Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to ask a question to the Minister of Environment and Natural Resources on his update on the Protected Areas Strategy. As people might be aware, the Deh Cho has been in discussions a long time, particularly with communities that have put their faith in the Protected Areas Strategy when it began in 1999. It’s been a long, drawn-out process. Communities have been involved and elders have been involved. A lot of the elders that were initially involved have passed on, so a lot of the leaders have taken up at least the torch of trying to move forward on some key areas within the Deh Cho. At this point, I think First Nations communities, especially, have put their faith in the negotiations process. They put their faith in this negotiations process that it will work. The other option is through the courts. In the end it’s really a deliberate, well-reasoned choice of trying to put their faith in the negotiations process.
My question to the Minister is: In terms of the discussions on protected areas, can the Minister explain the mandate of his department in the negotiation of protected areas?
Thank you, Mr. Nadli. The honourable Minister of Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Government of the Northwest Territories has a critical role to play as part of this process. We devote a considerable amount of public funds to maintaining the secretariat. We work with other stakeholders, the federal government, the Aboriginal governments, the communities. We work through this eight-step process.
I think it was just recently that one community in particular had worked on trying to advance the eight-step process and I think they’re at the point where they’re trying to conclude one of the stages to ensure that the process continues. Suddenly the government has stepped back and I want to know from the Minister why the department stepped back from the Protected Areas Strategy process.
We remain committed to the process. As we reached the critical point with our negotiations with the devolution process and we’re looking at concluding the deal and doing the transition and implementation so that we can take over those responsibilities, we wanted to make sure that the federal government didn’t, at those late stages, do anything precipitous until we could get ourselves sorted out with devolution and our thinking clear on the steps ahead. We indicated that we were fully committed to getting the groups that weren’t at step five to step five to pull the information together, look at northern tools, negotiate with the federal government about the funds that were available for the five identified national wildlife areas in the Deh Cho. We are, as I indicated today, still committed to that process. I have in my briefing book a list. The farthest, most advanced site is Edehzhie, step six. We are going to conclude that with the federal government and the Dehcho. As I indicated yesterday, we’ve had a meeting with the leadership of the Dehcho. We’ve agreed to remove all the tables plus establish a bilateral process specifically to work on issues of special concern with the Dehcho.
Part of the negotiations process is trying to at least understand the issues and try to mediate and at least meet at a common point where both parties compromise. I think from the start of this process there has been great compromise, especially in terms of communities trying to… Without having a land claims settled First Nations communities have taken a leap of faith in terms of ensuring that this process works. One of the stumbling matters that has become apparent is that one of the policies that this government has stood on is the ratio of 45 percent land.
Can the Minister explain in terms of how this plays out in the negotiations of lands, particularly the PAs, and also the whole Dehcho land claims process. How does that figure prominently in negotiations and what kind of 45 percent ratio of lands fares with the amount of 225 square miles in the Deh Cho?
In our discussions with the leadership of the Dehcho, the issue of the 45 percent was raised, and through the bilateral process that was one of the items that was put on the table for further discussion. We indicated that we have some flexibility and we are prepared to enter into those discussions with them as we sort through that particular issue.
The key underlying principle, of course, is to make sure that, at the end of the day, we have an adequate balance between land that’s available for development that’s going to help the economy as well as recognizing that there are areas of special significance that need to be put aside and the balance between the environment and resource development on culturally appropriate land and those type of significant issues need to be, those pieces need to balance.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final supplementary, Mr. Nadli. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
