Kevin O'Reilly

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I don't want to prolong this, but can the Minister then commit to provide similar funding, then, to an organization like NFTI so that they can participate in agricultural conferences and so on as part of the agricultural strategy? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. In the department's business plan, there is a discussion of a regulatory roadmap that is being developed for mineral development. Can the Minister commit to me, this House, and the public that, again, our government will incorporate free, prior, and informed consent requirements into that regulatory roadmap? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. Like one of my colleagues before mentioned, you know, how do we know if we're getting good value for money here, and no plan, no priorities that have been identified? It doesn't sound like there's any discussion with communities in terms of what they think the research needs might be or should be. I think there are some issues around the accountability of this board, and I hope that the Minister is going to look at this issue in terms of when the Petroleum Resources Act comes up for review. Is that going to be the case? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I am conscious of the time. I have one other question. The business plan for the department talks about looking at legislation for geothermal energy. Can the Minister or his officials tell me what that is all about and is there a timeline in place for it? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. Yes, I guess I will go on record as expressing some concern about regulatory capture here. Given that all of Cabinet goes down to mining conferences, I want to make sure that the consultation around this is inclusive, that it includes all the interests across the Northwest Territories. I look forward to the Minister bringing forward some kind of a plan to the standing committee to make sure that that happens. Is he prepared to bring such a plan forward to the standing committee? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. Look, I understand there's a board for this. I guess what I'm trying to understand is, you know, the accountability for this rests with the Minister but how does the board set these priorities?

In fact, the government, ITI actually has a person who sits on this board, and so does ENR, and then there are a couple of people from industry, and I think one member of the public. So how does that board decide how to use these funds? Is it just one-off, oh, this year we'll decide we're going to do caribou or something, or is there actually a more strategic approach to doing this...

Thanks, Mr. Chair. So I guess I have asked this question before. I am just trying to understand. There have actually been no formal negotiations. People have not sat at a table together to talk about this. It is us just asking for these negotiations to begin. Is that where we are at? Because that is where I understood things were at. We can't even get the federal government to the table. Is that the case, or what is going on? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the response. I'm just wondering: what kind of assurance can the Minister give me that this drafting of this bill or this act is going to be done in a way that includes all interested stakeholders? Thank you.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. Well, the money may come from industry; this is not their money. This is money that's to be used for environmental studies, and if there's no plan for actually spending this money or priorities, so we just throw it open to requests for proposals. That to me doesn't sound like a very wise investment of the money. Is there not a set of research priorities or needs that have been identified so that the funds can be used in the wisest way possible, whether it's to understand the effects of oil and gas exploration on woodland caribou or offshore or whatever? What is the plan to...

Thanks, Mr. Chair. Was there any consideration given to cutting this funding to help meet our government's fiscal strategy? Thank you, Mr. Chair.