Government, NTI create Nunavut Partnership Committee
Two parties signed a partnership declaration Friday
Premier P.J. Akeeagok and Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. president Aluki Kotierk have signed a partnership deal, forming the Nunavut Partnership Committee, formalizing how the two organizations will work together.
The deal, announced Friday afternoon in a news release, comes in the same week that Commissioner Eva Aariak announced the territorial government’s Katujjiluta mandate, which means “a commitment to work in unity to manifest the courageous dream.”
The three Inuit organizations and NTI worked with MLAs to come up with the mandate, although the new partnership committee announced Friday is an arrangement between NTI and the government.
“I am pleased to take another step towards our ongoing efforts to strengthen the Government of Nunavut’s working relations with NTI,” Akeeagok said in a press release.
“I know that working together, we have the joint resolve and resources to tackle Nunavut’s historic inequities and to make our territory a better place for all Nunavummiut.”
Kotierk said the government and NTI will work better together.
“The Nunavut Agreement created Nunavut as a place for Inuit economic, social and cultural well-being,” Kotierk said in the release. “This declaration will see us working towards this vision with determination and coordination.”
In January 2020, the government and NTI signed the Katujjiqatigiinniq Protocol, which was a framework that described how they would work together.
A similar framework had been signed in 1999, 2004 and 2011.
Is it just me, or does this have a real Chinese Communist / Soviet ring to it:
“a commitment to work in unity to manifest the courageous dream”?
you’ve been watching too much legacy tv.
I have never heard of “Legacy news”
Are you concerned that I might be accusing the GN of being “communist” or “socialist”?
If there is one, the relationship between the phrasing is probably more interesting from an anthropological perspective than an economic one.
If you can lighten up for a brief moment, I’m sure you can see the similarities.
I know exactly what you mean, but the problem is in the translation, not the concept. A broad statement of principle originally written in one language usually sounds a bit clunky, overwritten, sometime pompous and unintentionally funny when translated literally into another language. Your parallel with Mao-era China is quite right; some of his political writings, quite poetic in the original, sounded faintly ridiculous in English.
I suspect the Inuktut original of the phrase you quote probably reads and sounds better than its English version.
It’s undoubtably the ‘Lost in translation’ problem, and I’m sure the Inuktitut version is an interesting reflection of its world.
I would love to hear an proper explanation / translation of the concept.
Who would have ever thought Nunavut had any socialist leanings? This place is just one large dumpster fire.
Nunavut is beyond socialist, there’s no doubt. Probably the most socialist place in all of North America. But calling this beautiful land a dumpster fire is regressive and unwelcome.
Unwelcome by who? I find the comment refreshing and a nice reflection in the vernacular of what I see on the ground.
Don’t ever again presume to speak for me.
Yes, a welfare state is always endearing. Open your eyes.
Well, lets look at it.
Consensus leadership, opposition to private property, communal ownership, extensive sharing and a definition of equality that seems to eliminate capitalist principles such as per capita allocations of funding.
Well, that sure isn’t capitalism……. looks like you are bang on correct.
Nobody called Nunavut itself a dumpster fire. It’s the government, NTI and ITK that are dumpster fires.
sat morning and i read dumpster fire thats a good one,keep me going all day, i never seen a dumpster fire,but i seem Iqaluit dump fire,all of Canada right now is a dump fire.not just nunavut.
Thanks “curiously”; it certainly seems that the current GN / NTI cohort, along with our MP, are dedicating themselves to create a socialist oligarchy – much aligned with the 3-year old LP-NDP coalition in Ottawa.
Come back in 2026; you won’t recognize Nunavut or Canada. We will be the antithesis of democracy compared to conditions just a decade ago
That was really not my point.
I wasn’t making your point, ‘curiously’; I was thanking you for your comment. I was making my point
Funny, I remember people forecasting the End of Canada when Pierre Trudeau was elected, when Brian Mulroney was elected, when Jean Chretien was elected, and when Stephen Harper was elected. Hasn’t happened yet.
I wasn’t Forecasting the “End of Canada”, Valentin; I was reflecting on the unpleasant changes that we have to address and undo
Doom … DOOOOOOOOOMMM!
We’re always just on the verge of “socialism”
Stop threatening me with a good time.
The Premier either doesn’t care or doesn’t understand that signing this kind of stuff has significant implications. Everyone is for more cooperation, but when you declare an unelected corporation a partner in your government efforts it suggests they are equals. They are not. NTI has a mandate to hold government to the land claim and nothing more. The GN is an Inuit government, elected and tasked to represent all Nunavummuit, 85% of whom are Inuit.
The new GN is composed of a lot of NTI execs and friends and maybe this doesn’t phase them but it is concerning to me that a body I will never be eligible to vote in (and something like only 17% of Inuit vote for) will have any partnership or say in how public government affairs are conducted.
The GN is not ‘an Inuit government”. Other than that, your comment is bang on and reflects many of my concerns.
NTI is in no way the equal of the GN, and should not be seen as such.
This smack of using the private sector to do an end-run around governmental processes and accountability.
It is not exclusive to Inuit like NTI, but it is effectively an Inuit government when all (almost all?) the politicians are Inuit.
1) the Nunavut Territory and GN exist because of the Agreement that TFN/NTI negotiated (review Article 4);
2) GN is obliged to consult with Inuit on ANY program, policy, or legislation that may impact on Inuit social and cultural well being, and NTI (which includes executive representation from the RIAs) would seem a logical partner in that process (review Article 32)
3) This is not really “new” measure at all, but a restatement and reaffirmation of several previous accords and protocols.
Speaking of social and cultural well being and Article 32, did NTI ever create a non-profit to pick up on the work of the ‘Social Development Council’ it scrapped under Cathy Towtongie in 2002?
If not, who holds NTI for failing to meet its obligations under the NLCA?
This issue resurfaces here and there, but needs to be talked about much more than it is.
The bottom line is NTI is not doing what it is obligated to do under the Nunavut Agreement and has been given a free pass not to do it.
Most document signings are just photo ops. The signing parties probably have not participated in the formulation of the policy document. They were given a brief over view of what the document contains. Given a pen a chair a table and a photo was taken. Minion’s picks up the signed document put it in a file never to be used again.
What is scary is how many dollars and time was wasted to get to the point. Were it can be used as a public relations event. The whole thing is staged and is used world wide no matter the political stripe or organization.
Is it me ?? or wasn`t the creation of Nunavut and the signature of the land claim with the Feds happen more than 20 years ago ?
Wasn;t the relationship between the GN and NTI clearly defined then ?
The past actions of the last 20 years show clearly that this relationship and its definition of rights and duties have never been understood by the majority of the Nunavut people and by the feds also.
I am all for cooperation but wolves and sheeps will never be made to cooperate and neither should they be ( my apologies to sheeps and wolves but sometimes you have to find a comparison that works)
All to their duties and things will work as they were intended.
This only serves to muddy the waters even more.
Who are you saying is the Wolves and who are the Sheep between the NTI and GN?
I’m not sure which one of the two is best known for hoarding funds meant to help the people they’ve been appointed to help.
But that one is NTI.
It was called the Clyde River Protocol.
Sorry I for got to add to my previous comment. This event in Cambridge Bay. With the flowery and up lifting title. Follows the North Korean model of governance.
Hollow words no substance
“to manifest the courageous dream.”
Am I the only one to whom this sounds like Don Quixote in Man of La Mancha?
My question is, who will be Dulcinea ?
I think most Nunavummiut are intended to play the role of Dulcinea.
In a jurisdiction, such as we have in Nunavut, where the majority are not well educated the majority will have a tendency to elect those who stand for people who are at the grassroots. They attempt to stand for the underdogs.
However, in this case, the government of Canada and the indigenous people of this jurisdiction have made it mandatory to ensure those who were the first people of the area are consulted and not overrun by force, as was and still is the case, in southern Canada.
I believe it creates somewhat of an equal footing. If only there were some teeth to these agreements and this was not just a photo op.