Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the Member is absolutely correct. We have a lot of good people whowork over at the department. I think, as far as the funding goes, they obviously feel they are able to do the job with the resources that they have. If they needed to seek more resources, then they would go to FMB. I think they will continue to do the work with the resources they have.
ENR has been very good at, as we get into the information items later, getting a lot of external funding as well. In fact, I think we have brought on one person to do the work going after external funding. We have been very successful. I think we have almost $6.7 million in external funding from those that like to fund research projects; so we have been successful in that.
As far as the mandate items, we do not have that information at our fingertips, and I apologize for that in advance. I will work with our deputy and our officials to make sure we get that information and share it with the Members, but my apologies for that. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I did the homework for the Minister over the lunch hour. Out of the 27 commitments when you look at the mandate tracker on the executive website, only one has been completed; one out of 27 items. This is a department that cannot get the job done. They are behind in legislation, important wildlife planning, climate change initiatives. I am sorry to say this, but the department is way behind on everything, and it is because of the cuts that continue to be made to this department.
Last year, and again this year, there are cuts of $371,000 to the corporate management function. You have lost four positions in communications, policy, and legislation. That is why things are not getting done.
Legislation is behind schedule. We are behind schedule in terms of getting caribou recovery strategies together. Our climate change work is lagging. It is because the department does not have the capacity to get the work done, and I think there are probably even more cuts coming.
I guess I would like to hear from the Minister how he is going to work to try to get this department back on track again. Can he go to his colleague, the Minister of Finance, to get more money to get the job done? Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister McLeod.
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, I could sit here all day and disagree with the Member, and he will disagree with everything I say, but I totally disagree with him, and I take offence to the fact that he says that this department cannot get the work done. That, to me, is not thinking very highly of the capacity of the people that we have there. They obviously feel that they are able to get the work done.
He has mentioned a couple of things, and I appreciate him doing my homework for me. I thank him for that, but the work on the Climate Change Strategic Framework, we are nearing completion on that work, and some things have changed that had us have to go back and look at the work we have done. We have to align it with a couple of the other strategies that are out.
I would be happy to share that information with the Member. I don't think I have briefed him on it yet, but there are some changes that have been made that have had us go back and look at the work that we are doing. It is unfortunate, because our folks put a lot of work into the Climate Change Strategic Framework based on the numbers that we were given. Some things have changed, and I need to have a conversation with the Member about that.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. Yes, I don't want to turn this into a big debate. I started off my remarks complimenting the hard-working staff in this department; there are just not enough of them to get the job done. That is my point here. I haven't really received much to make me any more confident that anything is going to change in 2018-2019 with this department. Look, I support the work that they are trying to do. They just don't have enough money to get it done.
I don't have any further questions for the Minister on this part, other than to try to encourage him to get his department more resources to actually get the job done, and please stop the cuts to the department. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I was reflecting on the business plan review that the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Environment conducted of the department's business plans, and subsequently, that has fed into this budget review process. One thing that was very clear is that the department is significantly delayed in pursuing its legislative agenda. They are not alone in this. We have not seen a considerable amount of legislation.
Now, I, for one, think that the government, when it is proposing reductions or changes the budget, they are considered in those reductions. I don't always support them, but I believe them when they say we are going to make cuts, and they are not going to affect operations. However, time and time again we have seen this department emerge with business plans that have not been accomplishing a whole lot, and again, we hear that reductions in the appropriations are not the cause of that.
What is the hold-up, in particular with the devolution legislation? This is a long time coming that we have needed this legislation, and we have not made significant progress on it, not at all. What is the department's legislative timelines for its legislative agenda moving forward? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Minister McLeod.
Yes, thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, we have a number of pieces of legislation that are coming forward. I think we have amendments to four pieces of existing legislation, and we have one new legislation. We have done a lot of work on these. I think work is proceeding towards the goal of having all five pieces of legislation coming into force on July 1, 2019.
I think I have made a commitment in previous discussions with committee on updating them, and I think we had one update. We are looking at doing all of the amendments, and the LPs are approved. I know five pieces of legislation is a lot to pile on committee in the last two years of the Assembly. We are all going to be busy for the next two years. We do plan on having these legislations coming into force of July 1, 2019. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think that is good work, and I look forward to doing it. I just hope that we don't see any further delays with these important pieces of legislation. They are important for the development of the territorial economy, and also in ensuring that we are protecting our environment and managing our environmental liabilities.
The climate change audit that was done by the Auditor General of Canada, who is also the Auditor General of Record for the Northwest Territories, was quite critical of the department's leadership role in climate change as the lead department in government. I think it is appropriate to raise those concerns in this corporate management area.
I know that there is a Climate Change Strategic Framework that the department has developed, but one thing that that document does not contain, and one thing that the department did not commit to, or did not address in the audit review, was how its working relationship with other departments of government. How does the department plan to address its working relationship with all departments of government, in particular on climate change? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Yes, go ahead, Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, we are working closely with the other departments on our Climate Change Strategic Framework. We want to make sure that all these strategies we are set to release are coordinated, so we work closely with them.
On the leadership, I mean, the Auditor General I think admitted themselves that some of the things that they looked at were done before they realized some of the work that we were doing. Good on them for admitting that.
We're looking at developing a GNWT direct level coordination leadership group. We're also looking at forming a climate change council with GNWT, an external membership, to inform on implementation and then receive input from Indigenous governments and organization, industry, communities, NGOs, and the public. It's a similar approach that was taken in the Water Strategy. We do coordinate with the other departments and make sure that we're all singing from the same song sheet and trying to achieve the same goal and make sure that the work that we are doing is coordinated. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Testart.
Is the department considering any memoranda of understanding with other GNWT departments in order to create the authority it needs to form a leadership role over climate change activities in this government? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Minister McLeod.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, we don't have MOUs with other departments. We have a very coordinated approach. There is a committee that is set up, direct level committee, I believe. It would be different if you were working with external stakeholders like Aboriginal governments, where you do sometimes enter into MOUs, but within the government itself, between departments, I'm not sure if it's common practice to have MOUs between departments. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The department has had its strategies and frameworks implemented before, such as the greenhouse gas emissions strategy, which is one of the areas the Auditor General addressed, and that was one of the big issues. The framework was in place. There was buy-in across government, but nothing actually happened at the end of the day. I know that in some cases around information sharing, MOUs are entered into between GNWT departments. Is this an approach that the Minister will consider moving forward? It is something that the Auditor General recognized that was lacking, the authorities in place. A strategy or framework is not an authority that gives the department the real ability to take position in that leadership role. Is this something that the Minister will look at? I'm happy to work with him on this. The standing committee, I'm sure, will be happy to address this. It is something the Auditor General has repeatedly mentioned, and it is still unaddressed. Is this an area the Minister can commit to looking into? Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Minister McLeod?
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, the simple answer to the Member's question is: I will go back and we'll explore it, and have a conversation, and see if it's something that we need to do, or if just a coordinated approach will work. Again, once we gather some information, if it's the wish of committee, we'd be more than happy to update them. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister McLeod. There's time for one more question. Mr. Testart?
Thank you for your indulgence, Mr. Chair, and also for the Minister indulging this line of questioning, which is very much a policy area. It is important to remember that, although he is in the chair right now, he is not always in the chair. It's the officials' level that does a lot of this work, and that's why instruments like MOUs are valuable, because it's not always Cabinet that makes these decisions. I have no further questions on this activity. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Testart. Any further questions? Mr. Nakimayak.
Back on page 74 as well, too, I see country foods has $100,000. Could the department give an update on the strategy, on the framework for that? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Nakimayak. Minister McLeod. Dr. Dragon.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. The country foods strategy and program development, we are currently working with communities to support on-the-land activities related to hunting, trapping, fishing, hunting, and gathering. We propose to develop a program consisting of the development of a sustainable, collaborative country foods programming that supports communities along with a community driven pilot initiatives to build capacity to deliver locally appropriate programs, and finally to develop a collaborative research and monitoring initiative related to characterization, stewardship, management, and sustainability of country food systems. What we're looking at doing is having 11 regional engagement sessions with a number of Indigenous governments. After that process, we will develop a "what we heard" document as a basis for drafting the strategy and further public engagement. We're expecting the strategy to be complete by March 2019. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Dr. Dragon. Mr. Nakimayak.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. That's actually really good to hear. I think, as we move forward with our budgets, we look at conservation. Mr. Chair, I believe that the harvesters and the people who are out on the land are the best conservationists, period. I think those are the people we need to engage with, furthermore, and actually learn from them, build Indigenous traditional knowledge, and have them collaborate. Also, I'm just wondering, more of a comment: I think it's about time that government, it's not just the territory but all across Canada, look at the lead the Northwest Territories for joint committees to conserve, manage, and take authority for the caribou, for all the land-bearing species, and all the mammals that, I guess, are living resources, is how we call it. I just want to know what the department has to say on traditional knowledge as well, too, while we're on this page. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Nakimayak. Minister McLeod. Dr. Dragon.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. One of the initiatives that we've been really looking at and focusing our attention on lately has been the guardianship programs, where we're out with Indigenous governments and looking at having local community members. Not only have we encouraged this with our Water Strategy, where we've had local water monitors who have been out. We're looking at further capacity of doing those types of programs across the Northwest Territories. The comment regarding traditional knowledge, I believe we're doing a real focus of that in the department. We've recently changed the science agenda to the knowledge agenda, which incorporates the use of traditional knowledge. I see this as a huge opportunity that we need to continue, although I know that, at different times as we go across in different regions, having the conversations with community people, is we find that they want to participate. It's finding in the right time and the right opportunity for them to participate in activities. In certain cases, here in the North Slave region, we'll have community members who will actually go on patrols and provide that type of guidance and learning opportunities for our officers. That's worked really, really well.
Overall, I think, again, as we look at the Climate Change Strategic Framework, a big part of that is traditional knowledge and how we incorporate that. I see that as being a big focus of where we're going in the department. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Dr. Dragon. Mr. Nakimayak.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I appreciate the response. I know sometimes traditional knowledge or Indigenous knowledge is easy to promote and work with here in Canada. It's outside that other countries don't really see so much the value, but I appreciate the department for putting topics like this and lines like this in the budget. I think we need to continue to work with this for it to grow and integrate as we learn together. That's all I have to say. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Nakimayak. Any further questions? Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm going to ask in this area under corporate management. It's relative to, I guess, knowledge agenda. We do identify it in the Environment activity, but it's more of a line item that relates to funding to support the Carbon Flex Monitoring Network. I've come to, as we all have, understand that the Knowledge Agenda is going to be led by this department. It's a mix of a bunch of things. The honourable Member from Nunakput just spoke a little bit on some of what traditional knowledge means and how that relates to the Knowledge Agenda. We've questioned the Department of Lands and ITI about the knowledge economy. We speak strongly as a government about wanting to support our own made-in-the-North innovation and technology.
I'm just wondering if the Minister or the department can give some explanation around what the real understanding is of our government in trying to create a vision, I suppose, for what it is that we envision as the Knowledge Agenda; and as the lead department, what undertakings or initiatives are we going to take to start to create a clear vision so people can understand where in fact it is that we're going in this new realm that we're undertaking. We heard from other departments that, you know, in all fairness, they're struggling to kind of understand where it is that we're going to go and that we've got a lot of work to do in this, but this is the department that's being tasked with the lead on this. If we can get some insight from the Minister with regard to what he envisions that we're actually going to do to promote this agenda and this important mandate item, that would be appreciated. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Dr. Joe Dragon.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. With the Knowledge Agenda, as I mentioned earlier, I'm taking it from a science to a Knowledge Agenda. What we've really tried to do there is encourage the use of traditional knowledge.
In the scientific community, and one that went through the science of going to university, traditional knowledge is not in their experiments. It's not in their theory as they go through school and as you get a doctorate and you're studying. I think one of the things that we need to do is try to ask: how do we incorporate that traditional knowledge at the front-end versus the back-end of the conversation?
Recently, what I did was I invited the president of the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council, the acronym is SSHRC, and that deals with social sciences, and brought him up with the opportunity to see of how we're going to try to incorporate more traditional knowledge in the science and letting him be aware that when these granting councils are giving millions and millions in dollars to researchers to come up in the North, what are some priorities of the North?
We had a really good visit in November. The President of the NSERC, the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada, whose name is Dr. Pinto, is going to be arriving in the end of March. That's on the applied sciences. What we're trying to do is bring those two granting councils, that give away millions of dollars to researchers, to align that to a conversation of how we do things in the North and ensuring that we have traditional knowledge. That's one of the first questions. As well, making sure that their engagement with Indigenous groups and different regions across the North is doing research that they want to do.
That's really where I see the Knowledge Agenda going. I see it as an opportunity for us to actually make a difference in this conversation, but again, I see it as a challenge. I don't see it as something that's going to happen overnight because we have researchers who come up into the North from a real, varied number of university institutions, but they've been doing their research in a certain way. With the Knowledge Agenda, we're looking at trying to change that way of thinking and making sure that traditional knowledge and local knowledge is included in that type of research. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Dr. Dragon. Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for some of the additional detail. It sounds like those are great undertakings and great initiatives to start rolling out work on the Knowledge Agenda.
It almost seems like it's also a little bit ahead of itself in terms of we're still trying to understand as a government, and I guess the public is trying to understand: what is our vision? Is the department going to work on any framework of any kind that's going to really outline what it is that our government's doing in promoting the Knowledge Agenda? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Dr. Dragon.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yes, if we look at a vision, one of the things that I think what we have to look at is four pillars. The management of information, I think, is paramount. We'd look at building a repository so that we have these information sources from traditional, local, and scientific knowledge that we can refer to as we retain all this information.
We also have to look at our natural environment. Looking at the availability of information on weather, on permafrost, on aquatic ecosystems, forest and tundra and systems, all our species at risk, as well as our country food sources.
The third pillar would be looking at human health, public safety, culture, and heritage. They're looking at how we look at mapping vulnerable communities and seeing whether or not those have areas that we need to look in.
Finally, we would look at the goal of infrastructure and looking at how we obtain accurate climate data and information from the different areas. How do we make sure that it's based on the infrastructure design and look at climate projections, whether or not we can include that? Now that's more on the climate change side, but those give you kind of the pillars and the vision of what we're looking at in terms of the overall Knowledge Agenda. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Dr. Dragon. Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'm just on my last point. You know, it sounds like we have some initiatives in the works. I appreciate the insight on the four pillars. I'm very excited to, already excited, believe it or not, to see what's going to come forward from the department in the next year's business plans, because I'd really like to see some advancement in this area.
If I could almost suggest a fifth pillar, it would be an economic development component. There's a lot of opportunity out there to build around centres of excellence and northern design and innovation incubators. Arctic Inspiration Prize is always looking for new initiatives and projects to fund. We want to take advantage of those kinds of organizations and develop this knowledge economy and prove to the world that we have resources that are available for sale as it relates to information technology. We are not just a resource-driven jurisdiction. I guess, Mr. Chair, that is all I have in this activity. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. Any further questions on this activity? If not, we will go back to page 73 and call this summary. Environment and Natural Resources, corporate management, operations expenditure summary, $13,928,000. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Agreed. Thank you. We shall move on to page 78, starting on 78 and ending on 81. Questions to this activity? Mr. Beaulieu.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I have a question for the contaminated site remediation section. I notice the budget here of $319,000. I am wondering: how come there is so little money in that budget when there are so many sites? I recognize that the sites are split between the federal government and the GNWT at the time that the devolution agreement was signed, but I just can't imagine what you can do with that much money, or that little money, I should say, maybe. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Ms. Craig.
