Stephanie McDonald
Northern News Services
Published Monday, December 10, 2007

NUNAVUT - Five communities in Nunavut will be voting in the coming months to decide how they want to manage alcohol.

Kimmirut and Coral Harbour will hold a plebiscite today (Monday) to decide if they want to become restricted communities with an alcohol education committee, rather than prohibiting liquor altogether.

Communities where alcohol is prohibited: Arviat, Coral Harbour, Gjoa Haven, Kimmirut, Pangnirtung, Kugaaruk, Sanikiluaq, Whale Cove Communities where alcohol is restricted: Arctic Bay, Baker Lake, Qikiqtarjuaq, Cape Dorset, Chesterfield Inlet, Clyde River, Hall Beach, Iglulik, Pond Inlet, Rankin Inlet, Repulse Bay, Resolute, Kugluktuk Communities with no alcohol restrictions: Bathurst Inlet, Cambridge Bay, Grise Fiord, Iqaluit, Taloyoak Source: Nunavut Department of Finance

Whale Cove will have a similar plebiscite on Feb. 11, the same day Cambridge Bay votes on whether or not to increase the powers of its now defunct alcohol education committee.

Taloyoak has requested a liquor plebiscite on whether or not the town desires to put an alcohol education committee in place. There are currently no restrictions related to alcohol in the community. The minister of Finance will present the request to his cabinet colleagues before giving approval.

"This is rare," Chris D'Arcy said in regards to five communities holding plebiscites in such a short span.

D'Arcy, acting assistant deputy minister of the Department of Finance's financial management branch, has been with the finance department since June 2006. There had been only one or two plebiscites between then and now, he said.

"There's more interest in taking control of the situation at the community level perhaps," D'Arcy said.

Some organizers say the process of holding a plebiscite is easy compared to what comes after a successful one. Peter Harte, who spearheaded the campaign to get a plebiscite for Cambridge Bay, sent an e-mail to GN lawyer Norman Tarnow on Nov. 19, asking for specifics on how an alcohol education committee is supposed to run and what regulations it is to follow.

He said he sent a second e-mail on Nov. 27 when he had still received no response from Tarnow.

"The kind of support they are providing is marginal," Harte said.

He has received no information on how a meeting is to be run, if there is an instruction book, if someone is to keep minutes or files, or who keeps track of permits, he said.

Keith Peterson, MLA for Cambridge Bay, wrote Finance Minister David Simailak a letter in mid-October asking many of the same questions.

In his response, Simailak stated that "how to" guides for alcohol education committees are being developed.

Pamphlets explaining liquor plebiscites and the roles and responsibilities of a committee already exist, he wrote.

D'Arcy said that community members and legislative drafters in the Department of Justice create regulations after a successful plebiscite.

The regulations will set out the power of a committee, the number of members it will have, when it will meet and so on.

"We facilitate the creation of the committees under the act, but that's basically just about it," D'Arcy said.

Another point of contention, Harte said, is that committee members do not receive an honorarium, unlike similar elected committees.

"I don't know why they wouldn't provide some sort of compensation for the members of the liquor committee, particularly when the government is collecting tax off the sale (of alcohol)," Harte said.

Simailak's letter to Peterson said only the issue of honoraria was "under consideration."