Thank you, Minister Sebert. Time has expired, Mr. O'Reilly. Any further questions from committee? Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, this is also the activity in which we see the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act identified. Maybe I will start with asking the department, through their policy and legislation communications, have they identified any concerns or challenges that we are faced with, with regard to the MVRMA? Is there any undertaking as it relates to working with the federal government to make changes, if necessary, prior to our inheritance of the MVRMA, come 2019? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Minister Sebert.
The Department of Lands led the GNWT's participation in the current proposed amendments to the MVRMA and also the proposed Federal Impact Assessment Act. Members will recall that there was some litigation that led to the change in the federal government's process or procedures in this whole matter. I think, ultimately, we would like to bring this piece of legislation home, but that may be sometime in the future.
We have participated in the federal review of environmental and regulatory processes. I don't know if Mr. Hagen wants to add anything to that.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Mr. Hagen.
Yes. One of your questions was whether we work closely with Land and Water Boards under the MVRMA, and we do work very closely with them, almost on a daily basis, when there is a development on the application in, and there is a half-dozen of them at different stages as we speak.
Lands has only participated in the current proposed amendments of the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act. The actual negotiations of bringing the MVRMA home to the Government of the Northwest Territories is led by the Department of EIA, and the bill with the proposed amendments to the MVRMA has not yet been tabled in Parliament. Officials from Crown-Indigenous Relations, or CIRNA, have not communicated with us when this is expected to occur. It was supposed to be early fall, and, obviously, they did not meet that date. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Hagen. Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Okay, so I appreciate that the Department of Lands is working closely with the land and water boards. That is respectful. I also appreciate that it is EIA that is kind of the lead as it relates to working with the federal government on any amendments. I guess the question is: are we aware of concerns that need change in the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, and is the Department of Lands aware of any of those? Are they suggesting or making recommendations to EIA about what might need to be changed in the MVRMA before we inherit it? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Minister Sebert.
I see a note here that on February 8th Catherine McKenna wrote me committing that the government will continue to engage the GNWT through the Parliamentary process to seek our views on regulatory and policy issues. Perhaps I could let Mr. Hagen expand on that, but yes, we are engaged with them, and they do seem to want our engagement. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Mr. Hagen.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Like I said, Lands is doing the current proposed amendments, and the negotiations to bring the MVRMA home do include negotiating further amendments. We will have to get it home and do our own amendments. The bill that I mentioned, the proposed amendments to the MVRMA, that was stalled approximately three years ago now on the court action launched by the Tlicho government when the federal Harper government of the day wanted to make one super-board. In there are amendments that, in my future life, we put together some -- I say they are great amendments -- that are still there in this proposed amendment going forth to Parliament. Those amendments will come, and they will make a big difference in the MVRMA as you see it today. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Hagen. Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Just lastly, we are working with the federal government. We clearly are working with the land and water boards. We are working interdepartmentally with ourselves. Have we taken any initiative to reach out to industry? Are we working with industry and listening to industry and their concerns? I know that they have concerns that they have shared before with our government. Are we reacting or taking any action with regard to those? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Mr. Hagen.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, we are always taking industry, mining, and so on into consideration. They attend many public forums with us and the Mackenzie Land and Water Boards. They put their wishes forward, if I can call them that, for amendments, and they also meet with the federal government, too. It is all federal legislation, so they are the ones who they have to convince at the end of the day to make any changes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Hagen. Further questions? Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I want to go back to Prairie Creek just for a minute, if I can. I am trying to understand whether there are any legal impediments to us increasing the financial security now to cover the existing liabilities that are at the site. As I understand it, the lease is now in an overhold tenancy position. Are there any legal impediments to us changing the financial security now to cover the existing liabilities? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister Sebert.
As I mentioned previously, Canadian Zinc has met all current security requirements under the permits, licences, and authorizations, and we are holding slightly over $2 million in securities. I am not certain, but I could look into it to see whether an overholding lease would allow us to increase the security. It seems to me that it might be unlikely that we would have the ability to do that. That might be seen as being in bad faith, but we could get back to you with an answer. Mr. Hagen tells me he could give a better answer.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Mr. Hagen.
I do not know if I can give a better answer, Mr. Minister, but I can give a different perspective on it. The fact is that they have a lease that has been agreed to, the securities held have been agreed to, and, until that lease is up for renewal, we could not go back and increase it. I think it is well known that securities are based on risk, you run a risk model, and they are not operating. As a matter of fact, right now, they are shut down, so the risk is very low, and the securities that we hold on that lease right now are plenty sufficient. Like I mentioned before, if they clear all the hurdles and they eventually go for production, before they can do that they have to renew those leases and get added leases, and at that time we would increase the security to make sure that the Government of the Northwest Territories is well protected for any environmental problems or, heaven forbid, a disaster. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Hagen. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. Look, if our witnesses want to come back and give us more information and it has to be done confidentially, that is fine, but why is it that we cannot take any action now to increase the financial security for the liabilities that are on the ground right now? Is there some legal provision of the existing lease that is in overhold tenancy that the Minister does not have the discretion to increase the security right now? I cannot believe that someone would sign off on a lease that does not allow the Minister to have discretion to increase security when and if required. It is not covered right now. This property could come back to the taxpayers, and I want to know whether the Minister has discretion right now to increase the security to cover the existing liabilities on the site because they are not secured. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister Sebert.
I do not know the answer to that, but I know that they have met all security requirements to this stage, so a sudden change by us might be seen as arbitrary. Perhaps the best way of handling this, though, would be to have us look into it and perhaps we could meet with committee on a confidential basis to discuss some of these issues.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. Mr. O'Reilly.
Yes, I am happy to accept that, but we have been talking about this for two years. At least I have been talking about it for two years. There is currently unsecured liability for the existing condition of the site. Yes, they have met terms and conditions of the water licence, they have paid up the security under the water licence to the state that it is at, but right now we do not have enough security set aside if something went off the rails with the property to cover the existing liabilities. That is the problem. If the Minister has discretion to change that so that we are not on the hook, it is my view and I think it is dictated by the mandate and just good financial management that we get the security in place. So, if the Minister wants to come back and talk again about this, I am happy to have him talk to the committee about it, but there is an unsecured amount of liability there, and that needs to be fixed. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister Sebert.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are going around in circles a bit here, but, as I say, they did meet all security requirements. They might see a sudden change as arbitrary, but I will look into this. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister Sebert. No further questions? Okay, committee, we have no further questions. We will now go to operations expenditure summary, $6,991,000. Does the committee agree?
Agreed.
Agreed. Thank you, committee. We will now return to departmental summary on page 309. Lands, total department, $27,673,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Agreed. Thank you. Does the committee agree that the consideration of the Department of Lands is concluded?
Agreed.
Agreed. Thank you. Thank you, committee. Thank you, Minister, and thanks to your witnesses for appearing before us. Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the witnesses from the Chamber. No closing comments? No.
Okay. Committee, you have agreed to continue on with the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs. I will turn to the Minister responsible for the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs. Minister Cochrane, do you have opening comments?
I do, thank you, Mr. Chair.
I am pleased to present the 2018-2019 Main Estimates for the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs. Overall, the department's estimates propose an increase of $482,000 from the 2017-2018 Main Estimates, which is a .45 per cent increase.
These estimates continue to support the Government of the Northwest Territories' objective of ensuring a strong and sustainable future for the government and its programs by managing expenditures due to limited revenue growth.
The 2018-2019 Main Estimates reflect:
a decrease of $1.5 million which was the final contribution provided to Host Society for the 2018 Arctic Winter Games;
an increase of $944,000 to support the need for increased grants in lieu of property taxes payments to community governments, as well as an increase for the seniors and disabled persons property tax relief program; and
an increase of $1,300,000 for community governments to support their operational needs and the delivery of water and sewer services.
The department's proposed spending in 2018-2019 continues to support the priorities of the 18th Legislative Assembly.
Under the Community Wellness and Safety priority, Municipal and Community Affairs has refined its implementation plan for a territorial 911 service, and our investment in this budget will result in this service coming online by the summer of 2019.
Through an increase in funding for community governments, we are continuing to invest in a strategy to close the gap in funding levels to municipal core needs. This funding advances the governance priority by helping to build a stronger relationship with community governments. In support of the cost of living priority area, we will continue to support community governments as they apply for and take advantage of the suite of federal infrastructure funding programs available to them. That concludes my opening remarks. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister. Do you wish to bring witnesses into the Chamber?
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to bring witnesses.
Okay, thank you. Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort witnesses into the Chamber. Would the Minister please introduce her witnesses for the record.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. On my right is Ms. Eleanor Young; she's the deputy minister for Municipal and Community Affairs. On my left is Gary Schauerte, who is the director for Corporate Affairs. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. I will now ask committee to turn to your main estimates document, Department of Municipal and Community Affairs, which begins on page 331. Committee, we will defer the departmental summary and review the estimates by activity summary. Please turn to the first activity, found on page 335. Thank you. We have Municipal and Community Affairs, community governance, operations expenditure summary, $2,036,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Any questions? Agreed. Thank you. Next we have Municipal and Community Affairs, community operations, operations expenditure summary, $2,043,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Agreed. Thank you. Next, under Municipal and Community Affairs, directorate, operations expenditure summary, $3,765,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Agreed. Thank you. Next, we have Municipal and Community Affairs, public safety, operations expenditures summary, $2,132,000. Does committee agree?
