Debates of October 21, 2004 (day 25)

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions this afternoon are for the Premier, the Honourable Joe Handley. They centre on the devolution framework and negotiations that I guess are underway. This is where I am seeking some clarification. March 18th of this year, the Premier, in his capacity of Minister of Aboriginal Affairs, and the Minister of Indian Affairs, and a number of other aboriginal leaders signed the NWT Lands and Resources Devolution Framework Agreement. In that agreement, it sets out a timeline that suggests that an effective target date for this agreement shall be April of 2006. That is only about a-year-and-a-half from now, Mr. Speaker, but today and last week, the Minister told us that they are looking at an interim resource revenue sharing process because -- and I am quoting from Hansard of last Wednesday, Mr. Speaker -- “because I am not 100 percent confident that we are moving fast enough on devolution.” The question that I would like to ask, Mr. Speaker, is which deal are we negotiating, the one that was signed just seven months ago, or now some new process that we still seem to be feeling around for conceptual agreement? Which deal is the one that is on the table? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

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

Return To Question 280-15(3): Status Of Devolution Agreement

Mr. Speaker, we only have a formal negotiating table for the main devolution agreement. The concept, the idea, the proposal of interim resource revenue sharing is not at a table right now. We continue to negotiate devolution. The next meeting is October 26th to 28th, so we are still talking devolution. Mr. Speaker, I have been discouraged by this slow pace since when the Aboriginal Summit wanted to get a new negotiator. We did. We had an election and change of Ministers of DIAND since then, a change of Ministers of Finance. Things have slowed us down to the point where I am not confident that we can have a quick devolution deal because, even in the North, some of the aboriginal organizations have not negotiated their final agreements. The Akaitcho, Deh Cho and NWT Metis are saying we want to negotiate our own deal before we get serious about devolution. There are so many things working against a longer-term devolution deal that my feeling is, at the same time that is happening, we are seeing resources going out of here. We have to get something in the interim, something that comes into effect now, not 18 years from now.

---Applause

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Supplementary To Question 280-15(3): Status Of Devolution Agreement

Mr. Speaker, I couldn’t agree more that as the wealth of the territory is pumped and flown and driven out of the NWT, then we have to act as soon as we can to get a share of it. This is where Ottawa seems to be so good at the game. They have been very good at this for years. Process, divide and conquer are the tactics that keep us off balance and hurt us when we try to do this. The preamble to this deal of the signing, Mr. Speaker, on March 18th, refers quite clearly to the realization of resource revenue. It is not just a management deal, it is a money deal, too. Is this agreement worth the paper that it is written on, Mr. Speaker?

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Handley.

Further Return To Question 280-15(3): Status Of Devolution Agreement

Mr. Speaker, that agreement, in my view, is worth the integrity of everybody who signed it. That is what is going to determine how we treat that agreement. When we signed it, we took it very seriously. I am sure the aboriginal leaders who signed it took it seriously. So that is a serious deal. Mr. Speaker, I will say that we are not going to be rushed into signing or entering into some kind of devolution deal that is not a good deal. I would sooner have no deal than a bad deal. We are going to take our time. We are going to make sure that we have a good devolution deal. In the meantime, if we can get an interim resource revenue sharing, to get the money flowing here, the money staying here, I want to do that. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Handley. Supplementary, Mr. Braden.

Supplementary To Question 280-15(3): Status Of Devolution Agreement

Mr. Speaker, the answer that the Premier gave is one that I was hoping he would. There are a lot of people standing behind this. The signature of the previous Minister of Northern Affairs is on here too, and yet this seems to be where the bottleneck is. Why is it that, as we all seem to agree, on March 18th, that we can’t say, okay, we agreed to live up to a deadline here of April 2006 to make this deal work? Why is it that we can’t do it? Just do it. All this stuff about interim this, and sort of that, and maybe this, I am just so tired of it, Mr. Speaker. We make an agreement to get somewhere, and yet somewhere along the line it falls apart. Why can’t we stick to the plan and work the plan? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. Mr. Handley.

Further Return To Question 280-15(3): Status Of Devolution Agreement

Mr. Speaker, as one party to the plan, we have been working hard to stick to the plan and move ahead with it, but I cannot speak for the other two parties on this one, the aboriginal leaders and the federal government. We want to move ahead as quickly as we can on this and will do everything we can. Mr. Speaker, we have to understand that we are not in control of it ourselves. We have two other parties we have to work with. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.