Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would like to table a letter that was distributed to all Members of the Legislative Assembly on October 30, 2013. It’s a letter from the Inuvialuit regarding their concerns with respect to Bill 3 amendments. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Mr. Moses. Mr. Hawkins.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Yellowknife South, that Bill 3, Wildlife Act, be read for the third time. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It’s not normal that I would speak on third reading, but I just wanted to take a moment to reflect on the vote we’re about to take in this House on an issue that has been a goal of Assemblies back as far as the 12th Assembly and we should appreciate the significance of this bill and what it has done for us. It has helped us create processes working with Aboriginal governments that exist nowhere else and in which we can draft legislation together. It has helped set a really strong foundation for devolution and it has brought our Wildlife Act, as old and archaic as it is, into the 21st Century.
It will be, Mr. Speaker, the biggest single bill that we’re going to pass in the life of the 17th Assembly. We should appreciate that fact.
I thanked most of the folks that needed thanking yesterday, and today I just want to note for the record that while they support the bill, the Inuvialuit and Sahtu have put written concerns about a specific clause, 98.1. I want to restate our commitment as a government that we will work with them through the regulation developing process to resolve the concerns tied to 98.1.
Mr. Speaker, given the significance and singular importance of this bill, the likes of which politically none of us will see again probably in our political lives, I would like to ask, for posterity, for a recorded vote. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The Member is seeking a recorded vote. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I, too, would like to make a very brief comment. This bill represents a big effort to date, as the Minister has said, but still leaves the public hanging on a number of issues that should properly be dealt with in the legislation.
It’s an important improvement over past efforts and I congratulate the Minister on that. Unfortunately, it is not an impressive piece of legislation, other than its length and its propensity for unnecessary and confusing detail. While I wish I could support it, I cannot in good conscience endorse it. Fundamentally, the bill is unnecessarily divisive and fails to provide the mechanism to get all voices heard under one roof and provide public and transparency in decision-making on wildlife management.
Should the bill pass today, the Minister will need to work equally hard, perhaps harder, to ensure comprehensive and fair process and input for all people in the development of the regulations. I would expect our committee to play a role here as well. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Northwest Territories is home to half the population of the Dene and Inuvialuit, called Denendeh, the territory of Treaties 8 and 11 of 1899 and 1921, which were viewed as historical treaties by Canada unless you have a negotiated final agreement.
The Dehcho and Tlicho are regarded as unsettled areas in negotiations with Canada and the GNWT. For that same manner, the Metis are also negotiating. Regions that have settled land claims are regarded as modern treaties. Treaties between First Nations and Canada are protected under Section 356 of the Constitution, which states, “Treaties and Aboriginal rights are hereby recognized and affirmed.” I understand the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which has expounded on multiculturalism and inclusion.
I also understand that there are concerns about proposed wildlife and this divisive nature. There is a view of the historical treaties, that treaties between First Nations and governments are based on peace and friendship. This is highly held by the elders of Denendeh. In this context, the Government of Canada has a duty to consult and accommodate First Nations and, above all, work in honour of the Crown.
There is a relationship between Canada and the Government of the Northwest Territories through the Northwest Territories Act. There is also a relationship between Canada and First Nations through land claims and historical treaties. At this point, as we go down the path of devolution in terms of implementing a land and resource regime, I have questions, likely along with other First Nations. How would the GNWT assume in terms of treaty obligations from the federal government? However, I agree with the spirit and intent of the proposed Wildlife Act. Bill 3 is intended to set up a wildlife management regime. From that standpoint, as a Member of the Economic Development and Infrastructure committee reviewing the Wildlife Act, and exercising due diligence and seeking clarity in the interest of wildlife management and also conservation, above all in the manner of stewardship of the land including wildlife.
Wildlife management in terms of this tool that is before us could be said as blind to rights. From a very specific scientific standpoint, perhaps it could be a linear perspective, but it is not. With this in mind, this is the view that I have in terms of the important consideration of the Wildlife Act.
As MLA, I have an unsettled region that is still negotiating with Canada. The Dehcho First Nations have expressed concerns and made written submissions during the review process. In particular, I referenced the consultation provisions and also the progress of their land use planning process, which has been ongoing for some time.
I understand that some of my constituents have concerns regarding GHL, general hunting licence, where it could be construed as whether you have to have a GHL to prove your treaty and Aboriginal rights. The residency clause in terms of allowing people the right to hunt, a lot of the constituents that I talked to would like to remain at two years. Some even take the view that two years is not enough. As a committee of EDI, Economic Development and Infrastructure, I was involved in the second reading that referred this act to the committee. We had hearings, we had the review and now we are reporting to this House.
I have, in consideration of this Wildlife Act, raised the fundamental issues on treaty and Aboriginal rights as a leader. I have reassurance in Section 172. I understand that the Dehcho First Nations are negotiating with the Government of Canada and the GNWT. At some point, my hope is that there will be a conclusion to those discussions and at that time the Minister will sit down with those regions including Dehcho and Akaitcho in terms of exchanging notes of the conformity of that clause. I understand that this Wildlife Act will not come into effect for a year and that regulations still need to be detailed out and that perhaps provisions could be tweaked, deleted or modified, and once it’s legislated, it will be reviewed every five years.
I understand that negotiations on wildlife management are being negotiated at different tables in the spirit of co-management. Dehcho First Nations have been involved with negotiations for some time. My hope is that, at some point, through the support of this government and the federal government, there will be a conclusion, but yet the positions of the Dehcho perhaps are fundamentally challenging in terms of trying to determine the jurisdictions of salvaging the ownership of the asserted traditional lands.
I am hoping that we don’t go down the path of, perhaps, legal challenges, but it is the prerogative of groups. My worry is that it could be a legal challenge and it could trigger a stop, a halting of negotiations while the rule law reviews provisions. However, I see this is another level of conservation. In the Deh Cho, we have mechanisms in place including land withdrawal, interim land use plan and also put a great deal of effort in terms of ensuring that we have part regimes and structures in terms of how co-management should work.
Today I continue to remind this government and the federal government that I support the efforts towards finalizing the Dehcho process. I want to make sure that we all help out to accomplish at least that goal in the land use plan. I would like to say something in my language too. [English translation not provided.]
As we experience increased natural resource development, we have to put in place land management regimes to ensure the sustainability of our land and wildlife. Today I see that we are at that point. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. To the motion.
Question.
