Mr. Speaker, I tried to explain in my last response the reasons why the Member is getting frustrated here. In response to an earlier question, regarding legal aid, I have taken that question as notice. The Member is continuing to rephrase the same question about the same subject. That is why I took the time to elaborate in my last response, to say in a long clear way that I am taking it as notice. He did not understand it the first time, maybe he understood it the second time, but this is the last time. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to take the opportunity to present the report of the Special Committee on Constitutional Reform.

Mr. Speaker, on October 26, 1992, the majority of residents of the Northwest Territories voted "yes" in the national referendum on constitutional reform.

However, the majority of residents in six provinces voted against the constitutional reform proposed by the Charlottetown Accord. This "no" vote registered by the majority of Canadians brought to an end the latest round of constitutional negotiations, which had been launched on March 12, 1992, and the meeting between federal, provincial, territorial and aboriginal representatives.

The Charlottetown Accord had proposed the most extensive package of amendments to the Constitution of Canada since 1867. As a result of the October 26 national referendum, none of these proposed constitutional amendments will be acted upon at this time.

In the report of the special committee, tabled April 1, 1992, as Committee Report 9-12(2), the committee recommended that five major issues should be closely monitored in the current round of multi-lateral consultations. The five areas of particular importance were; one, territorial participation in public and private meetings and conferences on constitutional, economic and aboriginal matters; two, constitutional recognition of an inherent right to aboriginal self-government; three, the effects of the constitutional amending formula on future political and constitutional development of the Northwest Territories; four, the implications to the territories of the Canadian Economic Union proposals and the mechanisms for decentralization of the federation and; five, the constitutional amendments relating to national institutions, such as the Senate and the Supreme Court of Canada.

The multi-lateral negotiations that began in March 1992, involved first Ministers and aboriginal leaders in a process unique for its scope, complexity and duration. In the case of the Northwest Territories the special committee Members made up the principle advisory body and were present during key negotiation sessions. The negotiations of the accommodation were probably the most inclusive process of constitutional consultations in Canadian history, which had spanned the two years following the failure of the Meech Lake Accord in June 1990.

Numerous federal, provincial, territorial and aboriginal processes canvassed a wide range of public opinion during this two-year period. It remains to be seen whether future talks on the constitution or in the intergovernmental area will continue the multi-lateral approach which included territorial and aboriginal leaders in all levels of discussions.

With regard to the review of the Northwest Territories' achievements, the principles and objectives which the government of the Northwest Territories pursues, in negotiations, in relation to the above five matters, were recommended by the special committee in the committee's report of April 1 and were approved by the Assembly. These principles and objectives were achieved to a high degree during the negotiations. The content of the best efforts legal text and political accord released on October 12 confirm this. The referendum results in the Northwest Territories where voters supported the Charlottetown package by an impressive 61 per cent, provide a strong mandate for our Legislative Assembly and government to continue pursuing the gains we made during the current round of talks.

Northern objectives which were achieved in the package, and which I believe should be pursued include the commitments to territorial participation and all future first Minister's meetings and constitutional conferences; and the recognition of the inherent right to self-government in the territories through constitutional amendment or through claims, treaties or other mechanisms. Further, other aspects of the Charlottetown package which should be pursued include minimizing or eliminating wherever possible the negative effects on northern political and constitutional development arising from the current amending formula for creating new provinces and protecting the territories from negative impacts of the future decentralization of the federation and from a tax of northern preference and economic development initiatives.

With regard to the referendum process, the Members of the special committee conducted an extensive public education campaign to explain to the territorial residents the content and meaning of the Charlottetown Accord, which included personal appearances in many communities as well as publications such as "A Northern Agenda, the referendum in the Northwest Territories", which was widely circulated through the print media.

The national referendum results are susceptible to a wide range of interpretation. The Northwest Territories was one of only four jurisdictions that returned a "yes" vote in the referendum. Some of the "no" results no doubt represent a lack of support for the contents of all or part of the constitutional package. In some cases it may reflect the lack of support for any constitutional change at this time, given the concerns of Canadians for the economy. In other cases the "no" vote may not relate directly to constitutional issues. Appendices a, b, and c contain the referendum results by province and territory, within the Northwest Territories and for aboriginal peoples across Canada.

Conclusions and recommendations in the five areas of importance to the Northwest Territories identified in part one of this report form the basis for the positions taken during this round of constitutional negotiations, and some of the principles and objectives will no doubt continue to be important. However, governments and aboriginal organizations are still discussing where to go from here. Canadians have expressed concern for the economy, and this will likely be the focus of most governments in the near future. Resumption of constitutional talks are unlikely in the short term.

The Government of the Northwest Territories and the Legislative Assembly have a direct interest in the reform of the national constitution as it relates to the rights of aboriginal and non- aboriginal residence and the territories' role and status within Canadian confederation. With the failure of the Charlottetown Accord, other avenues for achieving territorial objectives in these areas need to be explored. The committee recommends that the Government of the Northwest Territories undertake a review and an assessment of the Northwest Territories' national constitutional priorities and objectives. A medium and a long-term strategy should be developed to achieve them.

The fundamental element in the intergovernmental affairs in the constitutional process is territorial participation. The territories must continue to build bridges with other jurisdictions and contribute to national affairs through the existing governmental forums. The current round of constitutional talks has demonstrated that the Northwest Territories can make positive contributions in national affairs and that its representatives bring a unique perspective to the table.

The committee recommends that the Government of the Northwest Territories take any necessary action to preserve and enhance its role and status in intergovernmental affairs in relation to the constitution, national institution reform, and the economy in particular. The Charlottetown Accord was a carefully balanced series of compromises which contained economic and fiscal implications for all governments. In many cases the commitments contained in the accord required cooperation from all levels of government in order to be implemented. The context has now changed. Aspects of the Charlottetown Accord, such as the inherent right of aboriginal self-government will have to be realized through new approaches following close consultations with aboriginal peoples. Parliament has constitutional authority to recognize in the territories the inherent right to self-government for aboriginal peoples. Most of the Charlottetown Accord provisions on self-government could be implemented through a constitutional amendment by Parliament acting alone in relation to the territories. Financial and other matters respecting the implementation of the right contained in proposed political accords adopted at Charlottetown could similarly be accepted by the federal government for the territories.

The federal government has the authority to recognize and implement the inherent right to self-government as part of the land claims process, in a parallel process, or through renewal of the existing Treaties 8 and 11, in recognition of the right and elaboration of the process. Some elaboration of the process of implementation could be achieved through constitutional amendment within the context of the existing section 35 of the Constitutional Act of 1982.

Financial and resource commitments could be enshrined in the legally enforceable agreement or through a political accord. A number of governments, including the federal government, will be calling elections in the near future. Some aboriginal organizations will be reviewing their priorities and mandates.

The committee recommends that prior to pursuing either a constitutional or non-constitutional means of implementing any part or parts of the Charlottetown Accord, the Legislative Assembly and government should consider the strong mandate given in the northern referendum results for the priorities and means of achieving our objectives, bearing in mind the political, social, economic, and fiscal implications of this course of action.

The special committee would like to thank the many people who worked tirelessly through this process and the families of these people, who also gave up many hours without them around. The Members of the special committee dedicated many long days to this process, and without this team approach and the support of the Legislative Assembly, we could not have achieved the success we did. With the presentation of this final report, the special committee is of the opinion that we have to the best of our abilities completed our work according to the mandate given by the Legislative Assembly. The work of the special committee at this time is complete but, as indicated in our recommendations, there will be a need to monitor and participate in the years ahead as there are still a lot of important areas to be addressed. Mr. Speaker, that concludes the final report of the Special Committee on Constitutional Reform.

Motion That Committee Report 3-12(3), Final Report Of The Special Committee On Constitutional Reform Be Accepted And Moved To Committee Of The Whole

Therefore, I move seconded by the honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, that the Final Report of the Special Committee on Constitutional Reform be received by the Assembly and moved into Committee of the Whole. Thank you.

---Applause