Thank you. Are there any further comments on this section? Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Similarly, I am wondering why special events funding to Aboriginal organizations has had a considerable decline over the past couple of years. In 2014-15, the actual spending was $139,000 and we're projecting this year $50,000. I wonder if we can get an explanation from the Minister. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would ask you, through you, Richard Robertson, please.
Thank you. Mr. Robertson?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The special events program is intended to fund annual general assemblies and annual celebrations of the National Aboriginal Day. The reduction allows us to retain the funding that goes to support the National Aboriginal Day celebrations, which provides $1,000 to each community to hold events on that day, plus provide funding to Aboriginal governments that are celebrating significant milestones of either an anniversary or of signing an agreement, or another similar event of a significant celebration event. The decision to cut was more on the annual general assembly side, where we weren't getting a significant amount of applications every year. It ranged from two to four. That presented an opportunity. The Member is correct that the actual year prior is much higher than the actual… That's a bit of a blip for that particular year in question, where we had provided some funding on one-time events that were unique in nature. We did have things of the nature where we funded the Canadians for a New Partnership, to get them off the ground. It's a national organization, one time only for $30,000. We provided funding for the Sahtu Secretariat so that they could hold discussions on some workshops internally about engaging with the GNWT. Those were two unique events that sort of boosted those costs up for that one year only. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Robertson. Mr. Vanthuyne, anything further?
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for the explanation. Further to that, and to the previous speaker's points around the Indspire Awards, Mr. Chair, we are aware of the efforts and the kind contribution of Mr. Arnold Witzig and his wife, the founders of the Arctic Inspiration Prize. You know, they fund purely northern people with ideas and innovation that benefit the North. I believe this government has stated in the past that we are going to be a supporting partner for Arctic Inspiration. I know it's not in here; I'm just trying to get a sense of is that, in fact, the case that the government will be a supporting partner of the Arctic Inspiration Prize? If so, to what amount? And if so, where do I find it in the budget? I know that that's not specific to this department, but it's because I really don't know where else it would be, and so I take this opportunity to ask. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Certainly the Arctic Inspiration Prize is a very wonderful project, and one that certainly promotes the North, and we are very pleased to be part of it. You won't find it in the main estimates because funding has not been approved as of yet. We have indicated we will be looking to find ways to fund, see if we can find money to contribute a small portion in relation to the prize money that is given out to all the northern territories. It would be a very small amount compared to the large sum that is given out, but we have committed to look for additional resources so we could contribute. It’s not part of the main estimates. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier McLeod. Mr. Vanthuyne.
Well, I appreciate the Minister's reply and I certainly look forward to the efforts that we can hopefully find the means within our fiscal ability to support the Arctic Inspiration Prize, because although the prize money is donated by philanthropists and what have you, there's a lot of administrative support required and I think that that's where our dollars are required. Those are just comments. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. I'll give Premier McLeod a chance to respond to the comments if he wishes.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, we share those views. Thank you.
Thank you, Premier McLeod. Are there any further comments on page 30? If not, Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, corporate management, operations expenditure summary, activity total, $3.873 million. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Agreed. Moving on to page 31, which I believe is an information item supplementing the previous page. Are there any questions on page 31? Seeing none. Moving on to page 32, another information item, corporate management, active positions. Any questions or comments? Seeing none. Moving on to page 34, Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, implementation, operations expenditure summary. Are there any comments or questions on this page? Seeing none, Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, implementation, operations expenditure summary, activity total, $553,000.
Agreed.
Committee agrees. The next page, page 35, implementation, active positions. It's an information item. Are there any questions or comments on this page? Seeing none. Moving on to page 37, intergovernmental relations, operations expenditure summary. Page 37. Comments or questions from committee? None. Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, intergovernmental relations, operations expenditure summary, activity total, $1.93 million. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Committee agrees. Moving on. Page 38 is an information item. Are there any questions or comments on page 38? Seeing none. Moving on to page 39, another information item. Are there any questions? No comments or questions. Moving on to page 41, negotiations, operations expenditure summary. Comments or questions? Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. In the spirit of trying to advance the Iand claims and self-government negotiations forward, especially with the outstanding regions, I just wanted to understand. It states within, at least the departmental business plans, that there will be an effort to revisit the negotiations mandate, and these are the mandates that, you know, guides the negotiators at the table. I want to understand, in terms of the negotiations to mandate for the GNWT that we bring to perhaps, you know, the Dehcho First Nations table or the Tlicho table or else the negotiations with the Metis. When was the negotiations, the last time that they were updated? Mahsi.
Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. 2011. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier McLeod. Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Since 2011 to 2016, I mean, five years have passed and more likely we've seen the main interest point would be more likely legal challenges within the Supreme Court, the more likely would reverberate with policies with governments across Canada. At this point is there a particular focus that perhaps this government would have in terms of ensuring that a mandate is fairly focused but at the same time it considers, you know, some of the legal precedents that have been set perhaps at the national level. Would the regular side of this House be involved with perhaps maybe refining the negotiations mandate of the GNWT? Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have submitted a terms of reference for a Joint Cabinet Standing Committee on Aboriginal Affairs negotiations and I believe it's part of the terms of reference and I don't see as to why we wouldn't do that. In the meantime, we have looked at several mandates which we believe have resulted in a logjam for a number of years and we are expecting to, as we committed, put forward new offers in the near future for those outstanding land claims. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier McLeod. Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I thank the Minister for highlighting that initiative that was just recent in terms of the move forward in terms of bringing the regular side of the House to be involved in the spirit of consensus of trying to at least address the outstanding land claims that are still ongoing. Trying to at least help out the process. Maybe the Minister could at least outline to us maybe some of the principles or interests that he might ensure that negotiators have in terms of moving forward. The fundamental question is: how can this government help negotiations move forward? Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We've undertaken a number of initiatives. One is we're looking at a new collaborative way of negotiating these long, outstanding land claims. We'd be prepared to discuss that. I believe we've offered a briefing to the standing committee to discuss that. The mandates, there were at least three mandates that we think were part of the log jam. One was the requirement for consistency, the other one was to use population numbers from the failed Dene-Metis comprehensive land claim, and also the “me too mandate,” if I could call it that. Those were the three principal mandates that were important to look at. Consequently that affects land quantum and other considerations. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier McLeod. Mr. Nadli, anything further?
Maybe a final question on this section there, Mr. Chair. With negotiations I mean there are impasses and points of disagreements. Really what happens is the parties just agree to disagree and, unfortunately at some moments in time the negotiation's evolution points would be arrived at. It could be inevitable that, you know, you do have very fundamental differences of parties. Would there be maybe down the line, you know, other jurisdictions have kind of dealt with the idea of dispute mechanisms in terms of trying to bring mediation of parties together and to try and at least put a very good exhausting effort in terms of trying to resolve some issues. Would perhaps a body like that be considered as we try to assist in trying to support the outstanding land claims? Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. As long as you recognize that there are three parties to the negotiations. I don't think anybody would rule out any different attempts as to how to move forward. I expect that as we run into additional roadblocks, I wouldn't rule out any other opportunities to move forward. You have to recognize there are three parties to the negotiations. Thank you.
Thank you, Premier McLeod. Mr. Nadli, no further comments? Mr. O’Reilly.
Page 41 table, here. I have a couple of questions for clarification, and then maybe some comments. The contracted services are going up. In 2015-16, they were $182,000, so they're going up to $362,000 in 2016-17. Are we actually contracting out the negotiations? What's going on here? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. That's where we put the $200,000 that we've identified for those new collaborative processes for negotiations that the Members identified we would need additional resources in order to accomplish. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier McLeod. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. That sounds interesting. On the travel, though, it's being reduced from $350,000 last year to $250,000. Can I get an explanation for the reduction in travel? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. With this new collaborative approach, our expectation is that we would have longer periods of negotiations, so that would consequently reduce the travel required. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier McLeod. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I've been in my position now since November 23rd, or whatever, and although we've had one, perhaps two, briefings on general negotiations, I don't recall actually seeing any sort of regular updates that are provided to Regular MLAs. Is there supposed to be some kind of regular report provided to Regular MLAs on negotiations? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. There was one on my desk, but I had to send it back for some corrections because I realize that, if it goes without corrections, it's brought to our attention very quickly. You should be receiving it very shortly. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier McLeod. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I look forward to getting an update, and I hope that they will start to come on a regular basis. I guess I'm very concerned about the inconsistent messaging and what seems to be a logjam emerging here within this building. As part of the mandate, we all agree that we were going to try to move this along. I heard promises from the Premier in his accepting his new position to try to move things forward. A new offer was to be put on the table with the Dehcho within 90 days. There was supposed to be a joint Cabinet/Regular MLA committee set up, but I don't really understand what this new approach is. I don't have any updates. The joint committee is not established. There is not a new offer out on the table, at least according to the Dehcho First Nations. There are some very inconsistent things going on here, and can the Minister provide some assurance that this is still a priority with this government and that things are going to start moving? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
