Kevin O'Reilly

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I move that Bill 34 be amended by deleting clause 51 and substituting the following:

51(1) The Commissioner, on the recommendation of the Minister, may prescribe requirements in respect of measures that provide benefits to the people of the Northwest Territories that the holder of a mineral lease must meet before being granted a production license.

(2) Benefits in the measures referred to in subsection (1) may include, but are not limited to, particulars in respect of the following:

(a) employment practises;

(b) human resource development;

(c) business development;

(d) social well...

Merci, Monsieur le President. I want to thank the Minister for that. It sounds like we are clearly on the hook now, and this happened post-devolution. I don't know, Mr. Speaker. Our government really doesn't have a very good track record in terms of managing resources in the post-devolution world. In an unprecedented move, a Minister turned back a decision on a water licence, and then, following a request by a diamond company, unilateral changes were made to measures arising from an environmental assessment of the Tlicho all-season road. There are financial security gaps for Canton, Prairie...

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I'm trying to understand what the problem is, here. It's okay to report an aggregate amount of royalties paid, but it's not possible to report that as a breakdown because of some larger fiscal review that the Minister and his department want to undertake? Look, companies file, or will be filing, an annual royalty return. They remit money to our government. What is the problem in disclosing to the public what that figure actually is? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I move that subclause 24.7 of Bill 34 be deleted and the following substituted:

(7) A zone may be established under subsection (2), and the regulations establishing a zone may set out requirements that the Minister considers appropriate on the Minister's own initiative or as recommended by the proposing Indigenous government or organizations after

(a) the Minister engages with the applicable Indigenous governments and organizations in respect of the requirements; and

(b) a reasonable opportunity has been provided by the Minister for the public to provide comments on the merits...

Merci, Monsieur le President. I know this has been a long night, but I do owe it to my constituents to tell them where I stand on this bill. This is one of the few pieces of post-devolution legislation that was not co-drafted. We established that for the record here earlier in this House. I believe that this bill was too rushed. It was not what was promised. There were to be sets of amendments for administrative purposes to the Commissioner's Land Act and the Northwest Territories Land Act, and we ended up with a bill that merged the two systems.

The most egregious part of the bill, Mr. Speaker...

Thanks, Mr. Chair. There may be an industry understanding of what "prospecting" is, but it's not outlined in the bill. It requires a licence. You have to get a prospecting licence to do prospecting, but I cannot get a clear answer as to what it really means and what work. I understand, if somebody stakes a claim, only they can do prospecting on the claim, but what if you have a prospecting licence? What can you do off of a mineral claim? Can someone tell me that? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. We did hear from the Northwest Territories Association of Communities. Sorry. I just can't recall now whether there was specific requests from the individual community governments for this ability to ask for temporary restricted areas. Were there any conversations like that between the department and community governments in developing the bill? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. Yes, I, too, have very major concerns around section 51. Look, I'm all for benefits, and even if we have to legislate them, I'm fine with that. It could codify best practice, but this is written in such a broad, vague, permissive fashion it could mean anything. I understand what the Minister has said he intends to do; the problem is he may not be the Minister who develops the regulations in the 19th Assembly. It could be somebody else. It could be me; imagine that.

So the purpose that I heard the Minister talk about earlier was providing clarity, certainty, setting out...

I want to thank the Minister for that information. I'm not sure how I can find out, but yesterday this House rolled back provisions for mandatory financial security in the Public Land Act. Now, I'm here to talk about what seems to be a shortfall in financial security for Cameron Hills. Can the Minister explain whether this apparent shortfall in financial security for Cameron Hills is going to leave taxpayers on the hook, as the owner is in creditor protection?

Thanks, Mr. Chair. Some of our mining companies here actually are required under the Extractive Sector Transparency Measures Act, federal legislation, to disclose on an annual basis what they pay actually to our government in the form of taxes, fees, royalties. Part of the issue is that there is no consistent reporting period, but can someone confirm for me that, indeed, the royalties paid by those companies that do business in the Northwest Territories, portions of that may actually already be disclosed under the federal legislation? Thanks, Mr. Chair.