Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In regard to the statement made by the Premier on devolution, I asked a few questions regarding the Dene leadership, regardless it’s the Gwich’in, Sahtu, Tlicho, Akaitcho, or Dehcho, which make up a large part of the Northwest Territories land mass which encompasses some of the riches like oil and gas and minerals. The devolution process, the whole reason it got to where it was is because of the Dene/Metis claim which was signed in 1988 in what is now Behchoko and was back then Rae-Edzo, in which they signed it with the idea that the Northern Accord was part and parcel of the Dene/Metis land claim because the Dene/Metis could not negotiate participation agreements like they negotiated the Inuvialuit Agreement and the agreement in Nunavut. That’s why they demanded that “shall consult” and “shall include” the Dene/Metis in the Northern Accord process was fundamental to the Dene/Metis Agreement back then and it is today.
The Gwich’in have similar wording, and the Sahtu have similar wording, and the Tlicho have the same wording. It says the Government of the Northwest Territories shall involve the Gwich’in in development and implementation of the Northern Accord for oil and gas development in the Northwest Territories and which negotiations between the enabling agreement dated September 5, 1988, between Canada and the Government of the Northwest Territories.
I’d like to ask the Premier, noting from your statement, you make reference that you’re inviting the participants back to the table. Like I noted, the Dene/Metis have the right to be at the table, especially the Dene groups that basically were part and parcel to the land claims, but more importantly, to the rights they have. I’d like to ask the Minister why there is such an inconsistency between your statement and what’s in the land claim agreements.
Thank you, Mr. Krutko. The honourable Premier, Mr. Roland.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Quite clearly, I think there is a lot of consistency in the statement. The fact of the way we’ve behaved as a government. When you look at the agreement-in-principle, that got its origin… The Member talks about the Northern Accord of the Dene/Metis comprehensive process. That agreement never got signed and moved forward. That’s why the Gwich’in were the first to do a separate agreement, followed by the Sahtu and now the Tlicho. Other groups are negotiating. In those claims that are settled, those groups that have settled are already benefiting from royalties as part of the claim process. That’s one thing, for example, the Inuvialuit don’t have, because theirs was the first and that option wasn’t on the table.
There are groups benefiting from royalties of developments already in the Northwest Territories. Not this government but some of those groups. The invite, as I’ve worded in my statement, is there, the table is set, the chairs are there, they are ready to be filled if they want to come to the table. They have been a part of the process. They have developed the agreement-in-principle that was signed. They helped pen some of the sections. When you look at chapters 5 and 6 of those sections, those are the strongest parts of an agreement that actually put in place in a final process a government-to-government approach. Not just ad hoc but an actual process that would be protected going forward. So the table’s there and the chairs for all of the groups are at the table. They just need a body to fill them. By signing and moving forward, they would be full participants once again, and the option’s there for them. They have to make the decision to come to the table.
I believe the concern that the Dene have is the way the approach has been taking place, in which I quoted the comment made by the Premier in the Globe and Mail where he stated that he worries he may have been too heavy-handed in ramming it through. I believe you were heavy-handed and you continue to be heavy-handed by not trying to find a workable solution to get these parties involved in the process, but more importantly, how they’re going to be affected through these negotiations and not being party to those talks. I’d like to ask the Premier what you meant that you have been too heavy-handed by ramming it through.
I guess I could do the proverbial “I was misquoted,” but, no, the fact is I was speaking frankly with an interviewer and he asked, well, some people have said you were too heavy-handed in your actions.
Clearly, these were not my actions. They were the actions of the Assembly. The majority of Members agreed that we need to move forward with this process. We decided to do that. Taking the stance and holding the stance, some may consider that heavy-handed and I guess I would look at it that there are some people who would believe that is the action I took and followed.
Quite clearly, one of the things I’ve said right from the start of this Assembly, one of the things I’d heard for decades about Northerners needing to be the leaders in their own land and making decisions in their own land, this is absolutely about that. Let’s take our rightful place. Let’s be the leaders. Let’s be the governments. Let’s not just talk about it.
The only group in the Northwest Territories that really have real ownership of land in the Northwest Territories is the Dene people. They have been here for countless generations. They have Treaty 8 and Treaty 11. They have a fundamental right to the land in the Northwest Territories, regardless if it’s lands through treaties or lands through modern land claims. They have the right to those lands that you’re talking about. If you’re imposing legislative decisions on those groups on their land without them at the table, to me that’s a fundamental flaw of where you’re going as a government.
I’d like to ask the Minister how you can state that you are willing to continue to race full speed ahead and not include those groups that have a fundamental right to lands in the Northwest Territories and have a proven track record to those lands, regardless through the Paulette court case or the land claim agreements.
Before I respond directly to the question, I must thank the Member, I guess. We can have one more lively question and answer process. This is going to be our last opportunity. We have one more day coming up to debate such an important subject, and I must say the Member has been very consistent in his approach and his values placed on Aboriginal leadership and the fact that we need to take our responsible place in decision-making here in the Northwest Territories.
Along with that, I think we’re so close, and I’ve said this to the Aboriginal leadership in the territory. We’re speaking almost the same language. In speaking to the president of the Gwich’in Tribal Council at the assembly, he said a lot of times we get tangled up in the process, and I think that is one of the things here. The process is what we’re tripping up on, but we believe in the principle that we need to be making decisions and benefiting from those decisions in the North.
When you look at the land claims, Mr. Speaker, we’re following those land claims. They do have a right. That is why they were part of the development of the agreement-in-principle. They also have a seat at the table should they choose to, and it is their decision to choose to. We have opened the door. The seat is ready for them. It’s not about saying, well, you can come in if we think about it.
In another instance with the regional leadership process we started in the 16th Assembly well over a year ago, I put on the table the concept of the Council of Federation, much like we’ve taken place, and prior to that, and I believe it was the premiership of Premier Kakfwi of the day who signed that agreement on behalf of the Northwest Territories. Prior to that we were on the outside in the hallway waiting to be invited in. When you look at that principle, we have now created a table where they can be in there, should they choose to.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. Your final, short supplementary, Mr. Krutko.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’d like to reverse the statement made by the Premier. That’s exactly how the Dene people are feeling today. They are feeling they’re sitting outside the room and they’re waiting to be invited in, and technically they don’t have to be. I think that is the problem with this process and I think the Premier nailed it right on the head. How we felt when we’re basically sitting on the sidelines of the federation of the governments across Canada is how the Dene people feel today because of this Devolution Agreement.
I’d like to ask the Premier, prior to signing off the agreement there was an attempt made for a protocol agreement to try to work out these arrangements through a workable situation moving forward, and also those sections of the land claim agreements you noted, they have to be implemented by way of whatever legislation we come forward with. I’d like to ask the Premier exactly what are we doing as government to find a way to get those groups back into the tent, to the table, and allow them to raise issues and concerns that are going to affect them through resource development into the future?
Through the process we’ve been engaged in, we continue to update all of the Aboriginal groups including those who haven’t signed and are not right now a part of the formal negotiations. But as I said, there is a spot at the table. There is a chair waiting for someone to take up that seat and become part of the process. The door is open for them to come in. It’s a decision they need to make. In fact, we’ve put through this government a request for dollars to help with the Aboriginal groups to be a part of that process. We’ve opened the door, we’re providing funds, and we continue to keep that door open.
Thank you, Mr. Roland. Colleagues, I’m trying to give the Members as much leeway as possible in questions here, but at the rate we’re going with the preambles, we’re going to be lucky to get eight Members in. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.
