Thanks, Mr. Chair. In the Minister's opening remarks, and it is found in the budget address as well, there is $440,000 of new funding for conservation area planning. Is any of that for Thaidene Nene? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, it is. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. Can the Minister tell us how much is for Thaidene Nene? This is going to be the biggest park that our government has ever established. National parks of a similar scale cost millions of dollars annually to manage. What portion of the $440,000 is anticipated for Thaidene Nene, and is it enough? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, my understanding is that the $290,000 is increased funding to the funding that is already there. As far as the funding that is already there, I don't have that information at my fingertips, but I will undertake to gather that information and share it with committee. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. $290,000. I don't know what the square kilometres for our portion of that network of area are, but that does not sound like a lot of money to start coordinated management planning and so on. I know Parks Canada spends significantly more for similar areas or national parks in the NWT. I am just going to leave that with the Minister, but when can he provide committee with a costed plan moving forward for the management of the territorial portion of Thaidene Nene? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I will commit to provide committee with a briefing as we get closer and closer to the establishment of the park, and as well, we will have some numbers as to the cost to operate it. As we get closer to concluding our negotiations, I will keep committee informed and then provide them with a briefing before we finalize it. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.
Yes, thanks, Mr. Chair. Yes, I appreciate that, and I want to encourage the Minister to have a costed cash flow moving forward for our contribution toward the management of this area. I don't think $290,000 is going to cut it, but I am happy to see what he is going to come forward with.
I wonder, though, too: can the Minister tell us whether we have any staff who are being trained for the management of this new area? Are there secondments going on with Parks Canada? What are we doing to get ready to assume management responsibility for this new area? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, first I will just speak to the funding of the $290,000. I said before it was to increase the funding for monitoring of the Canada protected areas, and $290,000 was specifically earmarked for Thaidene Nene, and that was to conclude the planning and decision-making.
Again, as we get close to finalizing it, we have been working on some preliminary numbers as to what it might cost us. I will finalize those numbers. I will share them with committee. As far as billing or capacity, we will work with ITI and see what is needed to enhance our capacity to monitor and look after the park. We will be putting that information together, and I will be glad to sit down with committee and share that as we get closer to finalizing it. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. It looks like there is going to have to be a supplementary appropriation for this. I probably don't need to impress upon the Minister or his staff the significance of taking on a large area like this and managing it properly as a protected area equivalent to a national park. That does require a significant investment of funds from our government.
There are also significant benefits that are going to come, and I look forward to having more of a discussion with him moving forward, but if we are going to really take this on, we have to do it right. We have to find the money to do it, and it has to be a serious commitment. There will be benefits for people in Yellowknife, and for Lutselk'e on the other side of the lake as well, but I just don't really get a sense that we are approaching this with the seriousness that it needs; but I'll stop there.
I want to move on to Cumulative Impact Monitoring Program. It looks like there are reductions of that in the order of $190,000, and that money is being shifted to corporate management, which I think is the next item, for legislative proposals, and some money is being taken out for another activity that I just cannot remember off the top of my head. Why is there money being shifted out of the Cumulative Impact Monitoring Program? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Dr. Dragon.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. What we looked at doing there was an internal transfer to corporate management. This would be to increase the capacity to support the overall department's programs in that area. Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chairman. Yes, that's what I was worried about. Look, the Cumulative Impact Monitoring Program is established under federal legislation, the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act. It's part 6. It's the audit function and state of the environment function for the MVRMA. If there is money to be taken out to support legislative initiatives, where is the legislation to actually set up the Cumulative Impact Monitoring Program to a greater extent than what is already in Part 6 of the MVRMA?
If we're using this as a pot to shuffle off money for other departmental activities, in my view, that's wrong. This Cumulative Impact Monitoring Program, we got money out of the federal government as part of devolution to carry out this responsibility and implement it. If we're now using that money to fund other work internally that ENR should have been doing or that FMB should be coming up with more money, that's just not right.
Again, why are we taking money out of the Cumulative Impact Monitoring Program, which is set up under Part 6 of the MVRMA, to do audit and state of the environment reporting to support other internal activities of the department? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, before I hand it off to Dr. Dragon, the Member's first comment before, and I failed to reply to it, on the Thaidene Nene. Obviously, our desire is to do this right, and we're going to make sure we do it right. The federal government is going to make some investments, so we'll have the resources to make sure we have the ability and the capacity to monitor this part.
As far as shuffling money off, we don't do that. We don't shuffle money off, but I'll get Dr. Dragon to respond to why the money was being moved from CIMP over. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Dr. Dragon.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In looking at efficiencies within this area, we had a person who could provide those services to the department and we thought it best that we were able to put that person in the position to provide that service for all the departments. With the Lands lawyer, we look at on oversight role for departments and services. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Dr. Dragon. The time has expired. However, no one else is on the list. I'll open it up to a second round of comments. First, I have Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to clarify some of the issues raised by my honourable friend, the Member from Frame Lake, on this Cumulative Impact Monitoring Program. Although there is a decrease indicated on page 69, if you turn to page 70, it would appear that the contribution to the Cumulative Impact Monitoring Program is actually increasing by just under $300,000, and conservation planning is likewise increased. Could the Minister just speak to the issue of the program detail decreasing but the overall contribution increasing? Thank you.
Thank you. Ms. Craig.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Within the Cumulative Impact Monitoring Program, we've had some vacancies, so we had a bit of salary surplus which is being transferred to corporate management temporarily. Indeed, the Member is correct in that the grants and contributions have increased. They historically have been oversubscribed, so we moved some money from operations and maintenance into grants and contributions so that that money would be available to go out to the recipients. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Ms. Craig. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for the clarification. What is this? The money in the grant, what is it used for by grant recipients? I'm just wondering if we can get just a brief summary of where this money goes and how it benefits the public policy objective of conservation efforts by this government. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Minister McLeod
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, we have a comprehensive list here. There is a number of items where it lists where the money goes. What I can commit to doing is getting a copy of this list to Members. That way, they'll have a fairly good idea as to where the money goes. It's a fairly long list, but we're looking at fish and water and caribou. It's pretty well where the money is going. There is a number of items on here. If committee wishes, I can provide the list. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Testart.
Might as well. If the Minister can provide that list, that would be helpful. Thank you.
Minister McLeod
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, if the list won't do, then I can sit here and read it out and take up some of committee's time.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Testart.
My apologies if there's any confusion, Mr. Chair. I think the list is acceptable to me. I'm not sure about the other committee Members. They may have questions for the Minister, but I think being clear about where this money is going, but look, I think one of the best ways we can use these conservation funds is to get them in the hands of people who are doing that work. It seems like the government is doing that, and I appreciate that, notwithstanding concerns about the overall management of the Cumulative Impact Monitoring Program, but it does look like there's more money getting out to do conservation efforts and that is something I support. Again, I'll thank our witnesses today for clarifying the discrepancy between the program's details and the contributions. With that, nothing further. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Mr. Nakimayak.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm on page 70 on conservation planning. I'd just like to wonder, Mr. Chair, the Inuvik to Tuktoyaktuk highway opened recently and in this summer I'm sure there's going to be some sort of an impact on the fishing along the highway, as well as Husky Lakes. I'm just wondering if the Minister and his colleagues can update us on any talks with fisheries, joint management with the Inuvialuit, the land administration, or the federal government, any types of conservation along the highway and Husky Lakes. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Nakimayak. Dr. Dragon.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, we've been well aware of that in the department on the impact that the new highway would have on resources. We've been working with both the Inuvialuit and the Gwich’in and talking about our enforcement in those areas. In addition, we've also had conversations with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans on how we could increase enforcement pressures as of the result on more visitors to that area. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Dr. Dragon. Mr. Nakimayak.
I appreciate the response, Mr. Chair. That's all I have for this section. Thank you.
Thank you. Any further questions on this activity? Seeing none, we will go to page 69 and read conservation, assessments and monitoring, operations expenditures summary, $7,926,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Agreed. Okay, we shall move on to the next activity, corporate management, beginning on page 73. Please, Members, refer to which page you're directing your questions to. Questions? Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. Since the decision was made to dispense with opening comments, I have a few opening comments on this particular activity item because this is sort of the corporate heart of the department and where policy, planning, legislation, communications, and so on, take place.
First off, I want to recognize that there are lots of great staff within the department, very hardworking, and many that I worked with before I became an MLA. I know that they continue to do a great job, but the problem is they don't get the resources that are necessary to do the job the way that it should be done.
This is only one of three departments that is getting cut in the 2018-2019 budget. The reductions are over $3 million, and most are being reallocated internally for other initiatives, the sort of switching that I talked about earlier.
You can see this on page 73. Look at the compensation and benefits over time. From 2016-2017 to where we are now, that is a 14 per cent reduction in compensation and benefits within the department. This is a department that is bleeding, and they cannot get the job done.
Now, to prove that, I want to ask the Minister: there are 27 mandate commitments that this department has. How many of those have actually been completed? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister McLeod.
