Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The current Wildlife Act is old and antiquated. It’s definitely time to be replaced with a new act that recognizes the realities of the North and is developed by the people of the North for the North.
Hear! Hear!
I know the department has been working on this new act for a long time, well over 10 years. However, the majority of the work on the existing act has been completed since the Assembly passed the Species at Risk Act two years ago. Mr. Speaker, I think it’s important to applaud the Minister and his department for recognizing treaty rights and land claim agreements, and for actively involving the Aboriginal governments throughout the NWT in drafting of this new act. They had a legal requirement to do this and I’m glad that the Minister and his department lived up to this responsibility. However, initial drafting is only the first step. The second step is to obtain public input. To do this, the department has been conducting public consultations throughout the Northwest Territories since before Christmas.
As a public government representing over 42,000 people, Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal people alike, we have a moral and ethical responsibility to ensure that all of our residents are heard in a meaningful way, that their concerns are taken seriously and that their input to improve draft legislation is incorporated into the drafting of the legislation, where appropriate.
Unfortunately, I’m concerned that the consultation that has been conducted or completed over the last couple of months did not meet this standard. This was not consultation in good faith. For example, on January 15, 2011, the NWT Wildlife Federation had a meeting with the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to receive a briefing on the proposed Wildlife Act and to discuss concerns they had with the department. I was there. This was supposed to be public consultation. The meeting did start off well, with the director of ENR’s wildlife division introducing the draft act, explaining it in detail and telling the participants that the department was eager for their input. Specifically, that the department asked the participants to identify the areas they thought needed work and to identify what they thought might help improve the draft. This sounds like the department was interested in meaningful, respectful consultation. Unfortunately, my optimism of the process disappeared later when the same director indicated that any input from this group would be included with all input that they have received over the last couple of months, but the department was not planning to make any substantive amendments prior to introducing the bill in the House later in February or early March. Only editorial improvements are being considered at this point.
Only including minor editorial amendments does not demonstrate that this department is listening to the people. It does not demonstrate consultation in good faith.
I seek unanimous consent to conclude my statement.
---Unanimous consent granted
In fact, it’s just insulting to responsible hunters of the Northwest Territories who are not covered by land claims or treaties. This group’s voice is clearly not being heard.
This act is not ready to be presented in the House. It won’t be ready until the department conducts real consultation in good faith with interested stakeholders throughout the Northwest Territories.
At the appropriate time I will be asking the Minister responsible some questions on this topic.
Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Member for Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.
