Debates of February 11, 2005 (day 34)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, too, would like to talk about the pipeline discussions that went on this morning on CBC Radio. I found it very interesting this morning when people were calling in, and I think the majority of the callers were in favour of the pipeline. On the one hand, in the Finance Minister’s statement yesterday, he indicated that the government is in support of the Mackenzie Valley pipeline. I think that’s working in the right direction. On the other hand, the problem we are having, Mr. Speaker, is we are still talking about resource revenue sharing. On one hand, the government supports the program of the Mackenzie Valley pipeline and on the other hand, you say unless we get the resource revenue sharing agreement in place, the government will not approve this. What direction are you showing the people of the Northwest Territories? In my region, the Inuvialuit are progressive people and they are looking forward to developments like this. Can the Premier indicate whether we are in support of it or not? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Pokiak. The honourable Premier, Mr. Handley.

Return To Question 370-15(3): Conditions For Pipeline Development

Mr. Speaker, we support the pipeline. We need the pipeline, I believe, to have a strong economy. But our support is not unconditional. There are conditions on it in the same way with the Inuvialuit, the Gwich’in, the Sahtu, everybody is negotiating benefit and access agreements and we support them in doing that. I know their support is not unconditional. They are not going to say come and take the oil and gas, we don’t need any agreements, we don’t need any more benefits. Our position is the same as theirs. We have conditions on environment, conditions in terms of social issues, conditions on the financial side. We do not want to see, over the next 20 years, $50 to $70 billion in government revenues from development go south and we are left there with a few short-term benefits. So, yes, we have conditions on it and I believe they are achievable and I am confident that our Prime Minister is determined to be fair with us on this issue. I am not at all even thinking that the pipeline will be stopped because of resource revenue sharing, because I believe strongly that we can achieve that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Supplementary, Mr. Pokiak.

Supplementary To Question 370-15(3): Conditions For Pipeline Development

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Right now, there is a joint review panel doing an assessment of the documents provided by Imperial Oil. There is a process going on right now, Mr. Speaker. NEB is doing their own review of the socioeconomics of the program. Are we moving too fast to say yes or no? Can we just let the joint review panel do their work, the NEB do their work, at the same time we, as government, can sit down and iron out socioeconomic agreements without resource revenue sharing? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Pokiak. Mr. Handley.

Further Return To Question 370-15(3): Conditions For Pipeline Development

Mr. Speaker, as I said earlier, there is a lot of work to be done over the next 18 months or two years by one of the review committees, on socioeconomic benefits, environmental or technical issues, before a recommendation is made to the federal government to approve or not approve this pipeline. We have a lot of work to do. I think a lot of this work has to happen at the same time. We don’t want to slow down the pipeline. The gas is needed in the South. We need the revenues. We need the economic activity. We don’t want industry to turn somewhere else, to Alaska, as an alternative, and leave us sitting here with nothing happening. So we have to move ahead at the same time.

We are actively negotiating the resource revenue sharing and devolution as a requirement. We are negotiating the socioeconomic agreement. The regional governments, aboriginal governments, are negotiating their benefit and access agreements and the pipeline company is going through the environmental and technical review stages. So all of that happens at the same time. At the same time, we also have to look at social impacts and maybe do some adjustments of our programs. We have to look at training. So we have a very, very busy 18 months to two years here. I don’t think we can solve one problem and then the next one and then the next one, otherwise we will still be talking 30 years from now. We have to roll up our sleeves and work on all these fronts at the same time. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.