Thank you, Mr. McNeely. Minister Sebert.
Yes, perhaps the Premier could assist in clarifying this point. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Premier McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The only reference to a five-year review is the review of the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act. When the devolution agreement was enacted, the federal government insisted that they would continue to be responsible for the MVRMA. With the new government, we made representation that there was no need to wait five years. Now, five years will be up in 2019. We had also made representation to the federal government that they should transfer the MVRMA and we would make changes. The federal government has indicated that they want to do changes before, and we still have to get them to agree, although it has been negotiated, that there will be a five-year agreement to start. We have asked that the review begin since it is less than two years away. That is where it is at now, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Premier McLeod. No further questions? Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I believe it was in last year's budget that there was a $370,000 reduction in inspections, and I am just wondering: I have noticed in the business plans that the number of inspections for leases and land use permits and so on are steady if not increasing, so how did that cut affect our inspection capacity? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister Sebert.
Yes, I am confident that all of the inspections that are required are being made, but perhaps I will turn that question over to Mr. Hagen, please. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Mr. Hagen.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We have met or exceeded our goal of inspections in 2017-2018. We have not been impacted by any reductions in budget on it. The fact that the Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk Highway is completed, the fibre optic line is completed, the economic development is not there that there was a few years ago does not mean there are fewer inspections, but it has not stopped us from doing the inspections that are necessary. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Hagen. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the comments from the Minister and the deputy minister. It is something that I am going to continue to watch very closely. I want to ask about inspections at Prairie Creek. There were some issues there. I know that there were some additional inspections that were done in the fall. The company was supposed to be submitting some plans for moving forward. Has that actually happened, and where are we at with the existing liabilities at the site? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister Sebert.
Yes, I understand that, of course, there are ongoing concerns about Prairie Creek and possible noncompliance. Perhaps I can give some detail as to what the department has been doing. Since the summer of 2017, there have been six inspections by our inspectors from the Department of Lands and also by the Department of Natural Resources. There were six inspections, as I say, the most recent being October 28, 2017. The next inspection will take place in the spring of 2018, once the snow clears. The site is closed, shut down, for the season. Now, there were some compliance issues related to chemical storage. Perhaps I will turn it over at this point to Mr. Hagen, and he can expand on that answer. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, that is correct. There were some issues relating to chemical storage being raised by our inspectors, but, the company, we are working with them. Our first goal with our inspectors is to educate and be of assistance and the last being enforcement and compliance. They have made great progress addressing these issues. They have provided us with a response to inspector's concerns, information request from this past year, including a waste disposal plan, a chemical inventory, and we are currently reviewing some of these documents. We are in constant touch with them, corresponding, and we will be doing a follow-up inspection once the snow is gone, like the Minister mentioned, in the spring of 2018. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Hagen, Minister Sebert. Let's not forget to go through the chair as we continue. Minister Sebert wanted to add something.
I just wanted to add that inspection reports related to land use permits and water licences are available on the Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board's registry.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair, and I thank the Minister for that. Something that I do check once in a while is the public registry there. I appreciate the concentration of effort on that particular location because it is a problem, and I am glad to hear that there is some progress being made. I want to ask about: ENR has water use inspectors; they also do wildlife inspections, and Lands does land use permits, land lease, and I understand some of those inspectors are actually cross-appointed. Has there been any thought to centralizing inspection service and putting it with ENR, where, in my view, it should probably located? I know I raised this with the Minister during business planning, as well, so has he had a chance to look at this? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister Sebert.
Yes, as the Member pointed out, people are cross-appointed, and, prior to devolution, basically, these functions were carried out by a single department. It would seem to make some sense to have them combined, but maybe I will let Mr. Hagen take it from there. I understand what the Member is talking about. I know that different inspectors do work closely together and some are cross-appointed, so hopefully the system is not rendered inefficient by the fact that there are two departments, but I do understand the point.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Mr. Hagen.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This question has been asked of our Minister and the Minister of ENR a couple of times on putting the inspectors in a single department. I believe it has been looking and is still being studied. I can say from the Department of Lands that we work very well with the Department of ENR, who have the water inspectors, and we have not had any complications. Would it be more efficient? I think by year end that we should have some answers on the efficiencies of having it under one roof or in one department. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Hagen. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. Yes, I appreciate the Minister's comments and the deputy minister's, as well. Before devolution, it was one department. Now it is split between two, and I do not think necessarily that there are any complications, but we might get some more efficiencies if it was brought back under one roof. I appreciate that they are going to look at that. Hopefully, they can come back to the Regular Members and let us know what they found. Is that something the Minister can commit to do? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister Sebert.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Certainly, I can commit to that. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Committee, we do have two more names on the list. I am not sure of any others, but, as notified, supper is ready, so we will take a short recess and wrap up afterwards. Thank you.
---SHORT RECESS
I would like to call the committee back to order. Next on our list, we have Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Under operations, I think this is where we can talk about unauthorized occupiers, and I just want to get some clarification from the department as to what constitutes an unauthorized occupier. Maybe just a brief description of what an unauthorized occupier is? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Minister Sebert.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Well, to state the obvious, an unauthorized occupant is someone who puts up a permanent structure and occupies land without a lease or without a legal right to occupy the land. That has been an issue in the Northwest Territories for some time. Our estimate is that there are about 715 structures on public land that do not have any tenure, that is to say, no lease or other legal right, and about two thirds to three quarters of those are in the Yellowknife area. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. If somebody was to want to skirt being considered an unauthorized occupier, they would, then, I guess, go with something that would be not considered a permanent structure. Is this a case where we have people with wall tents and what have you that are arguably maybe not permanent but semi-permanent, and those also seem to be what are often referred to by some as being squatters? Does the department take in complaints relevant to those types of occupiers, and are we managing them in any way? Are we leaving posts or messages at these sites as well? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Minister Sebert.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Perhaps I could defer that question to Mr. Hagen. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Mr. Hagen.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. People occupying or putting up wall tents that are semi-permanent are not classified as unauthorized occupants, although it is supposed to be seasonal use. It is a little bit of a grey area.
We don't call them squatters, because there is no homesteading act in the Northwest Territories, so there are no squatters' rights. If they have a permanent structure, it is unauthorized. If it is a tent frame and it is there for a while and it looks like it is semi-permanent, then we do check to make sure that their garbage is taken care of, there's a proper outhouse, and there's no contamination going into the water. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Hagen. Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for some clarification. I am going to assume that maybe the same thing, then, applies to the use of campers and the like that find their way into roadside turn-offs and what have you that are not necessarily territorial parks. I am thinking of the Ingraham Trail that is in my riding where, on occasion, there are going to be people who have just found space, and they have basically set up what appears to be a non-permanent structure. Are we addressing that in the same way that we would as it relates to an unauthorized occupier? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Mr. Hagen.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. It is a difficult one, because if a mobile trailer can be parked in an area where they can access and yet they can pull it out, the act is fairly clear that it is not a permanent structure. If it is not a permanent structure, then they are not unauthorized. They are treated differently, there is absolutely no doubt about it. We have had circumstances where somebody has pulled a trailer. The next thing you know they put a roof on it or an additional roof, and they put a porch and a door. As soon as that happens, then it's considered a permanent structure and we'll go and post it. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Hagen. Mr. Vanthuyne.
So just lastly, Mr. Chair: does the department feel, then, that there's some need to maybe revisit the definition of permanent structure or find a way in which we can address it? I mean, the point I'm trying to get at here is that this is an ongoing concern as it relates to wall tents, trailers, mobile units that are starting on encroach on Commissioner's lands, NWT lands. Albeit, they're not, maybe, permanent structures, but we have to have a way in which we monitor these activities. Other people are doing the right thing in paying leases and/or fee simple title. I mean, it just appears on every level that others are getting away with having some degree of residency without having to be under the same rules. So is there a way in which the department is going to take steps to address these issues? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Mr. Hagen.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. That has been a great concern of Lands before I got here and since I've been here, the last three and a half years of Lands' existence. I don't want to throw the feds under the bus, but the fact is that they were very poor managers of the land when it came to people building without any recourse to them. The Recreational Land Use Framework Agreement that we are stalled on right now will address a lot of those issues that are being brought up now. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Hagen. Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. That's all that I have at this time. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Ms. Green.
Just one follow-up question, please, Mr. Chair: what is the status of the recreational land use plan for Yellowknife? Thank you.
