Evidence of meeting #36 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 yesaa.

On the agenda

MPs speaking

Also speaking

Darrell Pasloski  Premier of Yukon, Government of Yukon
Scott Kent  Minister of Energy, Mines and Resources, Government of Yukon
Chief Ruth Massie  Grand Chief, Council of Yukon First Nations
Eric Fairclough  Chief, Little Salmon Carmacks First Nation
Carl Sidney  Chief, Teslin Tlingit Council
Roberta Joseph  Chief, Tr'ondëk Hwëch'in First Nation
Angela Demit  Chief, White River First Nation
Janet Vander Meer  Lands Coordinator, White River First Nation
Tom Cove  Director, Department of Lands and Resources, Teslin Tlingit Council
Leigh Anne Baker  Representative, Woodward and Compagny LLP, Teslin Tlingit Council
Daryn Leas  Legal Counsel, Council of Yukon First Nations
James Harper  Representative, Teslin Tlingit Council
Steve Smith  Chief, Champagne and Aishihik First Nations
Doris Bill  Chief, Kwanlin Dün First Nation
Millie Olsen  Deputy Chief, First Nation of Na-Cho Nyäk Dun
Stanley Njootli Sr.  Deputy Chief, Vuntut Gwitchin First Nation
Roger Brown  Manager of Environment and Natural Resources, Department of Lands and Resources, Champagne and Aishihik First Nations
Brian MacDonald  Legal Counsel, Champagne and Aishihik First Nations
Wendy Randall  Chair and Executive Committee Member, Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board
Tim Smith  Executive Director, Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board
Allison Rippin Armstrong  Vice-President, Lands and Environment, Kaminak Gold Corporation
Brad A. Thrall  President, Yukon Chamber of Mines
Samson Hartland  Executive Director, Yukon Chamber of Mines
Ron Light  Vice President, Capstone Mining Corp., Yukon Chamber of Mines
Stuart Schmidt  President, Klondike Placer Miners' Association
David Morrison  Former President and Chief Executive Officer, Yukon Energy Corporation, As an Individual
Amber Church  Conservation Campaigner, Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, Yukon Chapter
Felix Geithner  Director, Tourism Industry Association of the Yukon
Lewis Rifkind  Mining Analyst, Yukon Conservation Society
Karen Baltgailis  As an Individual

1:10 p.m.

Chair and Executive Committee Member, Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board

Wendy Randall

Yes, absolutely. We have timelines for all our processes. The designated office assessments, the executive committee screenings, and the panel reviews currently have timelines that were developed, as I mentioned earlier, through the consultation we've done with regard to our rules.

1:10 p.m.

NDP

Dennis Bevington NDP Northwest Territories, NT

Do you see that the amendment being put forward will radically change how those timelines are set?

1:10 p.m.

Chair and Executive Committee Member, Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board

Wendy Randall

It will change it in a number of ways. There will be timelines that are legislated now as opposed to being in our rules. There will likely be challenges with implementing particularly the timelines at the executive committee screening level. We will be hard-pressed to find ways to make that happen.

1:15 p.m.

NDP

Dennis Bevington NDP Northwest Territories, NT

I was very impressed with the quantity of projects your board has worked its way through. It's quite remarkable that you do as many as you do. You said that you do these mostly at a regional level, that most of them are through simple screening, office screening you call it.

1:15 p.m.

Chair and Executive Committee Member, Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board

Wendy Randall

It's called a designated office assessment. Those are the bulk of the assessments that are done. We've only done six other assessments that are screenings at the executive committee level.

1:15 p.m.

NDP

Dennis Bevington NDP Northwest Territories, NT

Would placer mining come up to that executive screening level at all, or would it remain generally at that...because that seems to be one of your largest customers.

1:15 p.m.

Chair and Executive Committee Member, Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board

Wendy Randall

That's at the designated office level.

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

The Chair Conservative Blake Richards

Thank you, Mr. Bevington.

We'll move now to Mr. Leef for the next six minutes.

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT

Thank you, Ms. Randall, for appearing here today and congratulations on your appointment to the board.

I'm going to ask you a question in particular reference to some of the changes that have moved into Bill S-6, outside of previous YESAA legislation.

In clause 10, proposed subsection 43(2) reads as follows:

If the proponent fails to provide the required supplementary information within the period prescribed by the rules, the designated office, executive committee or panel of the Board may suspend its assessment activities until the proponent provides that information—

How is that different from what currently exists under the legislation?

March 30th, 2015 / 1:15 p.m.

Tim Smith Executive Director, Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board

There are some subtle changes that will be brought about by such an amendment, in particular, the ability or authority to discontinue assessments when a proponent is unable to or does not provide a response to an information request within a prescribed period of time. We see this providing greater certainty within the act.

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT

Regardless of defined timelines, should there not be sufficient information, can the executive council or the screening-designated offices effectively stop the clock and require the proponent to provide additional information?

1:15 p.m.

Executive Director, Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board

Tim Smith

Yes. In terms of suspending an assessment pending a response to an information request, there is little change from current practice. We currently generate statistics. For the committee's benefit, a summary of those statistics is available on YESAB's website. The statistics are divided into both assessment time and proponent time. Where the proponent is taking time to respond to an information request, of course that is not calculated as part of the assessment timeline or the timelines being proposed in Bill S-6.

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT

Thank you.

The premier was here this morning and I think the phrase he used was that the meat in the sandwich is the regulations. I know we're here to seize ourselves of the specifics of Bill S-6 itself, but an act is followed by regulation. I'm just wondering if there are any changes in this act that are leading us toward regulatory development and providing greater certainty and continuance of environmental and socio-economic integrity.

Are you able to speak to any of that “meat in the sandwich” conversation which the premier referred to this morning?

1:15 p.m.

Chair and Executive Committee Member, Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board

Wendy Randall

I'm not clear on what you're asking me, actually.

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT

Effectively he was saying that we have the act, but next it's going to be the regulations and the regulations will speak to some of the things that we're speculating about at this point. We're making some speculation on what could occur and what can't occur, which will be tightened up by specific regulations.

1:15 p.m.

Chair and Executive Committee Member, Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board

Wendy Randall

The regulations primarily speak to triggers for assessment. If the regulations are being reviewed, that's where this will be discussed, I assume—what the triggers are either to have an assessment or to determine the level of assessment.

1:15 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT

Would that speak to the one outstanding piece of the “significant change” definition? The timelines in Bill S-6 are referring to an assessment as not being required unless there is significant change to a proposal. If you're defining triggers in the regulations, would it start to define what might trigger “significant change”?

1:20 p.m.

Chair and Executive Committee Member, Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board

Wendy Randall

It could. I just don't feel comfortable speaking to what the parties may or may not decide to do with the regulations.

1:20 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT

Okay. But that question, I presume, could come up. I'm certainly not asking you to say that this is exactly how they're going to be defined, but that option is at least open in that process. Is it, or do you not know?

1:20 p.m.

Chair and Executive Committee Member, Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board

Wendy Randall

That may be one avenue to look at it, sure.

1:20 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT

Okay. Thank you.

Can you again just reiterate the board membership and the executive committee membership for me?

1:20 p.m.

Chair and Executive Committee Member, Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board

Wendy Randall

There are seven members of the board. Three are the executive committee, and one of the executive committee members is also the chair of the board. Then there are four other members at large.

1:20 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT

Those board appointments are made by...?

1:20 p.m.

Chair and Executive Committee Member, Yukon Environmental and Socio-economic Assessment Board

Wendy Randall

The Council of Yukon First Nations nominates three of the board members, the Yukon government nominates two board members, and the Government of Canada also nominates two board members, all board members being appointed by the federal Minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Northern Development Canada.

1:20 p.m.

Conservative

Ryan Leef Conservative Yukon, YT

There's an additional change in Bill S-6 in respect to extension of time limits. There's an initial provision that sets out that there can only be time limit extensions for a maximum of two months, taking into account circumstances specific to a proposal for a project, and then a subsection that follows that allows a recommendation to be made to further extend those time limits for any period.

That, I presume, would have been put in to anticipate much larger-scale projects that might come forward for which the timelines in the bill right now would be impossible to meet.