Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Abstentions? The motion is carried.
Carried
Member for Deh Cho.
Madam Chair, I move that this committee recommends that if the overall legislative timeframe allows, there should be the ability to extend standing committee reviews of resource management bills to allow for completion of the collaborative review process. Mahsi.
Thank you. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Frame Lake.
Yeah, thanks, Madam Chair. Yeah, I'd mentioned, and other committee members have mentioned, that we kind of ran out of time at the end. We had met a couple of times with the departmental staff representatives of the technical working group and in the second meeting, we had a good discussion around some amendments that committee had proposed, and those were kind of taken away and some further work was done by the departmental staff, by the technical working group members, and then those were provided to committee. And committee had been at least under the impression that there was still time for us to respond to that and try to have maybe one more go at it in terms of reaching consensus on a few items. And we did provide that notice to the Minister, and, unfortunately, the Minister said I don't have any more time to look at this to get it through Cabinet, or whatever the Minister has to do, and we just ran out of time. So hopefully these things don't always happen at the end of the life of an Assembly. They don't get scrunched in. I guess and we also undertook, at the beginning of this, to really look at lessons learned because this is the first time we went through this process. It was a good process. And the thing that I one of the things I learned from this as well, that collaborative review worked very well, and if we had a bit more time I think we could have probably reached consensus on a few more items. But we just ran out of time because of the end of the life of this Assembly and the need to get this bill back in for this sitting. So that's the intention of this, is to try to encourage a collaborative review of bills like this and, if there's enough time, to extend that if necessary. Thanks, Madam Chair.
Thank you. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Abstentions? The motion is carried.
Carried
Member for Deh Cho.
Madam Chair, I move that this committee recommends that exchanges between standing committees, the departments, and technical working groups on the review of resource management bills should be made public, where possible, and documented in committee reports and resource management bills. Mahsi.
Thank you. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Frame Lake.
Thanks, I'm just waiting for the light to go on. Thanks, Madam Chair. Yeah, I guess what the process convention does set out some timelines and, you know, steps for committee to work with departmental staff, with the technical working group. And those are good things. But it's really silent on how public any of that can or should be. And we did exchange a number of written communications with as committee with the Minister. And I think it would be helpful for people, for the public, to know how that process went back and forth and what the outcomes were in some cases. And I think as much as we've tried to do some of that in the report itself, I think we should make more of an effort to be a little bit more transparent and try to find ways to make more of that information public. And that's what this recommendation is aimed at, is that another lesson that we've learned in going through this is that we try to find ways to make that exchange of information, of views, and the work that happens during the collaborative, we make it public. Thanks, Madam Chair.
Thank you. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Abstentions? The motion is carried.
Carried
Member for Deh Cho.
Madam Chair, I move that this committee recommends that departments undertake in the codrafting of resource management legislation and regulations, should secure additional resources for this process, and conduct more robust public engagement. Mahsi.
Thank you. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Frame Lake.
Yeah, thanks, Madam Chair. Yeah, I just want to get into perhaps the weeds a bit here but I guess when the bill was being developed, the department waited until basically the end of the process to carry out a very abbreviated public engagement period where they put out a summary of a policy intentions document. I think there was about four or five weeks to comment on it. It happened partly over the holiday break. It wasn't a very helpful thing to have happen, quite frankly, in terms of trying to engage the public. So it happened at the end, and it was very short. Some of the work may have been done in the last Assembly, but people wanted to know more about what was in the bill or what was could possibly be coming in terms of policy intentions.
We also heard and read in two written submissions from the Northwest Territories Association of Communities and from the NGOs that they felt that the public engagement was not adequate.
So I guess where I'm going with this, Madam Chair, is that as a public government, we have an obligation to do public engagement around these resource management bills. That's not for the Indigenous governments to do. That's for our government as a public government to do. And, you know, credit to the department, they did a great job working with the technical working group. We heard that from everybody engaged and involved. That's great. But it seems like they didn't have enough resources or time to actually do the public engagement that was required. And what this recommendation suggests is that when departments enter into this process, they seriously need to look at the resources they have available.
We asked I asked on the floor, and during budget reviews many times, does the department are you securing any additional resources for this? The answer was no, they didn't. And I think it clearly showed at the end of the day, when the public engagement happened at the very end, was more or less an afterthought. So I do want to compliment the Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment, again, for securing additional resources for the Mineral Resources Act regulation development. I've been critical of that process. But they did actually go out and secure additional resources to do the work. I just simply believe that other departments need to be able to access similar additional resources. This is not run of the mill stuff. We now have a legislative development protocol. We got that we have to live up to. And departments need to get more resources to do this important work. And that's what this recommendation is about. Thanks, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Member. To the motion. Member for Tu NedheWiilideh.
Thank you, Madam Chair. In regards to this motion, you know, the last few days I have been speaking about treaty rights and Crown consultation and accommodations. And I just want to let people know that, you know, when we First Nation communities in my particular riding, we don't have settled claims. We rely on core funding that comes in from Ottawa directly to our First Nation based on population. And we also rely on the resources we get from the mining industry to offset some of these costs. And I keep saying that we signed an oath, and we swore an oath too as well, to respect the treaties that we have. And we have a Commissioner. You know, we have a Governor General of Canada. Again, you know, a good portion of the monies that come from Ottawa to this government come from grants and contributions from various departments. But at the end of the day, you know, if we're going to be doing this, this work here, again, you know, we need to engage Indigenous governments. We're going to have to make sure Crown consultation and accommodations are met. And if that doesn't happen, then, you know, we could find ourselves in a very awkward position, maybe even in litigation, because, again, we do have treaty rights and, you know, Government of Canada is supposed to uphold it and the GNWT is also viewed as a the Crown as well, and that's the case, then they really need to take a look at this and provide adequate resources needed to Indigenous governments to really go through this whole thing. What I'm saying by that is that, you know, we got to fund the communities, the chief and council, the elders, expertise as needed,to review such documents as these. They just don't have the resources. So all I'm saying in speaking to the motion, Madam Chair, I think that should be looked at as well. Thank you.
Thank you. To the motion. Member for Monfwi.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, yes, what I would like to see in this is that more consultation with the Indigenous government as well. Not only with the public government but with the Indigenous government, especially those with the Aboriginal selfgovernment that they have in place. So I would like to see more of that in this because this is important, especially with to lands and resources. So I know that this is important for the people who settled their land claims already. And it's just that I would like to see this the codrafting be done with the Indigenous government, not just with the public government because GNWT is a public government and community government of Behchoko, Whati, Gameti, and Wekweeti are all public government as well. So it should be done with the Indigenous government. Thank you.
To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Abstentions? The motion is carried.
Carried
Member for Deh Cho.
Madam Chair, I move that this committee recommends that departments undertaking the codrafting of resource management legislation and regulations should share more information with the public about policy options and policy intentions and conduct public engagement earlier in the process, that is, not wait until the end of the codrafting process; and further, public engagement can and should run concurrently with the codrafting process. Mahsi.
The motion is in order. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Abstentions? The motion is carried.
Carried
Member for Deh Cho.
Madam Chair, I move that this committee recommends that the Department of Environment and Climate Change prepare a detailed budget and work plan for continued codevelopment of regulations necessary for a new Forest Act allowing for more public engagement on those regulations and the implementation of its new responsibilities under a new Forest Act. Mahsi.
The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Frame Lake.
Yeah, thanks, Madam Chair. Yeah, I want to speak to this one. I want to speak to the resources that this government actually got for forest management. The responsibility was, of course, originally held by the federal government and back in 1987, there was a devolution agreement for forestry negotiated. And this government, at that point, received an indexed offset to the territorial formula funding arrangement of $24 million. And so that was indexed over time. We asked the department about what that would actually be these days. We were told that it's about $55 million in today's dollars. So that's money that was given to this government for the purposes of carrying out forestry activities, including fire suppression.
Now, you know, in a normal year and this is not a normal year the department spends about $35 million a year on forestry. That includes fire suppression and management. So there seems to be a gap there where maybe all the money that GNWT was getting for forestry is perhaps not actually being spent on it in a normal regular year. And the reason why I raise this is this new legislation creates some very significant new tools and responsibilities on our government when it comes to sustainable forestry. There's going to be forest eco there should be forest ecosystem management plans. There could be forest harvesting agreements. There's supposed to be forest monitoring. And a lot of this is going to be ecosystembased management. Working collaboratively with Indigenous governments and comanagement bodies. That's a lot of new responsibilities on this government, and this government needs to have the resources to do that.
Why is this important? If we want forestry to take off here and begin to replace wood that's imported, we need to be able to identify where people can do the harvesting and ensure that the research and monitoring that can support those economic opportunities are made available. And I guess I'm not convinced that we do enough of that work right now. But the ability and tools to do that are going to increase exponentially with a passing of this legislation. So our government has to be ready for that. And we need to be spending more money on forestry, on forest research, on inventory work to identify those opportunities so we can create jobs in the forest sector to replace the wood that we import, as much of that as we possibly can. That's why this is important because it can create jobs here. We want to make sure it's done sustainably.
But the department has to get a budget together to do that. You cannot do it with the current budget; it's not going to work. So I'm trying to make a case for the next Minister to get that work done and put forward a proper budget to make sure that we have sustainable forestry and the jobs that it can create in small communities. And that's what this is aimed at, but also making sure that while we develop those regulations and there's a lot more work to be done to develop those regulations that that work can be done collaboratively with Indigenous governments and that there's a better public engagement as well. Thanks, Madam Chair.
Thank you. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? Abstentions? The motion is carried.
Carried
Thank you, committee. Does committee agree that you've concluded consideration of Committee Report 6219(2)?
Agreed.
Thank you. Committee, we have concluded consideration of Committee Report 6219(2), Standing Committee on Economic Development and Environment Report on the Review of Bill 74: Forest act. Committee, we've agreed to consider Bill 74, Forest Act. I'll ask the Minister of Environment and Climate Change to introduce the bill.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I am here to present Bill 74, Forest Act. It is also important to recognize that we are discussing forestry legislation at a time when people, our people, communities and our forests, have been significantly impacted by wildfires.
Bill 74 is the first bill drafted under the Intergovernmental council Protocol on Legislation Development and the first introduced under the Legislative Assembly's new process convention on bills drafted in accordance with this protocol.
Bill 74 is an important milestone for all of us, and I thank everybody the Indigenous governments, standing committee, and all Members of of this House for their work on this bill. The Department of Environment and Climate Change worked closely with Indigenous governments of the Intergovernmental council through a technical working group to develop Bill 74. Along with the Intergovernmental council Members, participation in the technical working group also included Lutselk'e Dene First Nation, North Slave Metis Alliance, Yellowknife Dene First Nation, Nahanni Butte Dene Band, and Deh Cho First Nation.
The bill is the result of hard work of many people and organizations and reflects consensus of the party under the Intergovernmental council Protocol.
Bill 74 combines and modernizes the Forest Management Act and Forest Protection Act. It will allow the GNWT and its partners to use the most current tools to effectively manage forest resources in the NWT.
Bill 74 is designed to provide for flexibility, to account for variations between regions of local needs. Special needs for many parts of the bill will be further defined in regulation development. New tools established under Bill 74 include
Forest ecosystem management plan;
Provisions required to allow the GNWT to effectively manage wildfires;
The ability to take immediate actions against invasive species and diseases that could seriously harm to the forest;
Removing the requirements for a permit for anyone with an Aboriginal treaty right to harvest forest resources in an applicable area;
Modernize the appeal process; and,
Update enforcement and investigation authorities.
I would like to thank the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Environment for its review of this bill.22 motions of the bill were approved and integrated. This shows the great collaboration between the committee and Intergovernmental council technical working group. That concludes my opening remarks, and I look forward to answering any questions that Members may have. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Minister. Would you like to bring witnesses into the Chamber?
Yes, I would.
Thank you. Sergeantatarms, please escort the witnesses into the Chamber.
Welcome. Minister, would you please introduce your witnesses for the record.
Thank you, Madam Chair. On my right is Dr. Erin Kelly, deputy minister of environment and climate change. And Brett Wheler, a representative of the Intergovernmental Council invited under the Legislative Assembly process convention on bills drafted pursuant to the Intergovernmental Council Legislative Development Protocol. Behind me, on my left, is Laura Jeffrey, legislative counsel with the Department of Justice. And on my right is Melissa Bard, manager of legislation from the Department of Environment and Climate Change. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Can you just repeat the last name of the the last name that you just said; I couldn't hear.
Bard. Bard.
Thank you. I will now turn to the chair of the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Environment, the committee that reviewed the bill, for any opening comments on Bill 74. Member for Nunakput.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Bill 74, Forest Act, received second reading in the Legislative Assembly on March 2nd, 2023, and was referred to the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Environment for a review.
The review period for Bill 74 was extended to 180 days rather than the 120 so the committee could proceed with a thorough review of the first codrafted legislation of the Northwest Territories. Indigenous governments comanagement bodies. The Government of the Northwest Territories worked together to create Bill 74. The bill was the first piece of legislation to be reviewed under the process convention of the introduction, consideration, and enactment of bills drafted pursuant to the Intergovernmental Council Legislative Development Protocol.
Bill 74 is a second attempt at this legislation that did not pass in the 18th Assembly. It was important for this committee to be thorough in its review to ensure people had their voices heard when they weighed in on this bill. The committee held public hearings in Yellowknife, Whati, Fort Simpson, Enterprise. The committee also received six written submissions. This enabled the committee to get a solid understanding on how the intricacies of the proposed forest management legislation would impact communities, individuals, businesses, and nongovernmental organizations.
The committee developed 37 motions to amend the bill and brought them forward for the consideration of the technical working group comprised of the Government of the Northwest Territories and representatives from the Indigenous governments.
The committee held many negotiation sessions with the purpose of seeing where the technical working group stood on the issues and why, and to have the opportunity to do the same.
On August 11th, 2023, the committee held a historic clausebyclause review of Bill 74 with the Minister of Environment and Climate Change and representatives of the technical working group. The committee moved 28 motions to amend Bill 74. The Minister of Environment and Climate Change concurred with 22 of those motions. It is committee's belief that Bill 74, as amended, is an even stronger and even more representative piece of our legislation.
I would like to thank the committee the best committee in the whole Legislative Assembly of economic development and environment, for its hard work and my cochair Mr. Ron Bonnetrouge for all the hard work he's done with me. And I thank him and the rest of the committee.
The review of Bill 74, as well as the work of the legal experts and the committee staff to comply with the tight deadlines outlined in the process convention and guided the review of this bill.
Individual Members may have additional comments or questions, Madam Chair. Thank you.
Thank you. I will now open the floor to general comment the on Bill 74. Does committee agree Member for Frame Lake.
