From barracks to better homes: Why housing Nunavut is part of Canada’s NATO commitment
Building defence capabilities in the North means good, sufficient housing, says NEAS president and CEO Daniel Dagenais. He’s advocating for his company to help achieve that goal through use of its sealift operations. (Photo courtesy of NEAS Group)
Daniel Dagenais, president and CEO of NEAS Group
When Canadians think of defence spending, we picture fighter jets, warships, or radar stations. Rarely do we think of plywood, insulation, or plumbing. But we should — especially in the Arctic.
As Canada moves to meet its NATO commitment to spend 2 per cent of GDP on defence, there’s an opportunity to align national security with northern equity. In Nunavut, that starts with housing.
Housing is security. It underpins any long-term presence — military or civilian.
Whether it’s the Canadian Armed Forces, coast guard, or front-line nurses and social workers, all rely on stable housing to live and work safely. No drone or submarine can substitute for that.
In too many Nunavut communities, health centres go understaffed — not for lack of funding, but because there’s nowhere for professionals to live.
RCMP members rotate in and out under stress. Maintenance teams and teachers face chronic vacancies.
It’s a fragile system in a region facing global attention and geopolitical risks.
If we take Arctic sovereignty seriously, then housing isn’t a detour from our NATO obligations — it’s a cornerstone.
NATO’s Article 3 isn’t about power projection; it’s about domestic resilience. Members are called to “maintain and develop their individual and collective capacity to resist armed attack.”
In the Canadian Arctic, that includes housing, water, energy, and transportation.
At NEAS, we see the gaps firsthand each sealift season: overcrowded homes, housing kits left onshore, delayed infrastructure. We have the capacity and partnerships to help close this gap.
Investing in Arctic housing delivers on multiple fronts. It strengthens sovereignty. It supports Inuit families and reconciliation. It enables climate adaptation and regional growth. And yes — it ensures barracks, search-and-rescue bases, and mission-critical support can be deployed faster and smarter.
Critics may say housing isn’t defence spending. But you can’t defend what you can’t live in. Canada cannot claim to be a reliable NATO partner while its northern front line — its people — lack the tools to thrive.
Instead of pouring billions into southern-based procurements that may never touch the North, Canada can start building a people-first Arctic presence anchored in the homes and communities that make everything else possible.
NEAS stands ready with sealift, logistics, and local capacity.
What we need now is a federal commitment that sees Arctic housing not just as a humanitarian need but as a strategic necessity.
Let’s meet the Arctic not with words, but with warm homes and strong partnerships — ready to defend what matters, together.
Daniel Dagenais is president and CEO of The NEAS Group
Yes, the North does lack housing for the professionals as u wrote in the article. It also lacks housing for the people who live there. No one can convince me that it is not discrimination from the Canadian government . Why not partner with the government and add units within the housing for Arctic Security . It’s a hard live to live in the a North without a secure home
Housing isn’t a federal responsibility. The GN should be to blame for the lack of housing built. Maybe if we had a better economy (build the mines), more infrastructure and housing could be built.
So it also follows that if housing is important to attract professionals, as a resident , we should become professionals. Learn trades, get educated, get jobs, work at setting our own destinies. It is easier to lounge around all day, smoke, drink, and whatever else fills your day. That will never improve your lot. You want better, everyone wants you and every canadian to do better. Participate. You will find greater happiness in being productive and part of the solution.
Look elsewhere, Nordik regions, how is housing built and maintained in Nordik countries. Social harmony within family and with neighbours something they have and us not so much is huge. All the moreso when living in close quarters… and include large porches for all of those boots and parkas!
Most locals that get gn jobs because of who they know and family ties that come with housing then they take away housing from professionals my opinion is that all the professionals should work from down south and gn should open offices in places like winnipeg and edmonton and leave the housing in the hamlets for the locals (public housings) just my opinion
The future of the Arctic — and of Canada — will be decided in the North, not in Ottawa. For too long, national policy has been written in the South and handed down like an instruction sheet, to be read aloud in Inuktitut by the Premier, like a colonial town crier. That time is over.
The Arctic is not a project of the nation. The nation is a guest here, and its role is to work within the terms set by Inuit.
Inuit lands hold what the world needs. No one can speak for the Arctic except Inuit. Southern governments and corporations may try to write the rules, but they can only succeed if Inuit agree. That is real leverage — not just to negotiate a better deal, but to define what “a better deal” truly means.
Hate to break it to you but, that decision was already made when the NCLA was signed.
Hate to break it to you, but no Canadian in Nunavut is a guest. They have a right to be here. That sort of of very common racist thinking holds Nunavut back. Inuit don’t set the terms for Canada – Canadians do. Inuit have a voice, like all Canadians. but the limits and context of that voice was set by our betters when they negotiated the NLCA.
Also, stop equating the ‘north’ with merely Nunavut and Inuit. There is a whole lot more “north” to west and south of of this one territory.