb. 19 in Kuujjuaq, where she announced a one-year extension of the Inuit Child First Initiative. (Photo by Dominque Gené)
Since Prime Minister Mark Carney is so eager to fast-track things, how about the Inuit Child First Initiative?
Last week, federal Indigenous Services Minister Mandy Gull-Masty announced a $115-million extension of the federal government program that helps Inuit children get government-funded health, social and educational products and services.
It’s the third extension.
Nunavut MP Lori Idlout, a New Democrat, called that Liberal measure a “Band-Aid.”
That’s exactly what it is.
Inuit families deserve to know — one way or the other — if the program has a long-term future.
For the past year, Canadians have heard Carney’s “supercharged” talk about how Canada must build “nation-building” projects such as railroads, ports, energy corridors and mines, faster than ever before. A proposed hydroelectric generator in Iqaluit is one of 13 projects on his list.
The “rupture” — as Carney calls it — in the world economic order means Canada must diversify its trade partners and build an independent economy that’s less reliant on the increasingly unpredictable United States.
So Carney snapped his fingers and created the Major Projects Office, now responsible for shepherding $116 billion worth of projects along.
Why have the Liberals left the relatively inexpensive Inuit Child First Initiative (it’s less than 0.1 per cent of what the Major Projects Office is responsible for) to languish in three years of uncertainty?
For a government hell-bent on moving faster on nation-building projects, the Liberals have moved at a glacier’s pace when it comes to retooling the Inuit Child First Initiative.
The federal government has been funding the Inuit Child First Initiative since 2019. Thousands of Inuit families have benefited from its programs, including for a time a universal food voucher program that gave them $500 a month per child to help pay for groceries.
When funding dried up again in March 2025, advocates warned of a “humanitarian crisis” if the government didn’t renew it.
We can forgive the Liberals for not having their eyes on the Inuit Child First Initiative then. They were busy throwing Justin Trudeau under the bus and ushering Carney in as their white knight to fend off Pierre Poilievre’s seemingly unstoppable Conservatives.
At the last minute — on the eve of an election — the Liberals coughed up a one-year extension for the Inuit Child First Initiative until March 31, 2026 — the end of the government’s current fiscal year.
Then in November, Ottawa came through with $122 million in its 2025-26 budget. Gull-Masty said the government planned to retool the Inuit Child First Initiative into a permanent program.
Last week, with about six weeks left in that first extension, Gull-Masty showed up in Kuujjuaq with … wait for it … another one-year extension to keep the program alive through March 2027.
It’s hard to understand why the government keeps stumbling and bumbling along with temporary measures — or as Idlout says, a “Band-Aid.”
This shouldn’t be that hard.
The Inuit Child First Initiative is either a much-needed program whose funding should become an ongoing part of the annual budget, or it should be deemed a frill that can be scrapped.
It’s time to rip off the Band-Aid and apply a long-term remedy.
That’s great ! Carney can now fast track Grays Bay ! get it started for the central arctic ….
Unemployed Family of 5 in Iqaluit Monthly Financials:
Public Housing = ($60)
Social Assistance = $2,203, after-taxed = $2,055
Canada Child Benefit = $1,933 not taxable
Inuit Child First Initiative = $1,500 not taxable
GST Rebate = $106 not taxable
An unemployed family of five is netting $5,534 monthly in income after their “rent” is paid. My net monthly pay is about $6,200, I don’t qualify for any of the above benefits. My monthly mortgage, utilities, insurance, and property tax are about $3,000. So I’m working hard every day and have about $2,300 less than that unemployed family every month.
The socialist strategy in a democratic society.
Increase taxes on one working individual by $500 a year, you lose one vote, but by redistribution the taxes by giving 5 unemployed individuals $100 each extra a year you gain 5 votes.
The Government of Canada receives most of it’s revenues from Income Taxes (people working) and Corporate Taxes (businesses operating and making money).
With the Trump trade war ongoing, Canada’s unemployment rate sits stubbornly around 7% with the recent declines only seen as a result of people quitting looking for work. That means Ottawa is not going to see a nice bump in Income Tax revenue anytime soon. Canadian household debt is the highest of any industrialized nation, so taxing people more is out of the question.
Similarly, Canada’s GDP growth is stalled out at 1.7% last year. This is a very clear sign that Canadian business is not growing very much, and is growing even less than down in the tariff ravaged USA. That means Ottawa is not going to see a nice bump in Corporate Tax revenue anytime soon.
Canada’s national debt is increasing $40B a year or so (from spending more than they take in). It now sits at $1.3T CDN, or $30K per Canadian. Adding more expenditure now will simply dig our debt hole deeper, making government discretionary spending even less tenable.
This is why Carney is rightly desperate to get new projects started as soon as he can. This is the only thing that is going to change this picture. More investment. More jobs. More businesses making money. Less Debt. This is the only way more services for northerners are going to be sustainably paid for by Ottawa.
No. Fast tracking more spending -any spending- does nothing to improve the situation.
Canada’s debt could easily reach $2.3T CDN in a few years. The only thing worse than having hungry kids around that have to pay back $30K each to preserve what public services they already get is having hungry kids around that have to pay back $56K each instead.