Evidence of meeting #57 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 41st Parliament, 1st Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was lot.
A recording is available from Parliament.
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
Thank you very much.
We'll go now to Ms. Ambler for seven minutes.
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
And thank you very much to both of you for being here today. I especially enjoyed listening to you, Josie, talk about the spirit of consensus, and just now to you, Bernie, with the respect for traditional knowledge, culture, and history. I like knowing that this is respected.
I'm wondering about the bill itself. As a general question, do you think the bill reflects that spirit of consensus and that respect for the history and traditional knowledge that's so rich in Inuit culture?
Would you say there's a respect in the bill for that?
10:20 a.m.
President, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
Especially if you take into consideration the amendments that have been proposed, I guess.
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
Okay, fair enough.
Let me get down to more specifics then. With regard to the Mary River Project and its recent approval—I think it was early December—I was wondering if you could explain your participation in the review process. You did touch on community committees and how you established those. I want to thank you for mentioning that today and ask you how that worked, and if that was the only way you participated or if there was another way your organization participated in that review process.
10:20 a.m.
President, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
We've been involved in the review process for about five years. Two years ago, QIA decided that we needed to get community input into the project if we were going to get community support. QIA as a board could not just decide for the communities that were supporting the project. So we created community committees in the seven more impacted communities: Pond Inlet, Igloolik, Hall Beach, Clyde River, Arctic Bay, Cape Dorset, and Kimmirut.
The committees consist of six members of the community—six Inuit members of the community—and with our technicians and our consultants they are working very hard to ensure that Inuit are given a chance to review what is in the project plans: the ten volumes of the assessment, or the stuff that Baffinland had. We did this with our own money, or lack thereof. It's been a long process, and we hope we can still fund these committees as the project goes along, so that if changes need to be made, the communities will be updated on a regular basis and can monitor the project.
I don't know if that answers your question.
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
I think so.
I'm also wondering if there's anything in the new legislation that would change that participation, or how in the future your participation would change when reviewing projects and doing assessments.
10:20 a.m.
Director, Land Administration, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
Both the Impact Review Board and the Nunavut Planning Commission are public bodies and they rely on a public process to analyze these changes. By strengthening both of these groups...I talked earlier about land use planning and environmental assessment. It's a public process, and things like participant funding will ensure that there's better public participation in these processes, especially from the communities' perspective.
10:20 a.m.
Conservative
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
You mentioned streamlining the assessment process, so let me ask you about efficiency. Since the bill clarifies and strengthens, as you said, the roles and responsibilities for the Impact Review Board as well as the Nunavut Planning Commission and creates better ability for greater cooperation between them, do you feel that this will allow the board and the commission to become more efficient?
10:20 a.m.
Director, Land Administration, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
In a nutshell, yes.
10:20 a.m.
Director, Land Administration, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
Another important part of this bill is that it actually creates some timelines and some accountabilities in terms of time for decisions to be made.
10:25 a.m.
Conservative
10:25 a.m.
Director, Land Administration, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
Yes. As you can imagine, considering where we live and considering the weather up there and the timeframes when you can actually do work, timing is very important. A delay that brings you past, for example, a decision point where you might have to book....
10:25 a.m.
Director, Land Administration, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
Then you've lost a lot of time, and in a lot of these projects, time is money. It could even be more severe than that. It might actually mean the difference between—
10:25 a.m.
Conservative
Stella Ambler Conservative Mississauga South, ON
Stopping the project entirely.
Do you feel that the Nunavut Planning and Project Assessment Act provides a streamlined process for environmental assessment that is fair to all stakeholders—community, industry, inhabitants?
10:25 a.m.
Director, Land Administration, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
This act is a direct result of obligations within the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement. I think it's the last piece of the puzzle in terms of legislation that has to be created because of the land claims agreement. It is a public process. Both of them are actually public processes—the Nunavut land use plan and these environmental assessments.
10:25 a.m.
Conservative
10:25 a.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
Thank you, Ms. Ambler.
We're going to turn now to Mr. Genest-Jourdain for five minutes. He'll be splitting his time with Ms. Duncan.
January 31st, 2013 / 10:25 a.m.
NDP
Jonathan Genest-Jourdain NDP Manicouagan, QC
Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to welcome our witnesses.
I have a few fairly quick questions about the commission.
What are the commission's actual powers? Having read the bill, I see that a final report must be produced. Can the commission use its report to express reluctance and even opposition to a project or a situation, either as a whole or regarding some of its aspects?
10:25 a.m.
President, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
I think so. If not, they stipulate conditions to any project.
That's a short answer.
10:25 a.m.
Director, Land Administration, Qikiqtani Inuit Association
I'll just add to that. The review board actually has, by statute, certain decisions it has to make, or certain recommendations it has to make, I should say, so that a project can proceed. More information might be required from the proponent; that's another option. The third option is that a project should not proceed.