Kieron Testart

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I agree with the intent of this motion, and this is not a hypothetical situation where there is a problem with the interaction between the challenges of rights issuances within municipal boundaries. This is a live issue. It has happened in Inuvik, and the committee was told about it in Inuvik. During the clause-by-clause, there wasn't support from the sponsoring Minister to resolve this issue the way that the committee thought would be a reasonable way to address it.

That being said, I think that there is a lot of merit to this, and the motion does more or less speak to...

Thank you. I am not sure what list the Minister is referencing. There is list that is being proposed. I am asking very clear questions about what this means because I am hoping to get a clear policy intent for the public that is listening to these proceedings. If the Minster could be careful to understand the questions and I will be careful to read them clearly. This section is quite broad in its application. If I am to assume that this is to legislate socio-economic agreements, what is the government's vision for this? Is it to legislate socio-economic agreements to be binding on industry...

Thank you. If there are multiple Indigenous land rights holders or rights holders who are all subject to an area where there is a production project, do they all need to have benefit agreements in place before a licence will be issued? Thank you.

Thank you. Well, the issue is that the mineral tenure rights that are governed by this act are impacting on municipal interests, so it is very much this piece of legislation and this department's responsibility. It might, perhaps, be other departments' responsibility, as well, but mineral tenure conflicts aren't governed by the Cities, Towns and Villages Act, the Hamlets Act, or any other statute governing municipalities.

Again, this is an issue that was raised by committee, taken very seriously by the committee. The amendments proposed by committee are not acceptable to government, so what is...

Will there be additional requirements put onto those agreements if they are brought forward to the Minister, above and beyond what are contained in the land rights agreements? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would to recognize some Kam Lake constituents today, Mr. Leo Konge, Kelso Neils Konge, and Caitlin Cleveland(ph). Thank you very much.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This clause governs benefits prescribed in respect to measures to provide benefits to people of the Northwest Territories. What is the practical instrument force that is contemplated by this clause? Is it a socio-economic agreement? Can the Minister confirm that? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. That's what I wanted to here. If there is a dispute, how soon can, do we have an idea of when this clause is triggered? Sorry, I'll rephrase. Can a production licence be issued if a dispute is in progress, or does a dispute prevent the issuance of a production licence? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, I think this is a very important section or important change because we have heard this concern from municipalities. For whatever reason, that might have not been the case with the government's early discussions with the public engagement around this, but it is certainly something the committee found. I think it is important that we respond to this in a meaningful way. If we are unable to, if the government can't support this amendment for whatever reason, we still need to find a solution.

I am not going to reflect on the outcome of previous matters, but a number of...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. In terms of existing land rights agreements that have conditions for benefits, will those satisfy this section? Thank you.