Bob Bromley

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just a quick follow-up to that. Do any of the other acts that Mr. Fulford referenced provide for mandatory requirements? I’ve only seen recommendations or that sort of thing, but I am very interested in pinning down mandatory requirements. Thank you.

I note that the bill also amends the Boilers and Pressure Vessels Act so that it doesn’t apply to work or activity governed by the Oil and Gas Operations Act. I’m wondering why that is. The reason I ask is our communities now are governed by that, and as a result, they’re not able to have biomass boilers that produce electricity, for example. It would be great to get them an exemption if that’s in fact what this is, but perhaps it just means that this is covered under a different act. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am happy to accept that. As I said, I’m not on a warpath here and I’m not going to worry about the colours the Minister wants to put on it. He can couch it as he wants, but I think he knows he was in error. We’re talking about the dignity of the House and I accept the apology. Mahsi.

The Section 65(5) requires an inquiry for a bigger spill or event, but the requirement for public disclosure, the report is not as strong as it should be, as I think we have heard about earlier. In fact, I think typically in federal regulatory processes that I have participated in, there’s a clear, well-laid-out process and predictable process for distributing information and reports. Can we assume that that sort of thing will be developed in the regulations so that the uncertainty I think Ms. Bisaro was referencing could be resolved? Thank you.

That was excellent. Thank you very much. Section 8, obviously, is a bit troubling in that anyone who is authorized to do something under GNWT legislation appears to be immune to any action under the Environmental Rights Act. This is not surprising given that we’ve had a recent inquiry and it was turned down under federal legislation with reference to federal legislation, but it seems pretty slippery. The intent of the Environmental Rights Act was for any citizens, to citizens in the Northwest Territories that have concerns, environmental concerns about a pollutant or a contaminant could bring...

Thank you. That’s a good example. It helps me see the purpose of this committee right away.

Section 61(4) seems to provide GNWT with an immunity, once again, for any damages or liability associated with regulations they may make even if they are bad regulations or cause problems. We’ve heard about this earlier today. Again, this seems typical for our federal government, but does this sort of subscription to a lack of degree of accountability apply to this government? Is that something that we might see considered in the review if there are no options now? Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. And yet we’ve heard that they’ve fully consulted with all of our Aboriginal partners. So, for this government not to have consulted with committee on this I regard as a major shirking of the responsibility of this government and I’m very upset about that. These are not mirror legislation. So, obviously, the Premier claims we have a consensus government here and clearly we do not. He has even said in their statement, all parties to the agreement. Clearly, we’re not regarded as a party to this agreement and neither is the public. So I just want to very clearly stress how...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This amendment simply reduces clarity in what this motion is asking by saying we’re going to change it however we like. It might be six months, it might still be a year, it might be eight months, it might be one month, but we’re not going to let you know. At least the way it is now is clear. So I may vote for, I may abstain, I may agree or disagree with the motion, but the point is this buries the clarity that I think has already been revealed by the motion itself and certainly the public will be alerted.

I think we do need some flexibility, but the crux of the issue...

I appreciate the Minister’s commitment. With the one possible exception, the largest market gardens in the capital area are about 2,500 square feet, or about a sixteenth of an acre. These successful market gardens have just had their applications rejected because they are too small. So if the largest market gardens are too small, how does the Minister plan to change this policy in time for this season so that any agricultural development can go ahead in the North Slave region? Mahsi.

Just on the question of the leasing and that it should be a matter of public record. I think the reasons for that are obvious. Is that provided for in this legislation? Thank you.