Wednesday, March 1, 2006
The usual pattern once convicted of a crime is people do time in jail. If the crime is serious enough, they are released on parole before the sentence ends.
The courts have added many shades of grey to punishment. At one end of the spectrum, we bend over backwards to keep youth out of jail. At the other end, we declare extreme criminals as dangerous offenders and keep them locked up for life.
There are many reasons behind one person killing another. Sometimes that reason may be mental illness.
If a mentally ill person is not placed in a secure hospital ward and treated, we need to recognize sitting in a jail cell for a length of time is not going to cure them of ills that led them to kill in the first place.
In 1988, Ulayuk was convicted of second degree murder in the death of his girlfriend Martha Ammaq. That conviction was softened on appeal to manslaughter when laws on insanity pleas changed.
He didn't simply kill his girlfriend. The brutality of the act and his sick reasoning indicated severe mental illness. This should have been an automatic red flag for the courts, police and parole officers.
Ulayuk's mental illness continued in prison. There is no evidence he received treatment before being let go.
Anyone handling his case should have been alerted to his illness and required to step up their level of caution. In Pargeter's case, senior officers should have included a second parole officer backing her up on the fatal visit. This is now policy, written in Pargeter's blood.
If we as a society can't "fix" people in Ulayuk's state of mind, then we owe society a permanent program to ensure its protection from the outcomes, such as the second murder Ulayuk committed.
If that means being on a permanent "watch list," then so be it. We already take similar stances for pedophiles because it's recognized there's no way to guarantee public safety otherwise.
The Ulayuks of this country need much closer supervision and the people in contact with them need better protection.
And when Ulayuk serves his 25 years, has he paid his debt to society?
Until society can guarantee he is not an immediate threat to the public, no.
Editorial Comment
Darrell Greer
Kivalliq News
It's fine for the Government of Nunavut (GN) to say it's not interested in revisiting its new staff-housing policy at this time.
And we see the logic in the GN's stance that the policy has only been in place for a few months (September 2005), which isn't nearly long enough for any conclusions on its overall impact on the ranks of government workers.
That being said, we hope the GN plans to closely monitor the situation given the results of a survey among 237 government employees.
We're not surprised the vast majority of those surveyed don't like the policy.
We are, however, surprised by how strong some of the responses are.
Many of the survey respondents stated emphatically they are prepared to leave Nunavut before the new policy affects them.
The policy will see the GN end staff housing in the major centres of Rankin Inlet, Iqaluit and Cambridge Bay, while increasing the rent for staff housing in every other Nunavut community.
The GN points to other areas, such as our Northern neighbours to the west, that adopted such a plan without any significant fallout.
It also maintains the policy will stimulate growth in the private sector and make Nunavut less reliant on federal monies.
The survey, however, points in another direction - one of mass exodus.
The GN is still badly understaffed, and 60 per cent of the respondents saying the policy will force them to leave (17 per cent within the year) is cause for concern.
We know behind closed doors in Iqaluit, government heads are thinking the responses are what you'd expect from employees about to lose a benefit they've become accustomed to.
And there's truth in that.
There are also some MLAs who don't view a mass exodus of southern workers as a completely bad thing.
In their minds, such an exodus would open the door for more Nunavummiut to obtain government jobs.
However, the GN still has to be a working government capable of delivering programs and meeting the needs of its people.
It has to provide proper education and health care to our territory's youth so they may have the tools necessary to keep Nunavut moving forward in the future.
And, the fact no less than 35 per cent of the survey respondents were Inuit, shows it's not just southerners who are threatening to leave.
Maybe the GN has a perk in mind that will act as a balance to the new staff-housing policy.
Or, maybe, the policy was simply ill-conceived to begin with.
To us it's a good policy, but initiated too early in our territory's development.
In short, the GN has nothing to fall back on if the promised exodus does occur.
We can only hope if this doesn't go the way the GN planned, it won't stubbornly dig in its heels and allow its staff-housing policy to drag the territory down.
Economies of scale will be the least of the GN's worries if there's nobody here to tip the scales in its favour!
Editorial Comment
Jason Unrau
Inuvik Drum
Sitting through testimony at the Joint Review Panel hearings which kicked off in Inuvik last week, I could not help but think of U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's words on the subject of finding the forest through the trees, so to speak.
"As we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say there are some things we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns - the ones we don't know we don't know."
The ramifications of constructing the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline fits nicely into Rumsfeld's logic. In terms of known knowns, a pipeline will mean more jobs, more people and more money flowing into communities along the construction corridor. The known unknowns will be the extent of the impacts - both negative and positive - of the "knowns" on these communities and their residents. It could be significant, negligible or somewhere in between.
But lastly, and perhaps most troublesome to anyone with the slightest concern about what will happen when the pipeline comes to town, are the unknown unknowns. You know, the things we don't know, we don't know. And being that we don't know we don't know them, there is absolutely nothing that can be done to prepare.
As for what can be done to lessen the socio-environmental impacts should the pipeline be built, as I've written before, that is the purpose of having these JRP hearings; get everything on the table to be in the best possible position to mitigate any and all negative effects.
Before coming to live in Inuvik, like most others I didn't really have the foggiest idea about gas pipelines, except for the fact that there had to be some connection between the natural gas flowing into my home and its source. That said, what I've been hearing regularly about how the people don't understand what's going to happen with respect to the pipeline doesn't surprise me.
Take your average Joe or Jane living here or there and it's a safe bet that they aren't much concerned about where their tap water comes from, how a faucet works or what was involved in going from say, electric heating to natural gas. And why would they be? As long as things are working, then life can go on. Enter Inuvik and all of a sudden everyone seems surprised/confused/angry that nobody knows what's going on with this pipeline except that there's a lot of lawyers in the community hall talking about gas volumes, fuel processing plants and low, moderate and high magnitudes of disturbances on plants and wildlife.
The only thing for certain at this stage is that there's 10 more months of testimony about pipeline known unknowns on the horizon.
Editorial Comment
Roxanna Thompson
Deh Cho Drum
With the Prairie Creek mine standing ready to start drilling work, thanks to the recently reissued water licence, the spectre of possible environmental dangers will be back in the spotlight for many people.
The mine has long met with opposition on a number of fronts, notably from the residents of Nahanni Butte which is closest to the mine site.
With Canadian Zinc moving forward on the project, the role of the people should now be to act as informed observers.
Both those who agree and those who disagree with the mine should be as well informed as possible.
John Kearney, the chairman of Canadian Zinc, said the company has an open door policy about sharing information on the project. The company has an office in Fort Simpson and is also planning to offer tours of the site during the summer.
Take Canadian Zinc up on their offers.
According to a well known saying, people are afraid of what they don't understand. But uninformed people are also unable to judge if something is going either poorly or well.
Understanding the basic principles and terminology for the mine will be important, especially if it ever reaches full production.
While it's not necessary to become mining experts, a little basic knowledge will probably be useful.
Work this summer at the mine is supposed to include the driving of 400 to 500 metres of new decline and carrying out about 10,000 metres of underground infill drilling. If you don't know what these terms mean, there is no shame in asking for clarification.
Those who are living near the mine have both an obligation and a right to know what is happening in their area.
Being informed will also be an important goal for the people of Fort Simpson in the next few weeks.
With two candidates running for the position of mayor, there is a choice to be made concerning the shape of the village's future.
Serious questions need to be asked about what the residents of Fort Simpson want for their future. Where would residents like to see the village in five or 10 years?
What preparations will be needed if the Mackenzie Valley pipeline reaches construction?
Think about the issues that matter to you and be ready to pose questions to the candidates when the opportunity presents itself.
The election shouldn't turn into a popularity contest or an examination of who has a larger network of connections, but rather be a careful choice about which candidate has the best overall vision for Fort Simpson.