Thank you. Minister of Education, Mr. Nerysoo.
Debates of March 17th, 1994
Topics
Supplementary To Question 318-12(5): Review Of Fort Smith Leadership Program
Question 318-12(5): Review Of Fort Smith Leadership Program
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 662
The Speaker Jeannie Marie-Jewell
Further Return To Question 318-12(5): Review Of Fort Smith Leadership Program
Question 318-12(5): Review Of Fort Smith Leadership Program
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 663
Richard Nerysoo Mackenzie Delta
Madam Speaker, I'll take into consideration the comment made by the honourable Member.
Further Return To Question 318-12(5): Review Of Fort Smith Leadership Program
Question 318-12(5): Review Of Fort Smith Leadership Program
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 663
The Speaker Jeannie Marie-Jewell
Thank you. Supplementary, Mr. Patterson.
Supplementary To Question 318-12(5): Review Of Fort Smith Leadership Program
Question 318-12(5): Review Of Fort Smith Leadership Program
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 663
Dennis Patterson Iqaluit
Madam Speaker, I think the Minister has said in his answer, I'll think about it. I guess I would like a little clearer answer than that. Could I ask the Minister if he's open to sharing the results of the review with Members of this Assembly, or is there some reason why the review should not be made public? Thank you.
Supplementary To Question 318-12(5): Review Of Fort Smith Leadership Program
Question 318-12(5): Review Of Fort Smith Leadership Program
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 663
The Speaker Jeannie Marie-Jewell
Thank you. Minister of Education, Mr. Nerysoo.
Further Return To Question 318-12(5): Review Of Fort Smith Leadership Program
Question 318-12(5): Review Of Fort Smith Leadership Program
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 663
Richard Nerysoo Mackenzie Delta
Thank you, Madam Speaker. I think the honourable Member knows, having served in Cabinet, that reports are not always a matter for public distribution. However, after consideration and after I ask my colleagues if it is with their consent and their approval that the documentation be released, I will suggest that all documentation be released, not just the report. One of the comments that was made to me was that the Nunavut divisional board did not support a leadership program in Nunavut, at the time the offer was made. I'm not aware of that fact and I've raised that point yesterday that it was my view, that if you have a leadership program, it should also be extended to the Nunavut part of the Northwest Territories.
Further Return To Question 318-12(5): Review Of Fort Smith Leadership Program
Question 318-12(5): Review Of Fort Smith Leadership Program
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 663
The Speaker Jeannie Marie-Jewell
Thank you. Item 5, oral questions. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Antoine.
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 663
Jim Antoine Nahendeh
Mahsi, Madam Speaker. Yesterday, I made a Member's statement concerning emissions from Giant Mine. This morning, I noted two interesting news stories. First, on the radio, the Minister of Renewable Resources reacted to my statement by saying that Giant is on its last legs. It seems he was implying that we shouldn't expect Giant to spend any money cleaning up its emissions. However, in yesterday's Yellowknifer, there was a story that said Royal Oak Mines posted a net income of $15 million in 1993. Royal Oak's manager of investors' relations, Graham Eacott, was quoted as saying Giant Mine has many more years of life. Figures in the news report suggest that Giant has at least eight and as many as 20 year's worth of reserves.
I would like to ask the Minister of Renewable Resources why he stated that Giant Mine was on its last legs? Thank you.
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 663
The Speaker Jeannie Marie-Jewell
Thank you. Minister of Renewable Resources, Mr. Kakfwi.
Return To Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 663
Stephen Kakfwi Sahtu
Madam Speaker, it was my impression that Giant Mine has antiquated pieces of equipment and it is seen as being very economical to run as it is. Any changes to its mode of operation would be extremely expensive and, therefore, they would be more inclined to shut down than to be open to any suggestions that the way it mills the ore be brought up to date. That was the basis for my comments to the media yesterday.
Return To Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 663
The Speaker Jeannie Marie-Jewell
Thank you. Supplementary, Mr. Antoine.
Supplementary To Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 663
Jim Antoine Nahendeh
Thank you, Madam Speaker. In the radio report, the Minister implied that forcing Giant to meet guidelines would result in lost jobs, but the company is profitable and their mine here in Yellowknife is obviously producing well now that the strike is over. Has the Minister obtained any figures, either from Royal Oak or from independent sources stating how much it would cost to significantly reduce Giant Mine's sulphur dioxide emissions? Thank you.
Supplementary To Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 663
The Speaker Jeannie Marie-Jewell
Thank you. Minister of Renewable Resources, Mr. Kakfwi.
Further Return To Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 663
Stephen Kakfwi Sahtu
Madam Speaker, the facts may differ, depending on the sources you get them from. But one thing is clear. If the Member feels the emissions from Giant Mine are grossly unacceptable, then what is acceptable has to be established. Right now, we have draft guidelines that have been circulated to the industry and to the public since January. The responses we are getting to the draft guidelines -- that try to articulate what is acceptable for emissions of sulphur dioxide and other floating pollutants -- are going to help us get a public read on what is acceptable and not acceptable. Until then, it is difficult to make any kinds of suggestions about what is and what isn't acceptable, simply because there are large economic questions involved here. We need some basis upon which to have a discussion.
First of all, who can answer the question as to whether there's enough profit in an operation to warrant the operators and owners spending their money on changing their method of operation and, as a government, will we accept the liability for making the continued operation of a mine questionable in putting the livelihood and income of large numbers of families in Yellowknife on the line, without being able to answer the question, what we are prepared to do about it? Would we be prepared to jeopardize operations and, if so, would we accept responsibility for picking up the pieces thereafter?
Further Return To Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 663
The Speaker Jeannie Marie-Jewell
Supplementary, Mr. Antoine.
Supplementary To Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 664
Jim Antoine Nahendeh
Mahsi, Madam Speaker. There is an outstanding complaint filed lawfully through the Environmental Rights Act. It has been outstanding for almost three years now. The Minister has a legal and perhaps a moral responsibility to act on this situation. I think that the Minister should study the issue more thoroughly. He and his department should be aware of how much it would cost Royal Oak to reduce their emissions. Another radio report had Royal Oak claiming that it would cost over $5 million to clean up the emissions. This may be the cost of one option, but the Minister should be aware of a variety of options available to the company. Will the Minister commit to responding to this House, within the month, with estimates of the different options for reducing Giant Mine's sulphur dioxide and arsenic emissions? Thank you.
Supplementary To Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 664
The Speaker Jeannie Marie-Jewell
Thank you. Minister of Renewable Resources, Mr. Kakfwi.
Further Return To Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 664
Stephen Kakfwi Sahtu
Madam Speaker, perhaps there is
a way to get some honest and accurate estimates on the profits that companies make and their commitment to ongoing operations when they expect some outside demands being made on them. I would take that question and ask for some assistance, within government, to help Renewable Resources to answer the question the way the Member has placed it and get back within a month, as he says. Thank you.
Further Return To Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 664
The Speaker Jeannie Marie-Jewell
Thank you. Supplementary, Mr. Antoine.
Supplementary To Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 664
Jim Antoine Nahendeh
Mahsi, Madam Speaker. The Minister also suggested in the...(inaudible)...that we don't have a perfect world. I agree with him. He compared my concern with Giant Mine's emissions to emissions from vehicles and furnaces in homes. We cannot make Yellowknife air perfectly clean, and private individuals are attempting to reduce their own pollution. But when it comes to sulphur dioxide in Yellowknife, Giant Mine is by far the biggest source. The report his department prepared last year stated that Giant Mine contributes the bulk of arsenic and sulphur into the Yellowknife environment. In comparison, the NWT Power Corporation Jackfish Lake diesel plant's yearly sulphur dioxide emissions are less than Giant puts out in one day. Is the Minister committed to ensure that acceptable standards for emissions are met, and will he be negotiating on an individual basis with every large company that chooses to set up operations in the north? Thank you.
Supplementary To Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 664
The Speaker Jeannie Marie-Jewell
Thank you. Minister of Renewable Resources, Mr. Kakfwi.
Further Return To Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 664
Stephen Kakfwi Sahtu
Madam Speaker, the commitment is there from the department to address this issue. The way we are doing it is by drafting guidelines and inviting the public to comment on draft guidelines that would set what is, in the public view, acceptable standards to govern emissions. Once these guidelines are set, then we have some standards to try to use to monitor new and current developments to see if everyone can comply. In the event that there is no compliance with these, then we would start to draft regulations that would be legally enforceable. But the guidelines themselves simply say what we think is going to be demanded by the public with regard to these emissions.
The Member has referred to the comments I made to the media. We don't have access to it, since the media takes total ownership of the comments I made. It is a bit out of context. I have simply taken the view that in this world are people who demand a pure, clean world and there are others who may be from industry who say they should be totally unregulated. Somewhere in the middle there will be a happy medium where all of us have to compromise a little in order to reach a workable solution to the problems. Thank you.
Further Return To Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Question 319-12(5): Emissions From Giant Mine
Item 5: Oral Questions
Page 664
The Speaker Jeannie Marie-Jewell
Thank you. Item 5, oral questions. Item 6, written questions. Item 7, returns to written questions. Mr. Clerk.
Return To Written Question 10-12(5): Inequity In Services
Item 7: Returns To Written Questions
March 16th, 1994
Page 664
Clerk Of The House Mr. David Hamilton
Madam Speaker, Return to Written Question 10-12(5) asked by Mr. Allooloo to the Premier concerning inequity of services.
A complete listing of the number and type of government positions and the number and type of recreational facilities for communities with a population of less than 550 have been provided to the Member.
All other Members were provided with the same information for communities within their constituencies.
Return To Written Question 10-12(5): Inequity In Services
Item 7: Returns To Written Questions
Page 664
The Speaker Jeannie Marie-Jewell
Thank you. Item 8, replies to opening address. Item 9, petitions. Item 10, reports of standing and special committees. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Antoine.