Home page

Text size

E-mail this page

There is little doubt that midwives provide a valuable service to pregnant women.

There has been ample testimony to support the physical and mental health benefits midwives provide to their clients. When the government cancelled midwifery services while a review was being conducted to determine potential models for providing services in the NWT, the economic viability of midwives to the territorial health care system had to be proven to bring the service back.

The consultant's report put forward three recommendations varying in cost and scope. The recommended model would see midwives established in five communities -- Hay River, Inuvik, Fort Simpson, Behchoko and Yellowknife.

The estimated annual pricetag of what is being called the community model is $1.5 million, excluding infrastructure costs, which are undefined. A host of benefits are listed as a result of the proposed model, but most significantly, from a bottom-line perspective, is the reduced cost for medical travel. Theoretically, pregnant women would have to travel less for medical treatment and many low-risk births would not have to take place in a hospital in Yellowknife or Edmonton. As a result, the government could save a substantial sum on medical travel reimbursements.

Unfortunately, the report does not quantify the cost savings because they are impossible to predict for a number of reasons. For example, mothers might choose to double up on midwife and physician care, and in the case of an unexpected emergency, patients will still need to be medevaced to an appropriate hospital.

In the report, the communities considered eligible for midwifery services had to have a minimum of 25 births per year to be cost effective and "ensure the continuing competency of midwives."

Unfortunately, that places midwives in the communities that already have such services and not those with the greatest need and where travel costs would be the highest.

As the GNWT looks to reduce spending, it is going to be difficult for it to support a recommendation that might appear as more a practical option rather than a necessity, despite the obvious benefits to health.

Having midwives in communities such as Ulukhaktok or Fort Good Hope would likely save more money and result in better improvements in health than stationing them in Hay River or Yellowknife. To get around the need for a certain volume of clients, the consultants should have considered a mobile midwifery program, similar to its regional model but with the healthcare provider doing the travelling instead of the mothers. With such a model, the cost of midwives travelling for check-ups and staying in communities for a few weeks prior to a mother's due date could have been compared to the cost of having mothers-to-be get on a plane for a far away hospital.

While the cost factors are murky, it costs little to nothing to voice one's preferences to an MLA. If you're in favour of midwifery being re-established in the NWT, or firmly opposed to it, let our territorial politicians hear your opinion loud and clear so they can deliver in the legislature.

It's easy to concentrate on flaws in government-Inuit relations - and that's often necessary for accountability - but now and then it is good to count one's blessings.

Last week's feature story on mining's threat to Saami culture in Sweden under the watch of an unsympathetic government ("Mines threaten reindeer herders," Nunavut News/North, April 16) paints a bleak picture - a people pushed around by a complicit government tends to side with industry over its indigenous population; a population of reindeer that may be unable to cross between winter and summer lands due to a blockade of mining development. Worst of all, it looks like nothing's going to change.

Though there have been atrocious, and some may say criminal, acts committed by the Canadian government in its history of dealing with aboriginal peoples - residential schools, High Arctic relocation, among others - the positions it has taken in negotiating land claims and balancing Inuit interests with major development in recent history have been, largely, in good faith.

While the Swedish Minerals Act does encourage consultation between industry and the indigenous population, the Saami say it has no teeth - the consultations take place, but the Saami point of view bears no influence on what ultimately happens.

The Nunavut Land Claims Act guarantees Inuit meaningful consultation in major developments, and, though it sometimes takes considerable effort to stand up against business interests, this guarantee has mostly been honoured. In addition to mine approval going through lengthy and comprehensive Nunavut Impact Review Board assessments, last year there was a victory which was outside the scope of the Nunavut land claim.

A National Energy Board-approved plan for RPS Energy to conduct seismic testing outside of the Nunavut Settlement Area last summer, along Davis Strait and off the shore of Baffin Island, was met with heavy opposition from community members, specifically in Pond Inlet, Clyde River and Iqaluit. They were concerned with how the seismic testing might affect aquatic wildlife. These Nunavummiut felt their voices weren't heard. Though the board was satisfied with the project's environmental assessment, and the project took place beyond Nunavut's borders, the testing was delayed to 2012 to allow for more community consultation.

Before that, in August 2010, the Nunavut Court of Justice granted an injunction temporarily stopping seismic testing in High Arctic waters at the request of the Qikiqtani Inuit Association, which argued Inuit were not meaningfully consulted. The decision put an indefinite hold on the proposed seismic program in Lancaster Sound, Jones Sound and North Baffin Bay.

Inuit rights are recognized and protected by the judicial system when push comes to shove. Though it's necessary to make sure these rights aren't eroded and environmental vigilance does not fade, at least the people themselves have the power to successfully challenge big-money interests and are not ignored.

These rights have been secured thanks not just to the federal government, but to the passionate Inuit behind the creation of Nunavut and the settlement of land claims. That passion must stay alive now more than ever in light of the recent federal initiative to streamline the regulatory process.

In light of what appears to be yet another year of inaction dawning on residents of Northland Trailer Park, we find ourselves asking what the board's push for lower local improvement fees will ultimately cost homeowners.

Without an agreement for the city to take over Northland's privately held streets and begin the task of replacing the crumbling water and sewer pipes beneath them, owners of the trailer park's 258 mobile homes face yet another perilous winter at risk of catastrophic failure, rising operations and maintenance costs, and a guarantee that whatever it would cost them to begin the repairs this year will be more expensive next year. The price tag has been estimated at around $20 million, although Northlanders hope to reduce that by cutting out some of the frills, such as paved roads.

City administrator Bob Long chided Northland's governing board during a committee meeting last week, saying the window to begin construction this year is closing fast.

The drumbeat of urgency has been beating faster with each passing year but it appears Condominium Corporation No. 8 would rather wait it out and hope for a better deal.

The condo corp. seems to think the $360 a month over 25 years from each residence won't survive a plebiscite vote among Northland homeowners - even though it's already been shaved down significantly from the original proposal of $455 a month.

There is also still this persistent idea among some trailer park residents that city council can be convinced to use taxpayers' money to lower the monthly rate, even though the city has repeatedly rejected that idea. It's naive to think council is going to roll over on this point, especially during an election year.

If the condo corp. wants to save Northland from ruin it best heed the pressures of time and do whatever it takes to convince homeowners to sign on now. Stick to all this wishful negotiating and it might just cost Northlanders their homes.

There is no logical reason for consumers to expect any immediate result from federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's recent announcement that the lowly penny will no longer be produced.

It's going to be a long time before the copper-coloured coin actually disappears from cash registers in Yellowknife stores. There are, after all, millions of the coins in circulation nationwide. It's going to take years for ordinary consumers to feel the impact of the decision for the Royal Canadian Mint to stop making new coins at a cost of 1.6 cents apiece.

Even so, when the one-cent coin finally does disappear, it will primarily penalize those people who choose to pay in cash. An estimated 50 per cent of Canadians don't make their purchases in cash, choosing instead to use debit cards, credit cards or gift cards.

There is the potential, however, for some retailers to adjust their prices solely as a result of the announcement that the penny will no longer be produced.

Most will surely opt to increase prices, rounding the purchase cost up to the nearest nickel. Of course, the cost will only be rounded down in rare occasions.

Yet, there are enough pennies in circulation that adjusting prices now is premature, if needed at all.

When the time comes, the most logical approach is for retailers to round down a price that ends in 1 or 2, or round up a price that ends in 3 or 4, on a total purchase - and only if there are no pennies left in the till and only if the consumer wishes to pay in cash and has no pennies.

That said, logic doesn't always rule the day.

Changes that affect the necessities of life such as housing are generally met with trepidation and sometimes hostility. With that in mind the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation's changes to the public housing program's rent scale are bound to create a lot of debate.

It will take some time for public housing clients to determine for themselves if the changes are beneficial.

The bulk of the changes to the rent scale seem to be a step in the right direction.

The corporation says the changes are based on feedback from residents who argued the current rent system is complicated, unfair, unpredictable and provided a disincentive to work. The new system, the corporation says, is much simpler.

Looking at the provided literature it certainly seems to be. A straightforward chart lays out how much rent a household will pay, based on the occupants' gross monthly household income and the zone they live in. The income range for each rent amount is clearly laid out so tenants will be able to decide if taking a new or additional job will push them into the next rent level.

Of course not everyone will be happy. The changes will result in approximately 262 households receiving a rent increase of $100 or more. On the flip side, however, 675 households are expected to pay less rent.

You can't please everyone and if the system proves to be better, having some households pay a bit more may be a small price to pay.

One area, however, that there's bound to be a lot of furor over is the case of seniors. Seniors in public housing will be paying rent just like everyone else.

It's important to note that many seniors won't be paying a lot. With $1,000 in income exempt each month, most seniors will be paying the lowest rent rates, either $70, $75 or $80 depending on the zone they are in. Even a small amount, however, still adds up when stacked against a fixed income.

Although there might be an argument that seniors should help pay their way, the corporation can't expect to take away something that was free and not have some backlash.

So what we are left with is a policy change that on the surface, except if you are a senior, seems to be beneficial and just what the populous requested.

Officials with the housing corporation should remain open to the possibility of revisions because even the best laid plans can have unforeseen negative consequences.

The crowd leaving the Midnight Sun Complex after last Tuesday's public meeting on the Inuvik natural gas supply issue was a disgruntled one, to say the least.

"I thought it was already a sales pitch for what had already been decided, rather than a public forum for input," said resident Toby Newendorf. "The whole thing seems to be scary – double your gas rates for two or three years, and then almost double them long-term. That's not really a good set of alternatives for people here."

Newendorf caused a stir during the public question period at the meeting by suggesting the town look into switching to a refrigerator-sized nuclear battery that would last for roughly 30 years before needing to be refilled and would cost about one-tenth of what residents are currently paying for natural gas.

Regardless of the logistics and feasibility of such a plan, Newendorf's suggestion got people talking – and thinking – about different alternatives to natural gas.

Questions about the so-called alternative energy sources (wind, water and hydro) were posed, but the impression given was that these have not really been looked at as serious options.

A feasibility study conducted by the Aurora Research Institute years ago states that annual wind speed in Inuvik is not fast enough to put in a wind farm – but another location could be possible. Solar panels have seen some success in the area, such as the town office that runs its air conditioning unit in the summer with solar panels, but there is no way to store this power through the winter and even if there was, that would only offset the town's electricity needs and wouldn't fix the heating problem.

Not to mention how much any of these systems would cost and who would pay for it.

There are a number of ways to heat a home or a building. As one woman put it on her way out the door, "Anyone chopping wood in this town is going to make a killing next winter."

Last week's meeting, which many expected or hoped would be a brainstorming session on what the options were, turned in to exactly what Newendorf said – a sales pitch.

Perhaps people should have seen that coming. After all, most of the members of the panel worked for either Inuvik Gas, ATCO Midstream Ltd. or the Ikhil Joint Venture – of course any solution coming from them will be a gas-based solution.

The point to be taken away from all this is not so much which alternative is best for the town of Inuvik, but that there are alternatives.

This is not to say that natural gas will not turn out to be the way of the future for Inuvik. As Mayor Denny Rodgers stated in the town newsletter distributed before the meeting, "We have lots of natural gas, we just need to get it to the town."

But how? And who pays for it?

There are lots of outstanding questions and it's time to start coming up with some answers. There is a good chance that this town will be out of natural gas before breakup of 2013. Either way, it sure would be nice for residents to know how they will heat their homes next winter and how much that might cost, so they have enough time to prepare.

Plus, doubling the cost of heating – and all the trickle-down costs that would add to products and services here – would be a lot easier to swallow if you knew that it was the best solution out of a number of options.

It seems as though, right now, private industry, the town, the territory and the people are unsure about who it is that should be coming up with those options. When really, the only real way to have this mess sorted out and a new system on its way by this time next year is if everyone works together.

Too often it seems Yellowknife MLAs keep their heads down when a controversial issue does not directly concern our city or the people living here.

Bring up the Deh Cho Bridge or changes to supplementary health care benefits, and our local politicians not seated on the cabinet side of the legislative assembly are jumping to their feet every chance they can get.

When the issue is something along the lines of: should the NWT Housing Corporation be evicting tenants who refuse to pay rent, however, Yellowknife MLAs remain largely mute.

On the proposed all-season Inuvik-to-Tuktoyaktuk highway, local MLAs finally seem willing to tip over some sacred cows. Range Lake MLA Daryl Dolynny isn't the only MLA critical of the project but he is the most vocal. He implored the government not to give in to "emotional feelings" and "political lobbying" in his member's statement on Feb. 15 and took to Twitter earlier this month, chiding the GNWT to "see the warning signs before we spend $300 mil."

The warning signs he refers to are revised cost estimates that put the highway at up to $300 million to complete from the original $200 million announced last year. This means the original 75-25 split proposed by Ottawa - which is pitching in $150 million - might actually wind up being more like 50-50, and leave the GNWT with such a huge bill that there will be little room left on its $800 million borrowing limit for other desperately needed infrastructure projects.

Many MLAs, including all regular members from Yellowknife, gave the project a rough ride in the legislative assembly after Transportation Minister David Ramsay announced $2.5 million for environmental assessment work Feb. 14.

First and foremost on their minds is why spend such an enormous amount of money - even with federal help -- to service a moribund oil and gas industry and link a community of 3,500 (Inuvik) to a community of less than 1,000 (Tuktoyaktuk).

It doesn't add up when one thinks of all the other infrastructure needs of the territory, particularly long neglected repairs for existing roads such as Highway 7 that may actually benefit large portions of the NWT with increased tourism traffic from the Alaska Highway through the Deh Cho and North Slave and South Slave. The influx of visitors will only increase if we actually turn these perilous routes into serviceable roads that tourists would be willing to drive on with their expensive RVs but strictly avoid now because of their poor condition.

Isolation remains a fact for many communities of the Northwest Territories, and unfortunately we won't be able to connect them all via all-season roads any time soon. It would be nice to have a highway poking out to the Beaufort Sea but is it something Northerners really need?

Thankfully Yellowknife MLAs are challenging this project when in previous years they might have stayed silent lest they be cast once again as the big bad bullies from the capital city.

Perhaps, ironically enough, this was prompted by cost overruns on the Deh Cho Bridge. Whatever the reason, we can only hope our MLAs don't waver and get suckered in by "free money" from Ottawa that will add to our debt at the expense of projects for which there is an actual need.

I can't hazard a guess at how many games I've been on the ice as a player or official during my half century of involvement with hockey.

But, with the last puck dropped in Rankin Inlet for tournaments and league play this season, for the first time in my life I face a summer of reflection and indecision as to whether I've reached the end of the line.

I can look any person in the eye involved with the game and say I can still cut the mustard, at a high level, as far as actually reffing, but that's not what I'm wrestling with.

The game has changed greatly during the past decade, and a lot of that change has been for the better.

One area, however, that's not so great, is the amount of abuse officials now take from the players, fans and, especially, the parents.

I often chuckle when I hear people say players have no respect for each other anymore.

If you want to know how it feels to be a true Rodney Dangerfield of hockey, try officiating for a few years.

It's no laughing matter.

The profanity and insults a ref now hears at the peewee level rivals that of the junior leagues of the '70s.

I wish I had a camera on the face of an official here in Rankin when he assessed a minor penalty and the peewee player told him to (ahem) "take" off and referred to him as the child of unwed parents.

A peewee player! Funny stuff, eh?

Complicating matters in a hotbed of hockey such as Rankin is that many people don't understand the constant intensity a small group of officials face when tournament season rolls around.

For each separate age group, it's a big weekend tournament and that's that.

But, for the officials, it's an intense six weeks of pressure with, during an average year, senior men's playoffs through the week and then weekend after weekend of the Polar Bear Plate, Avataq Cup, bantam or midget territorial, Powerful Peewees and the Jon Lindell Memorial in Arviat thrown in for those of us who travel.

Don't believe the playoffs or these tournaments are that intense? Then, by all means, come out next year and give it a try because we could surely use the help.

In the south, an official may have an exchange with a player, fan or coach and then not see that person for another month or more.

In Rankin (and many other Northern communities), you're back at the arena with that person within a week, if not the very next day.

My golden rule -- which I've never broken -- is that it stays on the ice.

You leave the community behind when you enter an arena, and leave what happens on the ice behind when you exit.

But it gets harder every year because many of the comments have become so personal.

Early in the NHL playoffs, bad calls on an offside goal and a phantom glove pass directly impacted a game's outcome.

And these are the best officials in the world.

That's something to keep in mind the next time you're ready to give it to a local ref because you don't agree with the call.

Refs aren't looking for anyone to give them a dinner, but a bit of respect would keep more of us on the ice doing our best for the game we love.

We welcome your opinions. Click here to e-mail a letter to the editor.