Debates of February 17, 2011 (day 41)

Date
February
17
2011
Session
16th Assembly, 5th Session
Day
41
Speaker
Members Present
Mr. Abernethy, Mr. Beaulieu, Ms. Bisaro, Mr. Bromley, Hon. Paul Delorey, Mrs. Groenewegen, Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Jacobson, Mr. Krutko, Hon. Jackson Lafferty, Hon. Sandy Lee, Hon. Bob McLeod, Hon. Michael McLeod, Hon. Robert McLeod, Mr. Menicoche, Hon. Michael Miltenberger, Mr. Ramsay, Hon. Floyd Roland, Mr. Yakeleya
Topics
Statements

MEMBER’S STATEMENT ON GIANT MINE REMEDIATION

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. DIAND’s recent decision to fund participation by outside groups in the environmental assessment of the Giant Mine Remediation Project is good, but late in coming. I want to congratulate DIAND for finally offering participant funding for federal environmental assessment, something that southern Canadians have enjoyed since the 1980s.

As Member’s know, DIAND is again in the conflicted position of being both the project proponent and the regulator. GNWT is a co-proponent under the 2005 cooperation agreement. To further complicate matters, other federal and territorial departments, who would normally appear as interveners in a public review if this were a private firm’s proposal, are working with DIAND to develop the project, so the work by these departments takes place behind closed doors and without any scrutiny.

Now, for the first time in the NWT and after a decade of process, DIAND has approved participant funds under the MVRMA, Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, to three outside bodies: the Yellowknives Dene First Nation, North Slave Metis Alliance and Alternatives North. This allows for informed public oversight of the process and project. The groups have stepped forward to act as the public’s defence attorneys. Without them, the whole kit and kaboodle would be done without hearing a critical outside word.

All of this raises a number of issues. First, rather than being exceptional, such funding should become standard practice. As Mr. Pollard continues on his review of our regulatory system, he has the opportunity and responsibility to listen to our northern boards and see this practice included in his recommendations. These developments also provide a timely commentary on the underfunded and piecemeal resource management regime we are inheriting under the devolution agreement-in-principle and highlights a key issue: Given the costs of an adequate territorial system, does the AIP deal sell us short or does it meet these needs?

Let’s be thankful for such committed guardians of the public interest as Alternatives North, the Yellowknives Dene and North Slave Metis. Hopefully the gains they make on our behalf will be carried forward diligently from now on and after devolution.

I will be asking the Minister questions with respect to the GNWT’s role in participant funding.

Speaker: MR. SPEAKER

Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The honourable Member for Frame Lake, Ms. Bisaro.