Thank you, Mr. Chair. Because the new section 24 is the enabling authority and because 113(5) says that the sections of the mining regulations which have the prospecting permits are deemed to be regulations establishing zones, I would think that the enabling authority applies, and therefore the 15-year rule applies, and it's subject to a review and a renewal. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Remain in force until amended or repealed to the regulations. That's the case. The old system for zones which were again a tool of government to promote exploration. They all remain in perpetuity, but any zone requested by an Indigenous government will expire after 15 years. That seems inconsistent with how this clause works. In actual effect of an Indigenous government requested zone, it will operate for no longer than 15 years, and then can be renewed, but the ones that the government has created and is carrying over from the old regime, will last forever. That seems to be, perhaps, "unfair" wouldn't be the way to characterize it, but it seems to be inconsistent with section 24. What's the position of the Minister on that? Thank you.
Thank you. A minute left on the clock. Ms. Faryna.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am not sure if I understood the Member correctly, but if I did, that is not exactly what I said. I said that they would be subject to the 15-year rule, because that is the new enabling authority, and they are due to be established as zones as regulations under that enabling authority. Therefore, they would be subject to a renewal. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Forty seconds, Mr. Testart.
How does industry, then, build a new zone or create a new zone to enable prospecting permits once they expire after 15 years and the act comes into force? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Twenty seconds or less. Ms. Faryna.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. It would as it is set out in the act. There would be a review of the merits, and then it would be a renewal of justice in the same system as the enabling authority says. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. Testart, your time has expired. To clause 24 as amended. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I move that subclause 24.7 of Bill 34 be deleted and the following substituted:
(7) A zone may be established under subsection (2), and the regulations establishing a zone may set out requirements that the Minister considers appropriate on the Minister's own initiative or as recommended by the proposing Indigenous government or organizations after
(a) the Minister engages with the applicable Indigenous governments and organizations in respect of the requirements; and
(b) a reasonable opportunity has been provided by the Minister for the public to provide comments on the merits of the proposed zone.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. There is a motion on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I recognize that this is getting late. Committee tried to work with the Minister to propose a number of changes to this concept of zones to put in some checks, and I think that it is fair to say that most of those were incorporated other than what this motion proposes, which is to provide an opportunity for the public to comment on the creation of zones. That opportunity could actually include even industry, of course, because they are part of the public as well. Whether it is an Indigenous government or the Minister does this on his or her own accord, this would provide an opportunity for the public to comment on zones.
If we are going to go through the trouble of creating these zones, the Minister has already publicly said that part of the expectation is that this is going to encourage development, well, let people weigh in and express a view about that. That's what this is about, affording the public an opportunity to comment on the creation of zones. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Continue, Mr. O'Reilly.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I requested a recorded vote. Thank you.
Thank you. To the motion. Mr. Testart.
Thank you. We're in 2019, we have a very unique circumstances for governance in the Northwest Territories, and we have to continue on the path of reconciliation and respect Indigenous partners. That they have an inherent right to self-government and many of those self-governments have come forward.
In regards to Indigenous governments being involved in the creation of zones, I think that that is important, but at the end of the day, it is the Minister who approves the zone. The Minister is a representative of the public Government of the Northwest Territories for all of the people of the Northwest Territories, and that is his role.
To have an opportunity for the public to comment on the establishment of a zone, which, again, is the Minister's discretion, is not a mandatory decision that is made after an Indigenous government proposes a zone, so I don't think that this impacts the ability of the new special relationships that have been established through zones.
I think that this is important for scrutiny, transparency, and allowing everyone to weigh in, including industry, including civil society, and hold a public representative of government making decisions on behalf of the public government to have those decisions appropriately scrutinized and held to a level of transparency that the public expects in 2019 as well. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. To the motion. Mr. Nakimayak.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Like other motions, I think that this is getting into the weeds of some of these clauses, and I think that it is a disrespect to Indigenous governments. Sometimes I am listening to this, and I am hearing that this might be mistaken with the Public Land Act. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it definitely sounds that way.
For the sake of effectiveness and expediency, I think that we need to really get to the point of this, stay on point, and focus on what is here. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. To the motion. The mover has the right to last reply. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. My job is to actually get into the weeds. That is why I am here. I tried to correct the Minister on this; I'm not disrespecting Indigenous governments. This does not take away from Indigenous governments by any stretch of the imagination. Those rights are already protected in other provisions in the bill. This is about affording the public an opportunity to comment on the establishment of regulations that would establish zones. The Minister doesn't even have to listen to whatever the public says. I could say something about how that has played out in the context of this public consultation around this bill, but there is nothing in here that is disrespectful of Indigenous governments by any stretch of the imagination. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
The Member for Frame Lake, the Member for Yellowknife North, the Member for Kam Lake, the Member for Nahendeh.
All those opposed, please rise.
The Member for Deh Cho, the Member for Nunakput, the Member for Inuvik Boot Lake, the Member for Range Lake, the Member for Great Slave, the Member for Yellowknife South, the Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes, the Member for Hay River South, the Member for Thebacha, the Member for Mackenzie Delta, and the Member for Sahtu.
All those abstaining, please rise.
The Member for Yellowknife Centre.
The results of the recorded vote are: 4 in favour, 11 opposed, 1 abstention. The motion is defeated.
---Defeated
Committee, we are on clause 24 of probably altogether around 120 clauses. We are about a quarter of the way through this, and everyone is getting a little testy, I can tell. What we are going to do is we are going to take a break, and we are going to come back after people have a few minutes to calm down and maybe get some fresh air. We are in recess.
---SHORT RECESS
I will now call Committee of the Whole back to order. Committee, clause 24 as amended. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I move that subclause 24(13) of Bill 34 be deleted and the following substituted:
(13) If a zone is established under this section, any person seeking to apply for an instrument in that zone must apply in accordance with the regulations establishing that zone. If those regulations differ from the general regulations establishing this act and may not rely on the general regulations established under this act to apply for an instrument in that zone.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. There is a motion on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I know that is a mouthful. The drafting of this motion is to say that there are two sets of rules that apply, one inside a zone and one outside of a zone. The way this had been drafted, it looked like, to me, that there was the potential for two sets of rules to apply within a zone: the special rules established by the regulation setting up the zone and then the general regulations established under this act. That is what the purpose of this is. One set of rules, whether you are inside or outside of a zone. When you are inside, you live with the rules that are established by regulation to set up that zone. When you're outside, the general regulations apply, or conditions set out therein.
I think this provides some clarity. If you're inside a zone, one set of rules; you're outside, the other rules apply. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. To the motion. I will put the question to committee. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is defeated.
---Defeated.
Clause 24 as amended. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
---Clauses 25 through 27 inclusive, approved
Clause 28. Minister Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to move a motion that paragraph 28(5)(a) of Bill 34 be amended by striking out the "settlement lands" and substituting "a settlement area." Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Minister. There is a motion on the floor. The motion is in order. The motion has been distributed. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.
---Carried
Clause 28 as amended. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to know from the Minister if there are any provisions in section 28 that provide for a municipal government to receive notice of an application to record a claim, a mining claim? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
No. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Can the Minister tell us why municipal governments were not included in those that could receive notice? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. We see this motion as unnecessary as municipal or local governments are effectively already required to receive notice. All of the public would receive notice ---
Minister, there is no motion on the floor. The Member had a question in relation to the clause. There is no motion to discuss. Minister.
