Kevin O'Reilly

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Nothing to add. I request a recorded vote. Thank you.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. Yes, during the review of the bill, I raised the issue of what was the definition of "production project," because there is none in the bill, and I think that created unnecessary uncertainty. So I'm glad to see that the Minister is prepared to clarify this. I had my own motion at the clause-by-clause review to deal with this; the Minister would not concur with it, so it didn't go forward. So I'm glad to see that something I said in the clause-by-clause has actually made its way to the floor of the House.

I guess lastly, Mr. Chair, it's rather ironic that we're going to get...

Thanks, Mr. Chair. While I support the motion, I think it needs to be clearly stated on the record that there were others who felt that they had expertise to offer in terms of prospector training. I think Indigenous governments, Indigenous elders, would have some perspective, some expert knowledge that they could share in terms of cultural awareness and awareness of the land rights agreements and our co-management system that mining is required to operate within. I know NGOs also expressed an interest in having an opportunity to look at whatever kind of curriculum was developed.

I note that, in...

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I understand the Minister is under no obligation to respond, here, of course, so I move that paragraph 17.1(1)(q) of Bill 34 be amended by adding ", and a breakdown of the amount of royalties paid by each mine," after "under Part 6". Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I requested a recorded vote. Thank you.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. While we're on the subject, I guess I'm not allowed to look forward. Where are the occurrences in the bill where settlement areas are referred to? I just can't find any. I don't have my computer opened to do a keyword search, but why was it necessary to include a definition of settlement area in the bill itself? Because I can't find any instances of it at my fingertips. Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Chair, I move that that subclause 22(7.1) of Bill 34 be amended by adding "or municipalities" after "governments or organizations." Thank you, Mr. Chair.

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.