Thank you, Mr. Chair.
On behalf of the Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board, I'd like to thank the standing committee for inviting us here to speak. It's round two for us and I'm glad we had the opportunity to come back and be able to speak to you face to face.
When we were asked to present to the standing committee, we were trying to think of what the messaging that we could provide could be to help the committee with the study that you're looking at, which is the future of Canada’s oil and gas, mining and nuclear sectors: innovation, sustainable solutions and economic opportunities.
In essence, we conduct environmental assessments. We're not there developing natural resource projects, but we are there to review any resource development projects that are referred to us. One of the things that we thought would be a good discussion to bring to the table here is innovation in decision-making. Our board represents a type of decision-making body that is unique to Canada's north, and from our perspective, I think there's a lot of learning opportunities from the work that we're doing in the north and we'll try and present that as best we can in our presentation.
In essence, this is a system by design. I'm going to talk a little bit about the background of the system in the Northwest Territories, which is similar to systems that you would find in Yukon or Nunavut. I'll speak, of course, from our perspective, and talk about the land and resource management in the NWT, particularly about co-management, and what that means to decision-making on resource development projects in the north. Of course, I will talk about, specifically, environmental impact assessments in the Mackenzie Valley, which is our mandate.
The Mackenzie Valley review board is the primary body responsible for environmental assessment and environmental impact review in the Mackenzie Valley of the Northwest Territories. There are two systems within the Northwest Territories. One is for the Inuvialuit settlement region, which I won't be speaking to, and for offshore and the high Arctic there is a similar parallel system, but I will speak strictly to the Mackenzie Valley system.
To provide a bit about the land and resource management system, our review board and other land and resource management boards were established under the MVRMA, and they're the product of negotiated land claims. There is a bit of a difference from what we see in other regions. In terms of the system as a whole, it's founded on the core principle of resource management in a co-management scenario. It's a fundamental part of the Mackenzie Valley resource management framework. Decision-making about land, resources, and the environment are shared. As for the composition of the decision-making bodies, 50% of our board members are nominated by first nations or aboriginal groups and 50% by government. It's a collaborative system. It's also an integrated system. The system itself is integrated through four key pillars: land access and ownership, land use planning, environmental assessment, and regulatory as well as wildlife and renewable resource management. Land ownership, of course, is the responsibility of the governments or aboriginal first nations with self-government. Also, wildlife, renewable resource management, environmental assessment and land use planning are particularly the realm of co-management boards.
In terms of the Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board, the role we play within that integrated system is we look at projects looking for potential significant impacts or public concern. It's a court-like tribunal and is very similar to other tribunals. The key difference is the composition of our board. In terms of our membership, we do say that we have 50% nominations to our board members that are aboriginal. It's very reflective of the population of our communities in the Northwest Territories. At any given time, even though the nominations may come from the territorial government or the federal government, we actually have more aboriginal representation on our boards, review board, or other co-management boards.
As for what the difference is in terms of environmental assessment, there are different legal requirements from some of the environmental assessments that you find in southern Canada primarily because the MVRMA was a negotiated act. It's very different from other pieces of legislation that have been developed through the typical legislative framework. In this particular instance, there was actually a group that sat down with the land claimant groups and they negotiated the terms within the actual piece of land and resource management legislation.
One of the key aspects is that we look at the protection of social, cultural, and economic well-being directly from a project. It doesn't have to be from an environmental impact; it could be inherent impacts on the social and cultural well-being of the people of the Mackenzie Valley. Another key aspect is the importance of conservation to the well-being and way of life of aboriginal peoples.
Some of the principles that are applied in the Mackenzie Valley are some of the new principles that you're hearing in the mandate of the government, looking at building public trust and confidence in the environmental assessment process. We've been doing that in the Northwest Territories now for 20 years.
It also means how we conduct our business is a little bit different. We have community hearings. These may include ceremonial aspects. We bring in all different types of members of the community, not just leadership. It's more culturally appropriate. Everything is transcribed and translated for the record in the official languages.
In the end, there's more decision-makers from the region. They're aboriginal decision-makers. This reduces or eliminates cross-cultural barriers during the actual proceedings and builds public confidence in the system as a whole.
In terms of weighing evidence, we have certain provisions that we have to look at, like maintaining the way of life or cultural well-being of aboriginal people. Having board members that actually understand what that means plays a huge role in having meaningful decisions in environmental assessment.
In terms of the actual decisions, the resulting measures that come out of environmental assessment are protective of the land and the people. Overall, we find that project designs are improved because there's more local input into the designs of the projects or mitigation of the impacts that may potentially occur. There are actual measures that are directed at cultural impacts and there usually is better acceptance of decisions by communities. In some cases, aboriginal governments actually have final decision-making authority as well in areas with self-government.
But the process isn't without its challenges. It's an integrated resource management system and without a complete system, there are problems with the implementation of land and resource management. We are still missing some approved land use plans. Of course, the settlement of all the land claims in the Northwest Territories is front and centre and plays out in all of our environmental assessments. There's always a limited capacity for communities to participate in the process.
To wrap it all up, at the end of the day, co-management results in communities having much more say on the projects that actually affect them. There's more meaningful aboriginal participation and the values and traditional knowledge actually influence the decisions and outcomes. We find there's more trust in the process, and in the end, developers end up with a better social licence to operate.
I'll end it at that. Thank you. Masi-Cho. I look forward to any questions.