Mr. Speaker, I moved this motion for the following reason, and the most important reason I see to ensure is that our policies and legislation are consistent with final agreements, provisions, as well as the spirit and intent of those agreements. Those agreements I speak of, colleagues, were actually we are actually signatories to those agreements.
Mr. Speaker, an example of what I'm referring to is in my region. We have the Inuvialuit Final Agreement, an agreement that is constitutionallyprotected, an agreement that provides for certain rights to Inuvialuit to access and establish camps as part of exercising their right to harvest, an agreement that we as the GNWT signed.
Some of the relevant provisions from the IFA include and I will be reading legislation because that's what we do in this House under section 14, wildlife harvesting and management,
Section 14.(6): This agreement provides the Inuvialuit with certain harvesting rights to wildlife in the Western Arctic region. The exercise of Inuvialuit rights to harvest is subject to laws of general application respecting public safety and conservation.
Then, in section 14.(23), the provision of subsection 12.(36), 12.(37), and 12.(38), and (40) apply with such modifications as the circumstances require to harvest of wildlife under this section.
Mr. Speaker, when we read these documents, like the land claim, we have to jump around to understand and clearly interpret what is being said in other sections. So let's skip to the section that's being referenced.
In this section, it talks about the national park on the North Slope but let's remember 14.(23) said that in the section of that this applies to the section 14 that I just read, and then this section speaks to the Inuvialuit settlement region and historical harvesting areas.
12.(36): the right to harvest game includes the right to use present and traditional methods of harvesting and the right to possess and use all equipment reasonably needed to exercise that right subject to international agreements with Canada, is a party to the laws of general application respecting public safety and conservation.
12.(37): Subject to subsection (38), the right to harvest game includes the right to travel and establish camps as necessary to exercise that right.
12.(39): The Inuvialuit not need to obtain permits, licenses, or other authorizations to harvest game but may be required to show proof of status as Inuvialuit beneficiaries where, for the purpose of conservation, permits, licenses, or other authorizations are required by appropriate Ministers or on the recommendation of the Wildlife Management Advisory Council or the Porcupine Caribou Management Board. The Inuvialuit should have the right to receive such permits, licenses, or other authorizations from the local authority at no cost.
The Inuvialuit Final Agreement specifically states that the Inuvialuit need not pay fees to exercise their right to harvest, colleagues, including their rights to establish camps. We can't and should not be passing legislation or regulations that are inconsistent with final agreements and treaty rights.
Mr. Speaker, I also want to speak to the devolution agreement for lands and resources in the NWT. This devolution agreement is the father of our lands agreement as we did not have lands in the GNWT until devolution.
And in that agreement, the paramouncy 2.(4): Nothing in this agreement shall be construed so as to prevent an Act of Parliament from prevailing over territorial legislation to the extent of any conflict between them. It speaks to Aboriginal rights and interests. It also has a section where it states conflict with land claim agreements or selfgovernment agreements.
2.(36): In the event of an inconsistency or conflict between this agreement and a settlement agreement or a selfgovernment agreement or a land claim agreement within the meaning of the section 35 of the Constitution Act 1982, the settlement agreement, selfgovernment agreement, or land claim agreement shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency or conflict.
How much more clearer does this need to be for GNWT to recognize these rights already exist and apply? Why are we not following the final agreements and the devolution agreement; both agreements we have signed. Surely the people of the Northwest Territories and the Indigenous people of the NWT expect the government to follow and uphold them. I do, as an MLA elected to this legislature.
Mr. Speaker, the issue of fees being charged to Indigenous people to access lands and establish camps that they've been using for thousands of years is just plain wrong.
I understand the importance of land management. I understand the importance of knowing what is happening on public lands. What I don't understand or accept is why we are purposely going against negotiated and finalized agreement provisions. If people want to enter into leases, that is totally up to them. I'm not against leases. I'm against charging Indigenous people fees for those leases. In my view, if an Indigenous person wants to enter into a lease, that's totally fine, but it should be at no cost as per our agreement with Indigenous people.
Mr. Speaker, this is not a time for GNWT to try and renegotiate rights that have already been done.
Mr. Speaker, we need to ask ourselves when we are dealing with things of these nature, where are we going with this and when is this going to stop? While lease fees may seem like not a big issue, in fact it is. There's a larger question that we need to ask ourselves. Do we continue to go against final agreements and treaty to collect fees from Indigenous people? Do we continue to send Indigenous people to collection and threaten them with legal action for exercising their Indigenous rights? Why such a heavy hand, Mr. Speaker? Is charging of fees and going against agreement that we as government made as part of the definition of what GNWT thinks reconciliation is with Indigenous people? I think one way of starting on the road to reconciliation, a basic and easy way, is to simply follow these existing agreements, get rid of these fees for leases for Indigenous people. They were here long before us and have negotiated agreements and are in process of negotiating agreements within the spirit and intent of peace and friendship. We have to honour those agreements and treaty rights. This must apply across the North.
Mr. Speaker, whether this is just growing pains of devolution, and maybe it was unintentional, but it's time for us to fix this. And I hope my colleagues from across the floor hear me and have heard what I've had to say, and if not, and if they wish to discuss this further, I welcome all discussions and debate on this topic.
I also hope that Cabinet will ensure that if and when regulations for the Lands Act come before them to ensure that they are using the UNDRIP lens and ensure that they do not go against any current agreements and Aboriginal land rights.
I also ask for a recorded vote, and I ask you all to support this motion, and let's stop chipping away at Indigenous rights and start by stop charging fees for leases to Indigenous people of the North for exercising their right. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
The Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes. The Member for Deh Cho. The Member for Hay River South. The Member for Thebacha. The Member for Kam Lake. The Member for Frame Lake. The Member for Nunakput. The Member for Yellowknife North. The Member for Tu NedheWiilideh. The Member for Monfwi. The Member for Great Slave.
All those opposed, please rise. All those abstaining, please rise.
The Member for Nahendeh. The Member for Yellowknife South. The Member for Sahtu. The Member for Range Lake. The Member for Inuvik Boot Lake. The Member for Yellowknife Centre. The Member for Hay River North.
The results of the recorded vote: 11 in favour, zero opposed, seven abstentions. The motion is carried.
Carried
Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, the cost of living in Nunakput is outrageous and, you know, the Bill 60, we're going down the road that we're unable to use sups to get our backlog, I guess, in funding to try to provide service. You know, our heating fuel and gas prices across the North over the last year, heating fuel and diesel and gasoline, all gone up in Nunakput. Heating fuel has gone up 25 percent, averaging $2.46 a litre. Diesel fuel, is up 24 percent, averaging $2.75 a litre. Gasoline is average up 12 percent at the pump, averaging $2.37 a litre.
This is going to have a rippling effect, Madam Chair, in regards to food pricing across the North and especially in my riding because I always said, you know, my riding, it's almost we're penalized because of where we live. Price of food is going up. We can't afford to buy food. Nunakput has the highest food price index in the NWT. Enough money we don't have enough money for food. We worry about our food for our families and our relatives. The people in Nunakput are worried about having to pay for food. Almost half of the residents in Nunakput are worried to do that because they don't have enough money for food all the time, or often. We have to hunt, hunt to eat. 67 percent of households in Nunakput eat country food half the time or more. Our power prices. Our power prices continue to go up across the Northwest Territories. The cost of power in Nunakput is almost the highest rates in the NWT. For example, Sachs Harbour pays $2.02 and $0.30 a kilowatt. You know, our housing situation, I always worry, is insufficient housing is poorly and leaking energy. Residents pay for poorly built public housing that are 40yearold plus. Housing NWT renovations in 2023 addressed only approximately eight percent of the housing needs in the region. Housing NWT will never renovate units fast enough to keep up with the housing issues and problems that we do have. Thirty percent of Nunakput houses are overcrowded. Inflation across Canada is at an alltime high, and in the NWT it's higher; higher than Canada by seven percent. Our household income in communities, Nunakput has the highest cost of living, the difference in the NWT is 18 percent of people in Nunakput are considered to live low incomes. Nunakput is over $50,000 below average for family income in the NWT but the price of all the goods and services in our region is the highest. Over ten percent of families in Nunakput live less than with $30,000 a year. 344 people in Nunakput live on income assistance. That's 17 percent. And there's little employment opportunities in my riding. Over 20 percent of people in Nunakput are unemployed.
Impact on Nunakput communities on Bill 60, the estimated total household carbon tax burden for Nunakput is average $899 for 20232024. And if this goes, it's 17 percent and 4 percent every year after. People in Nunakput already can barely put food on the table, find employment to earn income, to pay for heat, their power and their housing. How can we tax people that have nothing; nothing to give? Small communities can't afford the carbon tax, Madam Chair. Residents shouldn't be penalized for where we live. The GNWT is not providing enough offsets. Cost of living offset to step up is the right direction. Some people are still struggling. My elders, the single parents, the widows, the low-income residents are struggling, and us down here we don't see it because you never lived it.
Ottawa and the GNWT isn't doing our Beaufort Delta any favours. Ottawa is squeezing us financially with this tax while it imposes a moratorium and blocks resource development in my riding, and we're doing the federal government's dirty work. We should let it go to the backstop, federal backstop, then we're not painted with that brush. The GNWT has to step up. If Ottawa insists on our tax, it should impose a tax throughout the backstop. The GNWT isn't taking a meaningful control. If it has anything to do with the North, it should be paid for cleaning the air because we're at 0.05 of our carbon in the territory and across the country.
Madam Chair, the bill will impact all residents of NWT, especially those in the small communities in the High Arctic who already have the highest cost of living. Madam Chair, I oppose Bill 60. And I encourage anyone who's concerned about the raising the cost of living to impact Bill 60 to contact their MLA, like I asked.
You know, for myself, whoever supports this bill, we should almost be ashamed of ourself. The pressure you're putting on people across the territory in the small communities, it's unbearable. I see it every day when I'm home in my communities, people are struggling. And like I said before, there's no sups to bail us out for the communities.
You know, control I'd rather have Canada in control of this madeintheNorth. I worry. Us as Regular Members have the we could put this down and let the federal backstop take place. Ten percent of climate fossil fuel and diesel. We have nothing else to do use but diesel in the far north. There's no choice. Can't use sunlight; we're dark six to eight months of the year. And, you know, it's a worry it's really worrisome because I see families struggle and go without. And I think sometimes, you know, some of this carbon tax, I think our government worries more about the mines than our people that we represent that's why we're here. These people have no sups to help them at home and can go somewhere for money because everybody's tapped out and can't lend because they're in trouble themselves because the high impact of what we pay.
The people I represent can't afford to live in regards to where we're at and, again, we're penalized because of where we live. This Bill C60, I don't want to go down this road. I'm in full support of killing the bill, and we're in a position where us as Regular Members could do that but, you know, some of them want to support this bill and madeinthe North, us having control. We can't control what we have already in regards to the spending and sups that we're going through. How could you take this on now? Another burden for the Minister. Let it go to the federal backstop. Let the federal government do their own work and let them do their dirty work.
I'm really it's really upsetting in regards to I've been worrying about this. In regards to this bill coming forward, all I could say is I did my best in regards to to try to kill the bill. And I hope these my colleagues on this side of the House, all Members support us in regards to killing the bill and let the federal government do their own work. And it would be a lot better because at the end of the day, what happens in this House we all got to wear it, and we'll be painted with that brush that we supported Bill 60.
And, Madam Chair, I just, you know, once this vote comes through, I want a recorded vote when the vote comes down because this is going to effect everything in the months to come. Thank you.
Madam Chair, I would request a recorded vote.
Thank you, Member. A recorded vote has been requested. All those in favour, please stand.
The Member for Frame Lake.
All those opposed, please stand.
The Member for Yellowknife North. The Member for Monfwi. The Member for Nahendeh. The Member for Yellowknife South. The Member for Sahtu. The Member for Range Lake. The Member for Inuvik Boot Lake. The Member for Yellowknife Centre. The Member for Hay River North. The Member for Hay River South. The Member for Kam Lake.
All those abstaining, please stand.
The Member for Tu NedheWiilideh. The Member for Great Slave. The Member for Deh Cho. The Member for Thebacha.
The results of the recorded vote are: One in favour, 11 opposed, four abstentions. The motion is defeated. So to the appendix of the bill, does committee agree?
Agreed.
Committee, to the bill as a whole, does committee agree that Bill 60, An Act to Amend the Petroleum Products and Carbon Tax, is now ready for third reading?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. The committee has agreed that Bill 60, An Act to Amend the Petroleum Products and Carbon Tax Act, is now ready for third reading. Does committee agree that this concludes our consideration of Bill 60, An Act to Amend the Petroleum Products and Carbon Tax Act?
Agreed.
Thank you, Minister, and thank you to your witnesses. Sergeantatarms, please escort the witnesses. And Members we're just going to take a five minute break.
SHORT RECESS
Committee, we've agreed to consider Bill 66, An Act to Amend the Property Assessment and Taxation Act. I will ask the Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs to introduce the bill.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I am here to present Bill 66, An Act to Amend the Property Assessment and Taxation Act.
The purpose of Bill 66 is to address issues that can be resolved through administrative and operational amendments without changing the overall intent of the Act. Bill 66 clarifies and modernizes certain definitions. It also gives the director of assessment greater authority in respect of first assessment orders, corrections to the rolls, and carrying out supplementary assessments. The bill updates provisions related to municipal boards of revision, the territorial boards of revision and the assessment appeal tribunal to extend terms of appointment, adjust decisionmaking timelines, allow for sole adjudication in certain circumstances and change the title of "secretary" to "registrar." The bill also gives municipal employees the ability to purchase property at public auction with the approval of the municipal council. In addition to these amendments, this bill makes several housekeeping amendments to genderneutralize language and fix nonsubstantive grammatical errors in the Act.
During the Standing Committee on Government Operations review of the bill, the Department worked with committee staff and the Department of Justice on three additional amendments to the bill. The Department is appreciative of the time committee took in reviewing the bill and proposing amendments. This concludes my opening remarks. I look forward to hearing comments from Members and answering any questions the Members may have on the bill. Thank you.
Thank you. Minister, would you like to bring witnesses into the Chamber?
I do.
Thank you. Sergeantatarms, please escort the witnesses into the Chamber. Minister, would you please introduce your witnesses.
Thank you, Madam Chair. On my left is Jennifer Young, director of corporate affairs. On my close to me on the right is Laurie Fife, director of community governance. And in the far right is Christina Duffy, director of legislation, legislative division. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. I will now turn to the chair of the Standing Committee on Government Operations, the committee that reviewed the bill, for any opening comments on Bill 66. Member for Yellowknife North.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Bill 66, An Act to Amend the Property Assessment and Taxation Act, received second reading on November 3rd, 2022, and was referred to the Standing Committee on Government Operations for review. Committee engaged with stakeholders and the public in its review of the bill. Committee held a public review on the bill on January 23rd, 2023, and received two written submissions.
Committee was able to use that feedback to seek amendments that take transparency into consideration. Committee was pleased to work with the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs on these amendments.
On February 13th, 2023, the standing committee completed its clausebyclause review of the bill where it passed a motion to report Bill 66 as amended to the Legislative Assembly as ready for consideration in Committee of the Whole.
I would like to thank committee and the Minister and the staff for their work on review of Bill 66. Individual Members may have additional comments or questions. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. I will now open the floor to general comments on Bill 66. Member for Frame Lake.
Thanks, Madam Chair. Kind of seems like a lifetime ago but I actually served on city council in Yellowknife in 1997 to 2006, and I remember being at probably more than one conventions of the Northwest Territories Association of Communities where motions were passed, asking for changes to this piece of legislation. And so, you know, fast forward to what I can't even do the math anymore 20 years later, almost 20 years later, 25 years, whatever, and some of those changes are in this bill. And so I want to commend the department for getting around to those changes. And I you know, I think this Minister has found a way to light fires within his department, not literally, even though he's got that responsibility as well, but figuratively. And so I want to commend him for getting some legislation out of MACA, which we just didn't seem to be able to do in the 18th Assembly. And, you know, the Minister sat on this side of the House. So he well knows some of the concerns and issues that were raised in the House about the lack of anything ever happening at MACA. So that's good. But when are we going to get round two on path? When is that going to come? And, like, it probably is not going to happen in the lifetime of this Assembly, but what can we do to get that set up and ready for the next Assembly so that they're not sitting around twiddling their thumbs and waiting for MACA to do a little more and hoping that they get a Minister that's able to light the figurative fires. So where is phase two, and what can we do to get that going in the lifetime of this Assembly? Thanks, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you. So it will be in the 20th Assembly. We've already started doing the work. We've gone through legal. So we've done that work. Once we've done that, we're going to take that information to the MTAs, and then we will also be sharing that information with the Indigenous governments. So we are starting the work now, and by the time the 20th Assembly rolls in, we will have a good foundation moving forward. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Member for Frame Lake.
Thanks, Madam Chair. So I'm going to push this a little bit further. So can the Minister commit to get a legislative proposal for phase two to the Regular MLAs before the end of the life of this Assembly. Thanks, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Yes, thank you. Most likely we won't be able to. There's still a lot of work that we got to do before we get to that point. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Member for Frame Lake.
Thanks, Madam Chair. I don't want to prolong this. I guess I would urge the Minister and the staff to try to find a way to get that done before the end of this Assembly. You know, legislative proposal, it doesn't have to be super detailed. Just tell us what you want to do in phase two and start talking to people now about it. So if you can do it before the end of the Assembly, please do it. Thanks, Madam Chair. That's all I got.
Thank you. Are there any further general comments? Oh, Minister, did you want to respond?
Yes. So I'd just like to clarify why we're not paused so we can get there. We have to find a lawyer that's an expert in this area. That's the challenge is to find somebody to do that right now. So if we find somebody and we're able to do, then we can get it going. But I'm being very realistic and response with this. Thank you.
Thank you. Are there any further general comments? Seeing none, can we proceed to a clausebyclause review of the bill?
Agreed.
Thank you. Committee, we will defer the bill number and title until after consideration of the clauses. Please turn to page 1 of the bill. I will call the clauses in groups of five. Clause 1 to 5, does committee agree?
Agreed.
Clause 6 to 10, does committee agree?
Agreed.
Clauses 11 to 15, does committee agree?
Agreed.
Clauses 16 to 20, does committee agree?
