Markets 
Inuit leaders are set to meet with Prime Minister Mark Carney and six federal ministers Tuesday in Kuujjuaq, Que., at the latest Inuit-to-Crown partnership committee meeting.
But some Arctic observers say there is discernible tension between the two sides heading into the meeting — a first since the forum was launched in 2017.
“I would think that the federal government going to the meeting on Tuesday would have their backs up a little bit,” said former MP Peter Ittinuar, who in 1979 was the first Inuk elected to the House of Commons.
Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami, the organization representing Canada’s Inuit, hosted an Arctic sovereignty forum earlier this month in Ottawa. It culminated with a call for the federal government to be a better partner and ITK’s rejection of what it called “outdated, colonial approaches to Arctic policy that repeat Canada’s past mistakes of marginalizing” Inuit.
Natan Obed, the organization’s president, told attendees if the relationship with Ottawa is no longer feasible, Inuit could look for other partnerships abroad.
Ittinuar called the comments “ill-timed” and said Obed and Carney do not have the relationship Obed had with former prime minister Justin Trudeau.
“I think it was ill-advised of Natan to make those kinds of comments,” Ittinuar told The Canadian Press.
Obed insisted the relationship with Ottawa remains a positive one and said his statement wasn’t a threat.
He later told The Canadian Press there has been “a very large shift” in how Ottawa involves Inuit in decisions in their own backyard under Carney.
“I think Inuit are delivering a very direct message to the government of Canada, that failing to include (Inuit) at the table when it comes to decision-making will become a failure, and detrimental to development of Canada’s Arctic sovereignty and security,” said Sima Sahar Zerehi, CEO of Arctic Opportunities Group, who attended the ITK forum earlier this month.
Zerehi said not consulting with Inuit on decisions is a “mistake” but it’s notable the Carney government is still engaging with the Inuit-to-Crown partnership committee, or ICPC.
The forum brings Inuit leaders together with federal cabinet ministers three times a year. The prime minister typically attends one of the three meetings.
Get daily National news
Get daily Canada news delivered to your inbox so you’ll never miss the day’s top stories.
In addition to Carney on Tuesday the meeting will include at least six ministers: Energy Minister Tim Hodgson, Defence Minister David McGuinty, Public Safety Minister Gary Anandasangaree, Crown-Indigenous Relations Minister Rebecca Alty, Indigenous Services Minister Mandy Gull-Masty and Northern Affairs Minister Rebecca Chartrand.
Obed said a few weeks ago that under Carney, Ottawa is returning to a model of working more closely with the territorial governments, rather than Inuit organizations.
“We’re not seeing the same opportunities or the same consideration for rights-based funding envelopes and fiscal policy. And that is of deep concern to Inuit,” Obed told The Canadian Press.
Former Nunavut senator Dennis Patterson said that’s exactly how it should work in Nunavut.
“As it relates to Nunavut alone, I emphasize, the Inuit-to-Crown partnership committee process is disrespectful of Article 4 of the Nunavut land claim agreement, which calls for a public government to serve all citizens of Nunavut, Inuit and the small minority of non-Inuit alike,” Patterson told The Canadian Press.
Patterson said his concerns about the process relate only to Nunavut, as the other Inuit Nunangat regions of Nunavik, Nunatsiavut and Inuvialuit operate under different governance structures.
“The ICPC process gives the money to Inuit in Nunavut, namely (Nunavut Tunngavik Inc.) to deliver programs in clear areas of the Nunavut government’s constitutional jurisdiction as set out in the Nunavut Act,” Patterson said.
Nunavut Tunngavik Inc. represents Inuit in Nunavut and is responsible for ensuring the Nunavut Agreement is implemented by Ottawa.
Patterson said the ICPC process has created some duplication of services in the territory and “caused some tensions between the Inuit organizations in Nunavut and the government of Nunavut.”
“The ICPC process has essentially undermined the potential for collaboration by creating duplicative and sometimes rival bureaucracies,” he said. “I’d add the adjective wasteful.”
That includes tuberculosis programs. Ottawa made a major push with ITK in 2017 toward eradicating the disease in Inuit communities, where TB rates were more than 270 times higher than the rate among Canadian-born non-Indigenous people.
In 2018, Ottawa committed $27.5 million over five years to help combat TB, dividing the money between the four Inuit regions.
A senior Nunavut government source, who was not authorized to speak publicly about the situation, said there were disagreements between the territorial government and Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., over how to administer TB clinics, which led to delays in money flowing from to the government of Nunavut to carry out the work.
Despite those disagreements, the source said it wouldn’t have made much difference to the goal — eradicating TB — to have the funds flow to the territorial government or to the territorial Inuit organization.
The source said co-ordination between the two sides has improved.
Under former premier P.J. Akeeagok, the territorial government and Nunavut Tunngavik formalized an agreement to work collaboratively on shared interests.
Ottawa recommitted another $27 million over five years to ITK for tuberculosis response in February. ITK had been seeking $131 million.
Zerehi, who worked for both a regional Inuit organization and in a senior role in the government of Nunavut, said there’s a danger in pitting the territorial government and Inuit organizations against each other.
“I think (the collaboration agreement) speaks to that desire of, and that understanding that there is no way of moving forward if the territory and the Inuit organizations are not aligned,” Zerehi said.
She added she believes there is a concern that as Ottawa strengthens its relationship with the territorial government, Inuit might be left behind.
“And I think that nobody wants to see the role of Inuit, on a territorial or on a national level, be diminished,” she said.
“I think that the federal government, or territorial government, would all benefit from hearing the warning that was articulated by ITK. There must be ongoing, active, and serious partnership with Inuit at every step of the way. Because otherwise, none of this will make sense.”
Read the full article here
