Home page

Text size

E-mail this page

The Department of Education, Culture and Employment wants to overhaul the education system in the territory.

This is partially in response to a May 2010 report from the Auditor General of Canada, which stated "the department does not have a detailed territory-wide plan to improve student performance." It's also because NWT graduation rates lag behind Canadian rates by approximately 20 percent.

ECE released a framework document in November entitled Education Renewal and Innovation Framework: Directions for Change. Lacking any specific direction, this framework is more like a discussion paper. It pulls together previous consultations and reports, research and high-level thinking, boiling it all down to an educational dream.

And like a dream, it's all over the place.

This explains the confusion at a town hall meeting set up by Yellowknife's three school boards on Dec 4. intended to help us "better understand ECE's new initiative."

Simon Taylor, chair of the Yellowknife Catholic school board, told Yellowknifer: "It (the initiative) accepts the fact that the territories have a lot of difficulties that southern communities don't face ... It's a stated aim that we will do better and that's important."

The Canadian graduation rate sits at approximately 76.9 per cent, Alberta at 73.7 per cent, the U.S. at 68.3 per cent.

The Yellowknife graduation rate is 68 per cent in Yellowknife, 64 per cent in Inuvik, Hay River and Fort Smith, and 37 per cent in smaller communities. The non-aboriginal graduation rate is 80 per cent. The aboriginal rate is 40 per cent.

The numbers say that the education system is culturally biased. This is understandable. The curriculum is Alberta-based. That's why the system works for non-aboriginal students far better than for aboriginal students. If the NWT education system's goals are to be achieved and educational standards met, there must be a far greater inclusion of aboriginal culture in the learning process.

The Conference Board of Canada concluded in 2010: "Canadians have made high-school completion a priority. This accomplishment is driven less by official policy than by labour force entry-level requirements, social expectations (parents not wanting their children 'left behind'), and overall prosperity (which reduces the need for early labour force entry). The education system has certainly encouraged 'stay in school' programs, but broader economic and social factors have been more important than policy in contributing to Canada's impressive performance on this indicator."

In sum, jobs, social expectations and prosperity encourage higher graduation rates. All Northerners, aboriginal or non-aboriginal would agree.

We welcome any effort to improve the system in the smaller communities, as the GNWT has a duty to do so. The challenge will be ensuring that aboriginal culture enters the classroom daily rather than ignored or destroyed, as was attempted, with disastrous results, with the residential school system. More aboriginal teachers would be key to any success.

However, we repeat, Alberta academic standards must be met. Everyone recognizes these standards are essential if students are to become successful adults outside of their communities, even the territory, and in the wider world.

Yellowknife school boards need to focus on their students. Until ECE comes up with an actual draft action plan as part of their budget, the ways and the means, Yellowknife boards can improve on a system they've already proven does work, and raise the overall aboriginal and non-aboriginal graduation rate to 80 or more per cent. After all, that's their responsibility.

The question of what the future leaders of the Deh Cho will be like is a thought-provoking one.

Many of the people who have led and are leading as chiefs or Metis leaders are getting older. Which adults in Deh Cho communities will step into their positions in the next few years and, in turn, who will be the leaders from the generation that are currently teenagers and young adults?

Many First Nations and Metis groups in the region have tended to elect people who are fluent in Dene Zhatie and have strong ties to the land and know a variety of traditional skills. Are those the qualities that people will still want in their leaders 10, 20 and even 30 years from now?

These questions were in part inspired by the presentation that two staff with the Dechinta Centre for Research and Learning made in Fort Simpson during a recruitment drive last week. On its website, the centre says its mission is to support "a new generation of leaders and researchers by providing accessible and practical learning and development experiences, respectful of traditional ways, in a taiga bush environment."

At Dechinta, courses on topics such as traditional leadership, indigenous community health and sustainable communities are held alongside instruction on traditional skills like moose hide tanning, dry fish making and how to set fish nets. Students are expected to chop wood and write essays.

Is Dechinta on the right track?

Do First Nations now, and will they in the future, want their leaders to be able to hunt a moose as well as negotiate self-government agreements? Will there be a day when a business degree or a political science degree will be more desirable in a leader than a strong foundation in traditional knowledge and skills?

It's difficult to predict. It's likely that communities will want leaders who have both, a western style education as well as Dene teachings. If two people were running in an election and one had a degree, but few traditional skills and the other had maybe a high school education, but had spent lots of time in the bush it would be interesting to see who would get the most votes.

That day may come. Dehcho First Nations is still working on the Dehcho Process. If the region becomes self-governing will high levels of education become the most desirable trait for leaders who have to understand complex agreements and the ins and outs of resource development?

Only time will tell.

As Inuvik residents begin to digest the news that the town is looking to acquire the Inuvik Gas distribution system, let me chime in on the issue.

I think, at least in theory, that it's a sensible and prudent move for the town to enter into negotiations with the company, and by extension, its Ikhil Joint Venture partners.

Two councillors, I think, spoke the truth when they said it's time for the town to start examining all options.

"No one else was doing anything, so we had to," Derek Lindsay, a former mayor, said bluntly.

Terry Halifax also was eloquent on the issue.

"As it sits, we have two choices here: do nothing and hope that Inuvik Gas Ltd. continues to provide us with a fuel source, or take control of the situation and negotiate a fair price for this utility. Both scenarios beg some serious questions and elements of risk. What that future is, remains unclear at this point, but we are surrounded by opportunity -- we only need to bring it to town."

Of course, the main point of contention is going to be that "fair price." So far, there's nothing been made available to the public to even ballpark what that figure might be.

Negotiations are in the earliest stages, so it might well be the case that no numbers have been bandied about yet.

It would also be easy to say in hindsight that the town should have known better than to allow the distribution system to be held in private hands. I've heard some residents say that, although it's always "off the record." People, there's nothing wrong with expressing that opinion, but you might consider opening a public dialogue on that rather than remaining silent on the sidelines.

I'm sure the council at the time the deal was signed to bring low-cost natural gas to town had reasons that made sense. Hindsight, as they say, is 20-20, and second-guessing is futile at this point.

So it's good to see the town is now trying to rectify what could easily be seen as a mistake. But the devil is in the details ... and the numbers.

So hopefully there will be some numbers released to the public before long so they can begin to process whether this might be a good deal. I might suggest the sooner that happens, the better it might be.

People are anxious for some concrete information and action.

Colleges are places of higher learning, but there is one service Northern students - especially women - are in need of besides a solid education.

Female students are being forced to bring their children to the classroom or spend less time studying because of the lack of daycare services available while they are in school. Two students, Jocelyn Apps and Michelle Bourque, both attending Aurora College, have stepped forward to voice their concerns over the lack of daycare at the Yellowknife campus.

The missing daycare is a barrier to women's education. Many like Bourque, who can't make arrangements with family, are forced to take on jobs to pay for outside daycare, cutting into their study time and threatening their chances of earning their degrees.

There are also several students who have resorted to bringing their children to class, which creates a distraction for other students, hindering their education as well.

Aurora College is not alone in having so many students with children. There are more people attending college later in life due to many circumstances, such as second careers or upgrading for their current jobs. Other colleges and universities around the country have been offering daycare service for years to meet the changing demographic of mature students who are often going back to school after spending years in other fields or raising families.

College administration should be looking at other post-secondary institutions that run daycares on-campus - either through private organizations, or as part of an existing degree or diploma program - and use it as a model to develop its own service. Everyone from students to professors want to see Aurora College offer daycare to make it less stressful for everyone.

Yellowknifers are being told to choose between hosting the Arctic Winter Games in 2018 or the Canada Winter Games in 2023.

With five years between these two events, the city's argument that volunteer burnout will be an issue is specious at best, but cost certainly isn't.

Fortunately, the city appears well-equipped in facilities, such as the Multiplex arena and the Fieldhouse. In fact, many other Canadian communities would rightfully be envious of these facilities. They were funded, for the most part, by taxpayers who demanded state-of-the-art facilities in a city that experiences winter seven months of the year.

As the territorial capital and regional sporting centre, we should proudly show these facilities off. With 10 years to prepare, hosting the Canada Winter Games shouldn't be out of the question. Yellowknife certainly deserves the right to claim them, as well as the potential tourism opportunities they will bring.

The 2018 Arctic Winter Games would be an expensive distraction, so Yellowknife should take a pass this time. Doing so might also hammer home the point to the organization's governing board that if it wants participation from communities with elite facilities, it shouldn't give the games to communities - such as Nuuk, Greenland - that can't handle them.

Hockey, figure skating, speed skating and curling will always have a home in Yellowknife as long as this city is hosting premiere sporting events.

The world became colder this past week, and it had nothing to do with climate change.

The death of Nelson Mandela, 95, was mourned around the globe.

Not since the days of American president John F. Kennedy - both the youngest American president elected (43) and the youngest to die - has an individual had the ability to polarize so many people around the world.

Kennedy's battle was as much inside America as abroad, despite the infamous Bay of Pigs Invasion and the Cuban Missile Crisis, which brought the world to the brink of nuclear war.

Despite efforts to keep him out of civil rights by his administration, Kennedy's domestic policy (The New Frontier) included his promise to end racial discrimination.

That promise and the actions to follow (including being the first president to call on Americans to denounce racism as morally wrong), led to him losing his life in the pursuit of equality.

It was as hard to believe racism could be so rampant in 1960s America (a so-called enlightened age), as it was when Mandela toppled apartheid in 1993 and became South Africa's first democratically elected president in 1994.

The two leaders shared much in common, despite Mandela's 27 years as a political prisoner.

Kennedy was born into a politically powerful and affluent American family, while Mandela was born the son of a tribal chief.

Both were destined for greatness, fought ruthless foes and will be forever recorded in the annals of history as greatness personified.

They were extremely charismatic, and projected an image of warmth and caring rarely seen among world leaders.

Even Kennedy's alleged marital missteps have done little to dim his star.

He remains one of the most beloved presidents in American history, both within America and around the world.

Even those in the fascist and communist regimes of the times begrudgingly gave the man their respect.

As dedicated to the spoken word to affect change as both men were, neither was afraid to reach for the sword when needed.

While Mandela helped found the National African Congress's (NAC) Youth League, he also helped found its gorilla movement, Spear of the Nation, which took credit for more than 70 acts of sabotage against apartheid.

Despite other charges of the past, such as treason, it was his link to the Spear of the Nation that ultimately landed him in prison for 27 years.

Upon being released, at the age of 71, Mandela resumed his struggle against apartheid as leader of the ANC, which was, by then, legal.

He, for all intensive purposes, retired from politics and public life in 2004.

With his death this past week, he leaves behind a powerful legacy.

While Kennedy took patriotism to new levels by beseeching Americans to ask what they could do for their country, instead of what their country could do for them, Mandela showed the world the true power of conviction in fighting for what's right.

He provided the ultimate answer to the power of the individual, and what one person could hope to accomplish when up against insurmountable odds.

The NWT's regulatory regime is going to be drastically altered in 2015 with the elimination of regional regulatory boards and the creation of a single super board.

That became inevitable when the Conservative government lumped changes to the regulatory system and Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act into Bill C-15 - The Northwest Territories Devolution Act.

With the changes come concerns that regional voices will be diminished and community interests weakened when development projects go through the review process. Last week, the Gwich'in leadership came out publicly in opposition to the regulatory changes.

Those valid concerns can be alleviated with strong legislation. Equal regional representation on the so-called super board combined with regional panels - already included in the Bill - will, if done properly, ensure public opinion still factors strongly into all regulatory reviews.

Our regulatory system serves three purposes.

The first is to safeguard the environment with stringent controls to protect land, water and wildlife or denying development outright when the environmental damage cannot be adequately mitigated.

The second is to deal with development applications quickly and efficiently, providing developers and investors the confidence they need to invest in local economies.

The third is to protect the interests of regional populations by ensuring proper consultation and, if development moves ahead, ensuring local benefits.

As long as the public continues to engage in the regulatory process by voicing either opposition or support for proposed development, we believe the super board can be effective. Public engagement in the past has been enough to either help development along or force regulators to scrap it.

Will the new super board be an improvement over the current system? Unfortunately, no amount of legislation can fix the real problems of the past - Ottawa's inefficient management of its role in the Northern regulatory system.

The irony of this overhaul is it would not have been necessary if the federal government from minister on down hadn't repeatedly dropped the ball.

Gwich'in president Robert Alexie Jr. says his people have made numerous applications to have people appointed to the regulatory board. None - we suspect for partisan reasons - have been approved.

Too many development applications, having successfully navigated the Northern boards, collected too much dust waiting for approval from the federal minister of the day.

As well, whether it is the old system or the new system, the board cannot do its work without sufficient staff. Nor can the integrity of the process be maintained if the board seats are stuffed with Conservative appointees.

The federal government, having taken the drastic step of re-designing the Northern regulatory regime, which it created in the first place, has a chance of doing it right this time.

Hopefully, hard lessons have been well learned and history will not simply repeat itself.

Alarming statistics about the high rate of violence against women in Nunavut are one of the reasons behind a call by the president of the Qulliit Nunavut Status of Women for the development of a strategy centered around prevention.

On the heels of last month's statements by Qulliit president Charlotte Borg on the need to create a family violence prevention group, a similar call for action came from Assembly of First Nations Chief Shawn Atleo.

Last week, Atleo appeared before a Special Parliamentary Committee on Violence Against Indigenous Women, which was established to propose solutions to the root causes of violence against indigenous women and girls.

In Nunavut, the rate of violent crime against women is eight times higher than the rate in the rest of Canada.

A look beyond the numbers is helpful to better understand the severity and the high incidence of family violence in the North. It is sisters, mothers, grandmothers, aunts, daughters and granddaughters who are the victims. In Nunavut communities, family violence is happening in homes, in public places, in vehicles and on the streets.

Not enough is being done to stop the legacy of abuse. There are only four shelters available in the territory's 26 communities, and the resources available to a woman who wants to leave an abusive relationship are not only severely lacking but are virtually non-existent in many remote communities. That is unacceptable. There have been repeated calls for a family violence prevention strategy in Nunavut, but not much progress has been made.

There needs to be a number to call and a place to go for a woman in an abusive situation. There needs to be a mechanism to remove abusive men from the family home so the women and children can live safely. And there needs to be support for initiatives by the community at large.

A suggestion by the Qulliit Nunavut Status of Women to establish a council involving itself, the YWCA Agvvik, Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., the RCMP and the territorial departments of Health, Family Services, Justice, Education and Housing must be followed in earnest.

The initiative must also increase awareness among the perpetrators, educating men that it's not OK to use violence against women and girls.

The initiative should encourage reporting, so action taken will realistically address the issue and resources can be established that meet the need. Central to action being taken is a need for funding.

The numbers used to describe the level of violence against women in Nunavut are frightening.

However, politicians, health-care providers, social agencies and the groups becoming involved in a prevention strategy should not be afraid of how much money it will cost for meaningful changes to happen.

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