Debates of October 23, 2013 (day 37)

Date
October
23
2013
Session
17th Assembly, 4th Session
Day
37
Speaker
Members Present
Hon. Glen Abernethy, Hon. Tom Beaulieu, Ms. Bisaro, Mr. Blake, Mr. Bromley, Mr. Dolynny, Mrs. Groenewegen, Mr. Hawkins, Hon. Jackie Jacobson, Hon. Jackson Lafferty, Hon. Bob McLeod, Hon. Robert McLeod, Mr. Menicoche, Hon. Michael Miltenberger, Mr. Moses, Mr. Nadli, Hon. David Ramsay, Mr. Yakeleya
Topics
Statements

QUESTION 362-17(4): DISPUTE RESOLUTION MECHANISMS IN DEALINGS WITH ABORIGINAL GOVERNMENTS

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My question is to the Premier, Mr. McLeod. I just wanted to highlight I reference several elders and I just wanted to mention the elders like Leo Norwegian, the late Leo Norwegian, Gabe and Mary Cazon, George Boots, the late Paul Wright. Just a few elders that were at the meeting with Mr. Martinez back in 1999, and a lot of them have passed on. It’s unfortunate that a lot of the promises that were made in the treaties remain unfulfilled.

What recourse do First Nations have at this point to address especially the unsettled land claim areas? Now, we take the view that those regions that don’t have settled land claims are basically called historical treaties and First Nations are encouraged to negotiate at the table. Sometimes there are conflicts and what recourse do First Nations have? My question is to the Premier. What recourse do First Nations have when governments ignore and do not address their concerns?

Speaker: MR. SPEAKER

Thank you, Mr. Nadli. The honourable Premier.

Governments have a historical and special relationship with Aboriginal, specifically treaty, people. Here in the Northwest Territories, we have an opportunity to show the rest of Canada and the world how to improve and do things better in the area of negotiations, settling land claims and working together, having a good relationship with Aboriginal governments, and I think we’re making a lot of progress in that area.

I’ve said many times that in the historical treaty areas that the Member is talking about, the difference is that those Aboriginal governments believe in the oral version of the treaties. They don’t believe in the written version of the treaties. The Constitution of Canada refers to the written versions and modern land claims and self-government, so I think that’s a decision that Aboriginal governments have to make.

We as a government are working. We have the process with the Dehcho First Nation to try to find a way to move forward, and I think we’ve been having some good discussions. We’re hoping to establish a similar arrangement with the Akaitcho at some point and I think that’s been happening. As everybody knows, it started out as a Dene and Metis comprehensive land claim, but because of their differences and development, it split out into a number of regional land claims and even to community land claims and self-government, so for those that feel they want to make progress, they’ve looked at those other options as well.

I think the NWT prides itself in providing leadership in terms of First Nation issues and leading the way in terms of coming up with key agreements. The unfortunate reality is that if you negotiate and if you don’t agree with governments, governments have the power of withdrawing funding and basically walking away from the table, which leaves the option of First Nations to seek perhaps a remedy through the courts. Other parts of Canada do have systems in place, and I’m encouraged that the Minister has indicated that we want to show the other parts of Canada how to improve the system of working with First Nations.

Would the Premier agree in principle to the idea of having a commission that could be struck up between the First Nations and governments to oversee disputes that go unabated, that are not addressed, and to try to perhaps speed up the unresolved land claims process?

I think we have taken the lead in that area once again. Once devolution is implemented, we will have an intergovernmental council; we will be working with all of the Aboriginal governments that sign on to devolution, working together, and I think that in that way that’s the best way to resolve disputes. For those that haven’t signed on yet, we’re still very optimistic that we’ll hopefully see that happen within the next year or so.

Does the GNWT support the work of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission extending beyond July 1, 2014? If so, how has that support been expressed to the federal government?

Speaker: MR. SPEAKER

Mr. Nadli, I’ll allow the question if the Premier will take it, but it’s two different topics. If you want to redo your question, Mr. Nadli.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Could the Premier update us in terms of how it is that this government is working with the federal government in terms of ensuring that work with truth and reconciliation continues? Mahsi.

Speaker: MR. SPEAKER

Same question. Mr. Premier.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. We’ve been a very big supporter of the truth and reconciliation process. We think they have been doing an excellent job. If we are asked and if we are prepared to continue to work with them, we will work with them to include the history of residential school in our curriculum, working with Aboriginal governments, and I think that we would be prepared to work with them if we are asked to do so and try to extend the process. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Speaker: MR. SPEAKER

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Member for Inuvik Boot Lake, Mr. Moses.