Good morning, Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee.
My name is Paula Isaak, and I am the director general of the natural resources and environment branch of the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development. With me today are members of the team: Janice Traynor, Todd Keesey, and our legal counsel, Tom Isaac.
As you know, Bill C-47, the northern jobs and growth act includes part 1, the Nunavut planning and project assessment act, which responds to our government's obligations under the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement of 1993, and part 2, the Northwest Territories surface rights board act, which fulfills our obligations under the Gwich’in Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement and the Sahtu Dene and Métis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement in the Northwest Territories. Both of these proposed acts were developed in consultation with the relevant aboriginal groups of the two territories in accordance with our legal obligation under the land claim agreements.
Over the past few weeks the committee has heard testimony and received submissions from a number of witnesses on Bill C-47. Given the nature and scope of the comments and recommendations received by the committee, it's conceivable that some may give rise to some questions, or may require additional context to be fully understood.
If that is the case, Mr. Chairman, my colleagues and I will be pleased to respond and clarify any outstanding questions.
If I may, I would like first to reiterate a couple of rather important points with respect to the development of both parts of Bill C-47 and the consultation efforts in each case.
With respect to the Nunavut planning and project assessment act, our commitment to close consultation resulted in a unique co-development approach where the drafting of the bill was guided by a tripartite Nunavut legislative working group. Canada, the Government of Nunavut, and the Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated, or NTI, were members of the working group. They were assisted in an advisory capacity by the Nunavut Planning Commission and the Nunavut Impact Review Board.
Since 2002 the working group, guided by the provisions of the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement and aided by the counsel of its advisers, resolved questions of policy and language, and crafted the bill which is before the committee today. This unique partnership confirmed our commitment to consult closely with Inuit, but our consultative efforts extended beyond the working group once a legislative proposal was completed.
The proposal was circulated widely across Nunavut and in neighbouring jurisdictions. Departmental officials travelled to no fewer than 10 communities in Nunavut to talk to people about the proposal. Industry was also engaged over the course of the last three years, and their insights and suggestions resulted in several improvements to the bill.
With respect to part 2 of the bill, the Northwest Territories surface rights board act fulfills the Government of Canada's obligations under the Gwich’in Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement and the Sahtu Dene and Métis Comprehensive Land Claim Agreement. Both agreements refer specifically to the need for a surface rights board.
The establishment of the board is also consistent with the Inuvialuit Final Agreement and the Tlicho Agreement, the other two comprehensive land claim agreements in the Northwest Territories.
The Tlicho Agreement allows for the establishment of a surface rights board. The Inuvialuit Final Agreement specifies that any interim measures related to access across Inuvialuit lands to reach adjacent lands will be replaced when a law of general application such as this bill is enacted.
Obviously, our duty to consult fully on such a legislative undertaking was paramount, and our consultation efforts spanned the entire two-year period the bill was in development.
To fulfill our obligations, three successive draft legislative proposals were distributed which were reviewed by 13 aboriginal groups and governments in the Northwest Territories and adjacent jurisdictions, the Government of the Northwest Territories, and industry associations, at which time written comments were solicited.
These reviews were followed by consultation sessions primarily in the regional centres of Yellowknife and Inuvik to explain the changes made from one draft of the initiative to the next, and to discuss potential improvements to the legislative proposal, including any accommodation measures.
The written comments received and views shared during consultation sessions from aboriginal groups and governments were reviewed and taken into consideration in the preparation of subsequent drafts of the proposed legislation. All parties who provided feedback received written responses to their comments indicating what accommodation measures had been included in the draft proposal, or the reasons that accommodation measures were not or could not be included.
Funding assistance was also made available to all aboriginal groups and governments throughout the consultation process and could be used for the preparation of written representations, attending consultation sessions, and for legal counsel or consultants to assist in reviewing the more technical aspects of the legislative proposals.
In summary, we have met the crown's obligations under settled land claims agreements and in common law to engage in meaningful dialogue with aboriginal organizations, governments, and other stakeholders who participate, have an interest in, or may be impacted by the regulatory regime in Canada's north.
In addition, I would reiterate that this bill is intended to implement land claims. In our view, and in the view of the Department of Justice, both parts of Bill C-47 are consistent with those respective agreements, subject of course to the four amendments that Canada and Nunavut Tunngavik Incorporated have agreed to make to the Nunavut Land Claims Agreement prior to the coming into force of the Nunavut planning and project assessment act.
At this point, we thank you for the opportunity to appear today to assist the committee in its review of Bill C-47. My colleagues and I would be pleased to respond to any questions that members may have about the bill.
