Swaggering with an accident fund stuffed with cash from employers in the Northwest Territories and Nunavut, the Workers' Compensation Board seems determined to spend the money on a new building for itself.

According to various spokespersons for the board, the new building will help it better serve its clients - especially if it's close to Stanton Territoral Hospital. Conveniently, it also has a view of Frame Lake.

If Yellowknife city council refuses to rezone the desired land to accommodate the board's desire for a new office building, the board has hinted that it may invoke legislative powers to force the issue.

We're not sure what those powers are. The Workers Compensation Act gives the board discretionary power over how the accident fund is invested, but it can't lease or build without the approval of the commissioner in executive council.

By our reading of the law, that means the minister responsible for the board and cabinet -- the same people who choose the board members, and have the power to fire them should they lose sight of their purpose.

Nowhere in the Act does it say that the board is to be a real estate developer.

The legislation does say, however, that the Workers' Compensation Board of the Northwest Territories and Nunavut SHALL be located in Yellowknife.

As a good corporate citizen of the capital, the board should endeavour to get along with its neighbours, including businesspeople who are concerned about the board's plan to move its offices to Old Airport Road.

The city centre needs more commercial energy, not less.

Unless the board can make a business case, it should stay exactly where it is. If there is a dispute, it's up to the territorial government to sort it out. Regardless of what the Workers' Compensation Board might think, it is not a power unto itself.

The accident fund is built from the contributions of employers. If it falls into a deficit, it's up to the government to bail it out.

The reverse should be true as well. If the fund is burning a hole in the board's pocket, the government should insist that it's invested in job training and worker safety.

Editorial Comment
Darrell Greer
Kivalliq News

Other than personnel issues such as job performance and related matters, I have always loathed the ability of governments to go in camera (behind closed doors) to discuss topics.

That is especially true with issues affecting people in the community and depriving them of their right to know why decisions were made.

And don't think in-camera sessions aren't a double-edged sword, because they most certainly are.

There are times in-camera sessions protect the reputations of those involved with questionable decisions, but there are also times when they cast shadows of suspicion over members of the community.

The bottom line is that human nature dictates we all draw our own conclusions based on the information we are given, even if that information is more than a little limited on any given subject.

Rankin hamlet council's decision to take over the local search-and-rescue (SAR) committee's finances and bingo operations is a perfect example of just such a case.

Why did it happen? What irregularities showed up on the audit?

Were the members simply lacking in bookkeeping and record-keeping skills, or were they taking money meant to help save lives and spending it on themselves?

Coun. Janes let it slip that SAR members were paying each other honorariums, but he didn't say for what. If you take for granted the committee agreed on the concept of paying out honorariums from bingo revenues, you're also accepting the fact not a single SAR member cared enough to find out if that was allowed.

Did the committee have other sources of revenue that would allow it to pay honorariums for attending SAR meetings?

Was it just honorariums that created the "irregularities" or were there other things going on?

While nothing stops me from tracking down a SAR member who may not understand they don't have to answer questions about a matter council dealt with in camera, that's not the style of journalism I choose to employ, nor is it the point of this piece.

This is the third committee we've reported on during the past few years with "irregularities" in the way they handled their finances.

And, while we appreciate the fact council is trying to address the problem on one level, the community should have the right to know what's going on in these situations.

We've stated many times that there's a dark side to the amount of bingo revenues raised in the Kivalliq.

When money raised through bingo is being spent in irregular ways, the scale tips towards the negative side of fundraising through gambling.

And, dealing with such matters behind closed doors does nothing more than cast a serious shadow of doubt over the validity of every entity in the community that raises money through bingo and Nevada sales.

It also sends a message to people in the community who support these groups: You have no right to know where your money went.

Editorial Comment
Jason Unrau
Inuvik Drum

This past Friday, Nov. 11, many Canadians took a moment out of their lives to think about the sacrifices our countrymen and women have made on battlefields which litter the 20th century.

Of course we musn't forget the wars that took place previous to the First World War, but Remembrance Day was born in the modern era. Its symbol is a poppy and the day's significance was punctuated not so much by the Great War but rather that conflict's second act, the Second World War, in which there clearly was an evil: Hitler and his henchmen's bloodthirsty conquest of Europe. This failed painter was obviously the bad guy and everyone knows what bad guys have got coming to them.

Now enter the Korean War, which followed the Second "great war" a mere five years later, more or less precipitating the "quagmire" of Vietnam and so on. In a nutshell, the lines of "right" and "wrong" start to blur. What did all these armed conflicts mean in terms of "good" versus "evil"? Essentially, there no longer was a distinguishable bad guy lurking in the hinterland bent on the destruction of mankind, as we knew it.

Keep in mind that during the Second World War the good guys (us) were aligned with villains like Stalin, whose purge of his own people in the Soviet Union is said to have surpassed Hitler's body count. But when we're dealing with millions upon millions of dead, these figures, sadly, become mere trivia, overshadowed by politics. To paraphrase something I heard through the media haze last week during the buildup to coverage of Remembrance Day: Canadians take comfort in the fact the reasons this country went to war were the right ones. Well isn't that a truth we can all live with, because if we're going to send people out to get killed for the wrong reasons, what a shame that would be.

Ultimately, only God knows the answer to the brain-stinger, which brings me to my point.

At Sir Alexander Mackenzie school gymnasium last Friday, those in attendance were treated to what could best be described as a "sermon from the mount" as it related to our nation entering the Second World War. The speaker had a captive audience and his sentiment was plain enough and frankly, quite thought-provoking given the "socio-economic" situation this town finds itself in; what with all the drug and alcohol abuse and their trickle-down effects.

Basically the speaker was questioning the worth Canadian blood spilt on those battlefields as it related to his view of society-at-large's current direction.

Fortunately, I've never had to experience combat. The closest I ever came was travelling by bus along the militarized border of India and Pakistan (they fought two wars in this century). I remember the Indian tanks sitting restless in the sand while the music on the bus played so loud it impaired passengers' abilities to hear Indian fighter jets screaming less than 100 metres overhead.

Anyways, on Remembrance Day I think about the sacrifice people made so that I could travel in foreign lands with a backpack rather than a gun. But regardless of me not having served in the armed forces or been in battle, what I can say with certainty is that Canadian soldiers have never spilt blood on any battlefield to end abortion or ensure the Lord's Prayer would be recited each morning in Canadian schools.

Sentiments such as these heard at our Remembrance Day observance are not those of the majority, rather opinions from one religious faction.

Pause for a moment to think about that the next time you tune into the war on terror.

Editorial Comment
Derek Neary
Deh Cho Drum

They were the pot-smoking comedy duo that starred in a series of movies in the 1980s. They had some amusing run-ins with the cops and were always in pursuit of an innovative way to get high.

Has our society changed much since those days? Well, kind of.

Today there are plenty of rappers and comedians who glamorize pot use. Heck, even historian and literary icon Pierre Burton appeared on CBC television last year to give tips on rolling a doobie.

On the legal front, the federal government has approved marijuana use for medicinal purposes, usually to dull pain. Parliament has toyed with the idea of decriminalizing small amounts of pot. That would mean it is still illegal to possess a few joints but the penalty for having it would be a fine, not a criminal record. Selling the stuff, though, would still land you in a heap of trouble.

In 2002, a Canadian Senate committee actually recommended taking it a step further and legalizing pot for adults.

Marijuana alters a person's state of mind. There are healthier ways to do that: meditation, yoga, a sweat lodge, tai chi and exercise just to name a few. Regardless, some argue that cannabis is less harmful than alcohol - which is legal - because pot smokers are more often tranquil than violent.

Others remain vehemently opposed to it on moral grounds. The police want to remind everyone that every joint purchased is essentially supporting organized crime - i.e. biker gangs from Alberta and B.C. It's thought that they are the ones who are ultimately supplying the stuff found in Fort Simpson.

Some people believe pot is a "gateway drug," eventually leading users to much stronger narcotics. Some dealers in the south have been known to cunningly lace marijuana cigarettes with crystal meth to get users hooked on that drug. It has also been theorized that the relatively benign marijuana of the 1960s and '70s has largely been replaced by much more concentrated, potent weed nowadays.

Like cigarettes, dope pollutes the lungs. Similar to alcohol, it impairs reflexes and makes it extremely dangerous to operate heavy equipment or drive a car. But it could be argued that people can smoke marijuana responsibly just as some people can drink socially and responsibly.

So, do you know of any marijuana smokers? Most people do. And what do you think of those people? Are they the despicable? Or are they decent, accomplished citizens who happen to have "bad habit?" Chances are they could be either, or anywhere in between.

Another contentious question is whether an elected leader who is caught with marijuana still merits his or her office. As we approach National Addictions Awareness Week, any community leader who is ready to stand up and make a public presentation on the dangers of drug and alcohol use should be walking the walk, not just talking the talk. Either that, or come clean with his or her true thoughts on reefer madness.

Perhaps most troubling is that a couple of Fort Simpson teens were apprehended for smoking up last week. Were they just dabbling, or are they on a slippery slope? If only we knew for sure the answer to that question.

In the Wednesday edition of Yellowknifer it was incorrectly reported that 40 per cent of $1.15 million in energy conservation funding will go towards advertising. In fact, just under 40 per cent of the money allotted to the Arctic Energy Alliance - just over $500,000 - will flow into awareness programs. Yellowknifer regrets the error.