Monday, February 13, 2006
First, the Baffin Regional Hospital loses its accreditation. Second, nine out of 16 foreign nurses hired to work in a number of communities fail their entrance exam. A nursing program at Aurora College has eight students taking courses this year.
But Nunavut needs close to 100 nurses right now, minus the 16 foreign nurses recently recruited at a cost of $13,000 each.
While new health centres opened in Cambridge Bay and Rankin Inlet, both of these are still understaffed. At the end of last year, the Cambridge Bay centre needed to hire 42 people, including 33 health professionals.
And we haven't even touched on the lack of physicians in Nunavut.
Sending patients to Yellowknife, Iqaluit and further south eats away at what little resources are available - resources which could be better used to prevent diseases and promote healthier lifestyles.
The government is playing the reaction game: hospital fails accreditation, give it $1.2 million; nurses fail test, wait for the next round of testing and hope for the best.
The government needs to acknowledge there is a problem, and then start finding solutions, proactive ones aimed at improving lifestyles, health education and, above all, adequate access to health care in the territory.
Considering the money being spent, what can this be called other than gross mismanagement by the health department?
During the election, Stephen Harper's Conservative Party promised:
Three new armed troop-carrying icebreakers stationed in Iqaluit with 500 regular force personnel for support.
A new military/civilian deep-water docking facility in Iqaluit.
A new Arctic sensor system for underwater surveillance, technologies such as listening posts to monitor foreign submarines and ships.
A new Arctic army training centre in Cambridge Bay, staffed by an estimated 100 regular force personnel.
New fixed-wing search-and-rescue aircraft in Yellowknife.
Recruiting up to 500 additional Canadian Rangers and increasing their level of training and equipment.
At the heart of sovereignty is investment. Canada has fallen behind in that investment and lost a grip on its sovereignty as a result.
Harper says he is going to turn that around. Canadians and Nunavummiut must hold him to his word.
Fort Smith is acting true to form as a politically charged town, a reputation built up over many years and many elections.
At the centre of the debate now is how to spend the $1.5 million allocated to the area from the territorial government's Community Capacity Building Fund.
It's a sign of good times that people have that kind of money dropped in their lap. It's also true that money is not all that easy to spend, especially when people have to agree on the best way to do it.
In this case the decision is in the hands of the Town of Fort Smith, Salt River First Nation and the Fort Smith Metis Council. The talks have not gone well since last November. There are competing projects but the good news is all will unquestionably benefit the Fort Smith area.
Municipal and Community Affairs Michael McLeod has been asked by the Metis and Salt River to make the decision on where to spend the money. The Minister has wisely put it back to the three parties in Fort Smith, pointing out the deadline is not until November 2006.
Politics is the art of compromise. Surely three such community-minded organizations can come up with a solution all on their own.
The ignorance of southerners about Northern society and the issues that affect us is nothing new.
We've all been asked if we live in iglus, whether we have running water and, of course, do temperatures ever climb above zero?
Recently, Proctor and Gamble aired television ads for Scope mouthwash, depicting Inuit couples rubbing noses before one of them rinses with Scope and they engage in a kiss.
Glen Guthrie of Norman Wells was not impressed by what he saw and contacted the company. He indicated that not only did the commercial misrepresent an Inuit custom, but aboriginal communities are stricken by alcohol abuse and some substitute mouthwash for an intoxicant.
His concerns were acknowledged and to the company's credit, the commercial was pulled off the air.
Northerners may not be able to change the way southerners think, but we can take action when we see ourselves portrayed in an unjust and unfair manner.
If each of us learns to stand up for ourselves, maybe we will eventually be taken more seriously by our southern neighbours - or at least make them a little more sensitive to our uniqueness.
Editorial Comment
Darrell Greer
Kivalliq News
If I had a dollar for every time during the past five years someone told me there are too many rules being enforced in Northern hockey, I would be a lot closer to retirement than I am now.
The popular opinion of those expressing such views is that the rules are taking all the fun out of hockey and, this is the North, nobody really gets hurt playing here.
I wonder if Bryan Fotheringham felt he was really hurt earlier this month while waiting to be medevaced to Winnipeg for surgery on the busted ankle he sustained in a Rankin rec league game?
As with the majority of hockey mishaps, the injury resulted from an accident when a teammate fell on him in the crease area.
The point to be made in justifying the rules is twofold.
First, people do get hurt playing hockey.
Rules are in place to protect players as much as possible from sustaining a serious injury.
That's why it's mandatory for minor hockey players to wear approved helmets, neck guards and full-facial protection.
Nobody's trying to be mean and keep kids, especially kids from less-fortunate families, from playing the game because they can't afford the necessary equipment.
Hockey organizers are simply doing what they can to help prevent injury.
It's the nature of the beast for the enforcement of these rules to almost always fall on the shoulders of the on-ice officials.
The second reason we have so many rules is that we live in a world run by lawyers.
Hockey is no different than most everything these days in that a potential lawsuit always lurks close by.
Most sports fans have little knowledge of the insurance and legal issues dealt with on the administrational side of the games.
Even executive board members, who may never take an active part in the playing of the game, are insured against lawsuits surrounding official policies.
Most hockey fans have heard of the southern lawsuits launched by parents of young players who felt their child was treated unfairly when they didn't make the big team of their area.
Of even greater concern is guarding players and officials from loss of insurance when injury does occur.
All it takes is for one unregistered player to be on the ice and everyone's coverage is null and void.
The same applies to the wearing of uncertified or altered equipment.
A player sustaining a head injury, for example, who was not wearing a properly certified helmet, would receive nothing more than a rejection letter from the insurance company involved.
There will always be issues surrounding sports that people will disagree with.
But, when it comes to the rules surrounding the safety and well-being of players and officials, the rules are in place to protect, not deny.
The denying part happens when the rules are not enforced and an individual is left to suffer alone.
Editorial Comment
Jason Unrau
Inuvik Drum
On Valentine's Day, the Joint Review Panel (JRP) hearings on the Mackenzie Gas Project kick off in Inuvik, but don't expect a lot of love going around.
Different from the National Energy Board hearings, the JRP will hear evidence about the socio-economic and environmental impacts of the proposed pipeline.
Understandably, there are many concerns about the pipeline with respect to both the environment and what effects the influx of workers and more cash will have on the North, which is already trying to deal with its fair share of social ills.
Ask somebody on the street their opinion about the pipeline and the reaction is usually mixed.
Most seem to understand that more jobs and a bustling economy will come and that it's a good thing. However, most of these people maintain valid concerns about wildlife and people. And this is what makes the JRP so important.
With half a billion federal dollars earmarked for dealing with socio-economic impacts of the pipeline, it would be prudent to have an idea where to channel this funding in the event that the project gets the go-ahead.
Ever notice that many of those - people and organizations - dead-set against the pipeline have little or nothing to gain regardless of whether or not the project happens? The irony here is that while their reasoning is caged in some kind of environmental or social altruism, they don't seem to care that others could lose out on jobs and educational opportunities if the entire thing were scrapped.
It's a very similar mentality to those protesting something like the seal hunt. Of course these creatures are cute and furry and nobody wants to see one clubbed over the head, but it's the person at the other end of the club whose livelihood could be at stake because some television celebrity can't handle the brutal realities.
So it's good to keep in mind that if the pipeline gets scuttled, the Sierra Club or Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society won't turn up the next day with offers of employment.
It was such a pleasure to meet with the teenager featured in the Coffee Break (page 2) this week and hear how his time spent in corrections helped change his outlook on life and put him on a path towards achieving his goals. Now that's taking some responsibility. I wish him all the best.
There's so much potential in the young people of Inuvik and it's disheartening to witness kids wasting theirs by not attending school and/or getting into trouble with the law.
Editorial Comment
Roxanna Thompson
Deh Cho Drum
As you read this paper, do you know where your dog is?
If you don't own a dog you can rest easy, but those who do should hopefully be able to immediately pin-point the location of their pet.
Long-standing concerns about potentially dangerous roaming dogs were voiced this week by residents in Wild Rose Acres in Fort Simpson.
While there is probably no need to panic about Cujo-like packs of canines causing havoc and striking terror into the hearts of the multitudes, there is a faint warning bell that should be listened to.
Dogs may be man's best friend, but situations happen regularly where dogs turn on humans.
No one ever wants to assume the worst about their own pet. It's hard to contemplate a canine who's considered a member of the family doing something violent, but it can happen. And it's not just the so called "dangerous breeds" that need to be watched.
Like a young child, if left to their own devices, even the best of dogs can get into mischief.
There's also something to be said about peer pressure.
The confidence of a dominant dog might give courage to an otherwise timid pet.
The simple fact is dogs should not be given the chance to cause an accident.
It's hard to say what could set an animal off. Even after 10,000 to 14,000 years of domestication, dogs still possess some of their original primal urges.
Basic precautions should be taken to ensure that the Deh Cho Drum never has to contain a report about a serious dog attack.
The onus is on pet owners to create a system that works for them, so their dog can have a measure of freedom and fresh air while still being controlled. This could involve a leash, a fenced-in yard, or even staying with the dog while it's outside.
The responsibility shouldn't be left to bylaw officers who are often only alerted after something has gone wrong.
Keeping a close eye on a dog's location is important for the animal's safety as much as that of humans. It's hard to protect a pet from accidents with vehicles or other animals if you don't know where they are.
Even if a dog is unlikely to be aggressive, owners need to be sensitive to the fact that dogs make some people nervous.
Others simply don't like dogs. Even dog lovers are generally cautious when meeting an unfamiliar canine.
A bit of time and planning is all it would take to ensure that man's best friends keep their titles.
The headline for Navalik Tologanak's Cambridge Bay Tea Talk in the Feb. 6 edition of Nunavut News/North should have read: "AKNAT INMIKURAHUAT. We apologize for the error.