Question has been called. I'll return sorry. There's a lot going on here. I'm going to pass it back to the mover of the motion to close the debate on this. Member for Frame Lake.
No, thank you or thank you, Madam Chair. Yeah, we're kind of constrained to some extent by our procedures here, and we don't have the ability to have the kind of back and forth that we had in the technical sorry, with the committee meeting and in the clausebyclause review so I appreciate the difficulty of trying to do this sometimes in Committee of the Whole.
But I just wanted to have an opportunity to respond to some of the things that I heard, and I respect all the viewpoints that I hear in this House even if I disagree with them sometimes. It's certainly not my intention to try to delay this bill. I want this bill passed in this sitting as much as probably anybody else because I had to try to deal with it in the last Assembly.
So that's not my intention here. I think well, I don't think; my intention here was to bring forward the motions that we had in from the committee to actually get a full response because we ran out of time, as several Members have indicated. So now that I've got the response, that's better; I have a better understanding of where folks have landed. But I haven't really heard any specific response as to why we can't release forest harvesting agreements as a public document. I haven't heard why we can't make permits and licenses that are not for personal use available for public disclosure as we do with all kind of other permits and licenses, because I think that's only in the interest of making more transparent and accountable decisions. So, you know, in no way am I trying to undermine the process convention that was set up, the Legislative Development Protocol.
I had to live through all of this in the last Assembly and made some very strong recommendations in the last Assembly supporting where we're at. So I'm not trying to undermine any of this stuff. We simply ran out of time as a committee. And I believe it is in the public interest to have the kind of debate and discussion we're having right now on the floor of the House about whether some additional information should be made public in the bill itself. That's what this is about.
And I guess in my view believe me, I'm not going to speak for another ten minutes so, because I'm the only thing that stands between people and dinner. So in my view, though, a lot of this can and should have been fixed before the bill ended up with committee.
The issue of a public registry, more public information being made public, that was raised in the last Assembly with Bill 44. It was raised again during the public engagement by the Northwest Territories Association of Communities and the NGOs. I made the same comments at second reading on the bill, so this shouldn't come as a surprise to anybody. And I think those that issue of public information, of public registry, should have been fixed before the bill got here. But it wasn't. So we negotiated to a point where we've got a pretty short list, much shorter than I would like, and I think it's in the public interest to add these additional items. Clearly, it's not going to get support here, and that's fine. But I think it was worthwhile to have this discussion and debate on the floor of this House. And, Madam Chair, I think that's all I have to say.
Thank you. To the motion.
Question.
Question has been called. All those in favour, please raise your hand. All those opposed, please raise your hand. All those abstaining, please raise your hand. The motion is defeated.
Defeated
Clause 14.1, does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you, committee. Committee, I just wanted to explain sorry, because when we're speaking to a motion, we can't ask questions. But we can ask questions that's why we have the witnesses here. When there's a clause to that clause, you can ask questions. So if we that's the difference and the Minister and the witnesses can respond to questions from Members but once we go to the motion, only the Members can speak to the motion. Sorry, that was and that's what happened. So with that, we are going to take a recess, and we'll come back with the remainder of this bill.
SHORT RECESS
Members, we're going to continue on with the clauses from Bill 74, Forest Act, and we're continuing on with clause 15. Does committee agree?
Agreed.
Thank you. Clause 15.1. Member for Frame Lake.
Yeah, thanks, Madam Chair. So this is an addition to the bill that standing committee worked with the departmental staff and the technical working group on, and there's now a new requirement for an annual report from the forest superintendent.
Part of the reason for this was during committee's review of the bill and it was actually in submissions as well that there was some concern that this forest superintendent has really broad powers to help create or develop forest ecosystem management plans that needs to be done collaboratively with Indigenous governments and comanagement bodies, monitoring, research, a whole bunch of things. But all of that was kind of qualified by the word "may". And there was concerns raised about how much discretion this position seemed to have without any accountability. So committee thought about this a lot, and we came up with the wording that now appears in section 15.1, which is a relatively short list of things that the forest superintendent is now going to be required to report on. There's a lot of other things the forest superintendent will actually do. And I guess I'd like to get an explanation from the Minister as to how this list was arrived at. Thanks, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
For that detail, I'll turn to Dr. Kelly. Thank you.
Dr. Kelly.
Thank you, Madam Chair. The technical working group worked through this very carefully and determined what they felt was appropriate to include in the Act. I would definitely say that there are concerns about the use of the of broadening to any research activities because some of there's a question about what that could ultimately mean and it could be it's quite broad. It could be unclear in the Act that it doesn't include, for example, the forest supervisor Googling things on the internet. So the IGC, as technical working group came up with what they feel should be in the Act itself. And we can always look at putting some of these things in at a later date. We already have reporting that is done annually on forest science and research that are done, and it's a commitment that we've made to continue that work. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Yes, thank you. With your permission, I'd ask Mr. Wheler to provide something from the technical working committee too. Thank you.
Thank you. Mr. Wheler.
Mahsi, Madam Chair. The technical working group for the Intergovernmental Council does share the concerns that were just expressed by Dr. Kelly, including the need for well, including the vagueness of any research activities. In general, the technical working group has been and continues to be open to improving the bill or improving on these factors, these considerations. But on things like this, we do think there's a need to carefully consider the details as part of the regulations to make sure we get things like the definition of "research activities" and get that right. And, you know, going forward in development of regulations, the Intergovernmental Council partners expect to be fully involved under the Legislative Development Protocol in that. Mahsi.
Member for Frame Lake.
Yeah, thanks for that. I guess I want to point out that the wording, you know, about research activities is actually not contained in here. We're going to get to that in a minute with a potential motion. But the other list of items here in 15.1, they're all kind of preceded with this language about it's a summary of. And then it's any activities, any forest ecosystem management plans, any monitoring. So, you know, this word "any" and the kind of activity, that's the way that it's presented in the list here. So I just want that clarified, but or I just think it's important to look at the way this was drafted as well.
I guess the other concern with this list from committee's perspective, and my perspective, is that there's nothing in here about inspection and enforcement. So where would the public have any sense of whether there's inspections being carried out, whether there's any enforcement activities being carried out? You know, people want to have some reassurance that if we're going to pass legislation that departments actually follow up and actually do the work and that they have the resources to do the work as well, because we don't want people doing things that they're not supposed to be doing. So where would the public find out anything about inspection and enforcement activities if the forest superintendent doesn't have to report on it? Where would they find that information and where is it in the bill itself? Thanks, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
For that detail, I'll ask Ms. Bard to with your permission, I'll get Ms. Bard to answer that question. Thank you.
Thank you. Ms. Bard.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I know that for some ECC programs that some of that information is available in performance measures, and ECC can look at that under the forest program. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Member for Frame Lake.
Yeah, I hear that and that's sometimes those things are found in business plans that are public, but they're kind of buried in the detail of it. And I would have thought that we'd want to make that kind of information a little more public. And why, you know, wouldn't it be contained in the annual report from the forest superintendent who's actually largely responsible for doing inspection and enforcement. Why can't it be found in the annual report? Or at least be prescribed as one of the thingS that should appear in the annual report? Thanks, Madam Chair.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you, Madam Chair. Annual reports will provide summary data; i.e., inspections and that. So it is being provided in the annual report. Thank you.
Thank you. Member for Frame Lake.
Okay, well that's interesting because it's not required in the legislation. But if they want to continue to do that, that's great. Is that what actually happens now; is there an annual report from the forest superintendent? Is it public? Does it contain data on, say, the number of inspections, the number of enforcement actions? Thank you.
Thank you. Minister.
Thank you. We've heard the Member's concern, and we'll make sure it's added in the reports moving forward. Thank you.
Thank you. Member for Frame Lake.
Okay, thanks. So we don't get an annual report now from the forest superintendent. I got a commitment that it'll probably occur in future reports; that's great. I just would like to have it in the bill itself. So, Madam Chair, I'd like to move a motion to amend 15.1 if I could.
Go ahead, Member for Frame Lake.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I move that subclause 15.1(1) of Bill 74 be amended by.
(a) adding the following immediately preceding subparagraph (a)(i):
(0.i) any research activities of the Forest Superintendent under paragraph 15(3)(b),
(b) deleting "; and" at the end of the English version of subparagraph (a)(iv) and substituting a semicolon; and.
(c) deleting paragraph (b) and substituting the following:
(b) the total number of inspections and investigations conducted under Part 7;
(c) the total number and total amount of fines and other penalties imposed under Part 8; and
(d) any prescribed information.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Member. The motion is in order. To the motion. Member for Frame Lake.
Yeah, thanks, Madam Chair. First off, I just need to get it clearly on the record I'm not raising any of this to delay or derail this bill in any way. I want this bill to pass, and I want it to pass in this sitting. I support the Legislative Development Protocol. I support the process convention. These are minor tweaks to the bill to improve transparency and accountability. This is about the public aspects of this bill. This is not about anything else. And I think it's a debate that we can and should have on the floor of this House. That's always been my objective as an MLA throughout my year eight years in this place, is to increase openness, transparency, and accountability and that's what I'm trying to do here. This is not ability trying to usurp the codevelopment process of this legislation. This is not about usurping the process convention where we codraft or coreview this bill with the departmental staff, with the Indigenous governments, and Minister. That's not what this is about. This is about trying to increase transparency and accountability.
So I want this bill done and I just want it done right, and I want a few minor tweaks. That's what I'm here to talk about tonight.
So the things that this bill there's a lot of wording in here. What this really does is add two three things to the annual report that the forest superintendent would do. We've actually just heard the Minister say they're okay with that. So I don't know I'm hoping that the Minister and Cabinet will actually support this addition. This Minister just said that he was okay with it. So (a) or the first thing to be added is any research activities of the forest superintendent under paragraph 15(3)(b). So remember this: We're talking about a summary. We're not talking about all research activity. This is a summary of the research that the forest superintendent intends to undertake under 15(3)(b) of the Act. This is not about any other research that the forest superintendent may do. This is about the what the forest superintendent is explicitly allowed to do under the legislation. So why not get a summary of the research that the forest superintendent does? I think it's a good thing.
Secondly, the other addition here is about adding into the report the total number of inspections and investigations conducted under Part 7. We're not talking about individual case information. This is just to provide some information to the public that and some confidence to the public that, wow, there is actually inspections and investigations taking place under the Act. So they know, wow, it's good; they're actually doing their job. And that's a good thing.
The other thing to be added would be total number and total amount of fines and other penalties imposed in terms of enforcement actions. That's what I find in Part 8. That's probably another good thing for the public to know that if somebody does something contrary to what the legislation, action is taken. It's a good thing. Why wouldn't we want the public not to know about those things? So that's what this is about is adding three small items to the list of things that the forest superintendent would put into an annual report. The Minister's already said he's fine with it. Let's just incorporate it into the bill. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Member. To the motion. Member for Yellowknife North.
Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. We've had this discussion lots in committee on a number of bills. I guess if it was up to me, I don't think I would legislate any annual report in any piece of legislation. We see that they are moving. We see that often you want different things. Sometimes reporting changes over time. I just don't view what the content of a report is as something that's really the purview of the legislature. Government is pretty committed to publishing more and reporting on far more. We just have added a lot of these clauses, it will cost a lot of government, and I just think there's a better way to tackle it. Thank you.
Thank you, Member. To the motion. Sorry, Member for Thebacha.
Thank you, Madam Chair. It's not very often I agree with Rylund. That's a first time in after four years, it's one time. So, you know, I feel the same way. I'm not going to be writing a forest superintendent's criteria of his job description in a bill. That's up to that's up to the deputy minister and that's up to the people that supervise his department. And I refuse to do that. I think that the bill has been put before us, and it was done by the Indigenous groups and our people. And I refuse to go there. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you, Member for Thebacha. To the motion. Minister of ECC.
Thank you, Madam Chair. I do not support this motion. The GNWT has already agreed to previous standing committee amendments that add mandatory provision to report annually on forest management activities. The amendment adds any research activity to the annual report requirements. This addition is vague and considerable effort would be needed to track everything that the forest superintendent may research over the period of the year. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. To the motion. Member for Frame Lake, the Member who
Yeah, thanks, Madam Chair. I just want to respond to a couple items I heard there. I believe this is within the purview of the legislature. Part of our job part of why I got elected was to make sure that this government is more transparent and more accountable moving forward, and that's what I tried to do over eight years.
Plus, I think this is simply responding to some of the concerns and issues we heard as a standing committee about the forest superintendent having some new authority but no duty to do any of it. So how do we know if the forest superintendent's actually doing these things? Well, we have you know, an annual report is one way to find out. So that's why this was added in.
As to the details of this, about it being vague, well, it's no more vague than, you know, roman numeral three under (a) here, any monitoring under section subsection 26(1). How is that any more vague than or sorry, how's that you know, how's that any clearer than adding research activities? I just don't get it. So this is not vague. This is saying that the forest superintendent has to report on the research that's conducted pursuant to 15(3)(b). Not any other research. And it's to be a summary, that's all. So this response to what we heard increases transparency, accountability. The Minister, a few minutes ago, when the Minister was in the witness table, said that he was okay with this. Now he's saying he's not. I don't know what's going on here, but I believe this is in the public interest to increase transparency and accountability about what the forest superintendent does. And I think it's a good thing in the public interest to add these three items, so I will support it. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you. To the motion.
Question.
