Natural Resources Committee on Nov. 21st, 2011

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thank you, sir.

Mr. Goad?

[Robin Goad]

We are trying to negotiate impacts and benefits agreements right now. But right now the Tlicho government is not at the table to negotiate these kinds of agreements.

We have just recently completed—

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Which kinds of agreements? Are they IBAs, impact and benefit agreements, or is it actual equity participation?

[Robin Goad]

Equity participation would certainly be one of the issues that would be under negotiation as part of an IBA. We just completed agreements with the Tlicho to fund their participation in the environmental assessment process, to fund traditional knowledge as well as a cooperation agreement.

I made some comments about land-use issues being used to escalate demands. For example, our traditional knowledge funding agreement we have with the Tlicho is $370,000, which is about four times what is typical of these kinds of studies.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

So you were making investments in tech, in capacity, presumably ultimately in health--

[Robin Goad]

But they're escalating.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

--but they're isolated and they're not--

[Robin Goad]

No, they're escalating.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

They're escalating, but there isn't an equity here, participation with these first nations folks, is there?

[Robin Goad]

There's not currently an equity deal.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Are they asking for that, demanding that?

[Robin Goad]

We're not at the table yet with impact and benefit agreements.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Okay.

Mr. Kearney.

[John F. Kearney]

We have already signed impact and benefit agreements with two first nations, and under each agreement the relevant first nation participates in the projects for revenue sharing. So it's effectively, if you want to call it that, a type of royalty arrangement whereby a portion of the profit or of the revenue accrues to the first nation. It is necessary to have impact and benefit agreements, and under those agreements it has now become the norm to include revenue sharing or financial participation to secure the support of the relevant first nation. This support is essential to get a project permitted in the Northwest Territories.

The permitting system in the Northwest Territories is a co-management system. The boards are quasi-judicial. Because they're quasi-judicial, they're not like government agencies or departments. They're semi-independent and get their own legal advice. They do not respond to any federal authority, and as such, because they're a co-management system, they tend to be pro-environment.

Contrary to what you suggest, I would argue they should be pro-development. The purpose of the board is to issue permits, not to stop them being issued. I'm suggesting there needs to be a champion to negative the anti-development argument. The ministry of mines and economic development needs to be there as an advocate for development and for mine projects to counter the dominance of the environmental argument and the anti-argument.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

You're out of time, Mr. McGuinty. Thank you.

[David McGuinty, Liberal, Ottawa South, ON]

Thank you, sir.

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

We'll go to the five-minute round now and we are starting with Mr. Anderson.

Go ahead, please.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Goad and Mr. Kearney, I'm just wondering if you have the same concerns about the regulatory processes as Mr. Bubar. You've expressed some concerns, but would you put it in the same words as he has?

[Robin Goad]

Yes.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Okay, thank you.

Has the process in Saskatchewan sped up in the last few years? Is it better now than it was five years ago, or has it pretty much stayed the same?

[Dr. Richard Schryer]

We only have the singular experience in Saskatchewan, so I don't think we can have an answer to that.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Okay.

While you were talking about the approval process, it sounded as if the length of the process is the issue. That's what everybody has gone on about. I'm wondering if you are comfortable with the requirements. When this committee makes its report, are there ways we might be able to improve the requirements that are needed to reach approval? Are things duplicated in terms of requirements, or is your main concern the length of the process?

[The Chair, Conservative, Leon Benoit]

Mr. Kearney, go ahead, please.

[John F. Kearney]

There are significant duplications and overlaps. For example, you could have seven government departments each independently submitting a report to the review board. Each of those seven departments comments on everything, instead of just commenting on what might concern them. There's significant waste and duplication at the government level, where there is no coordination, or not enough coordination, between the reports that are submitted by the government departments to the review board. So, no, I wouldn't say we're comfortable with the process. The process is too cumbersome, and it's not just timelines. The whole process is way too complex, way too uncertain, and needs to be reconstructed from the ground up, frankly, but because it's a function of the land claims, that's quite difficult to do.

The aboriginal governments know it's wrong too, so everybody needs to get back to the drawing board and ask how to fix this. It's not a tinkering; it's got to be reconstructed.

[David Anderson, Conservative, Cypress Hills—Grasslands, SK]

Mr. Schryer.