The implementation of the Nunavut agreement raises very different questions and challenges from those it faces in the negotiations. In the Canadian government`s overall requirement policy, there is only one implementation phrase that must be implemented if ratification of the colonies is to be implemented. We can confirm, through personal involvement, that implementation has rarely been discussed in negotiations on the agreement. Ottawa`s attention was needed if the Nunavut project were to move from an agreement in principle to a final agreement within a reasonable time. In this sense, the collapse of the Final Dene/Métis Agreement in 1990 probably supported the Inuit in that it placed the Nunavut project at the centre of a time when Ottawa policy makers had to provide direction on the issue of political development. The federal government`s general refusal to resolve disputes, as provided for in the agreement, has embodied a growing gap between it and NTI. Conciliation by former Judge Thomas Berger in 2006 was unsuccessful. NTI agreed, but the Canadian government never formally responded to its report, which recommended a strong commitment to bilingual Inuktitut/English education, so that Inuit could develop the capacity to take full advantage of Nunavut`s agreement. The Nunavut agreement was a triumph of the political art of the state and, although much has been achieved, its full promise has not been fulfilled. In 1993, expectations that the Nunavut agreement would “solve” difficult social and economic problems were probably too high. Nevertheless, the agreement offers many instruments that The Inuit of Nunavut, the Government of Nunavut and the Government of Canada can use to address difficult public policy issues.
The NLCA negotiations were a comprehensive, 20-year process that took place under the mandate of four Prime Ministers. Inuit negotiators never gave up their main objective – self-management and separate territory – and were willing to sacrifice demand instead of signing an agreement that did not contain these points. Despite the unresolved national debate on Aboriginal autonomy, the lack of support precedents and many political obstacles, Inuit refused to implement an agreement that separated land rights and political development.