Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Dec. 5th, 2012

[David Akeeagok]

If the wording they are proposing to change, in terms of being consistent with the Nunavut land claims, the actual wording.... From my assessment, that 45 pages is based a lot on the wording of the legislation itself.

We don't have an issue with changing words, but what we would have an issue with is if there are any further delays in terms of getting this legislation through. It's critical legislation that the three parties would like to see in terms of the next move in our claim implementation.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

In terms of its recommended amendments to section 39, the federal government is to clarify that it is responsible to fund the commission and the board.

Your planning commission stated:

To be successful with our organizational transition and the on-going implementation of NUPPAA, additional human and financial resources will be required.

Their amendment says—I guess we want to know what provisions have been made regarding the commission's request for “an initial $2,918,284...to effectively prepare for and implement the new legal requirements...$1,878,284 in core funding...for ongoing implementation responsibilities”.

Is that your estimate of the costs, and has the federal government made provision for these additional costs?

[David Akeeagok]

I'm going to refer that to NTI, Nunavut Tunngavik Inc., to answer. Their proposal for the implementation of the legislation, the passage of the legislation, still has to be worked on in terms of figuring out the funding portion. In terms of funding governments, there are provisions within the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement whereby the three parties fund the board. In that respect, there's adequate coverage in terms of where those funds will come from and how.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

Would you need any additional funding from the federal government in order to implement it, from the Government of Nunavut's point of view?

Go ahead, Christopher.

[Christopher Douglas]

There are some new responsibilities that will be coming to the territorial government, for example, the role of conservation officers, in terms of enforcing aspects of the legislation.

In terms of the funding agreement between the two governments for those new duties and responsibilities, that's going to be worked on during this implementation plan that will come after the passage of the legislation.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, St. Paul's, ON]

You're comfortable that if the legislation passes, then the negotiations will open it up in terms of the money you will require for implementation.

[David Akeeagok]

Yes.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you.

We'll turn to Mr. Richards now.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I appreciate your coming to see us here today. I know you've come some way, so it's much appreciated that you've made the effort to be here. It's obviously an important piece of legislation, and I know it's important to you, to your government, and to the people of Nunavut.

Obviously economic development is something that's key, and there are all kinds of opportunities in Nunavut. You know that as well as anyone. Certainly our government has recognized the economic potential in the north, and it's something I know you would be happy to talk about all day if I let you, I'm sure.

I would like to hear a bit from you on how, in your view, this legislation does help to foster greater economic development in the Nunavut territory. How do you see it helping to develop that, and maybe give specific examples if you have them. Obviously there is lots of potential there, particularly with natural resources, but I would love to hear your thoughts on how this legislation will help to foster that economic development.

[David Akeeagok]

As I mentioned in my opening comments, it will bring about certainty to the people of Nunavut. If there are any economic development opportunities in natural resources, there will be certainty that there will be a review process to allow for the environmental and economic opportunity for both of those. I think our government, through the Tamapta priorities that our premier is implementing, will bring about a good amount of certainty.

A prime example I will use is on the Baffinland project. Leading up to that, we used the boards—the Nunavut Impact Review Board and the Nunavut Water Board. This legislation has a model to make sure we don't duplicate a lot of efforts.

As you might know, the population in Nunavut is small. Having one window to give that opportunity helps all of us within Nunavut. It's streamlining a lot of these processes, which allows our population to effectively have their say in terms of moving this forward. The horizon we have and the projections on the resource development that is coming...it's growing, and it's growing quite substantially.

Without proper regulatory legislation, we did have concerns. But with the proper regulatory systems in place, from the Nunavut perspective, that's going to help our population, in terms of having their voice and having the decisions made by the people, for the people, in Nunavut.

Quyanainni.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Thank you.

I guess we could look at a project that was recently approved in Nunavut—and I'll certainly take the opportunity now to congratulate you and the people of Nunavut on that approval—and that's the Mary River iron ore project. Obviously that project was able to proceed under the current system, but I wonder if you could give me a sense as to how this bill might help in the review of those kinds of projects in the future.

[David Akeeagok]

As I mentioned, this draft legislation has already helped us review that huge project on the Mary River, and it's one that's given us certainty. There are definitely challenges, especially with the size and scope of the Mary River project. We're very pleased with how that process is coming along. Minister Duncan just recently approved it.

The next phase is for the project certification. The boards are already in place to say okay, we'll start that process. All the stakeholders know that process and all the stakeholders are getting prepared for that. Shortly after that, the Nunavut Water Board will do the licensing part.

Having clear timelines does help all the stakeholders, including us as regulators from the Government of Nunavut. This legislation will bring that clarity.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

In response to my first question, you mentioned the Nunavut Impact Review Board. Obviously this legislation clarifies the roles and responsibilities of both that board and also the Nunavut Planning Commission. I think what it will do is obviously create the ability for greater cooperation between them.

I just want to know what your thoughts are. Do you feel this will allow the board and the commission to become more efficient in their coordination and in their review?

[David Akeeagok]

Yes, it will. On the Nunavut Planning Commission, this legislation allows all three parties to sign off on the land use plan, so that would be the two governments and Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated. Signing that brings certainty and acceptance on which part of the lands will be used and which parts will be conserved. There will be good clarity if and when we do pass that Nunavut land use plan. If that is accepted by the two governments and Nunavut Tunngavik, it brings great certainty and assurance to the residents of Nunavut.

[Blake Richards, Conservative, Wild Rose, AB]

Thank you very much for your testimony and for answering my questions. I appreciate it.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you, Mr. Richards.

We'll turn now to Ms. Crowder, for five minutes, please.

[Jean Crowder, NDP, Nanaimo—Cowichan, BC]

I want to thank the witnesses for coming before the committee today and for their testimony.

We on this side would have welcomed the Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act being reintroduced as a stand-alone piece of legislation. That would have allowed us to deal with it expeditiously. As you're well aware, Bill C-25 was introduced two years ago, in May 2010, actually. I know there were some minor changes, and we actually reviewed both pieces of legislation. There were minor changes to that legislation, but it would have been easy for our committee to deal with that stand-alone piece of legislation instead of bundling it in with the Northwest Territories and Yukon as well.

I've gone back to the old Bill C-25 for some testimony, and I also have a funding question. I know that part of this you may not be able to answer. In May 2010 a witness for the Nunavut Impact Review Board came before the committee to testify on something else, but in their testimony, with the legislation having been newly introduced, the witness indicated that additional resources will be required for the boards to participate in implementing and planning and then in equipping the organizations to meet new requirements and timelines.

On May 27, 2010, the deputy minister did provide assurances to the members of the committee by saying that implementation will add to the workload of certain agencies in Nunavut, including the Nunavut Impact Review Board, but that they would get the resources they needed. However, it was not made clear in the deputy minister's response exactly how much funding would be dedicated to this purpose and when it would be received.

As my colleague pointed out, regarding NTI funding responsibility, clause 39 recommends that the bill provide that the federal government be responsible for funding the commission and board.

In your testimony, you indicated that once the act is passed and the implementation plan is put in place, you feel confident that funding will be provided. You'll have to forgive me, but there's a degree of cynicism on my part about that, and perhaps a degree of disbelief, because I come from British Columbia, where the B.C. First Nations Education Act was passed in 2007 and is still not appropriately funded five years later.

I wonder if you have some assurances from the government about the timeframes for when funding will be committed and whether the amounts that are on the table are going to be sufficient to meet the needs, given the new responsibilities that are going to be on your plate.

[David Akeeagok]

I think there were two components to the questions. One is on funding for the institutions of public government in the NIRB. There is a process to fund them through another tri-party agreement that has to get done, and that's through the contract relating to the implementation of the Nunavut Final Agreement. Within that contract, the institutions of public government are funded on an annual basis. That work is still ongoing, in terms of renewing that contract. That portion, ensuring the institutions of public government are getting adequate funding, should be addressed through the working party, the Nunavut Implementation Panel. With the number of projects that are coming forth, we're hoping that funding will be reflective of the number of projects that are coming. It's not contained within this legislation.

In terms of the other part of the question you raised, which is on our government and whether we're confident that we'll have adequate funding brought as part of this implementation, we have been working in very good faith on the drafting of the legislation. It is our anticipation that if we do need further funding to implement this legislation...I'm confident that there will be good faith among all parties to move that forward. We'd like to see that happen in good faith. It has already been identified what impact it will have on the territorial government.

Also, as part of the devolution agreement, those are still subject to negotiations, in terms of who does what and on the lands and controls and enforcement side, so I'll leave that portion in that area. But I'm confident that we've both been working in good faith for the needs of the Government of Nunavut and that that will continue.

Quyanainni.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you very much.

We'll turn now to Mr. Wilks for the final questions.

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Thank you very much, Chair.

And thank you for being here today.

I'm going to focus on the environmental part of the document that's before me today, having reviewed a portion of it. One of the main objectives of this bill is to protect the ecosystem in Nunavut. Does the Government of Nunavut, which you belong to, think that this bill will contribute to the environmental protection in the territory?

[David Akeeagok]

Yes.

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

Perfect. That's quick.

With that in mind, I was reviewing a lot of the enforcement that comes along with that. Could you describe how the enforcement provisions set out in the proposed legislation will support the regulatory framework that is currently in place to monitor environmental stewardship?

[David Akeeagok]

Sorry, we're having a technology failure.

You wanted specific examples within that legislation, and that's what we're trying to—

[David Wilks, Conservative, Kootenay—Columbia, BC]

In general.

[David Akeeagok]

In general?