Mr. Speaker, this motion is a reflection of the voice of the people of the Northwest Territories. They have written a petition, phoned, e-mailed, demonstrated, spoken at engagement sessions and petitioned, again, all without a single nod from either the Premier or the Minister of Industry to indicate that their voices have been heard.
The whereases of this motion speak clearly to those broad and deeply felt concerns about fracking, perspectives that have been clearly expressed by all of our regional Aboriginal governments and by all of those jurisdictions that have instituted bands and moratoria on fracking.
Concern for water is one of the first and most fervent ones I hear about from our residents. People consider water our most precious resource, our most precious and life-sustaining resource. They tell me that permanently contaminating great volumes of it with hydraulic fracturing chemicals and ultimately storing it in this state under unknown security forever is against their values, disrespectful and against the laws of nature. Many are knowledgeable about the science behind the impacts of fracking and point out the commonality between their concerns about water, their values and the concerns being expressed in scientific studies.
People are also not convinced that the NWT regulator is able to regulate fracking safely when so many people have expressed concerns; when the Canadian Council of Academies study, commissioned by Environment Canada, underscores the unknown risks involved; and where there are incidences of such failures to successfully manage risks, failures that resulted in human illness and health impacts, polluted service and potable underground water bodies, toxic air emissions and soaring greenhouse gas emissions. People know of the hordes of non-disclosure agreements that attempt to, and often do, obscure the facts.
I appreciate the Minister’s and regulator’s apparent confidence as he promotes this form of exploitation, but I cannot help but see the people’s point that he has no experience on which to base this dangerously naive endorsement of such a controversial practice.
Our public has watched our neighbour, the Yukon Legislature, conduct a comprehensive, transparent, thorough and public review of fracking and come to the conclusion, similar to the Canadian Council of Academies, that they could not agree that it was safe and the risks manageable. All of this over a two-year period, while our residents passed a blanket of regional government resolutions and territory-wide petitions with record numbers of signatures in repeated but unsuccessful efforts to get GNWT to recognize the degree of concern that people have.
At the same time, people were calling for participation in an environmental review of ConocoPhillips’ proposed fracking projects. Despite the opportunity to hear the people’s voice and despite having the power to support the public’s call, the ConocoPhillips project went ahead without this review, “partly,” our government said, “to demonstrate how fracking can be done safely.” Where are the evaluation projects residents were led to expect?
People have heard about the many close calls, the jackknifed trucks of produced water, the onsite incidents and accidents with the water and sewage spills. They know that there were months of gas flaring, but they are told the types and amounts of emissions are proprietary for now.
People are clearly calling for a discussion of what the science says about the risks of the fracking, what elders’ traditional knowledge says about fracking, and what the concerns of our youth are, as our youth are the ones most affected by our decisions today.
Our people have questions, opinions, thoughts, insights, and values that they want to present and have considered. They are saying they aren’t being heard and that this is unacceptable.
The Premier says we worked so hard for devolution of authority over our land and resources in order to give the people of the North a voice and bring governance home to reside with the people. Well, we have devolved, but this government chooses not to hear the people despite the clear and persistent communications through all the channels available to them. For shame. For shame.
You will hear about balance and how we must weigh the health of our planet against the jobs in energy our people need. Yet again, people and scientists tell me we have balanced ourselves into a place where our addiction to oil is now threatening human civilization’s very survival. Balance has brought us worldwide and extreme water woes and species extinctions unseen since the last big planetary catastrophe, and disastrous weather patterns, all of which cumulatively dwarf the benefits of any last gasp attempts to exploit remote, extremely expensive and barely accessible fossil fuels. If this is balance, people want none of it here in the Northwest Territories.
People want a thorough discussion about fracking, but they are not opposed to truly sustainable development. They have many perspectives to share on how to pursue those opportunities, but this is beyond the scope of this motion. The motion today reflects their call for a minimum two-year moratorium on fracking, or until a comprehensive public review of the risks of fracking is completed and the public indicates whether those risks are acceptable or not.
There is an old Navajo proverb that you can’t wake up a person who is pretending to be asleep. I sincerely hope there are exceptions to this observation and that this Minister, this regulator, and this Premier will stop pretending to be deaf to the people’s voice. Wake up and show it with their support for this motion.
I thank my seconder, the Member for Mackenzie Delta, and my colleagues for their support in bringing this motion forward, and I look forward to further discussion.
I will be calling for a recorded vote.
Thank you, Mr. Bromley. The Member is seeking a recorded vote. All Members in favour of the motion, please stand.
Mr. Bromley, Mr. Blake, Mr. Nadli, Mr. Hawkins, Ms. Bisaro.
All those opposed, please stand.
Mr. Yakeleya; Mr. Beaulieu; Mr. Abernethy; Mr. Miltenberger; Mr. McLeod – Yellowknife South; Mr. Lafferty; Mr. Ramsay; Mr. McLeod – Inuvik Twin Lakes; Mr. Dolynny; Mr. Bouchard; Mr. Moses.
All those abstaining, please stand. Five in favour, 11 opposed. The motion is defeated.
---Defeated
By the authority given to me as Speaker by Motion 10-17(5), I hereby authorize the House to sit beyond the daily hour of adjournment to consider business before the House.
Mr. Hawkins.
Mr. Speaker, today’s motion is a plebiscite. It’s a motion calling for clear guidance from the public to the Legislature. This motion is something that none of us can lose on if we vote in favour of it. Imagine, Mr. Speaker, this is our opportunity to get the opinion of the public.
Fracking is defined as the topic of today. You see this question all over the place, not just here, not in the Northwest Territories, not in Canada, but all over the world. This is an important question for our time. So, it’s not just about what we think we know about fracking, it’s also about what we want to know from the public, which is how do they feel.
This motion is simply asking about the authority to frack, nothing more. It doesn’t go along and ask the people how to frack, it asks the question, simply, “Should we be allowed fracking in the Northwest Territories?”
We have polls out there, like the old Nik Nanos that reach out by calling people and they all have margin of errors. But a plebiscite would come forward and it would be clear. It would be in black and white, of the public’s opinion.
Now, some will say, and they will be right about this, that the Northwest Territories government is out there getting people’s opinions on hydraulic fracturing under the regulations process, and what’s at play here is it’s not about should fracking happen, it’s about how to frack. It’s quite a bit different. They’re not the same issue.
Should we not ask the permission of the people on such an important issue? It may be correct that they should ask how to frack, but I think that’s one step ahead of where we should be today. We need to realize this before we continue too far down that path, before we forget to look back.
Let me stress, Mr. Speaker, this is a plebiscite. The plebiscite asks for clear direction, a public opinion, and a plebiscite motion is non-binding. Under Section 48 of the Elections and Plebiscites Act, it clearly spells out that it isn’t binding on the Legislative Assembly, on its Executive Council, or any other person under that purview. So, if it’s non-binding, there’s nothing for us to be afraid of. If anything, it shows great courage that we were willing to go out to the people and ask them their opinion. Leadership sometimes thinks that. It’s not about making decisions in isolation and there’s certainly no shame in asking the public what they want. If anything, we should feel enormously proud that we’ve used our democracy in a way that works. We’ve gone to the public saying, “What do you think?” We have the ability to make these choices. Let us use that courage to deal with this issue in that manner.
Now, there will be those in favour of fracking, and let me assure them, by supporting this motion it shows leadership, as well, because it is the direction from the masses. We should not be hiding behind maybe a few people making this decision. Let’s involve everyone as part of it.
This is an ideological question. It’s an environmental question. If anything, this is a question about the future. So let us gain power from the strength of ourselves reaching out to the strength of our people and stand strong and tall. This is certainly the lifetime opportunity we’ve been looking for by being willing to ask this type of question.
To be clear, this government technically doesn’t have a mandate from its people; and the style of government that we run, which is consensus government, never gets one. But wouldn’t it be neat if this was a way we could break ranks and allow our Ministers a free vote? Wouldn’t this be a neat way to get a mandate from the people of the Northwest Territories on one clear issue? A mandate could say, one way or the other, if the Territories supports fracking or not. It would be definitive; it would be clear; it would be black and white. We would be able to go forward as a government, as a people.
Now, some would say, “Well, let’s wait. We could do this in September.” Well, you know, there is no technical sweet spot of when we do these things. You either do them or you don’t. So we can wait and we can do an information campaign now; we can wait and do it later; or we could probably not do it at all. But we have to ask ourselves, when would be the right time, and now is it. I trust the public, I really do, and I think the public deserves the opportunity to have their voice heard on this one.
This is not a trivial issue and I wish people would not try to pretend that everything’s perfect. We all know that there has been, and I’ll be fair, there have been experiences where fracking has not been done well – and there should be no denial of that – and at the same time there have been places where fracking has been done very safely and we know that. But this is an ideological question. This is not a question about has it been done right or has it not been done right. This is a question about what type of northern development do we want here. This issue, honestly, will define a generation, like climate change. I link it to that. How many issues do we have the world talking about? Not many. Let us not miss this opportunity to rise to the occasion.
Now, some don’t think this is important and, you know, making a decision, I hope they do see this is important. But people will ask, “Where were you when this decision was made, this incredible decision was made?” People will also ask you, “Where were you and how did you decide as part of this very important decision?” The opportunity to make this decision – empower the people, get them involved, let them be clear – would only cost us $17,500 if it ran during the next General Election, which is about six months away. Without trying to sound critical, of course, I’ve seen this government spend millions of dollars on profoundly less important issues over and over again. That’s an opinion. I’m not trying to say that it’s critical, but we all know spending could be done better in various ways. But I’ll tell you, what an amazing amount of investment and public opinion and mandate that would be clear and definitive for such an affordable price.
Now, if you’re for fracking, I honestly say this actually helps your argument. If the public votes for it, there you go. And if you’re against fracking, well, that helps your argument too. I really don’t see a lot of losers in this situation by asking the people what they want. Let the people play a role in this, because they deserve it. So, this is not about how to frack, this is solely left, should we frack. By the way, to date, to frack or not to frack is left solely in the hands of the seven people on Cabinet. It’s not the 19 of us.
So, back to timing. There’s the old Goldilocks theory and it’s all based on timing. Either too soon, too late, or when it is just right. So, again, some people will say, “Well, let’s wait and leave this motion until September. Let’s put it off until later.” The fact is September is just, frankly, too late. The government or anyone else couldn’t get the right information. The government or anyone else couldn’t get information out in time. That wouldn’t be fair to the issue. That wouldn’t be fair to anyone.
Now, some would have said, “Well, we should have done this last session or maybe even last year.” Mr. Speaker, that wouldn’t have been right either because it would have been so far in advance people would probably not care, not organize properly. So, when is the right time? Now is the right time to make a decision. It’s relevant, and with the regulation discussion going on, the timing doesn’t get better. The public barometer is there. They’re tuning in with their finely tuned antenna, asking themselves, what’s happening? They want a role in this particular situation. They want to know. They want to be involved. They want a say.
This does not interfere with the regulation discussion going on. It could go on at the same time and there’s nothing to be afraid of. It doesn’t debunk that process and, actually, could run concurrently. And there’s no worry, Mr. Speaker, we could do it.
The public is asking for an opinion on this one. I’m asking Members to vote to allow them to have an opinion. Should it succeed, I think we’ve done a monumental thing; that is the motion, that is. We should never be afraid to give the public an opportunity to engage on important issues like this, and frankly, as I said at the beginning, if the plebiscite came forward and whatever the results were, they’re non-binding. The government could use them as good advice on how to do business better, or how to do it differently.
As I come to the end of my opening comments I will say this: What better way to have a mandate from the people of the Northwest Territories? There is no clear method to do this through a public plebiscite. This would give any future government the authority to act and how to act. No one could deny that.
The plebiscite question is about all of those communities and all of those peoples and all of those assemblies talking about one thing – their future – and they want to be part of it. It takes courage amongst all of us to make that type of decision. If this motion fails, I will tell you, the public will never be given another chance to have input in such a similar way as they could today. It’s true they can write letters and they can send e-mails and they can demonstrate until the cows come home outside of the Assembly, but the fact is, this is really the sweet spot for them to have a chance to be part of the process and today is their day. So I ask everyone to think about that when they choose to rise about their comments. When they choose their comments, I ask them, let us give the public the chance to weigh in on this very important issue. Mr. Speaker, absolutely, of course, I’ll want a recorded vote. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. The Member is seeking a recorded vote. All those in favour, please rise.
Mr. Hawkins, Mr. Bromley, Mr. Nadli.
All those opposed, please rise.
Mr. Moses; Mr. Yakeleya; Mr. Beaulieu; Mr. Abernethy; Mr. Miltenberger; Mr. McLeod – Yellowknife South; Mr. Lafferty; Mr. Ramsay; Mr. McLeod – Inuvik Twin Lakes; Mr. Dolynny; Mr. Bouchard.
All those abstaining, please rise.
Ms. Bisaro, Mr. Blake.
Yes, three; no, 11; abstentions, two. Motion is defeated.
---Defeated
Mr. Bouchard.
