But it's going to take more than a fancy report full of wishes and hopes to make tourism growth happen.
It's going to take a lot more work and a lot more money.
"The Perfect Setting" is a report on how to capitalize on "diamond tourism" prepared for the city of Yellowknife and Resources, Wildlife and Economic Development.
One thing is clear from the report: promoting diamonds alone is not the way to build the tourism industry above the current 59,000 visitors to the NWT. The report suggests that diamonds alone will boost tourism by one per cent annually, creating fewer than 30 jobs a year.
It's the "aurora borealis, fishing, hunting, outdoor adventure and general touring" that will lure people North. Tourist visits to the remote diamond mines seems next to impossible. Cutting and polishing plants may want to charge people for tours.
The report suggests building a "Lights on Fire" pavilion that features diamond and aurora displays, but who's going to put up the bucks? Should the city really spend money to change street lights into the shape of diamonds?
It suggests selling unique, Northern-made diamond jewelry, but little of that is happening right now.
The city spends about $243,000 a year on tourism while RWED's parks and tourism budget has actually dropped from $6.42 million in 2002-03 to $5.98 million in 2004-05. Governments' heart doesn't seem to be in the tourism business.
Mayor Gord Van Tighem appears to prefer governments take the lead in developing the tourism industry, but unless the private sector is onboard, all public efforts and funds devoted to this will be wasted.
Although Stanton Territorial Hospital is looking at solutions to a lack of parking for patients, administrators seem to have their priorities mixed up.
The hospital recently made about 20 extra parking spaces available on the left side of the road leading into the hospital, but that means patients have to walk quite a distance.
For the elderly with mobility difficulties and the seriously ill, that walk to the hospital doors may just as well be a marathon. A group of consultants is working with the hospital to develop a blueprint for a 10- to 15-year master development plan, citing possible land for future parking between the hospital and McDonald's.
Here's a suggestion: instead of putting hospital staff parking in front, put adequate patient parking at the front of the lot.
Hospital staff should be pushed to the perimeter of the lot. Car-pooling and use of public transit should be encouraged. After all, the hospital is there to serve the patients.
Editorial Comment
Darrell Greer
Kivalliq News
Nunavut's unionized employees, especially those whose paycheques come from the territorial government or who are considering raising concerns to their employer, may want to pay attention to an "expedited" arbitration hearing taking place today, July 21, via conference call.
The call will have a representative from the GN, a union rep from the Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) representing the grievance filer against the GN, Norman Prince, and an arbitrator.
Prince was a social worker in Coral Harbour from 1997-99, before moving on to become the supervisor of social programs in Gjoa Haven.
This sad saga began when Prince voiced concerns to his superiors that Inuit were being deprived of services entitled to them by law, namely the right to visit family members living in nursing homes, sheltered settings or other health-care facilities in the south twice a year.
Shortly after Prince's complaints, the executive director of health and social services and the acting manager of social programs arrived in Gjoa Haven to inform Prince a complaint had been lodged against him and he was being suspended, without pay, for 14 days.
The complaint, apparently, revolved around misuse of his computer.
The GN's investigation proved no wrongdoing and Prince was told to return to work.
The source or nature of the complaint was never revealed to Prince, who resigned his position in Gjoa Haven on Aug. 30, 2002, more than six months after filing a grievance of personal harassment through the Nunavut Employees Union.
No excuse for delay
The fact Prince's grievance has still not been addressed two-and-a-half-years later should be cause for shame and embarrassment on the union side of the ledger.
However, the way in which Prince was handled by the government is symptomatic of a much bigger problem in Canada.
The death of the long ballyhooed whistleblower bill before the federal election leaves those who would speak up against injustice, bad decision making or wrongdoing by their employers in a vulnerable position.
This is especially true when unions lack the resolve or wherewithal to have grievances addressed in a timely, fair and thorough manner.
Actions need substantiation
Only Sharon Ehaloak, David Allen, Keith Best and, perhaps, former Health Minister Ed Picco know if Prince's suspension was in retaliation to his complaints of Inuit travel requests being denied.
However, as long as those who sign the paycheques in this country are allowed to initiate actions without explanation or substantiation -- be that government or private enterprise -- those who would stand up for what's right will continue to do so at their own peril.
If we may borrow a line: You have the right to free speech, unless you're dumb enough to actually try it.
Editorial Comment
Jason Unrau
Inuvik Drum
It's not the first time I've been called jaded or cynical, but the first time in print (see letters to the editor). However, easily surprised is something that I can assure the reader I am not.
At least not at the frequency words in this fair paper are misinterpreted. From a "post-modern" viewpoint, these perceived misinterpretations could be seen as alternative takes; in other words three people may read the same story and have a different sense of what the meaning or events of that story were.
An editorial, however, is the expressed viewpoint of the editor and in the case of the Inuvik Drum, that's me.
A reader citing the Drum's July 7 editorial admonished it -- and its author -- for "telling people how they should vote" in the federal election. This was slightly surprising considering the editorial was written nine days after the election.
This week, the Drum received several letters. I enjoy getting them and as far as I am concerned, unless a reader fails to accord the proper decency or is outright inflammatory, I am pleased to publish each and every one. For this kind of forum is a cornerstone of any democracy, even from the post-modern seats.
Like it or not, we live in an age of what, at times, seems like unlimited choice. Unfortunately, getting the government you want does not come that easily.
But before I risk being misinterpreted or called jaded and/or cynical, I should give credit to the Green Party for its effort. It got its platform together, fielded candidates and captured enough of the popular vote to earn a significant amount of federal funding.
Remember the days...
Friends of mine old enough to relate a time when the "us against them" notion spurned a generation to question "the powers that be" and achieve great things also admit that there came a time when "us against them" didn't quite cut it any more.
People began to realize that working for change from within the system was perhaps a more practical way of bringing about reform. Funny how the "us against them" idea has found its way into the popular consciousness again, albeit in the context of a "war on terror." For the average Joe on the street, working from within to bring reform in that arena could get one killed. In the context of one's career choices, it may result in death from boredom.
The pragmatist may say working for the devil is often the price of change. The rest of us idealists cling to a hope of eternal happiness via personal choice and individuality.
As far as I can tell, the Green Party's pledge of fiscal responsibility is what sets it apart from the public's perception of the NDP and, of course, the Liberals. The rest of the alleged differences are frankly in the fine print.
Would a pupil of common sense be so idealistic as to think they could make the NDP more fiscally responsible by infiltrating its ranks and ascending its hierarchy? Not these days, it would seem.
It's comforting to know there are those who believe democracy will flourish by giving people more choice in the hopes that they will some day see the light. However, the realists among us -- filling their usual seats in the cynic's section of the peanut gallery -- fail to see the common sense in that at all. In the meantime, whether we like it or not, the Western Arctic once again puts its voice in parliament in the charge of MP Ethel Blondin-Andrew.
Editorial Comment
Derek Neary
Deh Cho Drum
There's obviously no bigger topic in the Mackenzie Valley than the proposed natural gas pipeline.
The project was discussed at the Deh Cho Annual Assembly in Kakisa and again last week at the Dene Youth Alliance summit. It regularly rears its head at municipal and band council meetings and it is the subject of numerous workshops and consultations.
We're all consumed by the potential pipeline and its impacts. The problem is that it's so hard to separate fact from fiction on the project. There are several approaches being espoused by political bodies, organizations and consultants, each claiming they know how to truly maximize benefits.
The exchange between delegates at the Dene Youth Alliance summit in Fort Simpson and officials from Imperial Oil was quite adversarial, as many of these pipeline discussions tend to be, particularly in the Deh Cho. Several youths charged that aboriginal people won't realize enough revenue from the pipeline even though the gas is coming from their land. Imperial officials -- Alan Kennedy and Dee Brandes -- countered by pointing out that lucrative exploration and development opportunities will exist for aboriginal companies or aboriginal joint ventures to feed the pipeline. That's in addition to one-third ownership in the pipeline through the Aboriginal Pipeline Group. Then there will be benefits from access fees, a share of royalties through land claims and taxes paid to the territorial and federal government.
One delegate -- Jennifer Sharman -- shamed Exxon-Mobil, the largest corporate stakeholder in the Mackenzie Gas Project, for its poor human rights record and environmental practices in countries like Ecuador and Indonesia.
Then Fort Simpson's Randy Sibbeston took his turn to speak. He made a presentation like no other. Sibbeston said he had confidence in Imperial Oil's judgement and wealth to hire expert engineers. He said his primary environmental concern was the destruction of the "silence of the North," the tranquillity and the singing of the birds drowned out by large turbines at compressor stations.
Sibbeston said young people tend to romanticize the past, especially life on the land. If they want subsist in the bush that option is still available to them, he noted. He challenged the delegates to take a good look in the mirror and decide on a lifestyle they want to lead. Petroleum and its byproducts were necessary to process the Dene Youth Alliance t-shirts that were handed out to all of the delegates, Sibbeston noted. He added that petroleum was also used to make the plastic microphone that everyone was speaking into at the assembly. Other NWT land claim groups have already invested substantial amounts of money in exploration and development, and they are relying on a Mackenzie Valley pipeline to get their gas to market, said Sibbeston. There are many factors at play in this pipeline, he argued.
He's absolutely right about that.