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

[Brendan Bell]

Yes, well, certainly time will tell whether or not that mechanism is the most effective and efficient.

Look, our experience in dealing with the local boards, especially the Wek'eezhii Land and Water Board, a regional board, has been very positive. I think there's been some incredible capacity that has been developed there, and that needs to be maintained. I think we need to sit down as northerners—and I know the premier has committed to do this—to find a way to make sure we don't lose that capacity.

I guess, though, I would also tell you that at a working level there's a lot of collaboration between the main board and the regional boards right now, today, and I expect that will grow stronger and will continue. In fact, you've just seen an executive director from one of the boards switch hats and go to another board. I think there really is a commingling of resources and a collaboration there.

I don't know that this scuttles all of that, but look, I don't want to form opinions before we go out and see how it works. I think the most important element here is local control—those who are most invested in the outcomes here are making the decisions.

Thank you.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Well, when you talk about local control, I guess that's what I'm asking about, really. With the land and water boards set—the plural land and water boards—doesn't that give more local control?

[Brendan Bell]

On the face of it, it's hard to disagree that these local pockets, these local boards, offer an aspect of local input and decision-making. But I think we've seen, especially in big projects like the Mackenzie gas project, which became a regulatory—I won't say “disaster”, but it was certainly complex and tricky. The need to go through a number of jurisdictions needed to be recognized. I think these boards need to be able to work together.

I'll give you an example. Although our mine is regulated by Wek’eezhii, our impacted groups involve the Inuit in Coppermine. They're at the end of the watershed. They have no involvement in the Wek’eezhii board but they have a lot to say about the char fishery and about our operations. It also involves the Akaitcho people, primarily in Lutselk'e, and the Yellowknives Dene, who have no involvement at Wek’eezhii yet need a voice. It's the same with the Métis. We have a number of impacted groups who need to have the ability to have an impact and input on mines.

So if it were simplistic and all mines and all projects could reside in and only influence one regional area, then I think you'd be absolutely correct. I think we need to work our way through this. I think the premier is committed to doing that. I'm confident we can.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Okay.

Let's turn to the environmental assessment process. What are your thoughts, Mr. Bell, on the current environmental assessment process, and how do you feel it could be improved?

[Brendan Bell]

Look, we're right in the midst of it, so I guess I'd want to talk only in generalities. We are in the midst of an environmental assessment.

I think there's no doubt that defined timeframes for environmental reviews are a positive step forward. My understanding of this is that it really is much like chess. It's a two-year review. The clock is only ticking when it's in the purview of the regulator, but there is a serious onus on proponents to get their act together, too.

I can tell you, that cropped up for us this week as we were talking about anticipating needing more time to provide some input into a regulatory review. We got together and said that with governments collectively looking to do everything they can to put their shoulders to the wheel here and expedite timeframes and make sure this is done in an efficient manner.... We just can't do that. We need to bring more resources to the table. We need to work more hours in the day. We need to find some way that we are not an impediment to this process ourselves.

So I think it's forced everybody to get serious about this and to really start to think about how they can be part of the solution.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Thank you.

I'll start with Mr. Bleaney on this one, but you might all want to answer. If the time will allow that, I will as well.

Given the changes in the way this bill would manage onshore and offshore resources, and the changes in the sharing of that responsibility between the federal and territorial governments, what are your concerns about the shared management of resources and lands proposed here, and how do you feel it would affect development?

[Bob Bleaney]

As I mentioned earlier, we're in favour of the process transitioning smoothly, if you like, from the federal regime to the guidance and stewardship of the Government of the Northwest Territories. That is important. We don't want to see the transition not go well.

We're confident that it can go well. We're looking at the way this has been put forward. The approach that's been taken in the bill is consistent, we think, with trying to manage that carefully, recognizing that it is important that there be continuity in the process.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Anyone else?

[Rick Meyers]

I can't speak to offshore resources. Mining is done onshore.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

Clearly—well, so far.

[Rick Meyers]

If there is a restructuring of the boards, my impression—it's as much a guess as a hope—is that they will draw from the existing people who have been involved with the boards. The staff has grown and matured. There are some very competent technical people involved with all of the boards, so there is an excellent source of talent to draw from.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

By the way, when you say that of course you don't do mining offshore—

[Rick Meyers]

Not in the Northwest Territories.

[Geoff Regan, Liberal, Halifax West, NS]

—interestingly, I come from a province where you don't call it offshore mining, but coal mines used to go out several miles under the ocean off of Cape Breton. But that's just for interest's sake.

My time is up? Okay, thank you, Mr. Chair.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you, Mr. Regan.

We'll turn to Ms. Crockatt for the next questions.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Thanks very much.

Mr. Bleaney, I was interested in hearing you say that the markets are competitive and they can be rather fickle and money will move where the opportunities exist. I wanted to follow up on that. The lack of predictability has been a significant concern for you. How will this bill improve the ability to attract investment in the north in a very highly competitive natural resources market?

[Bob Bleaney]

As I mentioned, one of the uncertainties that the north has faced in the past has been the review process, in terms of its timeliness and just exactly how it gets conducted. We think this proposed legislation, which puts together the large board with relationships to the small regional boards, and the way it's been designed should be offering a lot more continuity or consistency in approach. With the fixed timelines that have been identified for the review process, there is certainty as to when a decision can come down. I think those things will be very favourably received by people who are trying to do investment work in the north.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

I may come back to that, but I'd just like to move on to another point you made here first. You said, in talking about the competitive markets, that companies are always comparing one country to another, one project to another, to see how the timelines that are established here under Bill C-15 compare on an international basis. How do they compare internationally to those that competitors who are looking at coming into the north would be looking at?

[Bob Bleaney]

I'm not really in a good position to respond to the question on international timelines, because I haven't been briefed on the international timelines for this particular type of activity.

I can say that for our industry right now the environment in greatest competition with the Northwest Territories is probably Alberta and British Columbia for similar types of activities. Even with the timelines being put in place for the Northwest Territories, there are considerably longer timelines for normal well-drilling activities, and so on, than would be experienced in Alberta and British Columbia.

That being said, just having that certainty is still a positive step in the right direction, and I think, as we work through this and implement this act and work closely with the regulators, we're going to find ways...because the timelines that are put out there are the maximum timelines. I think there are ways we can work within those timelines to further improve on the efficiency of the process.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

I was actually told by a former member of the National Energy Board that Europe operates within an 18-month timeframe for environmental assessment. Is anyone on the panel today familiar with that? No. Okay, thank you.

Mr. Bell, it still amazes me that the NDP, which claims to be in favour of job creation and the working person, would try to delay a bill like this and delay ushering in the era of prosperity for the north, as you put it so aptly. We seem to have a window of opportunity here. You went through part of the very excruciating Mackenzie Valley pipeline project, and I'm wondering if you think there is a need to ensure that this bill goes through now quickly or whether it could happen at any time.

[Brendan Bell]

I was the energy minister during the Mackenzie gas project. I testified in front of the National Energy Board. It was a particularly painful chapter for the Northwest Territories in terms of regulatory processes. I think that really was the light going on for many, locally and across the country, that we needed to do something to improve the regulatory environment.

With respect to devolution, yes, you make hay while it's sunny, as I said earlier. I think we really have an opportunity here with a premier who's capable, a government that's very able, and a federal government willing to devolve authority. We need to move this. I would hate to lose the momentum, so I think we need to move this ahead as quickly as we can.

Thank you.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

Mr. Bleaney, I believe you said this will involve higher-quality review protocols. Can you expand a little bit more on that? How will the review protocols be stepped up? How will the environment be protected? Thank you.

[Bob Bleaney]

My comment in that space is coming from the general expectation that as you consolidate the talent base for the review process, you have greater capacity to provide the appropriate reviews that need to be done to assess the environmental and socio-economic implications of these kinds of projects. By virtue of the fact that you have one larger resource—that's the premise I'm working with—that would be more capacity to give a thorough review.

[Joan Crockatt, Conservative, Calgary Centre, AB]

To the other two members of the panel—if I have time, Mr. Chair—do you want to address that question? How do you think that this will have a higher-quality process to what you had before? You can speak specifically or generally.

[Rick Meyers]

I think it will have a higher-quality process if it's managed properly and efficiently. It comes down to the ability of the board or boards to manage the process effectively. As I was referring to earlier, there's a good pool of talent amongst the three boards, or four boards, that are there now, so I'm optimistic that will take place.