Thank you. To the motion. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I agree with the intent of this motion, and this is not a hypothetical situation where there is a problem with the interaction between the challenges of rights issuances within municipal boundaries. This is a live issue. It has happened in Inuvik, and the committee was told about it in Inuvik. During the clause-by-clause, there wasn't support from the sponsoring Minister to resolve this issue the way that the committee thought would be a reasonable way to address it.
That being said, I think that there is a lot of merit to this, and the motion does more or less speak to itself, but what we have heard so far is that the concern is, when you are dealing with Indigenous governments and Indigenous organizations, that they have inherent rights that are protected by the charter and rights over lands and resources. Those rights need to be addressed in legislation and by government policy.
I don't disagree. That's really not a question; that's the reality. It is good that the legislation governs that, but when it comes to municipalities, they have the rights that we give them as a territorial government. They are creatures of statute, and if we change the statute to reflect a different role for them, especially in regards to solving this problem, it is not removing rights from someone else or an inappropriate issuance of rights. It is what we have decided is appropriate to strengthen local governance in the Northwest Territories.
Our Ministers are very, very proud of their times served in the bear pit over the years. All of our MACA Ministers talk about that, but we have to do more than just take their concerns. We actually have to address these fundamental issues of local governance when we have the opportunity to do so. I think that that is what the committee tried to do.
I already know that, most likely, the response to this motion will be that they will do the workarounds as best as possible, but sometimes these require going to court, which adds additional costs to both industry and municipalities, and when it comes to municipalities, it is taxpayers who foot that bill at the end of the day. If we can find any way to resolve that through legislation and through reasonable applications of things like restricted areas, I think that it is something that we ought to be doing.
Again, these are creatures of statute. By granting them additional powers to request things like a restricted area, it's not taking away rights from Indigenous governments, and it's not impinging on the rights of Indigenous governments. It's creating new authorities for municipalities to better exercise control over their boundaries and to preserve vital public infrastructure for public purposes.
I really hope we don't see another response like that and that we can change the government's perspective on these issues and start actually giving meaningful changes to our municipal partners. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.
---Carried
Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that this committee recommends that the Government of the Northwest Territories appoint an independent panel to undertake a review of the system for charging royalties to mining, petroleum, and natural gas companies operating in the Northwest Territories, and further, this review should include a comparison of the Northwest Territories system with that used in other jurisdictions and should make recommendations on system improvement while providing opportunities for public input. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will let other Members elaborate a little bit more on this, but generally, the genesis of where this motion comes from is recognizing that, while this particular bill didn't undertake any detailed specifics as it relates to royalties, there was a sense out there from folks who partook that they wanted to see some degree of a review on royalties and, also, as it relates to other mining financial or fiscal aspects.
I think that we recognized that the department is willing to undertake a two-part review of the financial or fiscal regime of mining and oil and gas and royalties in general and taxation in general. We commend them in that regard. This motion speaks to starting an independent panel that would be a part of undertaking that process. Of course, this would allow an opportunity for some public input. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. To the motion. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mines in the Northwest Territories or the minerals industry in the Northwest Territories pays a lot more than just royalties. Our fiscal regime is very unique in that we charge rents and other forms of revenue-generating fees to active mines that produce revenue that is used for public purposes outside of that royalty regime. I think that what I learned, at least, and I won't speak too much for committee here, but this is a much larger issue than just royalties. It is how we deal with public benefits by raising revenues from the minerals industry across the board.
If we are going to address this, we need to address all aspects of the system, not just one approach. This is, I think, a sound amendment, because it addresses that and asks that it be an independent review. It is not an in-house review that comes forward in the form of a document that is laid on the floor of the House, but it is actually an independent review that can give a fair assessment and a transparent assessment of the benefits of extractive natural resource industries in the Northwest Territories. I think that that would settle a lot of the questions that people have of the benefits of the minerals industry in particular, and the oil and gas industry as well. It needs to be undertaken, but we have to make sure that it is done right, and that it is done in a way that people aren't going to criticize because it was an in-house review that perhaps doesn't have the best terms attached to it. Clear terms of reference; independent panel; that's the way to go.
I think that we will get answers to a lot of the questions that have been raised. We will get the facts as to how much these industries contribute to our economy and contribute to our government. We can make those adjustments that a lot of people have been calling for over the years and ensure that we have a sound system. I think that there is, again, way too many moving parts here to just confine it to royalties. This process is going to greatly improve on how we manage our fiscal regime if it is done right and if it goes to an independent panel. Thank you.
Thank you. To the motion. Mr. Nakimayak.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don't agree with this motion. This takes away from the mining industry, working out those agreements that they have with Indigenous governments, and also with the GNWT. I think that this motion kind of undermines that and their working parts. They are doing things already to take care of this, and this seems like an expensive add to what is going on here. I think this takes away from the negotiating capabilities from Indigenous groups, the mining industry, and the government-to-government relationship that the GNWT has with industry and with Indigenous groups. It doesn't really make sense to me, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. To the motion. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. When ITI went out the first time to talk about the Mineral Resources Act, the idea of royalties was part of the scope of those original consultations. They said that they were going to conduct a review of the royalty regime. That was what was promised. We didn't get it. I think I understand why: because it is very complicated. That is what they promised, and they didn't delivery. It is part of the post-devolution promise of "We are going to devolve and then evolve."
Now that our government has taken over something as significant as mineral resources and how we manage those, I think we owe it to our citizens to look at the revenues that accrue to this government as a result of mineral extraction. That is what any reasonable jurisdiction would do. The federal government didn't really do a very good job of this. That is not going to change under this government, at least during the 18th Assembly.
Of course, this doesn't take away from Indigenous governments' rights, and so on, because they already have rights in their own agreements that enable and entitle them to be involved in any kind of review, and that that could be a separate, bi-lateral discussions, negotiations, and so on. I am sure that our government will do its best to respect that. In no way will this take away from the inherent rights of Indigenous governments.
Certainly, when the department talked about this initially, I said, "This is going to be very complicated." It is not just royalties. It is about taxation. It is about the property taxes that mining companies pay, and the general taxation area, as well. It is also about taxes that the workers pay, and that is usually the biggest amount of revenue that accrues to our government.
I understand that this is complicated, but that shouldn't prevent it from happening. That is what the public deserves.
I talked about the mixed role of this department in promoting mining and regulating it at the same time. There is an inherent conflict there. I don't think that this kind of review is something that should be handled internally by the department. That is why this recommendation has suggested that there should be some independent experts who can be brought to bear on this and give advice with public input. The review really does need to be conducted by an independent panel, not an internal review conducted by the department.
The last part of this of this motion is about making sure that there are opportunities for public input. That should include, of course, the mining industry itself who obviously has a stake in this, NGOs, the public, businesses, the business community. They should all have an ability to participate in this kind of review.
I think this is a sound recommendation. I will support it. I look forward to the 19th Assembly dealing with this matter, ensuring that it is independent and there is expert advice brought to bear on this and that there are opportunities for public to be engaged. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.
---Carried
Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that this committee recommends that the Government of the Northwest Territories assess, develop, and adopt a set of principles, tools, and indicators to drive performance and ensure greater transparency and accountability, such as those contained in the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), or the 'Towards Sustainable Mining' (TSM) commitment of the Mining Association of Canada. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. There is a motion on the floor. It is in order. To the motion. Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Some of this was touched on just in our last motion here. I won't elaborate too much. I think this goes to show that there is still a continued desire for public to understand exactly what contributions mining makes to the Northwest Territories in its various forms. There is this desire for more transparency in that regard. We see here in this recommendation and we are encouraging the government to use best practices. Some of the models that we do see are some of the ones that have been named in this recommendation.
Frankly, these are ones that the mining industry generally supports. The Mining Association of Canada, a number of their members already undertake these initiatives on their own volition. We are simply asking our government to use what is considered to be some of the best practices with regards to models of reporting and apply them to the Northwest Territories. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. To the motion. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. I support this motion. I have made statements in the House already about Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and how I believe our government should adopt this as a number of other governments around the world have. I have made statements in the House about how some of the mining companies that operate here have already accepted this initiative and the kind of reporting that would be required.
The federal government already has in place something called the Extractive Sector Transparency Measures Act. The problem with that act is that it is based on self-reporting by companies. They have different reporting entities. They use different financial years. There seems to be some confusion between what constitutes a royalty versus a fee versus taxes. There is no quality assurance/quality control that I can detect in terms of the reporting that is done via the Natural Resources Canada website.
We had discussions with the department, the Minister about that. I think there is even some wording in the bill around this. This does not constitute a proper reporting transparency measure of the federal legislation. I think our citizens deserve to know how much royalty each mine pays. That is just a very simple fact. Yet, our government has refused to disclose this to our citizens.
This motion is an effort to try to move us a little bit more towards greater transparency and accountability. I support it. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. To the motion. Mr. Testart.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, I think that we have heard a commitment from the government that there is going to be this comprehensive financial review of everything that is at play with natural resources, including royalties, including transparency, including reporting.
I have great confidence that the 19th Assembly will be dealing with this issue. I view these recommendations as more of guidance to the next Assembly on what this committee's experience was and to take those lessons on in building that review and ensuring that it addresses the concerns that we have heard and the evidence that we have considered.
I do think these tools, again, which are indicated in the motion, have broad support from civil society, from industry, and from governments. I think they are a good way forward. I support this motion. I hope the future government will be reminded of our work and take that on as they conduct this public review in the future. Thank you.
Thank you. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.
---Carried
Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that this committee recommends that the Government of the Northwest Territories develop an implementation plan for the Mineral Resources Act that identifies short and longer-term objectives, such as the development of regulations, and which identifies how key stakeholders will be engaged; and further, that the Government of the Northwest Territories return to the appropriate standing committee in the 19th Legislative Assembly with a copy of the draft implementation plan for committee. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. There is a motion on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. Committee was made aware of how Quebec and Ontario, two major jurisdictions in Canada, carried out major reviews of their mining rights legislation. Ontario, the roll-out of that actually took about a decade to achieve. I know that we did have some discussions with the Minister and his staff around this. This is not going to happen quickly. There's a whole variety of regulations that need to be developed and some very serious policy discussions that need to take place with Indigenous governments, and hopefully the public and the industry.
The intent of this is to try to make sure that there is an implementation plan so that we can clearly communicate how long this is going to take, and establish some milestones, some indicators of progress and some accountability as this rolls out. That's the purpose of this motion, Mr. Chair, and I look forward to the Minister responding.
To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.
---Carried
Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that this committee recommends that the previously noted implementation plan identify how the regulatory gap related to the matter of removing drill core be resolved. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. There is a motion on the floor. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. Through this process, I think that we recognize that there, of course, is one of the most important aspects of mining and exploration is drill core, and that it can be a little bit challenging and costly at times to store and/or move drill core, but that its preservation is very important due to what it can provide for history and for future exploration opportunities.
We felt that there was certainly a need to be able to address those challenges that we have as it relates to making sure that we are safeguarding drill core, and making sure that it's going to have some opportunity in the future to be accessible to those who might have some interests in exploration or prospecting in the Northwest Territories, or even for mines. That's the basis of it, but I think others might want to talk around this as well. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. To the motion. Mr. O'Reilly.
Thanks, Mr. Chair. Anybody who has hiked around Yellowknife knows that you can stumble across drill cores out in the bush that have been left there. As my colleague from Yellowknife North mentioned, we want to ensure that the money they expensed, the effort that has gone into drilling and retrieving core and storing it, that geological knowledge is protected. In some cases, drill core, when it's left out in the open can present a safety issue, a public safety issue, when cores start to fall over and so on. Some of the core may have the potential to generate acid, leach metals, so that there can be some environmental issues around some of the cores that might be brought above ground. I'm happy to say that we did work with the Minister and the department to make a couple of changes to the bill so that abandonment is now subject to regulations at the Minister's discretion.
What we did discover is that drill core is not actually dealt with in any way through something like the Mackenzie Valley Land Use Regulations, Territorial Land Use Regulations. The thresholds and items covered in those regulations don't really cover drill core. This is a policy recommendation around making sure that we close up that regulatory gap in the other regulations that deal more generally with reclamation and restoration of lands so that we capture the geological knowledge to make sure that there is no safety or environmental issues in the future. I support this. Thanks, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.
---Carried
Mr. Vanthuyne.
Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that this committee recommends, to the extent it is possible before the dissolution of the 18th Assembly and for the public record, that the government provide a response to these recommendations, even of a preliminary nature, that committee may publicly disclose. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you. There is a motion on the floor. The motion is in order.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.
---Carried
Seeing nothing further, does committee agree this concludes our consideration of Committee Report 33-18(3)?
