Honourable Paul Okalik

A National Conference on Racism, Land and Reconciliation in a Global Context

Good morning. It is a pleasure for me to be in Western Australia. I want to wholeheartedly thank Murdoch University and the organizers of this conference for the opportunity to speak here today.

I want to knowledge my fellow Aboriginals, the Nyoongar people of the South West of Australia and the Waylyalup Boordja, on which Murdoch University stands. I also want to pay my respects to their ancestors who lived and governed this land.

It was a long journey from my home in Nunavut, in Canada’s Eastern Arctic, but the topics being discussed during the next three days are important in the development of Aboriginal rights, as are the on-going conversations in both our countries, as well as throughout the world.

I want to share my experiences in Canada from the Nunavut perspective, both prior to the establishment of our Government and since its creation on April 1, 1999.

While recognizing that our situations are distinct, I hope that you will take away an understanding of how the Aboriginal people of my homeland, the Inuit of Nunavut, have tackled and are continuing to manage issues of reconciliation and advancement in our territory.

But I am also here with a readiness to learn. Through listening to others, I hope to understand my own journeys, and how I can prepare our people for the continuing challenges ahead.

Inuit, while largely situated in Nunavut, also make their homes in northern Quebec, northern Labrador and the Inuvialuit region of the Northwest Territories, in the Mackenzie River Delta.

Historically, the Inuit of Nunavut, in the Canadian Eastern Arctic, in the land we call “Our Land,” or in our language of Inuktitut, lived a nomadic life with relatively little contact with those outside their communities.

They lived in small, traveling camps, following the seasonal migration routes of the caribou, whales, seals and polar bears, which they relied on for food, clothing and shelter.

Since the 1600s, Europeans have weaved through the Arctic and the lives of its Indigenous communities. Inuit were exposed to explorers searching for a passageway through the North; whalers seeking the rich harvest of bountiful Arctic waters; and missionaries seeking new converts.

By and large, though, the impact and influence of these visitors was moderate and Inuit continued to live a life of relative isolation, following their customs and speaking their language.

But midway through the last century, Inuit lives were severely disrupted. During the 1950s, a seemingly well-intentioned Canadian government developed a policy to establish permanent settlements for its nomadic Inuit population. Inuit were moved into communities, away from their igloos and summer tents into southern styled houses. No longer following a customary, land-based lifestyle, Inuit soon became dependent on federal government handouts.

This forced an end to a centuries-old way of life and caused social, political and cultural upheaval in the daily lives of Inuit. We are only now in a position to begin to repair the harm this abrupt change caused.

Along with these forced relocations came new social and political structures, as well as new laws. Abruptly, traditional law was replaced by a national standard and had no place in this new society. Increasingly, Inuit, especially young men, found themselves in conflict with the judicial system.

Even today, Aboriginal people are disproportionately over represented within the Canadian penal system.

Perhaps to ease the adjustment process, Inuit children were sent away to English schools to learn in a southern education system. On the contrary, this policy caused more turmoil as families were separated for months, sometimes years, and children were forced to live in a foreign culture, with foreign values and language.

Once proud and self sufficient, Inuit quickly grew dependent on federal assistance in this new reality. In effect, Inuit became wards of a land they once co-existed with Nature. Our world was spinning out of control and we had no voice in changing it.

People who had rarely, if ever, visited Nunavut and had no understanding of our cultural foundation were making decisions about our future.

Dismayed by what they saw collapsing around them, yet determined to make improvements, a group of young, seemingly idealistic Inuit leaders began speaking publicly through the 1970s of regaining the Inuit homeland. They sought a role and a voice in the decisions that were being made by far-off administrators about their lives, their lands and their future.

It was a significant challenge because at that time in the Canadian political and legal landscape, Inuit were practically non-existent. Inuit were not even allowed to vote until 1960.

I will backtrack, just a bit at this point, to explain some of the historical roots in terms of the early growth of Canada as it relates to treaty development.

Canada has three Aboriginal groups recognized in the Constitution Act, 1982 as the descendants of the original inhabitants of North America.

They are Indians - now called First Nations – Métis and Inuit. First Nations are additionally defined as Status Indian, Non-Status Indian and Treaty Indian. Each group is dynamic and defines its roots from distinct heritages promoting unique cultural identities.

The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which forms part of the Constitution, prohibits discrimination against individual citizens on the basis of race, religion, or sex.

First Nations is the largest groups and number nearly 680,000 of Canada’s total Aboriginal population. Inuit, with 45,000 nationwide, have the smallest population.

First Nations tribes were also the first Aboriginal group encountered by Europeans who ventured beyond their borders to Canada in the early 1600s. In an effort to gain favour and promote peaceful relations, many treaties were established.

A significant legal event relating to Aboriginal people during this colonization was The Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763, issued by the King of England. This legal document recognized and protected Aboriginal rights from people seeking to establish homes in the New World.

This Proclamation “reserved…Hunting Grounds.” These lands were outside any colony, and colonists were strictly forbidden to enter into land transactions for this property. Exclusive rights to negotiate land agreements relating to Indian title were retained by The Crown.

This Proclamation also stated that any land purchase was to be conducted through a public process. In addition to the stringent restrictions relating to Indian lands, colonists were also forbidden to settle on this property.[1]

This Proclamation set the foundation for a basic understanding of the legal nature of Indian title in Canada and the historical root of the treaty process. It was also the first legal document to protect Aboriginal rights in Canada.

During the 1800s, the Canadian government formalized these early treaties and signed their own agreements to exchange Aboriginal title to land for treaty rights and Indian reserves to secure land for settlement. The Indian Act, which is currently under review by the federal government, was passed in 1876, legislating Canadian government responsibility.

While this Act recognized some rights, it diminished, even nullified, others. For example, under the Indian Act - between 1927 and 1951 - First Nations legally required government permission to hire a lawyer to bring a claim against the Canadian government. Inuit, though not First Nations, were also discriminated in this way, unable to legally challenge the Canadian government in a land claim matter.

Similar historic treaties were signed with the Métis, but on a much smaller scale.

Treaties, however, were not signed with Inuit, who made their homes in the more remote northern regions of the developing country. As a result, Inuit were not faced with the legalities of the protection of their rights. As a result, the relationship between the Inuit population and the Canadian government involving treaty relations is really quite modern.

Through the 1960s and ‘70s, discussion around the rights of Aboriginal people was opening up in Canada. The Canadian government began funding newly formed Aboriginal organizations to aid them in becoming involved in the political dialogues concerning Aboriginal rights, especially as these rights applied to land and resources.

The federal government was seeking public discourse on its relationship with the Aboriginal community. Though significantly outnumbered by First Nations, the Inuit voice began to resonate.

In 1973, a breakthrough was made in the debate when the Calder[2] case challenged the belief that Aboriginal land title, specifically relating to the Nisga’a First Nation in British Columbia, had been lawfully extinguished with the arrival of the Europeans.

For 11 years the Nisga’a had been seeking a declaration through the courts that they owned the land on which they lived.

The highest court, the Supreme Court of Canada, ruled against the Nisga’a, but the case is significant because the Court supported the view that the law of England, in force when the colonization of Canada began, recognized aboriginal title to the land.

Calder set the stage in Canada for Aboriginals to move forward in their effort to solidify their rights. The case has resonated internationally in its impact on the debate surrounding Aboriginal rights.

In that same year, in response to Calder, the federal government committed to a new process of settling land claims, and it is through that process that Nunavut was ultimately created through the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement.

Inuit of the Eastern Arctic wanted to determine their own destiny and they wanted to develop their own laws in accordance with their traditions.

Initially, talk of this Inuit self determination was greeted with fear and hostility, yet Inuit leaders reasoned that they were the indisputable first citizens of the land they claim as their homeland and continue to constitute the great majority of Nunavut residents today.

Significant pressure was exerted on the federal government to recognize Inuit inherent rights, especially as the North began to open up to outside interests in the vast oil and mineral deposits.

This pressure was coupled with the need for the federal government to show progress in the area of advancing Aboriginal reconciliation.

The case for an Inuit land claim settlement was further strengthened by the fact that Inuit represent 85 per cent of Nunavut’s population and are one homogenous Aboriginal group.

As a result, the Government of Canada agreed to begin negotiating a land claim agreement for the Inuit of Nunavut. Negotiations would move at a snail’s pace, but in 1990 an agreement-in-principle was signed. A final agreement was signed in 1993 and within six years a new territorial government was created. The Nunavut Land Claims Agreement represented about 18,000 Inuit and covered nearly two million square kilometres.

Ratified by the Inuit of Nunavut, this is a modern treaty that exchanges undefined title for defined rights. Inuit chose to move forward on land reconciliation, so we surrendered our Aboriginal title in exchange for constitutionally protected rights to land, money, renewable resources, and social and political development.

The Agreement included title to 318,000 square kilometres of surface land rights and 37,883 square kilometres of subsurface land rights for oil, gas and minerals, 18 per cent of the total land area of Nunavut. It also included a $1.1 billion payment.

Article 4 of the Agreement is key to the establishment of the Government of Nunavut and its role in the governance of the territory.

It deals with Nunavut’s political development, and mandated the Inuit representative organization - Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, NTI, - to negotiate a political accord to establish Nunavut. NTI represents Inuit beneficiaries of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement and is separate and distinct from the public government.

Our public government is composed of 19 elected representatives and is decentralized into communities outside Iqaluit to spread the benefits of the creating a new government throughout the territory. This is also an important means of establishing a presence throughout the territory and bringing the decision-making closer to our residents.

While the Inuit of Nunavut chose to express their rights through a public government structure, they retained their right to pursue self-government in the future.

WHERE WE ARE

For those who have not visited the Canadian Arctic, it is difficult to visualize the extent of our territory. Nunavut is immense, stretching across nearly two million square kilometers of land, water and ice. It equates to one-fifth the size of our country, or about the size of the whole of Western Australia.

While Nunavut communities have roads within their boundaries, the territory itself has no significant road system. This drastically inflates the cost of living, which is significantly higher than in southern Canada. Our 26 communities, scattered throughout the territory, are accessed exclusively by air for most of the year.

Though enormous geographically, there are only about 30,000 residents in our territory, with about 6,000 in our capital city of Iqaluit.

Nearly half our population is under the age of 25, a striking contrast to what is happening in the rest of our country. Our death rate has decreased significantly, while our birth rate is 30 per 1,000 – that’s more than double Australia’s birthrate of 13 per 1,000.

As a result of the land claim, the Government of Nunavut was established on April 1, 1999, coincidental with the formal establishment of the Nunavut territory as the 13^th jurisdiction in Canada.

I am honoured to have been elected by my constituents in Nunavut’s first general election, and subsequently chosen by my colleagues as Premier to lead the development of our government and our territory, as we work towards the fulfillment of the implementation of the Agreement in those areas of public government responsibility.

I made a commitment to those obligations that reaches back to the 1980s, when I worked as the deputy chief negotiator and special assistant to the president of the organization representing Inuit in the land claim discussions.

To be sure, one of the most significant hurdles since the establishment of our government has been to reconcile the hopes and expectations of our citizens with the stark realities of our fiscal situation. We are a developing territory with pressing needs, and we rely heavily on the federal government for funding.

Yet we continue to press our case with the federal government to receive treatment equitable to other jurisdictions in Canada. At the same time, we focus on those things in our government that we can change.

A notable challenge has been to incorporate Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, or IQ, within government. IQ refers to a way of viewing the world and the values associated with positive living. It encompasses Inuit knowledge, philosophy, language and culture.

Our government has committed to making IQ a component in the development of policies, as well as having it included in the day-to-day operations of our government, wherever possible. This has certainly broadened the thinking within our public service and has tapped into a new sense of creativity in providing public programs and services.

As we work to create a government that responds to the hopes and needs of our population, we are guided by an overarching document, The Bathurst Mandate. Developed from consultations with our residents, the Mandate describes a vision of the territory in our first five years of existence.

Government initiatives are developed with the principles of this Mandate at their foundation.

As well as addressing current issues, the Mandate looks to the future and describes a vision for the territory 20 years hence. Our goal is modest; that is, to be on par with Canadian standards in such areas as health, education and employment, yet retain our culture and language.

As we work to develop our territory, we must also keep in mind our obligations under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement.

Shortly after the establishment of the Government, we signed the Clyde River Protocol with NTI. This agreement commits us to maintain close working relations in the areas of land claim implementation, economic development, promotion of Inuit language and culture and Aboriginal rights.

As a result of this agreement, we have been able to move ahead in a number of significant areas in the past couple of years, including:

· implementing the provisions of Article 24 that call on government to develop procurement policies to provide incentives for local and Inuit-owned firms bidding on government contracts;

· strengthening the role Inuit play in territorial parks; in particular, formalizing the role of Inuit in joint park management and planning;

· developing an Education Act to reflect the population of the territory, and working in partnership to develop a new Wildlife Act.

· collaborating in our opposition to federal government legislation on gun control and Bill C-33, the Nunavut Waters and Surface Rights Tribunal Act, to protect and advance Inuit rights.

While this relationship is generally positive and progressive, we have encountered differences of opinion that have led to court involvement. Ideally, we would like to avoid this type of confrontation, however, on the whole, we are both working toward the same objectives - to protect Inuit rights and establish a solid foundation upon which to build a future.

There are other successes we can point to since April 1, 1999. Within the public service, we have dramatically increased Inuit employment and employment at the community level.

We are making progress on addressing the need for a responsive legal system for our residents, through training more justices-of-the-peace and working with community-based justice committees. Elder-led land camps also give offenders, particularly youth, the opportunity to learn traditional skills and connect with their roots.

Laws are being translated into Inuktitut, so the majority of our residents are able to read them in their first language. We are also training Inuit lawyers in our territory. We can look to Australia as role models for the progress it has made in this area. This year, 13 Inuit students completed their first year of the Akitsaraq law school program. This program was created through partnerships with governments, NTI and a southern university to address the need for our residents to have special legal and linguistic skills to respond to the Nunavut’s needs.

Creating an environment such as this - for students to learn in their own culture, supported by family and friends - is a key to the success of this program.

Though it is a one-time program, we are following its progress with the view of possibly adapting it to other sectors where Inuit lack the necessary specialized skills to attain employment, such as in the sciences.

WHERE WE ARE GOING

We are proud of our accomplishments in three short years, yet we are not resting on our laurels. Our residents expect significant changes as a result of the settled land claim and the establishment of their own government.

While trying to address immediate needs, we have also tried to plan for the future.

We have identified education as one of our priorities. Our statistics in this area are abysmal. We realize that our population must be educated if they are to take on the demanding roles to improve their lives, the lives of their families and the territory as a whole.

Last year, while visiting Sydney, I had the pleasure of touring Redfern College and was inspired by the focus on Aboriginal culture and history. It is a model such as this that we can aspire to in Nunavut. Our progress has been slow, but we have developed a relationship with neighboring Greenland for our student exchanges at a folk school.

As a government, though, we can only create relevant conditions. Each individual must take responsibility for making changes in his or her own life.

Economic development is one tangible sector that will measure the success of our territory in the years to come.

Last year, we began working on an economic development strategy and we are encouraging the public and private sectors to work together to use our resources to benefit our residents.

We have oil and natural gas deposits; we have a burgeoning fisheries industry; mining companies are investing millions of dollars throughout our territory in exploring our mineral potential. Within a few years we hope to have Nunavut’s first diamond mine open for business. We know there is potential, but as we develop the economy of our territory, we must work in a sustainable way to protect out environment, which many of our residents continue to rely so heavily on for food.

Another sector full of potential is our arts and crafts industry, as to this we again look to Australia’s example of the strong promotion and support given to artists. We know this is a viable way to employ our residents, while at the same time promoting our culture and history.

We realize that some progress is slow and we continue to press on for recognition of Inuit rights, especially in the areas of education and health care.

Again, I am pleased to be here to learn and share, and I appreciate your interest in Nunavut. I hope that my words may be of some value in your discussions.

[1] Royal Proclamation of October 7, 1763

[2] Calder v.Attorney-General of British Columbia (1969)

Top

Premier of Nunavut

Treaty – Advancing Reconciliation

While the Inuit of Nunavut chose to express their rights through a public government structure, they retained their right to pursue self-government in the future.

WHERE WE ARE

WHERE WE ARE GOING