Robert C. McLeod

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the time. The Member makes some comments there and some accusations. We have worked with committee. They were aware of the September 1st deadline, and I think the fact that we wanted to get it in writing is because committee had asked us to provide it, and we did.

I'm not going to get into that debate. There are a number of debates that we could get into, but the bottom line is the federal government has informed us, and this had been out there for a while, that September 1st was our deadline. We worked in collaboration with them to go from the original July...

I agree with the Member that protection of our citizens should be the number one priority of this government, and as such, as I said before, we do have another renewable resource officer who is going to the community, and I am sure that they will be doing some patrols to ensure that the bears are not becoming a problem and coming into the community. I think we've seen a number of cases of bears in the community, in some of the communities around the Northwest Territories. Our staff are being vigilant and, if we have to, we will bring in extra people to help with that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The original date of implementation was July 1st, but because we needed to work on our legislation, we had approached Canada to see if we can delay the implementation. They understand our process, therefore we agreed to it. We had hoped to deal with this during our clause-by-clause so that we wouldn't have the debate on the floor of the House. I will be moving a motion later to change the implementation date from July 1st to September 1st. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I know that, from questions from the Member in the past week, he asked about the relocation. I had committed to getting costs. I have not seen those costs yet, but I would imagine that it would be fairly expensive. Again, we need to have a look at it and explore all options in trying to alleviate the grizzly bear problem in Aklavik.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the time. We started working with committee in June of 2017, and it is misleading to tell the public that the federal approach is superior to ours. The Member failed to mention that our point-of-sale rebate on heating fuel, the rebate at the point of purchase, is an additional $400-something per household in the Northwest Territories. We give bits and pieces of information, but we need to give all of the information, the correct information, and committee has had a lot of that information.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The Environmental Rights Act, there would be a lot of technical talk that is in there. I think we would owe it to the general public to prepare a plain-language summary as to some of the contents of the Environmental Rights Act. It would be very technical, so we would work to prepare a plain language summary. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. To my left, I have Dr. Erin Kelly, assistant deputy minister of Environment and Climate Change. To my right, I have Ms. Cherie Jarock, legislative counsel. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am here to introduce Bill 39, the Environmental Rights Act. This bill takes steps to modernize and broaden the existing Environmental Rights Act in the Northwest Territories. The bill provides broader rights to:

request an investigation, including clearer timelines and responsibilities of the Minister;

prosecute an offence;

bring forward an action; and

protect employees who have engaged in processes under the Environmental Rights Act.

The bill also requires Executive Council to prepare a statement of environmental values and ensure that departments and select public bodies...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. When ENR reads the proposed clauses together as worded, the clauses would require the Minister or the deputy head to apply the criteria provided in the motion when considering all decisions the GNWT makes. This would include large decisions as well as minor decisions. If on the basis of the criteria it is deemed that the decision would significantly affect the environment, the Minister would then have to consider the statement of environmental values. For example, prior to making any decision, including every meeting requiring duty travel or every purchase of paper, the...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I believe that the next Assembly decided that this was something that they wanted to have a look at this; maybe towards middle to the end of the Assembly, then it is a decision that they would make. As the Member pointed out before, this has been around since 1990, I think he said. Last time it may have been used was 1991, been used four times. I think we have strengthened the bill a bit. We don't know how many more times it may be used because of some of the additions. The next Assembly, when they come in, they can make a determination if they want to have another look...