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

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

How much time do I have?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

You have just under a minute, Mr. Duncan.

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

We heard testimony in Whitehorse from private sector business involved in road construction and other things basically indicating that the barriers to cross-territorial activity were so great they were prepared to operate in Alaska but they weren't prepared to come back to NWT.

They kept referring to the BIP. I forget exactly what those three letters are about. Is this an ongoing issue and something that your attention is focused on?

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Go ahead. You have time for a short response.

[Floyd Roland]

The BIP, as we call it, the business incentive policy, is something we have in place. We work with northern businesses that are here in the north, built in the north, so to speak, to give them an opportunity to become involved in the economic opportunities that exist.

In some of our smaller communities we could never build our territory or business opportunities up because there were always other companies that were successful and had the expertise. So that's one of the tools we have for creating a more sustainable economy through our smaller companies.

At the same time, when you look at the north, I think that's where the aboriginal groups, in the joint ventures they have, have brought in that expertise. They've partnered with those companies and are big players in some of the oil and gas and mining fields now.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Premier, and thank you, Mr. Duncan.

Now we'll go to the second round of questions. We'll begin with Mr. Russell for five minutes.

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and good morning. I come from the great Labrador riding. I say that for the edification of my colleague, Mr. Rickford, who loves to hear those particular words and phrases.

We came from Yukon, where there is devolution, and there may be certain nuances to their particular devolution agreement that they would like to see refined or maybe amended. Can you give us some tangible examples of where devolution would bring down the barriers to economic development in the territory?

I have to be careful about trying to use other people's words, those of the witnesses, but we also heard in Yukon that they didn't really want to see the abdication of the federal role and the federal responsibilities in certain aspects, particularly in relation to crown-aboriginal relations. So you have that sort of situation of wanting devolution but not wanting to see the abdication of the federal roles and responsibilities.

I'm asking where devolution fits in your vision. How does it bring down the barriers? If we're going to make a recommendation to the federal government, we could say something along the lines that we could expedite the devolution process for the NWT and for Nunavut when we hear from Nunavut. We can say things like that, and we can encourage that.

I just want to get your sense of some practical implications of devolution and where the aboriginal people of NWT fit into that particular picture.

[Floyd Roland]

Well, that's a big question, and we could probably take most of the day on that. However, as for the highlights of that, because I think they need to be highlighted, the approach that would be taken and has been taken is one that includes the aboriginal governments and first nations and aboriginal groups here in the Northwest Territories.

Taking the example of Yukon, Yukon has a regime in place that had devolution happen, and their regulatory process, for example, seems much more streamlined than that of the Northwest Territories.

One of the biggest things we get from industry here in the north or from those companies coming into the north is questions on the regulatory process and on what's in place and where you go. Devolution would help bring that into place, and with the work that we've had with the federal government in trying to do the streamlining, there's been movement on that.

Another thing is the type of development that would happen. The involvement of the people on the ground here would help move the project forward and it would help us diversify our economy.

The north has a history riddled with gold at one time, or oil and gas, and now diamond mines. We've gone from one industry to the next, and we've followed the economic wave with that. Our plan is to diversify and build a stronger economy.

When you talk about the benefits of a project like the Mackenzie gas project, the vast majority of investment there would go to the federal government as well as to some of our colleagues to the south in the provinces.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

You have a minute and 30 seconds, Mr. Russell.

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Does somebody else want to come in on that in terms of a practical point of view? You say streamline the regulatory process. If you have devolution, you're saying you'll probably share more in terms of your own resource revenues, and therefore you can maybe reinvest that the way you see fit.

Are there other examples?

[Floyd Roland]

A practical example would be, as Mr. Miltenberger put it earlier.... Right now, the appointees to the boards that work in the Northwest Territories work through the federal government. We wait for it to approve the names that go on that list. If those don't get dealt with in a timely manner, that delays hearings and meetings.

Unfortunately, we have that to work at. We're working to improve it and put a package in there, but it's always through another avenue, another doorway, another cycle, another business case.

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Very quickly, does it have to be that long? If you make the recommendation now, why would it take the federal government a year to review and then rubber stamp an appointment? God almighty, it shouldn't take that long.

[Floyd Roland]

Our recommendations, for example, to the STRAW report talk about moving some initiatives forward that would not take a lot of work, and appointments are one of those. We have that in place. As to the reasons why...we can't answer that. We've made recommendations to try to improve that.

On the first nations side, we've worked on a different level. Every government before us--regular members of the assembly, members of our cabinet up to my position now, and Mr. Miltenberger, as finance minister--has moved the yardstick from the north ahead, and we continue to do that. Hopefully with the partnerships we've put in place we'll see some significant movement within the remainder of our life as government in the Northwest Territories.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

Thank you, Mr. Russell.

Now we'll go to the next installment, from what I guess will now be called “the great riding round”. We'll go to Mr. Rickford, for five minutes.

Mr. Rickford.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

It's unfortunate that my Liberal colleague stole yet another great Conservative idea, Mr. Chair, but I appreciate it.

[Todd Russell, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

That would be a rarity, Mr. Rickford, but eat it up.

[The Chair, Conservative, Bruce Stanton]

We'll start your time now, Mr. Rickford. Go ahead.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

And thank you to the witnesses here today. I'm going to look at a couple of other files that speak to the importance of relationships with the federal government, the territories, and first nations organizations, and maybe bring some facts into this discussion.

Hopefully I'll get the time to talk a bit about the importance of CanNor and the economic development agency that is very much for the benefit of northerners. Since the applications will be coming from them, I think it's safe to say intellectually that it will be developed by northerners and supported by this federal government.

I have questions around some specific projects. On the contaminated sites for mediation, it's my understanding that there is a significant investment from the federal government. Is there a member from the panel who could identify how much money has been committed to that by the federal government?

[Michael Miltenberger]

Mr. Chair, I don't have the overall number—there are hundreds and hundreds of sites—but it's substantive. In Yellowknife alone, with a Giant mine, I think the federal government investment was about $300 million or so.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Okay, $300 million.

[Michael Miltenberger]

It's probably going to be more than that by the time they finish just that one site.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

As part of those packages, my understanding is that there are significant benefits for first nations communities. These packages and contracts ensure levels of aboriginal employment on each of these remediation sites.

Can anybody from the panel comment on the percentage of first nations aboriginal people that would be working on these projects?

[Michael Miltenberger]

I guess there are two things. The first point is that they're trying to repair extensive damage to the environment that resulted on their land, usually with very minimal involvement from the owners of the land at the time. There would be opportunities, as there have been with some of the mines, if they have the technical expertise.

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Isn't it true, Mr. Miltenberger, that those contracts would ensure that more than 80% of the site projects would employ aboriginal people?

[Michael Miltenberger]

Not necessarily. It could be, but it depends.