Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on May 16th, 2019

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

I'm wondering how this legislation might affect future land claims. I know some of the indigenous nations in the southern part of the territories are still in that process. How might it affect them that we are reconstituting the boards again. I know we'll have some of them before us later.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, Toronto—St. Paul's, ON]

I think Mike McLeod is probably in a very good position to answer that question as the member of Parliament for the territories.

My understanding is that there's a real consensus that they want the uncertainty around the injunction tidied up. From my understanding all groups wanted to have their local board able to take decisions based on that local reality, as opposed to one super-board. I think a lot of people see this as housekeeping on one side, but a huge barrier to going forward on the other. This is just getting us out of court and able to move forward.

[Richard Cannings, NDP, South Okanagan—West Kootenay, BC]

Thank you, Madam Chair.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Cathy McLeod]

I believe we have MP McLeod.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the minister and all the people appearing with you.

This a very important piece of legislation for us. It's something I have been involved with in different capacities over the years.

I think the way the board structure regulatory process and the board structure are set up in the Northwest Territories is certainly a model for other jurisdictions. My colleagues from Alberta and Saskatchewan probably could take a good read of this and see that there is benefit to it. I don't see the involvement of indigenous governments in any other jurisdiction, not even in the National Energy Board, where they have guaranteed seats for indigenous people.

I think it's a model that people from across the world have asked to review and some of them are considering it. It works well and had been working well. Industry liked it, indigenous governments liked it and the Government of Northwest Territories liked it. The previous government of the day saw fit to make changes. Those were changes made without the inclusion of the people who came to this type of system.

I listen in amazement to my colleagues from the other side talk about the moratorium. When the discussions with the Conservatives, the Government of Northwest Territories and the people of the Northwest Territories were happening on the devolution, they wouldn't allow the subject of the Beaufort Sea to be even put on the table, or the Norman Wells oil fields.

I think it was a good time to put a moratorium on, because there was a natural moratorium. The moratorium was not only because it was declared. Oil prices were also a great factor. In 2011, the whole system was cancelled for the Beaufort Sea. In 2012, there was a total of $7 million spent. In 2013, there was no program. In 2014, the program was postponed. In 2015, the program was postponed.

In five years there was $7 million, so nobody's going to convince me of how much money we were making in the north from it. I can tell you that the money was not coming, the royalties were not coming to the Northwest Territories, because that was not allowed on the table.

As we move forward, I hear concerns but I recognize this as putting UNDRIP into action. The involvement of the indigenous people in land and decision-making for resource management and implementing the modern treaties is certainly putting UNDRIP into action. I want to hear some feedback on that. Is that something you would agree with?

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, Toronto—St. Paul's, ON]

Absolutely, and even how the boards are set up, with the voices of indigenous governments right there, this is putting into action the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

In fact, last year when we were at the UN, in the permanent forum, we had a panel on how you take regional decisions for things. I think it was the Premier of Nunavut at the time, but we discussed how, when you have a land claim settled—and it can be decisions taken by the federal-territorial governments and rights holders together—you can approve good projects quickly, reject bad projects quickly and send mediocre projects back to the drawing board to improve the environmental concerns of those.

We think this is an excellent model that we should be examining in a more regional way in the south. I think you have already proven how well this works in terms of achieving certainty and making it more attractive for investments that won't be blocked later somewhere down the road.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

Indigenous people have a tendency not to trust government. I'm an MP and I'm not sure if I trust governments.

[Voices]

Oh, oh!

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

I think it was a huge step for all of us in the north when we started seeing resolution and inclusion to some of the challenges and decision-making and to have a co-management process put in place. That's what we think is the way forward, to work together. There was a lot of applauding by certain indigenous governments that we would have a regulatory process that had regional boards and the MVR board and it was working, but then the Conservative government saw fit to tear that down, even though it was written into the land claim agreements. That was a real shocker to see that happen, without consultation with indigenous governments and without inclusion and discussion with indigenous governments.

As we move forward, if these changes come into play, how do we prevent that from happening again? We saw documents and agreements that we thought were cast in stone. The courts backed it up, thank God, but how do we prevent this from happening again? We came to an agreement with the indigenous governments, the federal and the Government of Northwest Territories, only to see it all ripped up by one government who said, “We're going to change it. These are the new rules”.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, Toronto—St. Paul's, ON]

Michael, I think you raise a very good point. This case becomes the teachable moment, going forward, for how things can get held up in court, so that the good changes get held up and everything comes to a halt. That's why we believe that, if you include indigenous governments, indigenous rights holders, indigenous knowledge, at the very earliest time of a project or legislation, that's the way you go forward in an even way. That keeps things going forward, so it won't stop or roll back. I hope we have learned a lesson from this and it will take us forward in a good way.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Cathy McLeod]

That's seven minutes. It's time to go on to round two, which is five minutes, with MP Viersen.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the minister for being here today.

As Mr. Cannings talked about, Minister, this bill seems like two opposing things put together. You have the idea that we're going to devolve interests to the territories, yet we're going to impose a moratorium in the north. Are you holding the Government of Northwest Territories ransom with this bill, by saying, “You will abide”?

You said, “Here, look at the premier's letter.” Well, the premier's letter doesn't reference the moratorium whatsoever. I know the premier has been very opposed to the moratorium. This seems like an exacted letter and it feels to me like you're holding the territories ransom, by saying, “If you want this good stuff, then abide by our moratorium.”

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, Toronto—St. Paul's, ON]

Thank you for that, but I think that, if you listened also to the member of Parliament for the Northwest Territories, you would understand this was an important time to be able to—

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

With all due respect, Minister, bringing certainty to the industry is.... For sure, you've brought certainty. You've said, “Certainly, there will be no development in the Beaufort Sea.” That is certainty. I'm not denying that.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, Toronto—St. Paul's, ON]

No, that's not what we're saying. We're saying that, when there was, in effect, a moratorium because the conditions weren't right, it was already happening by industry, so that this is the time to achieve the science—

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

You have ensured that those conditions are not right.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, Toronto—St. Paul's, ON]

I think what we are ensuring is that we will—

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

No development will ever happen in the Beaufort Sea. That's what you're ensuring.

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, Toronto—St. Paul's, ON]

Madam Chair, I don't think this is quite reasonable for the member to keep interrupting.

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

The question is, are you holding the territories ransom with this?

[Carolyn Bennett, Liberal, Toronto—St. Paul's, ON]

Absolutely not.

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Madam Chair, I have a point of order.

Can the member please allow the minister to answer the question?

[Arnold Viersen, Conservative, Peace River—Westlock, AB]

That's not a point of order.

[Mike Bossio, Liberal, Hastings—Lennox and Addington, ON]

Yes, it is a point order.

[The Vice-Chair, Conservative, Cathy McLeod]

I will intervene. I know it is the member's time. I would ask the member to give an opportunity for the minister to answer, but also to recognize that he has many questions within his time frame.