Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Jan. 30th, 2014

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Ms. Crowder, please.

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

I want to acknowledge the work that Mr. Bevington has done in bringing this forward. I know that we've had informal discussions around this, but I think what we've heard quite clearly is that there's pretty broad support for the devolution aspect of Bill C-15. What is more problematic are the changes to the MVRMA.

Unfortunately, as committee members know, I was not able to attend on Monday because of Canada's lovely weather system, but I did read the briefing notes that were prepared. There was pretty overwhelming opposition to some of the proposed changes in the MVRMA.

It would seem that with such significant changes that are going to have such a widespread impact, it would be important for the committee to have an opportunity to consider this bill separately. I think it's in everybody's interests to see the devolution aspect of the bill move forward quickly, but the other aspect, in my view, requires substantially more attention.

I was interested to note that in Mr. Bell's testimony he was talking about the fact that devolution is seen positively in terms of giving more control to the north, yet one of the major concerns that's been raised as a result of MVRMA section is that it will in fact give the minister more control. I won't take the committee's time to read all of the sections that result in the minister having more control, but I think this should be a major red flag for people who are seeing more northern control.

So, Mr. Chair, I would encourage members of the committee to support Mr. Bevington's motion.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

I think Mr. Bevington wants to comment again.

Mr. Bevington.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Thank you. I actually haven't commented on the motion, and I would like to.

I think quite clearly what we saw, and what we're seeing here today as well, with the testimony from the Mining Association, is the real concern about how we develop this legislation moving forward in the Northwest Territories. Ms. Crowder is correct; there is some opposition to devolution, although it certainly doesn't reflect anything but a minority opinion in the Northwest Territories. But the devolution bill also contains these elements of the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act that are very problematic.

To the committee members who weren't able to hear this testimony because they weren't there, this was a 10-hour session in Yellowknife. I don't know if you've had a chance to go over the blues of the meeting to see the type of dialogue that took place there with very serious and very concerned aboriginal governments. These are respected aboriginal governments in the Northwest Territories. Their testimony cannot be taken lightly. They have been through 40 years working towards what they have today. They're not interested in seeing that taken away from them.

When you look at the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act...and I had trouble with Mr. Bleaney's comments, because he spoke to it as if it were an environmental assessment act. In reality, when you read the act, it's an act that demands that you look at the social, economic, and environmental issues in the communities of the Northwest Territories—by law. In order to accomplish that, it's a much....

That's a very unique act in Canada. Those powers were put in that bill, through a land claims agreement, to ensure that people in the Northwest Territories who didn't have a say, as in the provinces, over how developments occur....

In a province, when a development occurs, there's negotiation with the province that gives some aspect of control over socio-economic issues within the province. In the Northwest Territories, that wasn't in place prior to today. The first nations governments, in their claims processes, have established regional boards that give their people in their communities the opportunity to speak to and to understand the developments that are occurring there.

With the loss of the regional boards, the loss of capacity in those communities will be complete. There will be no guarantee that there will be people in those communities to interpret the developments and to provide the type of input that's required.

Practically, that is one of the reasons why first nations governments are standing up right now, but more importantly, they made the agreements with Canada. These agreements were put in place. This government is making a move here that the first nations governments in my territory feel is improper and incorrect and that is denigrating the agreements they have made with Canada.

It's important that this bill be split so we can move ahead with devolution, so we can move ahead with the types of things we need for our territorial government, for the people of the north, so that they can take firmer control over aspects of land management and environment that are very important to them. The aspects of the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act need much more attention, and we do need a separate opportunity to look at this bill.

I'll leave it there. I know our chair is concerned about the time we take with this, but after spending 10 hours in Yellowknife hearing the testimony of people there, I think even our chair has to recognize that these were important issues that needed to be focused on by this whole committee at a time when we had the opportunity to do so.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Not seeing any additional speakers we will move to a vote.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Can we have a recorded vote, please?

[Bernard Trottier, Conservative, Etobicoke—Lakeshore, ON]

That motion is out of order because it's not translated.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

I ruled it in order and it has been read into the record. We'll move to it. It will be a recorded vote.

(Motion negatived [See Minutes of Proceedings])

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

We will now continue with our speaking list. I do apologize to our witnesses. This is one of these anomalies in the parliamentary system that sometimes change our plans. Unfortunately you were unable to engage in that discussion. It was simply limited to two members. I know that there was some desire to respond to some of the comments that were made directly about each of you, so we appreciate your patience in the process. We do apologize for your inability to respond to those comments.

We will now turn to Mr. Seeback for the next questions.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I will add my apologies that you haven't had the opportunity to answer questions.

I do want to quickly say one thing about the motion. I didn't want to keep the debate going. Parts of the amendments to the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act are actually required to implement devolution in specific sections 145 to 177, so separating these bills out would actually be a problem with implementing devolution.

To move on, some of your comments that you've made on devolution are quite strong and powerful. When we were in Yellowknife we heard the Honourable Bob McLeod, the premier, use such terms as: “usher in a new era of prosperity” for the north; “necessary tools” to develop the resources; it's a “priority”; it's a “game-changer for northerners”.

I suspect that all three of you would, in general, agree with the statements that the premier made with respect to devolution.

Anyone can answer.

[Rick Meyers]

I think that's true from my perspective and from the mining industry's perspective, although I'll defer to my colleague. The changes to the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act that are proposed, we see them as positive. I want to make a point of clarification on that. The points that I pointed out are what I referred to as opportunities for improvement.

That said, the Government of the Northwest Territories in the past few years has shown a lot of positive attitude towards mine development in general. So we are optimistic and hopeful that this will translate into a positive working relationship going forward with them.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Mr. Bell.

[Brendan Bell]

I think it's such a positive, fundamental, and monumental shift for the Northwest Territories, for the people who live there and who will benefit. I firmly believe, as the premier does, that decisions that will impact local people the most should be made locally. Listen, I think that is beyond debate at this point.

I would add one other thing here. I was a member of a government, successive governments, that made a lot of treks to Ottawa to lobby for devolution and it was quite honestly like running up against a brick wall continually.

Something has happened here and the clouds parted, and I think a lot of credit goes to the McLeod government for that. They were able to demonstrate the level of maturity that was required to give people here confidence that this could be done and done well. I think you had a government and a Prime Minister very interested and motivated to do this. So there was this alignment of the planets. I think we need to seize that, take advantage of that, and move quickly.

Thank you.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Mr. Bleaney.

[Bob Bleaney]

I would echo that. We view the opportunity for these changes as very positive towards our industry. As you know, the oil and gas industry has had some very protracted efforts around projects in the north in the past, and we've learned a lot from that. I think everyone has learned a lot from those experiences. We saw that the proposed legislation was aimed at improving not only the efficiency of how it all works but the effectiveness of it, and I think it offers a greater potential for, really, higher-quality review protocols.

Again, we're very positive with regard to the direction and are anxious to keep working to refine it as appropriate to optimize it for the opportunities that are out there.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

There's one thing I want to talk about and get you to comment on quickly. I forget who said it, but someone said that capital is “mobile”. When you look at some of the charts about exploration money in the Northwest Territories, you'll notice that there has been a decline, certainly. I think there's been an uptick recently, but there's been a definite decline in the Northwest Territories.

I would assume that part of it is that people invest their capital where there's certainty, and certainty in process. Do you think these improvements that are going to be made in the—I always say this wrong—MVMRA will actually help with that certainty and change the game a little for capital investment in exploration, so that we can develop those new mines?

Again, that's for anyone.

[Rick Meyers]

I'll lead off.

I think it has the potential to do that if it's well managed. It's like any government process. If a process for environmental assessment and permitting takes place effectively and efficiently and is timely, then it will improve what I was referring to before as the “investment climate” in the territory.

[Brendan Bell]

Yes, I agree with that. I also think that this is probably far from the end for changes and tweaks to the regulatory regime in the NWT. There will be twists and roundabouts. I think we'll learn a lot about the regulatory regime over the next five years. Future amendments no doubt will come.

Also, some of the perceived problems that we imagine may not be the ones that crop up. I think that if we were to imagine that we could anticipate all of the challenges and problems, it would be quite naive.

I think the industry is very optimistic about this, and I think that optimism will translate into increased investment. That takes time.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

That's the importance of the review as well—

[Brendan Bell]

Correct.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

—to make those tweaks, if necessary, down the road.

Mr. Bleaney.

[Bob Bleaney]

Yes, we would agree with that.

For our industry in particular, as you know, in the central Mackenzie Valley region right now there has been increased interest in exploration. We look forward to this new legislation helping to facilitate and expedite the decision-making processes to help people move ahead with exploration programs.

That confidence is very important for investment. With an uncertainty in the time process or in the process overall, it just lends itself to more questions, and it deflects capital away from the opportunities.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

That's great.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

We'll turn to Mr. Regan now for the next questions.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, witnesses, for coming here today.

As I think about the north, it strikes me, of course, that we have the name the “Yukon Territory”—it's the Yukon, but it's a territory—and, oddly enough, the territory we're talking about today is actually named in the plural, the “Northwest Territories”. But I think there's still a reason for that when you look at the enormous size of the region and the differences throughout the region.

That raises a question. I'm going to ask Mr. Bell to start off on this.

What has been your experience of working with the individual land and water boards around the Northwest Territories? Can you give us some examples? Also, what is it that gives you confidence, or why would you argue that a super-board would have enough understanding of the differences in those different parts of the Northwest Territories?