Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 28th, 2013

[Yvonne Jones, Liberal, Labrador, NL]

Okay.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you.

We'll turn now to Mr. Seeback for the next round of questions.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Minister, I know you talked a little bit in your opening remarks about some of the success stories with respect to Justice At Last, the specific claims action plan. I know certainly that when I've looked at some of the material it's really been exceptional how the backlog of, as you mentioned, 541 cases was cleared. I was encouraged to hear you say that since 2008, 100% of claims had been responded to. That to me seems to be an exceptional number.

I want to delve a little bit deeper into that. Do you know how many claims are currently before the tribunal? Is the extra $452 million earmarked for any specific claims that you think are about to be resolved?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

According to a document the deputy just cited to me, right now we have 90 claims under assessment, 39 at the level of research, 31 the subject of legal opinions being prepared by the Department of Justice, and 20 where the legal opinion has been signed. In negotiation right now, we have 231, so the total in progress is 321.

Also, as I said, concluded through negotiations, we have 385 that have been settled. We have 413 where no lawful obligations were found, 33 that have been resolved through administrative remedy, and 326 files that have been closed, so that we have concluded 1,157 specific claims.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Maybe, Michael, you know this as well. With regard to the number of $452 million, is that earmarked for some specific claims that you think are about to be resolved? Or is that just an anticipation of what may be resolved in the coming year?

[Michael Wernick]

One of the features of the reform of 2007 is that the Department of Finance has given us a specific settlement allotment. It can only be used for specific claims settlements and awards from the tribunal—no other purpose—and we can fairly flexibly roll it from year to year so we don't get caught in fiscal year-end sorts of things.

We go through a regular process with the Department of Finance and the Department of Justice in trying to ballpark what we expect to come to negotiation. We're certainly not going to send negotiators out to tables and not have the resources set aside for them.

It's a provision. It's an estimate. We're going to be a little under and a little over in some years. We have some very big settlements come in. We have several in the range of $100 million to $300 million, and some of them are $50,000. No two claims are exactly alike.

[Kyle Seeback, Conservative, Brampton West, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

We will now turn to Mr. Bevington for the next round of questions.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Thanks, Mr. Chair.

I want to thank the minister for being with us today. I look forward to hearing his answers to my questions. I'm going to talk about devolution, because of course that's a subject that's very dear to most people in the north.

I'm curious about the $24.8 million that's up for grabs in the supplementary estimates. This is going to be divided between the Government of Northwest Territories and Northwest Territories aboriginal groups, according to your statement.

First of all, what particular activities are going to be funded under that? I'd like to see that. Is this representative of one-time funding that was described at $26.5 million in June 2013? Is this what the money represents? Or is this money that's in addition to that particular allocation?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

That refers to the one-time costs being carried by the GNWT and the first nations for implementation of the agreement.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

So it speaks to that $26.5 million?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

Yes.

[Michael Wernick]

Yes, it's part of the overall agreement that was tabled in Parliament yesterday. It's the run-up costs to the hand-off next April 1.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Is there an anticipation of further one-time-only costs under next year's budget? Would that be safe to say? This is a fairly complicated process, this changing of administration for many of the lands and resource aspects of the Northwest Territories. We all like to see things done as expeditiously as possible, of course, but it may be that these things take a little longer and are a little bit more complicated than first meets the eye.

[Michael Wernick]

Yes, there is a financial component to the overall devolution agreement that was reached. Perhaps when the devolution bill is in front of you, which won't be too long from now, we can provide further information on the financial aspects of it.

[Dennis Bevington, NDP, Western Arctic, NT]

Under federal contaminated sites, you have a very minor amount of money, $425,000 indicated, but in the Northwest Territories there are many contaminated sites. Some of the progress on those sites has been restrained over the last number of years, especially those on the old uranium mines in the Sahtu region of the Great Bear Lake area.

Is there anything within this process that would give us an indication of a timeline for further work on the contaminated sites that has been retarded over the last while, for the work that needs to be done to complete the work on these sites?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

On the northern contaminated sites program, which is in place and is being executed, we issued over $325 million in contracts, with approximately 75% of this amount awarded to northern and aboriginal companies. The Giant Mine remediation project, which you know well, has already issued approximately $130 million in contracts, with approximately 65% of these amounts awarded to northern and aboriginal companies.

This is a responsibility of the government that we take seriously. As I said once before, what is at the heart of all of this is the safety and the security of northerners. Their health and safety is our prime concern. It is the prime consideration as to moving on a particular project or not.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you.

We'll turn now to Mr. Boughen for the next round of questions.

[Ray Boughen, Conservative, Palliser, SK]

Thank you, Chair.

Let me add my voice of welcome to the panel. Thanks for sharing your day with us this morning.

I will be staying with devolution for a couple of questions here.

Minister, the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Prime Minister made a commitment to the people of the Northwest Territories to target effective dates of April 1, 2014. Can the minister update our committee on the progress being made by the government towards delivering on that promise?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

As you may or may not know, I'm pleased to report that this morning the House adopted the ways and means motion necessary for introducing the devolution legislation in the House. After much consultation with our partners, and the Government of the Northwest Territories, and aboriginal communities, our government is ready to move forward with our commitment to northern control of northern lands and resources.

The devolution agreement, which we signed in June, and its intended regulatory improvement will lead necessarily and definitely to job creation and economic opportunities for northerners. I look forward to bringing legislation to put this agreement into effect as soon as we are ready. We're getting there really rapidly.

[Ray Boughen, Conservative, Palliser, SK]

Thank you.

When we're placing resources in the hands of the Northwest Territories to generate opportunities for Canadians and to enable the Northwest Territories to enjoy greater economic benefits, can the minister point out the important benefits northerners will enjoy, stemming from the government's action toward the devolution of land and resources responsible in the Northwest Territories?

[Bernard Valcourt, Conservative, Madawaska—Restigouche, NB]

I think it's fair to say that northerners, first and foremost, will benefit immensely from devolution. Decision-making will be in their hands. The people in the Northwest Territories will decide on the pace and the nature of development of resources in their territory, and this is for the benefit of all their residents, and of course of Canada also.

Devolution will not only provide greater decision-making to the northerners, but it will also guarantee that they receive a net fiscal benefit from resource development through resource revenue-sharing arrangements that have been agreed to in an agreement and that will find expression in the legislation.

In addition, aboriginal parties to the devolution agreement will receive direct financial transfers and a share in resource revenues from public lands, and participate in the government decision-making in collaboration and partnership with the Government of the Northwest Territories.

All of these benefits have been negotiated between our government, the Government of the Northwest Territories, and the aboriginal parties, and are set out in the devolution agreement, which I signed in June.

[Ray Boughen, Conservative, Palliser, SK]

Thank you, Minister.

[The Chair, Conservative, Chris Warkentin]

Thank you.

We'll turn now to Ms. Hughes, for the next round of questions.

[Carol Hughes, NDP, Algoma—Manitoulin—Kapuskasing, ON]

Thank you very much. I greatly appreciate the time.

Minister, on a number of occasions in your presentation—I think you have three paragraphs that deal with education—what's interesting is that you said,

“…deserve access to a school system that meets provincial and territorial standards…”. There is no mention that this would be equitable.

I have tons of correspondence here from the Chiefs of Ontario; from the Chiefs Assembly on Education, which includes chiefs from Quebec and all over; and the Anishinabek Nation, which is in opposition to the first nations education act.

When you were looking at drafting the first nations education act, did you consider the funding envelope? Did you consider equitable funding in designing that first nations education act?

I know you are saying you are consulting with first nations, but I can tell you that a lot of first nations are saying that they're not being consulted. I know that for seven years, Chief Shining Turtle from Whitefish River First Nation has continually asked the minister to attend the first nations, to meet with them so they can have those discussions about education and the economic impact.

I'm trying to get a sense if your view and your department's view of the first nations education act include equitable funding?