Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’ve received a copy of the recent e-mail from INAC’s Ottawa-based director of resource policy and programs updating agencies and groups on progress under the federal government’s May 2010 Action Plan to Improve the Northern Regulatory Regime. The memo refers to work on developing an NWT surface rights board act. I don’t recall committee receiving any information on this. Certainly I’ve heard nothing on any action that could redefine the jurisdiction of the NWT Water Board. I’m wondering if the appropriate Minister could tell me whether his department is aware of and/or participating in these surface rights consultations.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Minister responsible for Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. Miltenberger.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As we discussed somewhat in this House last week, this process is driven by the federal government. They’ve, for the most part, treated the GNWT as just another stakeholder. There’s been some improvement in that relationship since the signing of the AIP. The proposed surface rights legislation which is contemplated in the MVRMA, there was a first draft done in 2010 and we’re still waiting for a possible second draft. Things were delayed because of the election.
I appreciate the Minister’s remarks. I just hope the others that are being consulted include their membership a little more efficiently, or at all, than our Minister has. So far my best source of detailed information on the Mackenzie Valley Resource Manage Act, surface rights and Water Board matters is an industry journal and the sharing of information by public parties. Yet principle three, as you know, of the 10 Guiding Principles of Consensus Government, includes “open and respectful communication between all Members is the most essential feature of consensus government. While it is impossible to reach unanimous agreement on all issues, the opportunity for all Members to have meaningful input into important decisions is fundamental.” I would suggest that the MVRMA is important to our Members. Can the Minister explain how the record of consultation with Members on these amendments honours the 10 Guiding Principles?
The Member has been quoting from documents that I don’t have. I take his point about consultation. This is a federal process. This is federal legislation. We have been, for the most part, up until recently, treated like a stakeholder, much to our chagrin. They’re expecting the second draft. Most of the changes being contemplated at this point are legislative in nature. There’s been no significant reply to our response to the McCrank Report that we submitted back in 2009 where there was significant changes put forward and recommended by Mr. McCrank, some of which we took exception to and did not support. That report is public and filed. This process so far is federally driven and is focussing a lot, by our estimation, on legislative changes.
Thanks to the Minister again. If I could just ask him to imagine if he feels chagrined at being treated as a stakeholder, what Members on this side of the House are feeling at not being consulted at all.
INAC’s arbitrary May 12th deadline for the MVRMA consultations has come and gone. The invitation to provide input was apparently even suspended by the department during the federal election, although no corresponding extension to the deadline was given. Committee and Assembly Members had no opportunity to provide their views during this consultation. The act itself actually has specified conditions that must be met for peer consultation. Will the Minister commit to contacting the DIAND Minister and asking that the deadline be extended while the input of Members is requested and included in this government’s response?
My understanding is that the deadlines that were set by the federal government have slipped because of the election. Cabinet is not going to be sworn in or appointed until possibly tomorrow. We have this on our list to follow up on, along with many other issues. I will, of course, make note of the Member’s concerns.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Final supplementary, Mr. Bromley.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I appreciate the Minister taking note of my concerns. I’m just hoping that means actually consulting with us, keeping us informed what he finds out and so on. We’ve had McCrank; we’re waiting for the Pollard Report. The possibly connected MVRMA surface rights and Waters Act consultations are underway in some unexplained way. We have the devolution AIP and we have yet to ask our citizens for their specific views on these important matters. Can the Minister say when we’re going to put aside these regulatory scatter guns, get our Aboriginal partners back at the table, invite the specific views of our citizens, and proceed with one comprehensive made-in-the-NWT approach to charting our regulatory future? I’d prefer to see this before we take the plunge, not after.
This whole process is a classic example of why Northerners have to have control over their own decision-making in this area; regulatory reform and resource development, land and water.
Here we are in this Assembly trying to find out what the federal government’s up to. They haven’t told us clearly. They’ve made some comments about something dramatic that they want to do. We are concerned that they’re going to do things that are not going to be in our best interest as a territory. There’s been some improvement in relationships since the signing of the AIP where now the federal government has acknowledged that we’re in the process of transferring that responsibility finally to Northerners.
If the Member is content to sit here as a second-class Canadian waiting for the federal government to decide our future, then we will be here for a long time. I don’t think that is what most people want, not listening to the results of Mr. Abernethy’s poll that he took. We are moving on this. This is a classic reason why we want devolution. Members will be kept involved, but at this point we do not control this process. The federal government still has the authority to do something dramatic and we don’t know what that is.
Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Hawkins.
