I think it is extremely important that if the negotiators who are appointed do not work out with the actual people at the table in that particular claim or whatever that they have the option to ask for someone else who actually understands land claims and mandates and the implementation of a claim because many times we have these people who do not understand where we come from. You struggle with wording. You can have an "and" here and a "the" there, and it is entirely taken out of context sometimes, even in the implementation. The fellow sitting beside you understands where I am coming from.
When you are passionate about something and you are held up especially by lawyers who do not understand where a First Nation is coming from, it is a process that is unbelievable, disgusting, and not in good faith. I just want to make sure we as a government are going to move forward to ensure that the mandate is there in good faith to ensure that these claims and these implementation of claims are settled. The good example for me is always Salt River. They signed the claim in 2002. It is 18 years, and they have not come to an agreement and they are not recognized as a reserve within Canada. That is unbelievable. I am not going to ask any more questions, but you have to know where I am coming from. Thank you.
Thank you, Member for Thebacha. Madam Premier.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I already said that relationships were critical. I have to recognize that one negotiator at one table might seem like the worst person in the world, and the next table, they might be the best. I have seen that because I have had people come to me and say, "You need to fire So-and-so." Then I went and met with another Indigenous government, and they said, "That is the best person we ever had." What it tells me is: we need to have more than one negotiator and be willing to move them up. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Madam Premier. I will move to Member for Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Pursuant to Rule 82(1), no Member shall speak for more than 10 minutes at any one time in Committee of the Whole. I am seeking unanimous consent to amend it to five minutes for the purposes of the mandate discussion.
The Member for Yellowknife North is seeking unanimous consent to limit questions to each priority to five minutes. Do I have unanimous consent?
---Unanimous consent denied
We will resume, keep it at 10 minutes then. Member for Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Madam Chair. My question is: in self-government agreements, we have two agreements concluded. Can I just have a little more explanation of where that number came from? Do we have any idea of whether they are the self-government land claim or which two, just some more background on that point? Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Member for Yellowknife North. Madam Premier.
Thank you, Madam Chair. At this point, I am not willing to name them because they are not settled. It would be inappropriate for me to say, "These are going to be settled," and then I go into a meeting and I get slaughtered. It is like, "What do you mean?" We have a few that are fairly close, but they change day by day because one that we thought was close wanted to be off the table. I had to go and mend the relationship and say, "Come back." That same one is back on the table. It is impossible to say that. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Madam Premier. I will go to the Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I will make a quick statement about this. Out of all our 22 items, if I had to label a keystone item, this would be it. I think a lot hinges on this mandate item. I want to just make a quick comment about Oliver Edjericon, who is my great-grandfather, who signed a Treaty 8 in Deninu Kue in 1900. I often think what he would say if he was in here. I could imagine him saying, "What took you so bloody long?" I think in honour of our relations who signed that, I think we have to do it right and do it properly. To echo what my colleague from Thebacha said about having consultation, not just consultation but meaningful consultation, and get these meetings done right. My question: I am looking at page 8 again. It mentions that there is a special joint committee here. Will the Premier be open to having any of our elected Indigenous leaders to sit on this joint committee?
Thank you, Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh. Madam Premier.
Thank you, Madam Chair. At this moment, I am not willing to make that commitment because I need some time to think about it. It is too rushed to make that commitment. We have a whole bunch of Indigenous governments that are at the table. Am I going to pick and choose or have one of each? Then when does it become a land claim negotiation versus a joint oversight committee? I am not ready at this minute to make that commitment. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Madam Premier. Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.
Thank you for that response from the Premier. Thank you for that. I am looking here at what we will do to review, update, and publish territorial principles and interests to reflect GNWT's new priorities and mandate and there's a "how we will demonstrate progress for terms of reference being developed." Again, I'm going to go back to saying how it's really important. So how is the Premier going to proceed with developing these terms of reference, and is there going to be any consultation with any Indigenous groups for the development of terms of reference?
Thank you, Member. Madam Premier.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just had to check and make sure there were no political bombs coming off with that. Absolutely, this joint committee, I mean, in theory it's supposed to be between Regular Member and Cabinet, but we don't foresee -- you never know what will come out of the woodwork. At this point, we don't see a problem with sharing it with our Indigenous governments, to get their opinion on the terms of reference, as well, recognizing that it would take communication with that, because they need to be informed of what is going on, so we have to make sure that we have communication to make sure that they're clear. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Member for Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.
Thank you, Madam Chair. That's all I have for now.
Member for Deh Cho.
Mahsi, Madam Chair. I'm quite encouraged by the Premier's optimism for working with the Indigenous governments on the same level and that she has been in communication with them on, I suppose, an ongoing basis. To make this thing work, I guess, I myself have been after forming a special committee or some sort of a committee, and I'm glad to see that it has made it here. I'm just kind of wondering if we can, because it says "in the summer 2020, form special committee." That could be several months away, and there's just an eagerness, I guess, on my part, and maybe on the Indigenous side, too, to get the ball rolling. I would like to see that we escalate forming this committee and also the terms of reference for the committee, if that could be possible, because all these things can be done. I don't see why we need to wait any longer.
Also, because the terms of reference are pretty important, I guess, you're saying now we have to go to the Aboriginal governments to review the terms of reference for this committee, but they're not going to be part of that committee. This committee is going to be between Cabinet and the Regular Members, so that, this committee, we can hash it out on the floor, where we meet, on how we should be progressing. That's how I'm seeing this committee here. We can share terms of reference, all right; just maybe, if there's a final one, to show that this is what we're going to be doing, and it's agreed to by the Regular Members, also.
We also need to know, like, I understand from the last Assembly that there may have been a committee of some sort looking on the negotiation side, but it didn't do anything, and I'm just hoping that this committee will have meaning to it. That's all I'll go for, now. I'll wait for the Premier. Mahsi.
Thank you, Member for Deh Cho. Do you have a response, Madam Premier?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I just heard that part of the reason he thought the joint committee didn't work well was because it didn't meet frequently enough. That might be an issue. It is hard to get everyone together.
Madam Chair, respectfully, I won't bump up the summer 2020 because, if you look at the wording, it says, "the internal working group will be established and the terms of reference developed by summer 2020." We're coming up on spring; it's not going to be very much time. This is going to take a process, and so I will not at this point be willing to move that up any further. Thank you, Madam Chair. If it happens earlier, though, great. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Madam Premier. Next on my list is the Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. Pardon, did you have anything further, Member for Deh Cho?
Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. I'm really optimistic, you know, alongside of you, also, and I would really like to see this escalated and moved forward as soon as possible. Mahsi.
Thank you, Member for Deh Cho. Madam Premier.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I'll take that as a comment. I also want to see this move forward as soon as possible. Thank you.
Thank you. Anything further, Mr. Bonnetrouge? No? Okay, next, MLA for Inuvik Twin Lakes.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Under this section, I picked up from a couple of the comments and it's something that I hear and live and talk about all the time in my community: committed to doing business differently. The Premier has stated this over and over and over again, that the GNWT is committed to doing business differently and they want to work unilaterally with our Indigenous governments at the negotiating tables; saying that, and having this as a mandate, but yet our negotiating teams continue as a unilateral, by themselves. The federal government is not pushing it. Core principle objectives, CPOs; this is what I hear about from different leaderships, is the GNWT continues to push CPOs at the table, and Indigenous governments feel that this is a barrier for it to move forward because, and I'll discuss that further when we get to the next section, if we're going to the table to negotiate land claims, self-governments, and we're going to respect the rights of these negotiations and we're going to the table, then how are we pushing CPOs that are government CPO standards and they have the right to change them whenever they want to change them, and Indigenous governments, it's kind of "take it or leave it?" Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. Madam Premier.
Thank you, Madam Chair. There are a few questions in there. For one, we are trying to do this differently. I've already met with Carolyn Bennett and told her that she needs to come to the table, as well. Instead of just negotiators, we need to actually have the leaders at the table sometimes. I think I caught her off-guard; she didn't give me a solid commitment, but it's a start. I mean, I realize that people have to be kind of talked to a few times.
The core principles, I mean, that is something that I would have to give more thought to. They're basic principles like, for example, an income support. You know, everybody has a right to, I can't remember them, but they're very basic principles on people's rights. I would love to be able to say, "Throw them out the window." The reality is there are three people at the table, not just ourselves, the GNWT and Indigenous governments; there is the federal government. They have principles that we have to abide by, for example, the principles on health. They just brought out the Child and Family Services Act. They're looking at that. That has core principles in it. So we can't just say that we're going to throw them out at this table here and not recognize that there are principles across Canada that we have to abide by, as well.
However, I think it's a discussion that we should be able to negotiate and talk about. Like I said, the NWT core principles, it's only a little, tiny booklet. It's probably one of the smallest things I've read since I've been a Premier. They're very basic. They're not huge. They're more like a human rights thing, so I think it's an item for discussion, but I can't commit that we would throw them off when there is more than just one party at the table. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Madam Premier. Further, Member from Inuvik Twin Lakes.
Yes, thank you, Madam Chair. My understanding is that these core principle objectives, though, are being pushed only by GNWT. No other negotiators are pushing them at the tables, and the Indigenous groups are feeling kind of -- and I'm not speaking for every Indigenous group, because I haven't talked to every Indigenous group, so I can't speak to every, but the ones that I have and I do understand is that that may be a barrier, because it is almost saying that we are a tiered government. If we are going to the table to negotiate, what you're saying is the way you need to have it done, and what we're saying, as an Indigenous government, we can't -- like you said, that needs to be at the table where -- and the negotiators, and I mean, maybe that's going to help better with negotiators having a mandate that is going to tell them to be able to do these kinds of things.
A lot of times, what I'm hearing is they go, and they're not even coming back with the things that they say that they're going to follow up, so I think that there are some issues there, and I think that those need to be -- in order for us to move forward with this, I think that those things need to be looked at, and whoever is in charge of meeting with the negotiators needs to be saying, "Okay, what are the challenges? What are these, and how are we going to move forward? When the Premier is meeting with these Indigenous groups, what are the challenges, like it says in there? And how can we move forward, and how can we" -- because if that's the case, we're never going to move forward. Thank you
Thank you, Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. Madam Premier.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Like I said, I think that everything should be on the table and open for discussion. Anything that's within the Government of the Northwest Territories' purview, then I am open to discussion. I have to make sure that people do have basic rights, but I think that the core principles are something that we could negotiate. It's something that some Indigenous governments are fine with now, other ones who are fighting a bit more. It might not be a one size fit all, but, I mean, if it's only in the GNWT, I am willing to sit down and talk to them about it. That was my commitment to all of the chiefs, is that we will be sitting down and talking about all of the obstacles. I imagine, if that is an obstacle, it will come up. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Madam Premier. I have next on my list the Member for Frame Lake.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm going to finish in less than five minutes. I have one comment and one question, if I may. My comment is that the last Premier said that we were going to get all of the negotiations completed in the last Assembly, and we had one agreement-in-principle reached. The bar was too high with the last Assembly. This one, I think it's too low, with just two of maybe 16 tables. I think, hopefully, we can get somewhere in between.
That was my comment, Madam Chair. My question is the advisory committee that's mentioned in the "how we will demonstrate progress," the very first item there, "quarterly reports provided to advisory committee." What is that advisory committee, and how is it related to the special joint committee that is identified in the bottom of the second column? Thanks, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. Madam Premier.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Every single MLA in this building has certain strengths, and one of the strengths that I will say about the MLA is he catches things. That is actually wrong; that should say "joint committee." Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Madam Premier. Anything further? Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. Next on my list, Member for Kam Lake.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I've got one quick question, as well, hopefully. We have all, around the table, agreed that settling and implementing treaty land resource and self-government agreements is a top priority for this government, and we need to move the meter on this one. My question for the Premier is: does she feel that we need to actually accomplish priority number 3 of "implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People" before we can justly accomplish our priority number 2? Thank you.
Thank you, Member for Kam Lake. Madam Premier.
Thank you, Madam Chair. It would help, maybe, to do that first. However, I am not telling people to wait for it. There are issues happening, and the federal government is going to be doing it. BC claims that they were the first; they've got it done. BC is having problems with it now. I mean, they've just said that they've got it made into legislation, and now they've got a pipeline that the Indigenous governments are saying, "You never even consulted us."
It's one thing to put it in policy. I'm not willing to put it into policy. I mean, that would be my get-out-of-jail-free card. I think this is more than just putting it in the legislation and just saying, "Whatever, we'll keep going about business." In the phone calls that I've made, we've committed already to the Indigenous governments that each one of them -- we're already asking them, "What do you see UNDRIP looking like?" This process is going to take time, if we do it light. If we just want to make it a legislation policy, that's the get-out-of-jail. Please tell me, all of you, that you want that, and that's my get-out-of-jail-free, but I don't think that that's what we should be doing. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Madam Premier. Members, are there any further questions on "settle and implement treaty land resources and self-government agreements"? Seeing none, committee, we will move to page 9. Are there any questions on "implement United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples"? Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes.
Thank you, Madam Chair. With the goal to "implement the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples," I think one of the things when I'm reading in the "what we're going to do" and our timeline, what I heard when we met with the Indigenous leaders, for me, I feel like it's not enough. I know the Premier has said that we need to do this right, but I feel like, at some point, we just need to put this in our legislation in order to move it forward.
I'm going to say it again and again, because I think, in order for us to act on this and in order for us to respect the rights of Indigenous people, we need to start looking at everything that we do with that lens. I think it needs to go into legislation, and I think it needs to go into the mandate letters to the negotiators, and I think it needs to go into, you know, mandate letters to all the departments. That's how I feel that we need to be moving forward, if we're really in the true spirit of going to reconcile.
I feel like, sometimes, when I look at this, we might be letting the Indigenous governments down a little bit, because when they've seen it, and then what I see now, I'm Indigenous, so I'm kind of like, you know, you get excited and then, kind of, the bubble gets popped. That's kind of how I'm feeling. If the Premier is meeting with these groups, and they say they want to move this faster, is the Premier willing to look at that and move it along faster? Thank you.
Thank you, Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. Madam Premier.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Absolutely. If I can get all the Indigenous groups to say that they would have the working group established before summer 2020, which is just a few months, I would be all over that. I don't think that we're going to.
This is about asking the Indigenous governments what they see UNDRIP should be. It should not be about the GNWT saying what UNDRIP will be. If you look at the UNDRIP philosophy or whatever it is, one of the key things, it says, "Ask the Indigenous people." It doesn't say that MLAs should sit around and do this. It is about talking to the Indigenous people. I read that, I took that to heart, and this is something that I think that Indigenous governments should define for us, as long as it doesn't break the law. That is my commitment, that I will be working with them, and if they want to make it faster, then I am right beside them. Everybody knows I run fast. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Madam Premier. Anything further, Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes?
Thank you, Madam Chair. I know I have said this before, and I know I have said it to the Premier before, I feel that, when we talk about the priority before and we talk about UNDRIP, they go hand-in-hand. I almost feel like we can't move forward without them. You know, it's kind of hard to say, how do we settle these things where there are barriers, and we're not respecting -- so we're not putting these legislations in place. I feel like, to move forward on priority number two, we need to ensure that we have priority number three because I feel that they go hand-in-hand. Does the Premier agree to that?
