Thank you. Madam Minister.

Mr. Chairman, I'll let Mr. Flynn respond to that question...

---Recording Difficulties

Mr. Ashton.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I think the easy answer to that question is that these bills do not affect the ownership of lands, especially in those areas where the ownership is in dispute. We have a situation where quarries exist in communities and they are being operated. We want to make it very clear that these existing operations are in the capacity of the territorial government, the municipalities or any agent of the government to run.

In the case where there may be lands that are disputed, the ownership is more of a question of where and when quarries should be developed. That is more related to the land application and citing process. The focus of these bills is simply to say that the operations that exist today, and the fees and charges that have been made, were always intended to be legal and we are making it explicit that they are legal.

This is not an attempt to turn over any lands or change the ownership of any lands thereby prejudicing any discussions about land ownership. This is simply recognizing that the quarries are already being operated. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Mr. Zoe.

Mr. Zoe, I think you've been cut off. Mr. Zoe.

Thank you. Madam Minister.

Mr. Chairman, I'll let Mr. Ashton respond to Henry Zoe's question.

Mr. Ashton.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I agree with the statement that Mr. Zoe has made, that before any type of new operations were to be established there should be an agreement entered into by the municipality and the government or the owner of the land, whoever it may be. Again, this is what the focus of this legislation is about, to make sure that the municipality has the explicit legal capacity to enter into that agreement. And then, if it's on Commissioner's land, the Commissioner has the explicit legal capacity to enter into that.

The legislation does not go into the details of what would be contained in that type of an agreement. Historically, what we have encouraged the municipalities and the communities to do is to develop their own rules and procedures and their own quarry administrative system that they would like to see in any such agreement. As it pertains to third parties, we would like to make sure that the municipalities and the communities have the legal capacity to take control of their own local concerns.

So we haven't gotten into that level of detail because we don't see that as a problem with the legislation. Once they have the legal capacity to enter into agreement, it would flow from that that they could set the terms and conditions that best suit their local needs.

Thank you. Mr. Zoe.

Thank you. Madam Minister. Mr. Ashton.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In reply to the question, I think the important thing to realize, in particular with the situation in the Dogrib area where third-party interests and land claims negotiations are under way, is that we do have signed interim protection provisions that relate to any dispositions of land. So this bill does not automatically give the right to a municipality to go and establish a quarry. It gives them the legal capacity to do that, but there's still the next step that they have to approach the land owner and go through a whole land application process. This process is now subject to the interim provisions agreed upon by the Government of Canada, the territorial government and the Dogrib Treaty 11 Council. In that, there's a consultation process to make sure that areas of specific interest to third parties are not given away in claims processes. So we are continuing to operate with that in mind.

Thank you. Clause 3. Mr. Ng.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to ask, the jurisdiction for establishing operating quarries would go through the municipalities in this case. How about as far as the jurisdiction for quarry fees? Whose jurisdiction...Would that remain with the Department of MACA, or would that go over as well?

Thank you. Madam Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That will be with municipalities, and the recoveries are on a cost basis.

Thank you. Member for Kitikmeot.

Thank you. So that jurisdiction is in the existing act, then, I take it. It's not in the amendments.

Madam Minister.

Mr. Chairman, I'll let legal counsel respond to that.