Thank you, Mr. Chair. The public would receive notice under section 28(4), and municipal or local governments would be able to access notice. Furthermore, we believe the positive obligation to circulate. That's it. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Although community governments could obtain the information from the public registry, are there any legal impediments or particular reasons why municipal governments couldn't be given notice of request or record a claim within their boundaries? Are there any legal impediments to that happening? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
We leave positive obligation to circulation notices to Indigenous governments with territory overlapping the claim application area. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Were there any discussions that the department had with community governments or NWTAC about how to avoid land use conflicts from happening in the future such as providing notice to community governments of claims staking within their boundary? Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Not during public engagement, there was not any discussion on that or brought forward. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. That's great. I'm glad to hear that the Minister's department didn't actually hear any concerns about that one when they were preparing to work on the bill. This committee did hear that. We have raised that. Here is another policy issue that was live, raised to the committee, about how they would like to know what's going on within their boundaries. This is consistent with having good neighbour relationships, all that sort of thing that the Minister talked about in his opening remarks, but there's no provision in the bill.
Mr. Chairman, I'd like to move into the motion if I may.
I move that subclause 28(5) of Bill 34 be amended:
(a) in that portion, preceding paragraph by adding: or if applicable to a municipality, after Indigenous government or organization; and
(b) in paragraph (a) by adding, or is within or overlaps within the land of that municipality after Indigenous government or organization.
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. There is a motion on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. O'Reilly.
Mr. Chair, we heard from the Minister that there was no policy rationale for excluding or not including municipal governments because they didn't actually hear that concern. I said earlier that committee certainly did hear this issue in its review of the bill. As I said, this is about avoiding land use conflicts, about ensuring that there's good working relationships moving forward, and this does not take away from Indigenous governments in any way, but I think it recognizes that municipal governments have significant investment in infrastructure within their boundaries, and want to know what's going on in their areas of jurisdiction; and without having to go and check a public registry day after day, here's an opportunity for us to provide that information to municipal government on an ongoing basis. I think this is a reasonable request to a policy concern, an issue that was raised with us, and I look forward to the Minister and Cabinet supporting this because I know that they believe in our community governments. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. To the motion.
Question.
All those in favour, please rise.
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, the Member for Sahtu.
All those abstaining, please rise.
The Member for Yellowknife Centre.
The results of the recorded vote are: four in favour,11 opposed, one abstention. The motion is defeated.
---Defeated
Clause 28 as amended.
Agreed.
---Clauses 29 through 41 inclusive, approved
Clause 42. Minister Abernethy.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that paragraph 42(5)(a) of Bill 34 be amended by striking out the "settlement lands" and substituting "a settlement area."
Thank you. There is a motion on the floor. It is being distributed. The motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.
---Carried
Clause 42 as amended. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I move that subclause 42(5) of Bill 34 be amended:
(a) in that portion preceding paragraph (a), by adding "or, if applicable, to a municipality" after "Indigenous government or organization"; and
(b) in paragraph (a), by adding "or is within or overlaps with the land of that municipality" after "Indigenous governments or organization."
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. There is a motion on the floor. The motion is order. To the motion. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is about this new provision within the act whereby the Minister is going to require notice of intended work so that there is some understanding of what mining companies get up to when they are out there on the land. I think that this is a good thing, and I am pleased to see that, in the spirit of reconciliation, this notice of intended work is going to be provided to Indigenous governments. I support that. The purpose of this amendment, though, is to include municipal governments in that provision for notice so that we can avoid land use conflicts, but they can understand what is going on within their boundaries.
Some of those municipal governments are actually First Nation governments, as I have said before in this House: Lutselk'e, Wrigley, Sambaa K'e, Tsiigehtchic. This is about ensuring that even those Indigenous governments know what is going on within their boundaries. Of course, they are going to get this notice here, but I think that we should be treating all of our municipal governments with the same kind of process so that they can know what is going on in their backyards.
I look forward to Cabinet supporting this motion so that we support our community governments in understanding what is going on within their boundaries. I would say that we actually did incorporate this kind of notice provision in the Public Land Act that we dealt with the other day where now municipal governments will receive notice of land dispositions within their boundaries on the surface.
Let's do it for the subsurface. That's what this is about here. Cabinet has already agreed to do it on the surface lands in the Public Land Act. The Minister of Lands agreed to incorporate it into the bill. It passed in this House. Let's do it now for subsurface dispositions, make sure that we work with our community governments, adopt a consistent approach, and provide them with the kind of information that they need to manage the lands and carry out their duties.
For consistency's sake in supporting our communities, I really am going to appreciate the support from my Cabinet colleagues on this motion. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I request a recorded vote.
The Member has requested a recorded vote. To the motion. Mr. Blake.
Just real briefly, I keep referencing Tsiigehtchic, but actually, the way that the charter community is made up, they have the band that is in charge of the charter community, municipality, but once we signed our land claims, basically, a lot of our lands went over to the land claim group.
The designated Gwich'in organization, along with the Gwich'in, actually look after all of the surrounding lands, the Gwich'in lands. That is the responsibility of the RRC. If the charter community wants to expand their lands or protect any lands outside of the municipality, then they need to consult with the RRCs and the Gwich'in and Gwich'in Land and Water Board. There is a huge process, especially in communities like Aklavik where we have Gwich'in and Inuvialuit lands. It is really complicated in this area.
In instances like this, we have to have respect for the land claim groups. Municipalities just have to work with them. It is not as easy as saying that the charter community could just make decisions, because in Tsiigehtchic, for example, there is more than one organization there. I just wanted to explain that. Thank you.
Thank you. To the motion. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think that the last speaker was very apt. This is a complicated set of governance in the Northwest Territories. It gets even more complicated when you bring in designated authorities, but I think that the point here is to achieve the consistency that was obtained with the lands act.
I think that land is as significant a management issue as subsurface rights, and to think that we would have municipalities informed of land transfers, but not informed of intended work, really doesn't give them the tools that they need to understand what is going around them. The community that I represent is a rather large one and has a very effective local government. Really, I see no reason why we can't afford them the same notice provisions that we have already built into another territorial statute.
I think it is important that we show that kind of respect for our municipalities, because local governance in the Northwest Territories is at the core of what we do here. In a vast territory that is geographically separate, we have to give our local governments as many tools as they can to be effective in meeting the needs of their residents.
I strongly support this motion, notwithstanding the complexities here. If this was alien or a foreign concept, then perhaps I would have objections, but this is something that already exists in statute, and I think that we should be as consistent in possible in our regulatory framework moving forward. This does exactly that. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
To the motion. Mr. Nakimayak.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. In my region, in the four communities that I represent, there is the municipal government, and as well, there are the community corporations, which deal with benefits agreements. The municipalities would likely be in the administrative part of this where they would be involved with training and possibly employment, so there would be a conflict of interest for sure at some point or another, and I think that this is an example of that.
I think that, with all due respect to municipalities, we are a part of municipalities as well, too, and they are fully aware of what happens in their region. All of the research applications and any type of work that goes through to the communities goes through the municipality first to approve and also give the regulations to the mining or whatever it may be, research, for that matter. The municipalities are very well-aware, and I think that we are kind of confusing things and creating a conflict of interest for local and Indigenous governments. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
To the motion. Mr. Thompson.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I represent six communities in Nahendeh. Four of them are designated authorities, one is a hamlet, and one is village. I think that each community should be treated the same and equal. In four of those communities that are designated authorities are Indigenous governments. We are dealing with land issues all of the time and people looking to explore around the area. It's a complicated issue, and I agree, but across the territory is very complicated. I have to be respectful of the IRC, the Gwich'in, the Sahtu. However, they also have to be respectful of the Dehcho and the Akaitcho.
This is why I think that this needs to be in the act. We need to be consistent. When we build capacity in some of these communities, when you have two different ways of looking at two different acts, it confuses them and confuses us. We are not able to move forward. I think that we need to be consistent. The government needs to be consistent. This is way I believe that this motion is important and needs to be passed. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. To the motion.
Question.
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, the Member for Sahtu.
