I would agree with the Member. That is one of the areas that is of concern to us when there are so many different levels of government at the table. That is why, for example, at the regional leaders’ table we agreed to work on a land use framework process. That work is ongoing and, in fact, moving ahead, I would say, at a fairly good pace, considering the complexities across the Northwest Territories, and we continue to put that effort into it. Hopefully, before the life of this Assembly, we’ll have something we can agree on together with aboriginal governments and ourselves. But that is the very reason why we need to have something like that in place, because in the past are too many examples where one agreement is signed and then a different agreement is signed. It’s a piecemeal approach and that leaves it for very confusing and frustrating time when it comes to actual implementation of some of these agreements. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Roland. The next on my list, I have Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, one of the things that often comes up, in my view of some of this process, is there anything that could help accelerate some of the self-government agreements being developed and, certainly, implemented? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister Roland.
Well, a supply of unlimited resources would help. We know that’s not a possibility in today’s environment. Because it is such a challenging environment and the different interests at the table, at times, as it’s negotiations, it's a tough process to come up with the right balance and from the different interests and different perspectives, at times, but we eventually get there. In fact, we’ve stepped it up, as we highlighted as we went through this process at the last main estimates review, of increasing our presence and getting the dollars. So we’re at 15 tables now in trying to help with the negotiations process.
On the implementation side, again, that’s another one where we have to… Part of the agreement is in place…have a clear plan on implementation. We could go through that section. That is the next section we can go through. If Members wanted more information, we can go through that at that point. But it is difficult because if we were to ask that same question of the federal government, you’ll get one response. If you ask it to us, I’ll give you a response. If you ask it to an aboriginal negotiator, they will tell you a different response, as well, because there’s all different interests being looked at in trying to come up with the best balance. But I think the timing of some of these agreements, in fact, if we were to all follow the Acho Dene Koe in Liard, that has been the fastest moving table we’ve seen in the history of the Northwest Territories. But even that has its concerns of how we can go forward on that basis. Then the issue of within the Northwest Territories we have some groups that overlap each other that need to be taken into consideration, as well, when we talk about negotiation positions. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I guess my question next being is: has it ever been put to these organizations, each of the individual 15 tables, about would it be in their interest to consider accelerating negotiations and searching for principles that would work to accelerate it? Has that question been put to them? Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, that direct question hasn’t been put to the organizations, but through just the negotiation process there are different avenues taken at times when it’s felt that negotiations have gone as far as they can and then it’s time for the political masters to sit in a room and iron out the rest of the process and details. Thank you.
What stops the Premier, or in this role, the Minister, of putting those questions about finding a comparable path together to accelerate negotiations? Is there anything that stops the Minister from doing this? Thank you.
No. Maybe a little further to that, Mr. Chairman, that, in fact, when you look at our Northern Leaders’ Forum, in trying to come up with a common vision of the Northwest Territories, that is one of those areas where we can come up on our own, working together and finding the principles we can agree on and move forward on and probably move things along a little further. But, again, each region is somewhat different, even when you’re looking at the types of programs and service delivery that want to be drawn down. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, I’m wondering if the Minister would be willing to engage the 15 tables to ask them if they have an appetite to find a way to accelerate the self-government agreement process. And furthermore, if he’d send one more letter to Canada in that regard, which would speak to the same issue? It, perhaps, would be in Canada’s interest if we were in support of a process that was accelerated. So would the Minister be willing to find out if any of these tables would be interested in an accelerated process for self-government agreements? Thank you.
I’ll use the regional leaders’ table to pose that type of a question if they want to take part in something like that, but we have to recognize, for example, that these negotiations start at a point, for example, a treaty that’s in place that is defined by the federal government and in their instance, and then defined by the aboriginal group that is negotiating at a different level. At times, there is just not going to be an easy solution, because it is negotiating what that agreement actually is as a starting point and then where it’s being pursued to in improving to a modern-day treaty, as we would call it. So, at times, that just takes hard work and much effort to get to those conclusions. We’ve got a number of Members here who could speak to that work as it’s been done and they’ve been involved in it. Thank you.
Mr. Chairman, are there any steps that the Department of Aboriginal Affairs does to ensure that the negotiators aren’t leading the process vis-à-vis they are keeping the process alive as opposed to putting the challenge of bringing negotiations to a close? Thank you.
While there are definitely times when an aboriginal group or even the federal government may say that we’re slowing the process down there are many occasions when we help move things along. For example, in helping writing the proposals and the frameworks as we go forward and one of those examples, again, in sharing information upfront is the self-government financing piece where we went to all of the groups to identify the model we put together and showed them that model and what that, as a basis, potentially meant for implementation and the cost of implementing these agreements. So that’s an example of where we’ve worked together to try to help move things along and get a better understanding of what could be coming down the road. Thank you.
Just on that financial note, has any work been done specifically to show that it’s in everyone’s best interest to fulfill negotiations on these types of agreements to kick off the financial process for self-government? Thank you.
If I understand the question correctly, the work we’ve done around self-government financing in fact has shown and has been endorsed by the negotiators at the table that are involved in that to help them as we prepare our way forward, and then we’re working on trying to come up with a package of how we would advance this to the federal government. Ultimately, when it comes to the self-government financing, it is the fiduciary responsibility of the federal government. Although, for example, when an agreement is signed and it draws down a certain jurisdiction that we have as a GNWT, whether its transportation or housing or one of the programs we deliver, they would draw that down on the delivery based on today’s expenditures, for example, and the program as it exists and once they take it over they could redesign, but that dollar value is the same. It does not enhance it, because we don’t have that ability as a GNWT and that is sort of the work around the self-government financing piece, because the capacity issue is one that’s being dealt with. We’ve agreed, for example, in earlier discussions around devolution and resource revenue sharing, that we would use some of those benefits of resource return from the investment on resource revenues to help with the capacity side as a GNWT, but that still falls short of what would actually be required. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would just see it as in everyone’s interest if this question was posed to individuals. When I say “individuals,” I mean individual tables, that is, but I would see this question to everyone’s benefit if it is posed individually on their own timetable, that is if they would be interested in advancing their own negotiations. As well as the fact that could the territorial government find a capacity to support this? I would be surprised that there would be very few people not willing to consider this as a viable direction. I would be very surprised if Canada felt this was stalling the process or ruining it. You know, I would believe strongly that there would be an opportunity and certainly an interest from their perspective that anything to accelerate these negotiations that could bring them to a closure would be in everyone’s interest. In other words, we would have closure of agreements, as well as access to money, access to authority and access to self-determination. So, Mr. Chairman, from my perspective, and certainly one that’s been encouraged to me by many people is the real question, is what’s stopping an accelerated program considering that we have a number of agreements that we could agree and few outstanding issues we could deal with separately? Thank you.
The self-government financing piece is an example of how we’ve worked together with the aboriginal governments and negotiators. We’ve worked with every table and given them the information around that self-government financing piece, but it is still a difficulty in getting it to a successful conclusion because the partner that would come to the table... Well, let’s use the example since we’re talking about aboriginal issues, bring to the potluck with a potlatch would require the federal government to bring their end of this bargain and that is still an area up for final conclusion, I guess we would say. We are very concerned about it and that’s why we’ve worked with all of the negotiation tables to share this information with them.
The other one, as we work through, as I was speaking earlier about land use frameworks and a Water Strategy, knowing that those are near and very important to the people of the North, are areas where we’re working with a common purpose. It still doesn’t mean it’s an easy process, but there’s a common purpose in trying to bring these things to conclusion, because they affect so many and are very important culturally and economically as we go forward. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister. Next on my list I have Mr. Yakeleya.
Just one question if I can see if I can get a satisfactory answer, then I’ll be done. I wanted to ask the Minister about the negotiations. In the details he had talked about the Northwest Territories realizing the economic potential in the Northwest Territories. Does the Minister have an idea or assessment as to the economic potential in the North right down the whole valley? I know some organizations have put some numbers to it, you know, in the amount of millions or billions. Has this department put some numbers to the potential for economic potential in the North? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Premier Roland.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The process we’d be involved in directly from there is getting the information from the appropriate departments, for example. That is, again, when we set up our percentages we would like to be open to development, we’d be working with ITI, for example, or with Environment and Natural Resources, as well, to look at the overall potential. We use things like the mirror process to look at what potential is in the area. We look at the oil and gas, the minerals, all of that to see what the potential may be. Now, it’s very difficult to come up with a number because, again, market prices affect things. A couple of years ago or just over a year ago we wouldn’t have, I don’t think anybody in the Northwest Territories was prepared for $140 for oil. Thankfully we’re back down, but it’s creeping up again. Or gold that was down to almost just over $300 an ounce and now it’s almost $1,000 an ounce or hovering at that mark. Thinks really do change. When you do estimates, you do it as sort of the estimate is based on the time frame and what’s there.
There is huge potential in the Northwest Territories when it comes to realizing economic potential in the Northwest Territories right from our natural resources when it comes to hydro potential, for example, that is a return on investment. It’s a very high cost initially, but it pays dividends for lifetimes. When it comes to our wood products, for example, is another area that’s available and I know, for example, when we talk about biomass strategies, could we develop that potential in the Northwest Territories to our non-renewable resources that are in the ground that can return investment again to the groups that would benefit from that. For example, some groups now, through their land claims, do benefit from that in a small way. They do get some resource royalties, a small portion, mind you, and we aim through our negotiation processes as we go forward overall government and there would be a part of that is, for example, on our discussions around resource development or devolution, resource revenue sharing as well. It’s a multi-departmental effort to come up with all of the different aspects that are affected here. Again, working in partnership with the aboriginal groups and that is one of the areas we’re having further discussions on with the regional leaders as well. Thank you.
Just about got it there. So I’ll ask the Minister about realizing the economic potential. Is the Minister willing to share with the House in terms of some initial estimates or just as to what he’s talking about? Is that saved for the negotiations when you have negotiations with aboriginal governments or the federal government? It’s an interesting subject, because just myself in the Sahtu region, there is economic potential for oil and gas, hydro potential, minerals, even the Mackenzie Valley Highway construction. They had an economic analysis done on that and it showed a good return on economics. I want to leave it at that. I will respect the negotiation process in terms of not showing our cards on the table. I will leave it at that, Mr. Chair.
We work with departments on this where we do get information with potential estimates and we share that with groups involved and, again, there are different levels here. For example, where a land claim is established and a park is a part of that, we hope to have all the information on the table for the decision-makers to make a decision considering long-term benefits to that, whether it’s establishment of a park or establishment of mineral potential that’s there or oil and gas potential. We need to make sure we get that information to them and we would work with the Department of ITI, for example, and other departments that we can gather this information. What I’ll do is request the departments to pull something together to give some indicators and see if we can share that with Members. Thank you.
Thank you, Premier. Committee, we are on page 4-15...
Agreed.
...activity summary, Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, negotiations, operations expenditure summary, $2.748 million. Agreed?
Agreed.
Information item, page 4-16, negotiations, active positions. Questions?
Agreed.
Page 4-19, activity summary, implementation, operations expenditure summary, $643,000. Mr. Yakeleya.
Just in my own region with regard to implementation in the Sahtu Land Claims Agreement, are we... I am hearing we are slow on implementation. I have heard it’s a difficult implementation, from not only us but the federal government. Agreements have been in place for 15 years and we are finally starting to see some implementation here. Are we on par in terms of implementation specific chapters of the Sahtu Land Claims Agreement?
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Roland.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the implementation process is one where once an agreement is signed, then each party then establishes or puts their folks on the implementation committee. From the information I have, there are three meetings a year set out and those are usually established in the agreement initially; how often they would meet and so on. So there are three meetings per year and outstanding issues are addressed through that if there are issues that come forward. They could be specifically identified, for example, if the area of responsibility lies within the federal government. Then it is for them to implement or come up with a plan for implementation on that and again an agreement with the party bringing it back to their principals. From the information I have for the GNWT side, we have no outstanding issues on our implementation file that have been brought to the table, and that process is established in how they can get the issues to the table. What I have been informed in the Sahtu, there is no outstanding issues of implementation from the GNWT side.
The issue I have with the implementation is with the... I guess you look at it in terms of once you settle your negotiations and start implementing, the lay of the land really changes in terms of how our government is going to be in terms of our working relationship. It’s going to change quite considerably. Have we had some discussions in the House regarding the implementation, the potential benefits or potential things we need to be aware of in terms of implementing our self-government agreements?
Plus, this department is at a number of tables here negotiating self-government agreements. That’s a huge impact. God forbid if you settled all of it yesterday. The things like what kind of government we’re going to have. So I just wanted to raise that point. I am not sure if there’s a question there, Mr. Chair, but our future certainly could change significantly of how we operate as a territorial government and how our working relationship is going to be with the aboriginal governments, especially with the number of self-government agreements that are happening across the table here.
Mr. Minister indicated what it costs for one...(inaudible)... That’s a huge number there. That’s a huge chunk out of our budget. I don’t know even as MLAs if we’ll have jobs here. Anyhow, I’m getting more philosophical. I want to ask the Premier in terms of his discussions and strategy work with his departmental staff.
I think the Member has hit on a matter that is important, very important, as we look forward. If every agreement was to be signed and implemented, what would the Government of the Northwest Territories be? Would it be a relationship, for example, and this is much too simple of a way of doing it, but if it was a relationship like the federal government to the GNWT right now where there are a number of agreements in place that you have to meet the minimums on for delivery of a program or service and you get a transfer payment, delivery on the day-to-day basis will be by that regional government depending on the authority they actually draw down. That becomes the big issue, is to ensure that as we do this, we ensure that we can implement what we’ve agreed to in these agreements and the funding would be there. That is something that is very important for us as we go forward. What will we be? We will need to have that discussion. In a sense, that is why the intergovernmental relations piece is part of this department because we talk about negotiation and then there’s implementation and if that implementation is fulfilled, then it becomes a government-to-government relationship and how we interact with each other and how we sign agreements together for delivery or programs and services. Will there be a reduced role for the Legislative Assembly and a Member from each riding? Well, that’s yet to be determined, but that’s important that we look at that, and that is one of the reasons why I believe the starting of the work we have within the Northern Leaders’ Forum around political development, we need to have that debate amongst the people and leaders in the Northwest Territories. That’s what that process is meant to do, is have that discussion, put it out there for a good, healthy discussion about what the future may hold for us. Thank you.
The last question will be to the Minister regarding his department working with the federal government, Sahtu and Gwich’in on the land access information for companies and people coming into our region. Sometimes they are not aware of the agreement or not interested in looking at how we access our land and they should know. I think there is someone working in this department on land access pamphlets. I will ask the Premier if he can give me an update.
I think that falls in a number of categories. The area we would be involved with is probably in support of the end product of a devolution agreement. Who has those authorities? When do they make them? What kind of consultation do they do in making a decision? There would be areas where there are joint initiatives that we have some authority of and we would go to the appropriate department; for example, Environment and Natural Resources and some of those areas that they would be involved with. There would be some areas that ITI would be involved with, for example. Those specific issues we would be able to address with departments. I think that goes towards the bigger picture overall about devolution and how decisions are made and how that decision is shared at the end of the day. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, committee. We are on page 4-19, activity summary, implementation, operations expenditure summary, $643,000.
Agreed.
Page 4-20, information item, implementation, active positions. Questions?
Agreed.
Page 4-23, activity summary, intergovernmental relations, operations expenditure summary, $2.368 million. Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to ask the Premier regarding the Northern Leaders’ Forum Fund, $304,000. I am trying to see where I read about it. However, I’ll ask the Premier about that fund.
Thank you. I see some details on the next page, 4-24, but, Premier Roland.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Northern Leaders’ Forum Fund is the money we support the regional leadership in attending the Northern Leaders’ Meetings, as well as the work we are about to do under the political development area. So this is in helping them get to the table as well as establishing those community consultation meetings, and having a wrap-up to all of those meetings and, hopefully coming out with an agreed upon process for all governments in the Northwest Territories. It is an ambitious work that we have set out for ourselves in the next year, but I believe it is critically important.
Part of the discussion we had earlier was that we start to move on this side of it having a better understanding and a common vision of just what areas we’ll all be responsible for, whether it is on the aboriginal government side or the public government side or even, to a degree, the federal government side. Thank you.
Thank you, Premier Roland. Once again, committee, we are on page 4-23, activity summary, intergovernmental relations, operations expenditure summary, $2.368 million.
Agreed.
Page 4-24, activity summary, intergovernmental relations, grants and contributions, grants, total grants, $654,000.
Agreed.
Thank you. Page 4-25, information item, intergovernmental relations, active positions. Questions? Mr. Ramsay.
