Kieron Testart

Thank you, Mr. Chair. You know, of the issues that have been raised around protecting public infrastructure, or I shouldn't say that, not protecting public infrastructure, but avoiding conflict when the rights contained in this act impact the infrastructure of municipal public interests, if the government is not content to seek changes in statute, what is their approach? How are we going to resolve this and keep these matters out of the courts and provide certainty beforehand, so they don't end up in the courts? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

For greater clarity, the government will not attempt to bring forward regulations that contradict or add conditions above and beyond what are included in land right agreements? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I seek unanimous consent to move to item 6, recognition of visitors in the gallery, on the orders of the day. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

---Unanimous consent granted

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think that the last speaker was very apt. This is a complicated set of governance in the Northwest Territories. It gets even more complicated when you bring in designated authorities, but I think that the point here is to achieve the consistency that was obtained with the lands act.

I think that land is as significant a management issue as subsurface rights, and to think that we would have municipalities informed of land transfers, but not informed of intended work, really doesn't give them the tools that they need to understand what is going around them. The community...

Will industry be engaged as well? I thought this was to resolve disputes between industry and Indigenous partners. Are we just going to engage one side of the equation here? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are all pressed for time, so we are doing the best we can, I think. The House is doing the best it can.

On the motion proper, I think that there is a need for a more global transparency environment that kind of governs how we do this across the board, not just for the minerals industry, but also for oil and gas, and that might be a standalone piece of legislation. It might be consequential amendments, a bill that amends several pieces of legislation to deal with this, but just putting the cart before the horse in regards to what we know is coming, a comprehensive review...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. On the clause as amended, the new clause 1(2)(b) is saying that the requirements in subsection (1) can qualify if there is an existing agreement, but it also speaks to regulations.

Just for greater certainty, does the Minister envision a situation where, let's say, X mining company applies for a production licence; they meet the qualifications of the Tlicho agreement, for example; and then they go to the Minister and say, "We have this agreement. It meets the Tlicho land rights agreement." Will the Minister then say that that passes muster, "You have your benefits...

How does industry, then, build a new zone or create a new zone to enable prospecting permits once they expire after 15 years and the act comes into force? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Nothing further.

Thank you. You know, I am not trying to frustrate process here, Mr. Chair. We are trying to get clear answers, and what we heard was rationales referencing other parts of the bill that do not really relate to the point the Member raised, so, you know it's going to be a long night if we continue along this road. These are important questions that have not been satisfactorily answered. Nothing more, thank you.