Evidence of meeting #12 for Indigenous and Northern Affairs in the 41st Parliament, 2nd Session. (The original version is on Parliament’s site, as are the minutes.) The winning word was board.
A recording is available from Parliament.
3:35 p.m.
NDP
Dennis Bevington NDP Western Arctic, NT
This was presented on January 14, 2011, and the minister came back in February, 2012 on a protocol arrangement?
3:35 p.m.
Director, Resource Policy and Programs Directorate, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
I'll just ask....
February 4th, 2014 / 3:35 p.m.
Alison Lobsinger Manager, Legislation and Policy, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
The aboriginal parties shared the framework proposal with officials in November of 2011 and the minister responded in February of 2012.
3:35 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
Thank you.
We'll turn now to Mr. Strahl for the next questions.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC
Thank you very much.
Some of the other testimony we heard included that of Willard Hagen, the chair and CEO of the Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board. He raised some concerns with respect to board member liability. I think he indicated that there was a concern that the proposed bill, Bill C-15, was not as strong as what is there now to protect board members in terms of liability. I think he called it “legally inferior protection”.
Could you address that specifically? Is it legally inferior in your view, and if not, why not?
3:40 p.m.
Tom Isaac Senior Counsel, Negotiations, Northern Affairs and Federal Interlocutor, Department of Justice
Mr. Chairman, when we reviewed the provisions in question, one provision that Mr. Hagen was pointing out talked about how no action lies against a board member. I think that's a provision in the amended waters act that's coming forward. The provision that's currently in the MVRMA is that there's no liability in respect of a board member's duties and functions. The small change they've made to that provision is I think to powers, duties and functions. They've just put in powers or functions as a new aspect.
It's not a change from the structure of the current MVRMA, which is “no liability”. Between “no liability” on the one hand, and “no action lies” on the other hand, it's our legal view that there's almost...there's no difference in the level of protection afforded to a board member against liability between those two provisions.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC
Okay. So the same level of protection will apply under the new act.
I want to turn to another concern that we heard. The Mining Association recommended consolidating the environmental assessment and environmental impact review processes so that there would be a defined 24-month timeline, not one stacking on top of the other.
Did the department consider that as they were undertaking this review? If it was looked at, how would you respond to the concerns that were raised about that potential to go to another 24 months?
3:40 p.m.
Director, Resource Policy and Programs Directorate, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
We did undertake an analysis through the consultation period. It was our determination, however, that the proposal was inconsistent with the land claims agreements. We therefore were unable to proceed with any amendment in that regard.
If you'd like further detail on the land claims obligations, I would turn to my colleague Alison Lobsinger.
3:40 p.m.
Director, Resource Policy and Programs Directorate, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
She tells me that she has nothing else to add.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC
Okay. That was well answered, then. I appreciate that.
Devolution has been a long time coming. It's been something which the GNWT and the people of the Northwest Territories have been looking forward to for a long time.
What is the federal government doing, what is the department doing, to help the Government of the Northwest Territories implement this goal? Is the department or the government doing anything to help them offset the costs they will incur as a result of devolution?
3:40 p.m.
Director, Northwest Territories Devolution Negotiations, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
Mr. Chair, one of the elements we agreed to with the Government of the Northwest Territories in the agreement in principle signed back in January 2011 was what we described as one-time funding.
One-time funding was allocated to not just the Government of the Northwest Territories but all the aboriginal parties that were contemplated in devolution. That is really targeted towards defraying some of the costs associated with ramping up, with getting ready for devolution. The commitment we made to the Government of the Northwest Territories in one-time funding included $26.5 million, and $4 million to the aboriginal parties.
I'm happy to report to the committee today that we've been working with the Government of the Northwest Territories and the aboriginal parties on a number of different fronts towards implementation. Last week we were able to provide the final installment of the funding we committed to all of the parties.
3:40 p.m.
Conservative
Mark Strahl Conservative Chilliwack—Fraser Canyon, BC
Thank you.
We also heard from industry that although they were generally in favour of the regulatory improvement part of the bill, they didn't want to lose the regional knowledge, the capacity, the relationships they'd developed in those areas over the years.
Can you tell us how proposed Bill C-15 takes those factors into account and how the new structure will retain those features of that regional representation on the board?
3:45 p.m.
Director, Resource Policy and Programs Directorate, Northern Affairs, Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development
I would point to two features of the bill.
The first feature would be the regional committees that the chair of the Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board would establish to consider applications for projects wholly within a region. On those committees, the regional representative would be appointed by the chair.
At the same time that we move forward with implementation of the restructuring element of the proposal, cognizant of not only industry's concerns but also the concerns of aboriginal parties with respect to the retention of that regional knowledge, we will be working with all stakeholders to discuss what kind of administrative capacity we could maintain within each region to address those concerns.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL
Thank you, witnesses, for appearing today.
I'm just wondering if you could remind me once again why you chose to include the massive changes we're seeing within the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act as part of the devolution bill instead of a separate bill. Can you tell me again why you chose to do that?
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
Ms. Jones, you missed the first part of the meeting. That question was asked and answered.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
I do remind you as well, as I reminded all colleagues, that we have the officials before us. It's not the minister. The political decisions of course were made by the minister. These officials are here prepared to answer questions with regard to technical aspects of the bill.
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL
I guess in the last little while we've all seen some push-back with regard to that decision. There's no doubt about it. In light of the representation that was made before the department, are you aware whether there will be any changes or amendments to the legislation coming forward from a departmental perspective as we see it today?
3:45 p.m.
A voice
We're not aware....
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
It's not usually the practice, Ms. Jones, that the department would propose amendments. Usually they would come from political parties.
Did you have any further questions, Ms. Jones?
3:45 p.m.
Liberal
Yvonne Jones Liberal Labrador, NL
I have no technical questions according to your criteria, sir.
Go ahead.
3:45 p.m.
Conservative
The Chair Conservative Chris Warkentin
Thank you.
Mr. Seeback, we'll hear from you, if you have some additional questions.