Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’ve got questions today for the Minister of Transportation. It gets back to my Member’s statement in regard to the Deh Cho Bridge and potential financial liability for the Government of the Northwest Territories with that project.
Back in the spring Members were talking to the Minister and the department about a construction audit that was to take place on the project. It was supposed to, at the time, take a couple of months to perform that construction audit. There hasn’t been any report come back through standing committee or to this House. So I’d like to ask the Minister what is the exact status of that construction audit and are there any potential financial liabilities in regard to that audit. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Minister responsible for Transportation, Mr. Michael McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s good to see a Member consistent in these questions on the Deh Cho Bridge. The Deh Cho Bridge is proceeding very well. Over the summer months we’ve achieved our targets for the summer construction. The steel is en route and we’re expecting to start seeing the superstructure starting to be put up in the next little while.
As to the report that the Member is referencing, the draft is completed. We’re now doing a reconciliation with staff on it and we don’t anticipate there’s going to be any additional cost to the government. Thank you.
If the audit was to take two months and it’s taken six, I’m just wondering if that’s cost the government any additional money to have the construction audit finished. Thank you.
I don’t believe it has cost us any more. Thank you.
Can the Minister let us know exactly when the report will be coming through to standing committee and Members of the House on the construction audit? There was a number of concerns regarding the scour rock in some of the structural components of pier 3 south and I’d just like to ask the Minister when that report might be coming through. Thank you.
We’ve committed to provide that information. We will provide the information to the Members as soon as the reconciliation of the audit is done. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Final supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Will that information also be posted on the Department of Transportation’s website for the public to see? Thank you.
We will release the report once it’s finalized. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. McLeod. The honourable Member for the Mackenzie Delta, Mr. Krutko.
QUESTION 213-16(5):
DRAFT DEVOLUTION
AGREEMENT-IN-PRINCIPLE
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In regard to my Member’s statement I noted that this process, yes, it has gone on for a while, but the whole intention of the devolution process came about because of the settlement of the Dene/Metis Land Claim in 1988, which spells out the provisions of the Northern Accord and how the Dene/Metis were going to be involved under the section of the Northern Accord, which is called the Aboriginal Rights section. In that section, Mr. Speaker, it clearly stipulates that the government has an obligation to ensure that those parameters of the land claim agreements are upheld.
So I’d like to ask the Minister when we talk about the majority of Members on board, I know in the past there were letters by way of Ron Irwin in regard to asking for a majority of the groups on side, and also in the previous government in regard to Mr. Handley’s government, that you had to have a majority of the Members on side. So I’d like to ask the Premier why are we now taking the position where we’re basically going with a simple minority and moving forward without having the majority of aboriginal groups on side. It seemed to be good enough. So what I’d like to know is why have you come to that conclusion?
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The honourable Premier, Mr. Roland.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In the Member’s lead up to the question he talked about the comprehensive Dene/Metis claim that was concluded. Mr. Speaker, that was not concluded. It was a discussion that was going on, but that process then led to the regional claims process and those are in place and we continue to work with those in implementation in fulfilling the agreements.
On the area of how many groups it takes to go forward, the draft AIP is in the hands of both the Government of Canada and ourselves, as well as a letter has been sent to the aboriginal organizations, and they have to the end of this month to decide how they will participate in this and we’re awaiting that outcome. Thank you.
Again, under the land claim agreement it’s pretty clear that the Government of the Northwest Territories shall involve the Gwich’in in the development of an implementation of a Northern Accord for oil and gas development in the Northwest Territories, pursuant to a negotiation enabling agreement, September 5, 1988, between the Government of Canada and the Government of the Northwest Territories, which is the Northern Accord agreement. So I’d like to ask the Premier, are we sticking to the elements of the 1988 agreement in ensuring that we have the conclusion of those negotiations with the Aboriginal Rights section which clearly identifies that this includes land claim settlement agreements in regard to these agreements? Thank you.
Throughout this whole process -- and the Member talked about this -- this has been ongoing for a number of Assemblies. In fact, as I stated, half of my lifetime we’ve talked about devolution and resource revenue sharing or the Northern Accord in trying to move those authorities to the North. So there has been inclusion at all levels in the Northwest Territories, including aboriginal leaders and negotiators at quite a number of tables. In fact, if you look, we work with the claims that are in place and that are protected and we continue to honour that protection. When you look at the Tlicho Agreement of Section 2.4.(1), you look at the Gwich’in Settlement of 3.1.(10) and the Sahtu of 3.1.(9) and the Inuvialuit have a similar provision in their Section 20.(1). So we use the existing claims as our processes in how we conduct ourselves in our discussions. Thank you.
Under the Northern Accord agreement it states:
Nothing in this agreement will abrogate or derogate from any of the provisions included in any aboriginal land claims settlements including the following subjects:
land use planning;
environmental impact screening and review;
land and water use permitting;
wildlife management and compensation;
surface rights;
subsurface rights;
benefit agreements;
creation and management of national and territorial parks and conservation areas;
resource revenue sharing.
For greater certainty, the oil and gas management are required in the establishment of pursuing this agreement shall be comparable to those in the land claim agreements.
So this agreement states that you have to follow the land claims agreements with regard to how you implement devolution.
So I’d like to know why we aren’t following the Northern Accord as it was laid out, to ensure those provisions of the land claims agreements will be upheld.
As I had stated earlier, much like the comprehensive Dene/Metis claim, the Northern Accord work had a lot of work done that led up to that. As to actual implementation, we’ve been using the agreements that have been signed off, that have been voted on and protected under the Constitution and our work as signatories when those parties or those agreements were ratified. The Northern Accord was a process that led up to and many hoped that it would be finalized, but much like the Dene/Metis Comprehensive Claim it did not proceed beyond that. In fact, we do now use the agreements that are in place and we continue to do that.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final supplementary, Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d just like to ask the Premier exactly how many aboriginal groups were in the negotiating process, at the table negotiating this latest devolution agreement since previous statements by the Premier in which he put this arrangement on the back burner, as he stated. Can you tell us how many aboriginal groups were actually at the negotiating table when this was being negotiated between the Government of the Northwest Territories and the federal government?
We’ll be able to document the fact that we’ve had all groups at the table through the process up until April. That’s when the Gwich’in decided to pull out from those discussions.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. The honourable Member for Hay River South, Mrs. Groenewegen.
