Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I too have some real problems with regard to this introduction of this bill at this time. We have an obligation to consult. There is a process in place. For me, the big issue on this one is the whole aspect of looking at wildlife, the human activities that happen in the North and also looking at the ability of ourselves as a government and as people to manage our resources and to have the tools to ensure the protection of our wildlife.

Yes, everyone would like to have the Wildlife Act amended yesterday but it has been a long term. As Mr. Dent states, it has been 20 years. A lot has happened in the North in the last 20 years. We have seen some major impacts with regard to how activities happen in the North. We have entrenchment of people, roads, activities in the Northwest Territories that have an effect on the environment, on our resources, especially on wildlife. We have a lot of outdated laws and regulations. For me, if anything, the big thing is the enforcement abilities of ourselves as government, as wildlife officers to do an adequate job to ensure the protection of our wildlife by way of establishing legislation.

Right now, someone can go out and break the law with regard to the Wildlife Act by poaching, hunting out of season or even where it pays to break the law, knowing the penalties we have in our legislation are so weak that it pays to allow an outfitter or big game hunter to take the other game because he knows for the amount of money he will bring in, the penalties we have are so small that it does not affect them. Under the legislation, there is nothing we can do about it because the way the legislation is drafted, it does not do justice.

I think we have to allow for the process to take place so we do not just deal with one little issue, such as the resident thing, but look at the overall Wildlife Act to ensure that we do a thorough review, take the time, do it right. For Mr. Dent and the people he says he represents, the people who are classed as not having that ability, for them to be able to have an opportunity, for them to air their concerns at the public review process that everyone else is taking advantage of right now.

The public hearings today are taking place in the Beaufort-Delta region. Those processes are ongoing. We have to realize that we do not want to undermine a process that has been long overdue. You have to realize that the issues at hand are a lot bigger than just the residency clause. We have to look at the enforcement side. We have to look at ensuring that the quota systems we have are fair and just. Also, we have to ensure that the wildlife officers and the people we depend on to ensure the protection of wildlife and protection for future generations have the tools to do their job. Unless we make some major sweeping amendments to the overall act, other than just one amendment, it does not really justify the cause.

I do have a major concern with regard to Mr. Dent's amendment, where he says there is no real impact with regard to aboriginal hunting rights and aboriginal claims rights. That is where I have a problem. Being a negotiator with the Dene/Métis claim process, and then the Gwich'in claim and then the Sahtu claim, this section of the land claim agreement, the wildlife sections of all three of those processes was the primary concentrated effort by the First Nations for negotiating rights in the Northwest Territories. For them, it was crucial that they have control, they have a say on wildlife harvesting and they want a management say that is meaningful. They want to be responsible to manage wildlife and have a system in place that is there to ensure the integrity of wildlife in the Northwest Territories will be looked at with regard to how people will be able to allocate licences. What type of licences are going to be allocated? How will quotas be set? How much of a species can be taken? We have to protect the health and well being of those species for future generations.

I will use an example. We can sit here and say we still have a lot of wildlife species. We talk about the Porcupine Caribou herd. In 20 years, the Porcupine caribou herd, the size of the herd 20 years ago from where it is today has dropped by 50,000 animals in 20 years. So if one herd can drop by that large a number, by 50,000 animals, think of where we will be in the next 20 years. I think we have to plan long term. We cannot just be shortsighted and focus on one thing. We have to focus on the whole aspect of wildlife and as legislators, we have to do this right and realize this is the only chance we are going to get to do a thorough review of the Wildlife Act in the Northwest Territories, to bring it in line with the rest of Canada and also bring it in line with other jurisdictions.

If you break the law, you will get fined $100,000. In the Northwest Territories, you break the law, the most you can get fined is $10,000. It pays to break the law in the Northwest Territories. I think it is important that we focus on those types of things.

With regard to land claim agreements, it is clear that the powers of the boards that are established through land claim agreements will have the ability to establish policies and propose regulations to this Legislature to clearly state how wildlife harvesting will take place by a person, including the class of person. So you people who come up here for two months or three months, you can have a process in place through this system that they are going to have through the wildlife board reviews that people will be able to hunt, not use the excuse I cannot hunt because I am up here -- for them, it is a means of managing the wildlife. That is also being able to have that opportunity for First Nations, aboriginal groups and the wildlife boards to ensure there is a means of being able to control the population of the herd by establishing quota systems and wildlife enforcement.

I think on this one, we do have to take the time and we have to look at all aspects, not just focusing on strictly an application process, saying it is not going to affect anything because it is only such a small majority. We have to, through land claim agreements and aboriginal rights, ensure that we do not undermine the process.

I think the First Nations government and the Premier of the Northwest Territories, and even the Minister of Indian Affairs, should seriously look at what implications there are if there are no allowable efforts that an individual Member of the Legislature can overrule a constitutional and protected agreement by making an amendment to a process, without having to consult with those people that they will affect directly, by making piecemeal amendments to take out certain sections of a specific act that has to be amended to bring on land claim agreements, which override the ability of those land claim agreements to do what they were set out to do, such as manage wildlife and also establish policy and procedures to allow for harvesting activities to take place in land claim areas.

I think that it is important that we take the time, we allow for the process to take place. Mr. Dent and the people he is speaking for have an opportunity to due process. They should take advantage of the public process that they are able to go to and state what their concerns are on the residency requirement, say exactly where they want to go.

That is where I am coming from. I think we have to allow for due process. We cannot simply make an amendment here because I think that it is going to be a disadvantage for the people of the Northwest Territories by not allowing due process. By making a simple amendment, I think we can jeopardize the relationship between ourselves, the First Nations governments and claim agreements that have been constitutionally negotiated and are protected under the Canadian Constitution. With that, I will not be supporting this amendment because I believe that there is a process for it to follow and we should follow that process.