Thank you, committee. Moving on. The next activity, activity two of six, corporate communications found on pages 102 to 104. This is a $1 million activity. Do we have comments or questions on corporate communications, pages 102 to 104? Seeing nothing, I will call this activity. Executive and Indigenous Affairs, corporate communications, operations expenditure summary, total activity, $1,013,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. Moving on to activity three of six, directorate, found on pages 105 to 108. It is a $5.2 million activity. I will give committee a moment. Comments or questions? Seeing none, I will call this activity. Executive and Indigenous Affairs, directorate, operations expenditure summary, total activity, $5,194,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. Moving on. Activity four of six, executive council offices, found on pages 109 to 112. It is a $3.7 million activity. I will give committee a moment. If you have comments or questions, please raise your hand. I see no comments or questions. I will call this activity. Executive and Indigenous Affairs, executive council offices, operations expenditure summary, total activity, $3,734,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. Moving on. Activity five of six, Indigenous and Intergovernmental Affairs, found on pages 113 to 116. It is a $6.7 million activity. Indigenous and Intergovernmental Affairs, pages 113 to 116. Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to understand from the Minister in terms of the long-term vision of the intergovernmental council. I understand, since signing the devolution agreement, Aboriginal groups have been engaged in terms of trying to work cooperatively with this government. I just wanted to also understand: what is the long-term intention of this group? Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The long-term intention is that we are still optimistic of having all of the Aboriginal governments in the Northwest Territories sign on to the devolution agreement and become part of the intergovernmental affairs unit. With the unit, that will allow us to all deal with the lands under each of their different government's responsibilities. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. In the eventuality that, at some point, the ideal state has been reached where all regions have settled their land claims and self-government arrangements, would it be within the scope of possibility that this government presides over a framework of development and pillars to ensure that an understanding of the evolution of the NWT could become a matter of the discussions towards constitutional development? Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. That is certainly not something that we have discussed or contemplated since, I believe, it was the 11th or 12th Assembly, I think, was the last time there was any constitutional development that was discussed at any great length.
We haven't raised that matter. With regards to the intergovernmental forum, the way it operates is the chair is supposed to rotate amongst the different governments that are part of the intergovernmental forum. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, in this respect, in terms of the parties that have signed on to the devolution agreement, and as a step forward, this government has engaged in agreements called cooperation agreements, what is the spirit and intent of those agreements. As an example, I understand the GNWT signed a cooperation agreement with the K'atlodeeche First Nations. Mahsi.
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think it is important to differentiate between -- the intergovernmental unit is more to work together in the spirit of cooperation and collaboration. The MOU that we signed is a government-to- government relationship. With regards to the K'atlodeeche, as the Member referred to, it gives us a forum to discuss the most important issues between the two governments. It allows us to have some very detailed and frank discussions about some of the priority areas that are longstanding and continue to be irritants. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. Nadli.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. No further questions.
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I am just trying to find the page again here. It is page 114. The line item is negotiations. There is going to be a reduction between 2017-18 and 2016-17. Can someone from the department explain why we are reducing the funding for negotiations in light of the commitment and the mandate to try to finish all of these negotiations by the end of the 18th Assembly? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is the remainder of salary dollars that were aligned with reductions that were made in the previous fiscal year 2015-16. There was about $97,000 that were reallocated within the department. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. Just to be clear, was that funding actually reallocated or was it deleted from the budget? I understood from last year that these were deletions that were being made in light of the Cabinet's fiscal strategy. Can we get some clarification on that, please? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Premier.
Thank you. Just to be very specific, Mr. Chair, the decrease is $117,000. There was $67,000 for elimination of a chief negotiator position and $50,000 for reduction of implementation negotiator funding. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the answer. These funds weren't actually reallocated within the department anyway; these were reductions that were part of the fiscal strategy? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Premier.
That is correct, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. Are there any further staffing reductions contemplated with regard to negotiations in the current budget? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. There is none indicated in here, but as we go forward, as we settle land claims, my expectation is we would reallocate the GSOs perhaps, but that would be for future governments. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. That is all I have for now. Just wanted to get it on the record that the fiscal reduction targets are driving funding that we have been allocating for negotiations. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Next, Mr. McNeely.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. My question is on page 114, the implementation budgeted number that reduced a bit. Is there sufficient moneys coming up for this coming fiscal year for the implementation related to the Deline agreement? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. McNeely. Premier.
Thank you. Yes, we have funds set aside to make sure that the Deline implementation proceeds and is successful. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Nothing further from Mr. McNeely. I see nothing further from committee. Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, in last year's business plan, we indicated that, in an effort to conclude our land, resources, and self-government agreements, we are actually in the midst at some stage of either leading or trying to conclude, framework agreements, agreements in principle, or final agreements, in fact, with regard to 14 sets of negotiations. We did indicate as well who those respective First Nations are. Notably absent from here is the North Slave Metis alliance. I am wondering if the department can give some kind of indication, to the ability that they can, as to what if any status there is to report with regard to the relationship that we have with the North Slave Metis Alliance? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The North Slave Metis Alliance went to court against the Government of the Northwest Territories for a number of reasons, but the court ruled that the North Slave Metis Alliance had Aboriginal right to hunt and fish, and they indicated that there should be a strength of claim assessment done by the government. The previous federal government had done a strength of claim.
There was no land claims table for the North Slave Metis Alliance. We have completed a preliminary strength of claim assessment for the North Slave Metis Alliance. We will be sharing it with the North Slave Metis Alliance and expect there will be further consideration, either through negotiations or through the courts. I am not sure exactly what the process would be. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier. Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to the Premier for that. Just for clarification, there was a previous strength of claim done; we now, under this government, are doing a preliminary strength of claim, is that correct, and that that might lead to negotiation of some kind? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Premier.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The federal government had done their own strength of claim previously with the North Slave Metis Alliance, and the courts, the direction they gave us was to do a strength of claim with regards to hunting, Aboriginal hunting. We have done so on that basis. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
