• 7m 44s

    Zacharias Kunuk on Baffinland Iron Mine

    uploaded by: Ian Mauro

    channel: Cara's Picks

    Zacharias Kunuk talks about Inuit concerns with the proposed $6 billion Baffinland Iron Mine in Nunavut. Kunuk is an award-winning filmmaker, Igloolik Hamlet Councilor, Officer of the Order of Canada and recently-elected Board member to Qikiqtani Inuit Association (QIA).

    Read more

    uploaded date: 03-05-2012

  • 8m 25s

    15th Jan 2019 – 18th Comment - Jimmy Pittiulaaq - Pond Inlet - Inuktitut

    uploaded by: dandietzel

    channel: DID records comments from Inuit at the Nunavut Impact Review Board (NIRB) Public Hearings

    Jimmy Pittiulaaq: I have been a chair for the HTO here, if you are NIRB listen to the people and not the company, even with theese consultations our voice are not being heard. this effects five communities and the plans are being changed so fast, hunters are not welcomed at the site. MLA is not in the loop.

    Read more

    uploaded date: 01-02-2019

  • 8m

    15th Jan 2019 – 7th Comment - Elder Jayco Aluluuq - Pond Inlet - Inuktitut

    uploaded by: dandietzel

    channel: DID records comments from Inuit at the Nunavut Impact Review Board (NIRB) Public Hearings

    Elder Jayco Aluluuq: With the increase proposal, there would be many ships on the waters of Pond Inlet, the barges and ships for the mine will be a huge increase addition to the cruise ships and sea freighters that already occupy these waters in the summer.

    Read more

    uploaded date: 01-02-2019

  • 6m 20s

    15th Jan 2019 – 3rd Comment - Pond Inlet - Inuktitut

    uploaded by: dandietzel

    channel: DID records comments from Inuit at the Nunavut Impact Review Board (NIRB) Public Hearings

    Customers want to buy the iron. He was voted as QIA representative. A lot of people stated that Baffinland’s activities need to benefit communities more but nothing has changed. Their activities are increasing and they are making a profit but it is not coming back to them. … Read more

    uploaded date: 01-02-2019

  • QIA releases public version of Mary River IIBA

    uploaded by: Cara Di Staulo

    channel: DID News

    Royalty rate still not disclosed, few agreement details not included in plain language version

    The Qikiqtani Inuit Association released the public version of the Mary River Project Inuit Impacts Benefit Agreement Dec. 6 — an agreement that sets out the working relationship between Nunavut Inuit and the Baffinland Iron Mines Corporation.

    “It is QIA’s wish to share theIIBA openly,” said QIA president Okalik Eegeesiak in a Dec. 6 release. “We believe this will provide an opportunity to strengthen our implementation efforts.”

    The agreement would likely direct millions of dollars into QIA’s coffers after the mine moves into commercial production. The deal also came with a signing bonus.

    But most of the financial arrangements contained in the IIBA remain confidential, including royalty rates and land lease payments, although QIA said “amounts received as a result of the project will be reported at each annual general meeting.”

    The full impact and benefits agreement provides few details that aren’t already included in the plain language guide that was first released this past September, when QIA officially signed the deal with Baffinland.

    The agreement lays out how royalities will be paid to QIA: quarterly, beginning with the first quarter after commercial production begins at the mine.

    The royalty payment is defined as “the net sales revenue for a period multiplied by the royalty percentage.”

    However, the royalty rate is no disclosed.

    Those payments can be re-negotiated after 30 years, or once 1 billion tonnes of iron ore have been mined.

    As part of the IIBA, an implementation budget will be created along with several funds, which include:

    • business capacity and start-up fund — $250,000 per year paid by BIMC until commercial production begins;

    • Ilagiiktunut Nunalinnullu Pivalliajutisait Kiinaujat Fund (a fund to offset negative social or cultural impacts created by the project and to help distribute benefits) — $750,000 per year paid by BIMC and QIA equally for the first six years;

    • education and training fund — $1 million for the first two years the IIBA is in effect, paid by BIMC;

    • scholarship fund — $25,000 each year paid by BIMC;

    • workplace orientation programs; and,

    • money to pay the costs associated with implementation of any rights, obligation or requirements of the IIBA.

    An executive committee will be established to oversee implementation of the IIBA, made up three senior representatives from the QIA and another three from Baffinland.

    That committee will meet four times a year, and will be tasked with coming up with the minimum Inuit employment goal at the mine; reviewing a list of training and education opportunities for Nunavummiut and looking at contract award issues.

    Both the executive committee and a separate management committee respond to the need for any dispute resolution.

    They’ll also hire two IIBA coordinators, along with Inuit monitors, an elder in residence, a QIA employment and training coordinator and environment monitors.

    Baffinland is in the process of building an iron mine at Mary River in northern Baffin Island that start by producing 3.5 million tonnes of iron ore a year.




    as of December 10, 2013:

    #1. Posted by Tommy on December 09, 2013

    Too bad only handful of people will actually benefit from this deal - not necessarily the beneficiaries - funny how NTI just increased the annual wages distributed to QIA, now signing bonuses and withheld info from those that serves - this is all wrong right from the get go

    #2. Posted by InukShook on December 09, 2013

    I know several beneficiaries and long time Nunavut residents who applied directly with Bafinland for jobs they are qualified for and been rejected or ignored. Meanwhile the 737 charter jet is flying up form St Catherines Ontario is full of non-Inuit workers. The Inuoit from Pond, Clude, Igloolik etc are only working in menial jobs. Just like Nanisivik and Cornwallis Island, majority of wqorkers will be from the south.

    #3. Posted by Richard on December 09, 2013

    Here is what I see is causing the problem with these so called agreements. Three representative from QIA and three from Baffin Island. Why is the company involved with the process that determines where or how the money is distributed and spent? It seems that all over the North, companies are coming up with hair brain ideals that serve very little good or meets very few priorities in our communities. These so called funds must be managed by the people it was meant for. No exceptions.

    #4. Posted by pissed off on December 09, 2013

    I agree with no 1 and 2 
    But don’t forget that the jet flying these people is   “”“” Owned by an Inuit Company”“”
    Or so they say!
    What a joke!!!

    #5. Posted by Olympic Trip Success on December 09, 2013

    How is this “openly” when facts are withheld?

    Did the lure of signing bonus get serious thinking put into the back pocket for the pressure of instant bonus “loss” to take over thinking?

    For 30 years royalties are locked in at, who knows what rate, because they cannot be re- negotiated. When it’s hush hush it doesn’t sound like one side got a good deal. Does that mean the royalties in 20 years, 2033 are still at 2013 rate? Or do the royalties increase over the years, covering inflation/cost of living?

    Why isn’t QIA talking with the facts? Are we people like the polar bears, wildlife getting next to nothing, only covered for the first 2 or 5 years of the 30 years mine? Will ITK be barking for the bears in Nunavut and people or saying shhh it’s our backyard.?

    Giving the free Olympic trip seems to of been an outrageously successful strategy.

    #6. Posted by Tommy on December 09, 2013

    This deal no longer serves the Inuit Interests, only the few Interested Inuit.  Okalik likely has generous pay as Prez from QIA and now a Signing Bonus from BaffinLand?  Why is QIA so secretive? There is no competetion directly with this deal - all sole sourcing done by Baffinland to keep the costs from over inflation and pure profits from pure extracted iron.  The true cost of this pure Iron is sure profit all around - so why all the secrecy

    #7. Posted by Truth on December 10, 2013

    And the rich get richer, especially execs on these orgs! Where’s money to help me with food? Freight ? Hunting? Like usual these orgs that are supposed to protect OUR birthright just look out for themselves. I am sure the prez made her best frind the MP happy and the can both look forward to board positions with the corp and living down south permanently in the future

    #8. Posted by Pilipuusi on December 10, 2013

    Everything else aside, QIA is a private Corporation legally owned by the Inuit of the Qikiqtani region. It is not a publicly owned corportation. As a regular beneficiary in the community I feel isolated from the decision makers as much as any other beneficiary. But if you bring you NTI card and insist on seeing something only meant for beneficiaries, I bet you would get a lot more information than a non-beneficiary.

    The key word here is ‘beneficiary’. If you live here and are not a beneficiary - get over it.

    #9. Posted by Observer on December 10, 2013

    Uninformed quote from #5 “Or do the royalties increase over the years, covering inflation/cost of living?”

    If you read the article it says the royalty is a fixed percentage of Baffinland’s net sales revenue. Sales revenue, not profit. So this means it does not matter if Baffinland makes a profit. The more iron ore they sell the more royalty cash will flow into QIA. The value of the sales revenue will go up and down with the price of iron and it will go up and down with the rate of production at the mine. If Baffinland goes ahead with a future railway and port and 12 month shipping, the QIA royalties will quadruple and maybe more.

    If the royalty percentage rate were known it would be pretty easy to come up with a ballpark figure for total royalty revenues every year. Problem is, probably 95 per cent of Baffin beneficiaries are too uneducated to understand this kind of information anyway.

    This of course will make it easier for all the thieves inside the Inuit corporations to grab huge amounts of cash for themselves. Bring on the Baffin kleptocrats!

    #10. Posted by Laughing Out Loud on December 10, 2013

    Its funny reading the comments, they are all the same. The question is. Did the beneficiaries actually think they would benefit from the trip to the Olympics? Sounds to me that Harry, Okalik and Levi just got GOLD.
    If you don’t stand up for yourselves you will get taken advantage off by the Gold diggers.
    Don’t be so GD naive. That’s why you have the right to vote and denounce the wrongs against you.
    It is sad that there isn’t a Mandela amongst you.

    Congratulations to Baffinland let the bottom line grow..Big corporations know how to make money..


    Read more

    uploaded date: 10-12-2013

  • CanNor and QIA to collaborate on resource development

    uploaded by: Cara Di Staulo

    channel: DID News

    CanNor and Qikiqtani Inuit Association collaborate to promote economic development from resource development projects


    The Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency (CanNor) has signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Qikiqtani Inuit Association (QIA), confirming both parties’ commitment to advance responsible resource development while promoting regional benefits in the Qikiqtani region of Nunavut.


    Under this MOU, CanNor and the QIA will coordinate their efforts so that Inuit of the Qikiqtani region are best prepared to participate in and benefit from major resource and regional infrastructure projects. CanNor is putting in place MOUs as part of its overall efforts to foster a sustainable and dynamic economy for Northerners. Through its Northern Projects Management Office (NPMO), CanNor and the QIA together will identify the potential opportunities and challenges to participating in major projects, and map out a plan so that the region can grow and prosper as a result of their involvement in major projects.


    “CanNor is pleased to be working in partnership with the QIA,” said Patrick Borbey, President of CanNor. "Working with communities to establish these types of collaborative tools will help us all to maximize the opportunities flowing from resource development projects."


    “We are committed to striking a balance in developing resources in the Qikiqtani region and making sure Inuit not only benefit from these developments, but that our rights and traditions are respected, protected, and advanced. By signing this MOU with CanNor we look forward to coordinating our efforts with those of the federal government,” said QIA President Okalik Eegeesiak.


    The Qikiqtani region of Nunavut is rich with natural resources and with the recent federal approval of the Mary River iron ore project, the region is poised to take advantage of the benefits from a major project in the very near future. The approved project has the potential to produce 18 milion tones of iron ore per year over a projected 21 year lifespan and create thousands of jobs during the construction and operation phases.

    The NPMO, as part of CanNor, has a mandate to improve the timeliness, predictability and transparency of regulatory processes in the North to help create a more stable and attractive investment climate in the territories. CanNor fosters northern economic development through funding programs, providing project management services, leveraging the federal role in the North, serving as a champion for northern interests, and undertaking policy and research.


    Memorandum of Understanding on Cooperation for the Coordination and Management of Major Projects in the Qikiqtani Region


    SOURCE Canadian Northern Economic Development Agency





    Read more

    uploaded date: 06-11-2013

  • QIA calls for review of oil and gas development

    uploaded by: Cara Di Staulo

    channel: DID News

    Nunavut Inuit org says Qikiqtani needs big review of oil and gas development

    “Not enough known” about impacts to marine wildlife


    The potential oil and gas reserves in Baffin Bay and other Qikiqtani region waters may be huge, but Inuit of the region are not ready to support their exploration and production until they know more about the effect such projects will have on their communities.

    With that, the Qikiqtani Inuit Association resolved at its annual general meeting that its 13 member communities of eastern Nunavut need more information on oil and gas development in the region before they can support such projects.

    Some 20 per cent of Canada’s potential oil and gas reserves are thought to lie in Canadian waters off the east and north coasts of Baffin Island, according to Bernie MacIsaac, the director of lands and resources for QIA.

    “That 20 per cent represents $2 trillion dollars, and that’s huge,” MacIsaac told QIA board members on the final day of the association’s AGM, Oct. 11.

    MacIsaac told board members that Canada’s National Energy Board has long assumed that communities of the region support exploration and development in the area.

    But opposition to seismic testing in the region’s waters says otherwise, MacIsaac said.

    “Not enough is known about what the impact to marine mammals and wildlife might be in that particular survey,” he said.

    This, and lack of answers to questions about possible environmental hazards add up to “non-support” for the project so far.

    “People don’t really know what the benefits might be to Inuit in the communities,” he said.

    Seven QIA member communities on Baffin Island oppose seismic testing, MacIsaac said, because they fear this will affect wildlife populations — which they rely on for food and fisheries industries.

    Board representatives from each of the association’s member communities confirmed those concerns at the annual meeting.

    Many said they lacked information on the effect that seismic testing, which involves the use of sound to survey the sea floor, would have on whales and other marine animals.

    Simon Nattaq, community director for Iqaluit, said proponents claim current seismic testing technology has no effect on marine animals, although community members believe otherwise.

    Other directors pointed out safety concerns, such as the effect of oil spills, and questioned what effect oil and gas development in Greenland, across Baffin Bay, might have on animals that migrate into Canadian waters.

    The QIA has consistently pushed the National Energy Board to better inform the communities, “but they haven’t got all the answer to everybody’s satisfaction,” MacIsaac said.

    “A seismic survey leads to drilling, and drilling leads to production. So it’s the start of a chain, and we’ve got to deal with it now, before this snowball starts rolling down a hill and we end up with a situation where communities have to react to it as opposed to being involved,” he told board members.

    As part of its new policy on oil and gas development in the Qikiqtani region, QIA’s department of lands and resources would call for the federal government to conduct a “strategic environmental assessment” of such projects in Baffin Bay, MacIsaac said.

    “This would examine all the issues related to development, and establish what conditions have to be in place before oil and gas (development) takes place,” he said.

    “That’s the guts of what we’re working on. That nothing take place until these issues have been dealt with and examined.”


    COMMENTS from Nunatsiaq Online

    #1. Posted by snapshot on October 16, 2013

    lets wait till technology gets better, then we’ll get our shares of the trillion dollars.

    #2. Posted by yes! on October 16, 2013

    Finally, some sense in this situation.

    With Mary River opening up, there’s literally no need for oil/gas development on baffin. The region has nothing to gain and everything to lose from it.

    QIA and NTI should oppose it, out of principle.

    #3. Posted by concern inuk on October 16, 2013

    Stop being childlish you same old style towards white people.  Show some more respect to corporate aspirations.  Seismic survey are not killing marine mammals because you don’t see them floating near survey sites.  This is all too familar towards white people and to any business that want to do without any tricks from DIO.  I know my Community Director who is completely racists and makes it harder for local employee if he does not like him/her.  These personal attacks has to end on super Inuit who little or have no respect with Charter of Rights and Freedoms to another individual or corporation.

    #4. Posted by uncertain on October 16, 2013

    There are still a lot of unanswered questions that NEB themselves have no knowledge about as staff members keep deferring their questions to a later date…this may drag on for years but we have to be ready for anything.

    #5. Posted by The Arctic is the last global energy reserve... on October 16, 2013

    Number 1, Norway has been doing offshore drilling in arctic waters for over 20 years - the technology and know how already exists.  I’m not pro-drilling by any means, but critics of it always seem to conveniently forget that one arctic nation has been doing it for a while now.

    #6. Posted by pros and cons on October 16, 2013

    Better deal with it quick before somebody else such as the almighty American government taps into the oil reserves we have here in Nunavut. Don’t get me wrong because I too hunt and fish periodically when I have the time. Either way someone will want the piece of the pie.

    #7. Posted by no... on October 16, 2013

    #6—there is no way the USA can lay claims to minerals off Baffin Island

    Read more

    uploaded date: 16-10-2013

  • QIA sends Nunngarut dam back to review board

    uploaded by: Cara Di Staulo

    channel: Isuma News

    Proposed hydroelectric project would disrupt historical trail, says Inuit association

    Northern News Services


    A proposed hydroelectric dam between Kimirrut and Iqaluit should be scrapped because it would sever a heritage route that has connected the communities for generations, according to the Qikiqtani Inuit Association (QIA).

    The QIA's Community Lands and Resource Committee in Iqaluit is opposing Qulliq Energy Corporation's plan to develop a 25-metre hydroelectric dam at Nunngarut, approximately 20 kilometres southwest of Iqaluit. The site is partially located on Inuit-owned lands and within Katannilik Territorial Park.

    The proposed development would threaten wildlife and disrupt the Kimirrut trail linking the community with Iqaluit, according to Simon Nattaq, QIA lands and resource committee chairperson in the capital.

    “The initial plan to build a dam at Nunngarut was opposed by many in Kimmirut and Iqaluit as it is a place that is frequented by Kimmirummiut and Iqalummiut for fishing and hunting activities," Nattaq stated in a Sept. 25 news release. "Travelling between Iqaluit and Kimmirut would also be threatened as the lake at Nunngarut is the only viable route to cross. For these reasons, we have concluded that the impact on Inuit would be too great."

    The corporation is proposing to build two hydroelectric dams, beginning with phase 1 at Qikirrijaarvik, approximately 40 kilometres south of Iqaluit, followed by phase 2 at the Nunngarut site, which would tap into the same grid. The project is in the midst of a review by the Nunavut Impact Review Board, after it completed screening in July.

    Nunavut Tourism expressed concerns about potential damage to the popular tourist area, while supporting the corporation's search for greener energy, in a letter to the Nunavut Impact Review Board in March.

    "We want to encourage that the multiple uses of this area be considered and the project proceed in a manner that will allow these uses to co-exist, with minimized impacts on each other," states chief executive officer of Nunavut Tourism Colleen Dupuis in the letter.

    On Sept. 18, the QIA called for the proposal to be returned to the review board for modification, including the removal of phase two of the phase-two dam, and encouraged the corporation to explore alternative sites for potential hydroelectric development in the region.

    -- with files from Lyndsay Herman



    Read more

    uploaded date: 01-10-2013