Thank you, Mr. Chair. The reason for the legislation was really just to fulfil a commitment to our devolution partners who requested that we further solemnize the agreement by reflecting it in this legislation to elevate the contract status to not just a contractual arrangement but one that is also set out in legislation. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thanks to Mr. Goldney. The act established or the agreement, either one, but there is a secretariat that is established. There are costs associated with that secretariat. Clause 4 says each member is responsible for their own cost of participation on the council. But then Section 9 says money required to be expended for the purpose of carrying out, et cetera, shall be paid out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund. So my question goes to the cost to GNWT.
What are the costs that are referred to in Section 4 and, ultimately, what are the costs to GNWT, since I gather that we are going to be providing support for the secretariat in terms of staff support. Thank you.
The cost for all of the parties are intended to cover things like the meetings themselves, the organization of the meetings, the participation in the meetings and any participation that’s undertaken as a result of that council that might request that any of the parties undertake cooperative work. So we do expect that there will be some cost related to these efforts.
Aboriginal parties themselves are receiving ongoing funding as a result of the devolution totalling $3 million a year, divided among them depending on how many Aboriginal parties are there. So we do expect that they will be afforded some capacity to participate in the Intergovernmental Council.
Similarly, from the GNWT’s A-base and the funding that was provided to the Devolution Agreement, there is added capacity to the Government of the Northwest Territories to participate in this council as well.
Thanks to Mr. Goldney. I didn’t really hear in there if the costs are shared equally by all the parties. Everybody has their own money ,but if the costs for the annual costs are $100, is that $100 divided equally among the six or seven or eight parties that are party to the agreement? Thank you.
The agreement provides that each party will bear its own costs, so it’s not intended that the cost will be split up equally, rather what each party puts into this council will depend on the efforts that they bring. We do expect that there will be perhaps greater costs for the Government of the Northwest Territories because we will be involved on virtually all subjects that are brought before the council, whereas certain members from the Aboriginal government side to that council may perhaps participate less in some areas and have less costs. The intent really is for each party to bear its own cost of participation. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Okay, that’s kind of getting to where I needed to go. My next question goes to, I presume there is funding in the 2014-15 budget if that’s when this agreement is going to be implemented. So how much is in the 2014-15 budget for this Intergovernmental Council and where would I find it in the budget? Under what department? Thank you.
I’m going from memory here, but within the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, there was money identified for a coordinator position where much of the administrative side we expect to fall to that coordinator position. There is money there.
For other departments, it will be part of their ongoing responsibilities to lend support to the council and participate as subject matter experts, so I don’t think there are specific line items that specifically identify support for the Intergovernmental Council, but we would anticipate as subject matter expertise is required and departmental participation is required that it’s funded from within their budgets.
One last question here. There is no reference, I don’t think, that I can see or that I have found, to any kind of reporting. Does this legislation or does the agreement require any kind of reporting by the council or by the GNWT to the public on the activities of the Intergovernmental Council?
One of the roles of the council, and perhaps one of the primary roles of the council, is to provide recommendations to the parties, so there is an expectation that the recommendations will be provided to the parties. There is a requirement, also, that if recommendations aren’t accepted, we provide written reasons to all of the parties of why those recommendations are not accepted, so there is some reporting required through those recommendations.
Thanks to Mr. Goldney. I guess I’m looking for reporting to the public. The public is funding this to a certain extent. The public is interested in the management of lands and resources. Is there any provision in the act or in the agreement for reporting to the public on some annual or bi-annual basis?
There is no express provision for reporting to the public, recognizing that the role of the council is to provide recommendations to each participating government, and then, as governments respond to those recommendations, often that will require a public process if the recommendation is to sort of look at amending legislation, for example, or may require further public input if it is a recommendation that requests the party look at its policies or practices. There is an expectation that the work of the council will be public in that regard.
Thanks to Mr. Goldney. I guess I just have to reiterate that expectations can be ignored, and albeit this is an agreement between governments, but these governments are making decisions on behalf of residents of the Northwest Territories and they certainly can affect residents of the NWT in terms of the way that lands and resources are managed. I think that it should be a requirement of the council to do some sort of a report. I appreciate recommendations maybe to each other within the council, but those recommendations are going to have an impact on us as residents, and I would recommend that if and when this act is revisited that it includes some sort of a reporting to the public, some sort of mechanism for reporting to the public. That’s just a comment.
Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Next on my list, I have Mr. Yakeleya for general comments.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a few things to say. First of all, it’s quite the achievement to have the governments working. We’ve come a long way from the ’60 and the ‘70s to where we are today through the many forms of consultation with the parties on this bill Even in the ‘70s this would never be heard of, even the ‘80s, until recently. I think this is a good thing, a new partnership in our governments. Through the years of people who worked towards this type of vision of working with governments, we’re still, from our small communities, looking for bigger, giant steps and, hopefully, that will be one that will be taken in the next couple of days in the Sahtu region.
My question to the Minister is: Are there forums where a new government will be part of this, or is that being discussed as to how these new governments can be entering into this type of partnership with this type of legislation?
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Our objective is to get 100 percent of the Aboriginal governments in the Northwest Territories to become our partners. There are some specific provisions in this legislation as to how would that work, and through you, Mr. Chair, I’ll ask Mr. Goldney to go into more detail. Thank you.
Thank you, Premier McLeod. Mr. Goldney.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Section 7.1 of the agreement itself recognizes that there can be additional parties added to the agreement, so the expectation is future Aboriginal governments might decide to sign on to this agreement, as well, and become full parties and participants in this agreement.
Thank you, Mr. Goldney. Mr. Yakeleya.
Thank you. That’s good news for us and I appreciate that. Certainly, I know that will be welcome news to people in the communities who are negotiating their own form of government. It’s a big thing and that’s good for this type of provision. Again, I wanted just to say congratulations and nothing is easy that’s really good for us. Negotiations of putting this type or form of government partnership together enacted into legislation, we never think this would happen. We’re moving forward and we’re moving in a way that is new. It’s new for us. I just wanted to make that comment. That’s all I have to say.
Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to thank the Member for his comments. It is something new and we think it’s going to work very well and benefit all of the people that we all represent.
Thank you, Premier McLeod. General comments to Bill 16. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is, although a very brief bill, this seems a very large bill in other ways. If I’m right in reading this, this bill is meant to, really, broadly coordinate the management of lands and waters across regions and between public and land claim settlement lands, which we know is a big job. I think there’s a good chance that it could play a very important role for a sober second thought perspective on things for some accountability to be brought by our Aboriginal partners, for example. I think they have a better record, in many ways, than government. I’m somewhat hopeful that this bill will play an important role in the future, and it is certainly consistent with co-management.
But – and there’s always a but – it has been developed behind closed doors. It seems to be the modus operandi characteristic of this government. Again, very irresponsible, in my mind, that committee has been left out of this. The public has been left out of it. It’s murky still. A long-term commitment to significant public dollars, I suspect. Again, no public discussion, and it’s incredible. This is not mirrored legislation or anything, and I think it is a big bill, and it’s just incredible to me that we’re going forward without public discussion and, again, no formal committee review. Again, I believe it does make a commitment for review of suggestions and legislation by Aboriginal partners, but I think, as Ms. Bisaro has brought out, where is the mechanism for going to the public, all of our public, for their input and critique? Maybe I’ll just ask that question.
Where’s the mechanism for public input into this fairly important structure that we’re developing here with no consultation from the public?
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is something that has been negotiated for some time. The framework was provided for in the agreement-in-principle, which is public information. This involves Aboriginal governments, so this is an agreement that was negotiated on that basis. The Aboriginal governments have also indicated that they want to be involved in a review and participate in a review of all the legislation. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Not surprisingly at all, I think I’m interested. I know a lot of people who are interested but they seem to be being left out, along with myself, from this. So I’m asking for the public that’s not represented by Aboriginal governments. I’m very happy Aboriginal governments are there, like I said. I think they could play an important role in accountability here and decision-making.
I don’t know if the Premier didn’t understand my question, but I’ll ask it again. Thank you.
I understand where the Member is coming from; he’s being very consistent with his comments. The Legislative Assembly will be an integral part of any review that’s undertaken. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I do agree that this structure could play a very important role as a perpetual review of our suggestion in terms of legislation and management of our land and resources and water, and especially so if the full public is involved, if it’s transparent and if it’s inclusive of all people and all perspectives. I don’t think that’s too much to ask when the public is, indeed, funding it.
Again, the Premier says it’s been out there. In fact, it’s been very hard to find. For some reason it’s been pulled out of my copy of the Devolution Agreement, and most Members’ copies. It hasn’t been very available electronically and even our research people have had a tough time finding it. So, so much for that. Again, consistent with what we’re seeing from this government.
Given that these meetings that are proposed in this legislation can affect how everybody’s public land and water and resources are managed, is there any reason why these meetings can’t be public? Thank you.
This body can only make recommendations, so any recommendations that they make have to come back to this body and public input will come through these Members that are here, and they can get input in whatever fashion they want. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Could the Minister point out where that is in the legislation?
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Goldney. Mr. Fulford.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The act, at Section 7, states the decisions of the council are not binding and are subject to authorization or ratification by the members – and GNWT is one of the members – where required. Where, for example, a recommendation recommends legislative change, then it would be this body that would have to decide whether it’s appropriate to make that change. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Fulford. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you for that information, Mr. Chair. I’ll repeat my question again. Given that these meetings can affect how our public land, water and resources are managed, planned – and resources and water that belong to all of our public – is there any reason why these meetings cannot be public and made so through regulations?
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Mr. Goldney.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, I don’t think it’s correct to suggest that this council can affect the rights and the administration of land. Again, it makes recommendations. Those recommendations are subject to the approval of each party, whether it’s an Aboriginal government or the public government, where public interests are represented here. The agreement itself provides that observers may be invited to its proceedings and that may include representative boards, councils, co-management boards, regulatory bodies. There isn’t a lot of prescription in this agreement as to who may participate and how those meetings are conducted. It really is up to the Intergovernmental Council members themselves to determine their process and their procedures. Consistent with other intergovernmental arrangements that we have and other intergovernmental meetings, there might be a desire for free and frank discussions among council members that are open to the public, not unlike our other intergovernmental arrangements that we have.
Thank you, Mr. Goldney. Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Section 5 in this legislation, it’s not prescriptive, but I’m sure our Aboriginal government partners would be willing… They’ll be setting their own rules and I’m sure that part of that will be looking at having open public meetings. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier McLeod. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. That would go a long ways, I think. I don’t expect I’ll be getting an invitation myself. Why would I, as an elected representative of my people? But I wonder if the Premier would attend and make that request and develop it as one of the rules of the council referred to in the clause made mention of here.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I believe I’ve already committed to that in previous reviews, so I’ll commit to that again and I’ll make sure the Member is invited if he wishes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier McLeod. Committee, we’re on Bill 16. General comments. Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, just about there. I just wanted to express appreciation for the possibility of an invite there. I don’t recall his previous commitment, so I again appreciate him repeating it here.
My last question is: Given that there are many discussions that will influence decision-making on how we manage our public land and resources, is there any reason why we can’t develop regulations or rules? Perhaps the Premier could bring this up as a possible rule that requires the publication of minutes, decisions, costs, that sort of thing, accountability from these meetings so that the public has a mechanism of being informed. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We’ll make sure that those issues are raised when we work together to establish rules of procedure. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I just want to express my appreciation of the Premier again. Thank you, Mr. Chair. That’s all I had.
Thank you. Committee, we’re on Bill 16, Northwest Territories Intergovernmental Agreement on Lands and Resources Management Act. General comments.
Detail.
