Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 24th, 2011

[Greg Rickford, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Forty is a significant number.

And the third objective is to reflect a strong aboriginal voice. This one is a little bit vague in terms of progress to date. Can you give us concrete examples and perhaps some feedback from the groups?

[Paula Isaak]

That is a foundational pillar to ensure that all the activities do respect land claim agreements and that aboriginal groups are involved. It's a foundational piece that underpins all of the activities, whether legislative or monitoring, so they have been actively involved.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you.

Mr. Payne, you have seven minutes.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Thank you, Chair. Through you I'd like to thank the witnesses for coming out today. I'm very pleased to have them here to provide information to us. It's really important to our ongoing study.

For my first question, how does the department address the capacity issues in resource management for the boards?

[Paula Isaak]

I will ask Mr. Gagnon to respond.

[Stephen Gagnon]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you for the question, sir.

As Paula laid out, these are institutions of public government that are at arm's length from the federal government, so our role often falls to providing different kinds of support. We don't have the lead in developing land use plans, for example. That goes to the appropriate commissions, depending on the territory. But we do provide significant core funding and additional funding as and where needed. We've also provided some funding to a group in NWT, for example, that provides capacity development, the Board Forum. It helps train board members and that type of thing.

We're also mindful that sometimes funding delays have the potential to hamper development or the business of these boards, and we're looking to find more efficient ways of getting funding out to the groups so they can plan their year accordingly. A lot of it is financial, but I think we're trying to do it as efficiently as possible. We're looking to improve our efficiency there.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Yes, and I think we all agree that those boards certainly need help, either financially or in terms of being able to put together the necessary programs to ensure that the planning is appropriate.

Next, how is land management different in the north? Certainly there are major differences between the north and the south and between the provinces and the territories. If you could explain that to us, I think that would be very beneficial for the committee.

[Paula Isaak]

There are some key distinctions. I know you've heard from my colleagues in Lands and Economic Development about some of the issues in the south. Probably the key distinctions have to do with the fact that there are few reserves in the north and a significant number of land claim agreements. Those are key distinctions between the north and the south.

The Government of Canada sometimes plays a provincial-type role with respect to land and resource management in the north. I'm not talking about Yukon. The crown land is Government of Canada crown land, as opposed to provincial crown land. There are other land tenures, if you will. Aboriginal governments own significant amounts of land, whether it's Inuit-owned land or aboriginal-owned land. There are territorial hamlet lands as well, similar to municipal lands down south, and then there's private land ownership. There's a mix of lands, but probably the biggest distinction is the one between reserve and non-reserve, as well as the number of land claim agreements that have been settled in the north and the aboriginal land tenure that exists.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Could you also touch on Yukon? You said that there were some differences between the territories and Yukon.

[Paula Isaak]

Land and resource management was devolved to the Yukon government in 2003, which means the Yukon government plays a provincial-type role. They are the land and resource manager. The federal government has small pieces of land left in Yukon. In addition, there are 11 land claim agreements in Yukon. There's quite a large aboriginal land ownership and there are municipalities, private land ownership, etc. The biggest distinction is that Canada does not manage the land and resources in Yukon any more.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

There are some other interesting comments you made about the minister possibly reintroducing the Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act in the spring of 2012. I don't know if there's anything more you can tell us about that or the NWT Surface Rights Board. If you have any further details you could provide us on that, it would be important for us to hear.

[Paula Isaak]

I can provide you with more detail about those two pieces of legislation. NUPPAA is an act, a final legislative piece for the implementation of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement, which sets out the land-use planning and environmental impact review process for Nunavut.

The process is currently under way. It's guided by the language in the land claims agreement, as opposed to being guided by a piece of legislation. This is the piece of legislation that sets out the processes. It provides the leading thinking about work involving one process and one assessment, where there is one entry point for submissions by proponents. It goes through a land-use planning conformity check. Then it goes to the impact review board for assessment.

It provides for a seamless process of land-use planning conformity, as well as an environmental assessment process. I can get you much more detail about the act. It was introduced in May. The hope is to reintroduce it in this Parliament.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

What about the participants? Who's been involved in that whole process?

[Paula Isaak]

There has been extensive consultation. Canada, Nunavut, Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., the planning commission, the impact review board, all of the parties affected by the legislation have participated extensively and are supportive of it. Industry has also been consulted throughout, and they are supportive as well. It has been a lengthy consultative process.

[LaVar Payne, Conservative, Medicine Hat, AB]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Payne.

Ms. Duncan, I believe you'll be sharing your time with Mr. Genest-Jourdain. When you have time, pass it over.

[Linda Duncan, NDP, Edmonton Strathcona, AB]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you very much for the heads-up. We now know there are at least three additional pieces of legislation that will potentially be referred to our committee some time after Christmas. It would be helpful if you could send us information on the process and organizations and individuals who were consulted in the development of those three pieces of legislation.

I have three quick questions for you.

You mentioned the Mackenzie Valley. One of the key mechanisms for the development of the Mackenzie basin is the Mackenzie basin agreement. There were two years of discussion on that agreement in the environment committee in the last Parliament. We heard very strong presentations from the Northwest Territories Minister of Finance and Environment. He was completely disturbed that the federal government had shown no leadership in moving forward with the commitments under that agreement. I notice that is not mentioned here. He brought his concerns to our committee, and you might want to refer to the proceedings on that. He testified in Edmonton a couple of years ago. He was concerned that the Northwest Territories government was not being consulted on the approval of oil sands projects. He was concerned about both the air emissions and the water impacts on the Mackenzie basin because, of course, the Athabasca flows into the Mackenzie. I don't see that anywhere in here. There is also a need to look at external impacts.

Second, on the Mackenzie River basin, is the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development an active partner in that? If so, have they been making recent appointments of first nations and other persons to that board?

Third, in the last two throne speeches there has been a commitment to streamline regulatory approvals in the north. If I look at your language on page 9, it appears that this legislation is moving forward and that the initiatives are targeted at this timely, efficient development in the north. Is all this legislation about streamlining? To me, streamlining is reducing the number of reviews. I'd be curious to know what directions you're being given on measures for development in the north.

In the vacuum of the Nunavut piece of legislation, how are reviews of the mines in Nunavut being undertaken?

[Paula Isaak]

I'll start with your questions about the Mackenzie River basin. I apologize in advance that I'm not an expert on the Mackenzie River Basin Agreement, so we'll have to get back to you on some details of that.

We have a member on the Mackenzie River Basin Board. I know there is aboriginal participation, but I'm not sure who appoints members and what the status of that is. I don't have a lot of details, but we can follow up with information on that.

You mentioned the issue of streamlining. The idea is that the legislative amendments and some of the regulatory amendments and the new legislation are intended to streamline and not add more processes. They're intended to create certainty around what processes there are, to find where there can be efficiencies in some of the processes under way and to put them in legislation and create a complete structure.

One of the criticisms we heard from Neil McCrank's work was that the regime wasn't complete, resulting in some potential gaps in the system. So part of the new legislation is to fill in gaps and to try as much as possible to make the legislation align so that there is a streamlined approach. That's the intention.

On whether there is a vacuum in Nunavut in the absence of this legislation, there isn't a vacuum right now. Assessments are currently under way. The Nunavut Impact Review Board is very active. They are guided by the language of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement itself. It sets out the process, but not in a very detailed fashion. So the legislation is intended to set out the process and provide guidance in a detailed fashion in a legislative form. There is no vacuum, though.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you very much. Your time has expired.

Mr. Clarke, you have five minutes.

[Rob Clarke, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I thank the witnesses for coming in today.

I have just one question, really. What is the current status of negotiations on the agreement in principle for when devolution is going to happen?

[Paula Isaak]

The devolution agreement in principle was signed in January 2011 by Canada, the Government of the Northwest Territories, the Inuvialuit, and the Northwest Territory Métis Nation. Since that time, and particularly since the summer, negotiations have been ongoing toward a final agreement. Those negotiations are progressing as well as the table can make them progress, with a view to having a final agreement in an appropriate amount of time. The negotiations are continuing.

[Rob Clarke, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

When did the final negotiations commence?

[Paula Isaak]

They commenced around June 2011, shortly after the signing.

[Rob Clarke, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

They will continue until--

[Paula Isaak]

They will continue until a final agreement is struck.