Angry Yellowknifers packed city hall last week over the latest tax increase.
There was cursing and swearing, angry calls for mayor and council to resign and plenty of complaints about an administration with an anti-business attitude.
Councillors took it on the chin but we hope they understand these people represent the majority of Yellowknifers.
Is it the tax increase that drives the rage?
No, it's years watching property values fall. It's seeing neighbours leave town. It's watching businesses close while their own business takes a beating through no fault of their own. It's fear.
When council raised taxes, they ignored that fear, offering no remedy for a shrinking tax base and population. In fact, according to some councillors, city administration is above reproach and all money spent is perfectly justified. People must pay for their own good, there is nothing to cut.
Yet people see the city paying more for expanded bus service while council brags about saving money. They see streets torn up for million dollar beautification projects. They see more buildings going up at our state of the art dump. At the same time, they remember councillors sending themselves off to Halifax with a cry of "The more the merrier!", a small item that cost far more in integrity than dollars.
Raising taxes is a tough measure, it even may be necessary. But those councillors who defended it with crystal clear consciences seem unaware of the fear people have or why.
What about the costly mistakes and mismanagement of the past many councillors pointed to when they ran for election?
The idea of actually cutting back, as every government has done in the past decade, only comes to them as an afterthought to be considered sometime in the future.
People have good reason to be angry. Councillors have a duty to begin immediately what they should have done before ã work on a solution that eases instead of adds to people's problems, which is exactly what a tax hike does.
In a perfect world, everyone would have their own space. Unfortunately, in the real world, you sometimes have to make do with sharing.
Spending $25 million for a new building or $28 million to upgrade the court's current facilities seems a little pricey considering the reasons that have been put forward.
If the impartiality and independence of the court system is being called into question, perhaps we should look a little deeper than the fact it's sharing a building with other GNWT offices and departments.
The space the court is currently using may not be perfect for its needs, but how many of us can boast that luxury?
Editorial Comment
Darrell Greer
Kivalliq News
As the debate over the Nunavut government's decentralization policy continues to increase in intensity, one of the main reasons prior decentralization attempts in other jurisdictions met with limited success is starting to rear its head.
The problem is an inherent one to any government, but is much more prevalent in smaller territories where the majority of an area's elected MLAs make up cabinet.
Although cabinet members, these representatives are first and foremost MLAs from their respective constituencies. The problem is a translucent one -- no votes from home riding, no job in future.
Thus, the wants and needs of voters from their home ridings are never far from the subconscious thoughts of our individual cabinet members.
Initially, the majority may buy into the government's platform of making decisions to benefit their territory as a whole. But, as the term proceeds and the pressure mounts from their own constituents, they become increasingly aware of the benefits bestowed upon their own political careers by supporting government initiatives which directly benefit their ridings.
For example, if your riding is in Rankin Inlet, you don't have to be overly concerned with what the people of Baker Lake think. When next election comes around, it will be the people of Rankin who will decide if you did a good enough job to be "hired" for a second term.
The same can be said for each and every Kivalliq MLA from Arviat to Repulse Bay.
In fairness to our politicians, it can be difficult to balance the needs of your territory with those of the people from your home community. However, as our first government matures, it will become more and more obvious which MLAs are more focused on looking after their own ridings than making decisions which benefit Nunavut as a whole.
Although every MLA is quick to say they don't want Iqaluit to turn out to be Nunavut's Yellowknife, the capital city has already eclipsed its targeted number of government jobs by a whopping 159 or an additional 36.8 per cent of its original estimate.
The ministerial power Rankin Inlet holds has also seen that hamlet benefit, as 173 jobs have already been confirmed from a projection of 167.5. To date, Baker Lake, with no cabinet representation, has taken the biggest hit, already losing 54 per cent of the 65 government jobs promised it.
For the first time since April 1, some cabinet members and MLAs have come to the startling realization that not all hamlets are equipped, prepared or even minutely ready to handle a large influx of jobs into their communities -- yet another point of decentralization which should have been realized long ago.
The last hope for a truly effective policy may well rest with the newly formed Decentralization Secretariat. If not, there will be more cries of broken promises to come and Nunavut may be facing three years of a fledgling government trying to proceed with one heavy political albatross clamped firmly around its neck.