Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 19th, 2009

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Yes, and right now our territorial government has invested in almost all the river crossings that are on the Wrigley to Norman Wells route. They're just building the Blackwater bridge at an expense of $14 million. They had plans to do the Bear River for $32 million, so our government's moving in that direction, to link Norman Wells and the Sahtu.

The opportunities in the Sahtu region for economic development are very large, and Sahtu is calling out for that. We have an existing oil pipeline there that's only at a maximum of about 40% capacity right now, so we have the ability to move even more oil out of that region with exploration than we do now.

Does that describe the situation there a little better?

[Terry Kruger]

I'm not familiar totally with the capacity of the pipeline, but that could be true.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Mr. Ritchie, I know your desire to create sustainable communities. How would you envision a small community in the north being sustainable?

[Doug Ritchie]

Thank you.

I think one of the real threats to the sustainability of communities is the price of oil. As Terry was mentioning, many communities are very dependent on using diesel generation.

In 2008 we experienced the price of oil going up to $150 a barrel, and that was in July. That was at the exact same time that many of the communities through the GNWT were essentially buying their oil supply. So they got stuck with that high price even though the oil wasn't delivered until probably October, when the price was much, much lower.

I think one of the real challenges to economic development in the Northwest Territories is our dependency on oil. We import something in the order of 450 million litres of gasoline and diesel per year, and a doubling of prices would go from approximately $500 million in terms of imports to $1 billion in terms of imports.

So we believe there is a looming cost-of-living crisis if you start to believe some of the predictions of energy analysts who are saying that oil prices will be increasing, and I think, incredibly, it's no longer the granola-eating, Birkenstock-wearing, flaky environmentalists, but it is the more mainstream bankers, such as Jeff Rubin, the International Energy Agency. So certainly there's a growing consensus that the cheap oil is gone, expensive oil is here. Therefore, that's going to be a real challenge.

So I believe fundamentally that communities particularly do not have ready access to alternatives such as mini-hydro. We need to look at ways of increasing their independence. Hopefully, we can finish off those communities that have access to mini-hydro. Hopefully, we can experiment further with wind generation that's already starting in Tuk.

I really do believe it is absolutely vital in the north that we develop energy alternatives and the way you do it is to start doing it. I think in some communities such as—

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you very much. If there's another thought there that you wanted to get out, you may have an opportunity with responding to other questions.

Thank you, Mr. Ritchie. And thank you, Mr. Bevington, as well.

Let's go to Mr. Duncan for five minutes.

[John Duncan, Conservative, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Thank you very much.

It seems like I have a connection with each of the panels here. Mr. Kruger and I go back a long way, to newspaper days in Powell River, so it's fascinating to reconnect.

Just to carry on the segue into the energy question that you were talking about, Mr. Ritchie, it was interesting that out of the first panel we certainly got a strong priority on the Taltson project. That's just one of many. We have, I think, a similar priority on the real need for energy independence, efficiency, and alternate sources other than petrocarbon. So that is good.

I appreciated your comments about the highway system. We know we've been through a long, long exercise on the Mackenzie gas project. If we were to say tomorrow that we want to build the Mackenzie Highway, what kinds of hurdles and impediments are there in terms of the permitting process? Do we have consensus everywhere? Or would there be concerted opposition to this connector?

That question is really for both of you.

[Doug Ritchie]

I don't think Alternatives North has actually weighed in on the issue of the Mackenzie Highway. I would just say that we need to make sure that there is an appropriate level of environmental review of the road. One of the big issues, I would imagine, is the regulatory regime in the Northwest Territories. Alternatives North is of the view that this is the regulatory regime that flowed out of land claims agreements and by and large continues to be supported by the land claims groups. I think it's basically something we are here for.

I would argue that given the whole era of climate change, the project requires a strong environmental review process. For instance, there have been over 2,000 landslides documented throughout the Mackenzie Valley, so if we're going to build a road, it's really important that there be some time and effort spent to make sure that it will not damage the environment, that they choose the route carefully.

So essentially what we're saying is it deserves a proper environmental review, and I would love to spend more time addressing the regulatory system, but I think that was not the intent of your question. I would love to elaborate. The short answer is it should be subject to an environmental review and we just have to be careful that we're not making our environmental situation worse and we're not making it more costly than it need be.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Mr. Kruger.

[Terry Kruger]

I don't really want to take a position on how an environmental review would work. That's something I would like to refer to my board. We could provide an answer back on their vision for what kind of review would need to take place, but I can say that with respect to constructing the highway we've had a resolution on the books since at least 1993 that the highway needs to be completed. As I said, we adopted two resolutions in May at our AGM. They were unanimously adopted by our member communities. So the association's members are fully behind completing the highway.

[John Duncan, Conservative, Vancouver Island North, BC]

You don't think there are stakeholder groups out there that would really put up a stiff opposition?

[Terry Kruger]

I would like to defer that to my board.

[John Duncan, Conservative, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Moving to education, which is an important building block for--

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We'll have to move that to the next question. We're at our five minutes there.

[John Duncan, Conservative, Vancouver Island North, BC]

Why did you let me start?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

In fact, I didn't. We'll wrap it up there and we'll go to our second round, but there will be time, Mr. Duncan.

Let's go now to Mr. Bagnell for five minutes.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

Merci, Monsieur le président.

Gens du pays, Mr. Ritchie, Drin quassy shalakat.

Terry, I just want you to know that the head of NWTAM, Yvette Gonzalez, is a legend in Canada. She's the longest-standing person in that position and she's a great leader, a legend across Canada in municipal government progress in the last decade or two.

I mostly want to talk about infrastructure, because I don't understand how the system works here compared to my area. When we created the infrastructure programs, they were primarily for municipalities, because they have a small tax base, as you well know, and they need that help. But a year ago we were in full recession and yet some of the municipalities in my riding of the Yukon tell me that they still have not completed stimulus projects or gotten approvals. I know we have a different process from what you have, so I would just like to know if it's working well, if most of your municipalities have federal infrastructure projects. Does NWTAM have the input it would like into these decisions? Is it a good process? I'm not talking about the gas tax, but the municipal infrastructure projects, and how all that works and if it's working well.

[Terry Kruger]

In the Northwest Territories, each community got responsibility for developing its own infrastructure program in 2007. So it's a fairly new program. Each community gets a certain amount of funding from the Government of the Northwest Territories, and that is what they use. They each get a share of $28 million a year, which they can apply to infrastructure development. They use their share against federal funding or what not.

In terms of how the process works, I think our members are pleased with how the Building Canada program works. I mentioned that there were some challenges with rink funding and some disappointment with rink funding, which we've expressed publicly to the minister. Per capita funding just doesn't work here in the north. And I know that there are some challenges in getting applications done because of short timeframes.

A lot of our communities are small, as I mentioned. They may have an SAO, a senior administrative officer, who may be the only staff person for that community government. It's that person's job not only to work on the budget but to handle the community accounts, to make sure that their water-truck drivers are delivering water, that sewage is picked up, and that everything is functioning. So there has to be a great deal of coordination between our community governments, especially the small ones, and the Department of Municipal and Community Affairs. I know that MACA is involved in the capital planning, and has to be involved in the capital planning, to help get the applications done and to make sure that everything goes through the appropriate process.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

It sounds as if, with Building Canada, each municipality gets its money up front and can decide. It doesn't have to be approved by the NWT government. That's good. I think it's different in our area.

I have a question about the rink funding. There are between 50 and 100 communities north of 60. I think you suggested that the total that's flowed so far in the first two years is less than $1 million north of 60. Was that true in the figures you gave?

[Terry Kruger]

It would have been just over $1 million: $567,000 went to Nunavut in the first round of funding, and then seven NWT communities just received approval within the past ten days, I believe, for a total of $550,000 in funding. I'm not sure what's happening in the Yukon.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

For this $1 million, how many communities of the between 50 and 100 communities north of 60 could build a hockey arena?

[Terry Kruger]

I don't know what it costs to build a hockey arena.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

You don't know for your average NWT community.

[Terry Kruger]

I'm not familiar with those costs. I'm sorry.

[Larry Bagnell, Liberal, Yukon, YT]

The per capita funding makes absolutely no sense at all. You can do very, very little with it, which is why we put in base funding for municipal infrastructure. You would have gotten $500,000, with which you could have done a few feet of road in the north. Instead, people got a $15 million base for each territory, plus their $500,000. You're right. We're certainly onside with you that the rink funding should not be per capita. It should be base funding, not per capita.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We'll have to leave it at that.

Now we'll go to Mr. Payne for five minutes.

Thank you, Mr. Bagnell.