Mahsi, Mr. Nitah. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Thebacha, Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this issue as well would be contentious in my community. However, I believe it should be given a chance to go through the committee process to allow all the Members on the GED committee to give it the thorough scrutiny it deserves to address some of the issues raised by my colleague for Mackenzie Delta or my colleague for Tu Nedhe. On that basis, I will be voting in support of giving it second reading to allow it to go through due process and give it fair consideration. Let it be subject to the best decisions possible from the committee responsible for that particular bill. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Range Lake, Ms. Lee.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak in favour of this motion. I would like to start off by thanking the Member for Frame Lake for the hard work that he has put in to bring this bill to where it is today. It is not easy for Regular Members on this side to draft a bill and to carry it through. I would like to express my thanks and congratulations to the Member.

Mr. Speaker, I was not planning on speaking at length on this, but I would like to put my support for this on the record. Mr. Speaker, I can advise you that when I became an MLA, I became aware of this issue, where I was not aware of it before. It was very much a constituency issue for me because a lot of people in my riding either work for the RCMP or for the military services in Yellowknife.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that the work they do in this part of the country is as important as any they do in the rest of the country and around the world. This is a big morale issue for them. They feel that they are not being treated -- in fact, they are being treated substandard than they would be treated as any other Canadian citizens.

Mr. Speaker, I can also tell you that this is a subsistence issue. I have learned in my job in talking to these members of the military service that they really do not make very much money at all. The lower-ranking military service personnel make minimum wages and they do actually hunt for their food. I think a family of four expected to live at $25,000 is not -- I think we have a misconception about people's wages and people's living standards that we are not aware of.

This is very much an economic issue for those military families based in the Northwest Territories where the cost of living, as we know, is higher than the rest of Canada.

I think, Mr. Speaker, there is a very important issue here, and that has to do with our obligation as elected representatives and a Legislature to protect the Constitutional Charter of Rights that are supreme law of this land.

Mr. Speaker, I believe that whenever we speak about protecting our own rights, we have to always be willing and prepared to grant the same to those who are entitled to the same.

Mr. Speaker, we value the rights we have under the Charter. One of them is the residency of mobility rights. To ask these military personnel or RCMP who are not able to establish a residency requirement because they are being moved so often, to ask them to do something that they are not able to do has to be a violation of the Charter. They are not able to meet the three-year requirement in many cases. If they are only based here for three years and they have to spend two years establishing it, they would be asked to leave shortly after they become eligible to do what they want to do.

I believe that this is a very important issue. We should be thinking about the rights and privileges of everyone. I think it is possible to do this and grant them the equal privileges without affecting or delegating in any way the aboriginal rights of our aboriginal peoples in the North.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to conclude by adding that I do not believe it is a sound argument or it is true to say that the amendments being proposed or the review process of the Wildlife Act will take care of this question. I believe that process rightly is one that is fair to address the questions and issues and implementation issues that come out of settled land claims and other negotiations between aboriginal peoples and Canada, and that is fine. I think this government has put a lot of resources to make sure that does happen.

However, this one is very precise and it should be immediate. I think this deserves the support of this House as a democratic institution.

Mr. Speaker, I could also add that in the resources that this government has put in for the review of the wildlife legislation, I do not believe there is any effort put in there whatsoever for groups like this to come before the review committee to have their say in this process. So in that manner, I think that having this bill go forward and have a second reading, and then to have some sort of a public input process through a committee review, would be something that would be the right thing to do for this Assembly.

For that reason, Mr. Speaker, I would like to speak in favour of the motion. I would like to once again to thank the Member for bringing it forward. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for the Deh Cho, Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I wish to state that I will not be supporting this motion.

Whenever we talk about wildlife, fish, land or waters, it is a very sensitive issue in my riding. Issues of this nature should be put through a consultation process. I do not believe that has taken place. Committees in my riding are currently going through the land claims process. These issues will be raised at that time. There is currently a review of the Wildlife Act taking place.

I think there have been issues that we have to consider. I have heard the mover state that conservation is not an issue, but I believe it is. We really do not know how many people we are talking about here. It will certainly add to the number of people out there who are hunting and fishing. In the small area that we have to hunt in the Deh Cho region, there are already signs that the wildlife populations are declining.

I do not buy the arguments that we need to change the Wildlife Act so that we can attract workers from the south. If you want workers, there are many of the aboriginal communities that have 40 percent unemployment as it stands. I am sure you could go there and find some workers. With that, Mr. Speaker, I want to state that I will not be supporting this motion. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Great Slave, Mr. Braden.

Mr. Speaker, I will speak in favour of this motion. At the front of my responsibility is my constituents and I have a number of them in the riding of Great Slave who are employees of the federal police and military service. I too want to see that the benefits of living in the North are extended as much as possible to them.

However, I also note that the mover, Mr. Dent, has said that he is not seeking an exclusion or an amendment just for people in this employ, but for anyone who lives in the Northwest Territories for more then six months. Given the way our economy is developing, I think that in some small way if this can help encourage people to look at the Northwest Territories as a welcoming place, something that they can really put some roots down, that will be a benefit.

I think there is also something that we should look at, as Ms. Lee said, with mobility and going from place to place in Canada where we already have so many different standards by which benefits are extended or rights are extended. This is one way, in some sense, of equalizing things.

Mr. Dent has done a good job of researching this, Mr. Speaker. He has made it very evident that the whole Wildlife Act is something that is really taking on almost a life of its own in terms of consultation. This Assembly is seeing a lot of money and a lot of time expended in review and consultation on the Act.

A provision like this can be considered and should be considered up through to the committee level. I endorse it, at least to get it out to that stage so that the public can have a chance to give their views and we can come back and report with confidence on what I think is a good move. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Braden. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for North Slave, Mr. Lafferty.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Nunakput, Mr. Steen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, although I am a Member of the Executive Council, I am first an MLA representing a riding of people heavily dependent on subsistence hunting. This particular issue would have a direct impact on these people.

I believe that these people, through this process or through the process the government is proposing and initiating to review the Wildlife Act, will allow people to bring forward their concerns as to whether or not we should amend the time allotted for residence to qualify as residents under the Wildlife Act.

However, I think that regardless of whether it is through this process or through the government process in place, the committee that is taking on this responsibility, should this bill be before the committee, should take seriously their responsibility to hear from my small communities, because they are going to be heavily impacted by what happens here.

I urge the committee, if there is a committee, to not only concentrate on the larger centres when they do their hearings, because it is the larger centres that are going to have the populations that are going to want to amend this bill.

Mr. Speaker, I am also aware that there is legislation in place requiring the government to consult with the aboriginal groups in any changes to any legislation of this nature that would directly affect them. So I am confident that there are opportunities for people to have their say.

However, from the perspective of my people back home, it would not be right for me not to raise this issue in the House on their behalf, and this is what I am doing.

I am also, Mr. Speaker, aware that as a past chair of the NWT Game Council, this issue was debated, debated and debated. In the end, it was decided that a two-year residency was most appropriate. It was debated for exactly the same reasons that Members have addressed today; to attract people, to allow residents the benefit of living off some of our wildlife resources, as well as supplement their income. This is a way of attracting them. It was also looked at as a way of recreation. Regardless of what the result was, the end result was that people preferred that there be a two-year residency.

That is not to say that it should stay as it is. Twenty years ago is a long time and people may have changed their outlook, but nevertheless, they will express those concerns if they have any. I do know that one of the concerns were whether these people with residency licences have the ability to take care of themselves out on the land. That was one of the major concerns; whether they have the ability to effectively hunt wildlife in a professional manner. We should keep in mind that one of the major issues here is going to be that if you are a resident, you no longer require a guide. That is one of the major issues that has not been mentioned so far.

I think all this will come out in due course, but really, I am here to voice the concerns of my people that we would like to be heard if this thing is going to go before committee and participate.

Thank you, Mr. Steen. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Antoine.

Mahsi, Mr. Antoine. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Yellowknife Centre, Mr. Ootes.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This is no doubt a very difficult issue for many of us. I just want to speak about a concern that I want to express for some of my residents, and it has been ongoing ever since I have been in the Legislative Assembly, and that is the representatives of the military and the RCMP who get posted into the North. They are here for perhaps a short period of time. These are people who get transferred on a consistent basis to other jurisdictions, and they never have a home anywhere. They feel that this particular Wildlife Act is an imposition on them, whereby they cannot ever hunt in any jurisdiction.

This is the crux of the problem, from my perspective, for many of my constituents. As a matter of fact, the RCMP and the military headquarters are within my constituency and I do have to speak for them. I think it is important that this issue be addressed.

Yes, I am very appreciative of the comments made by other Members. The Wildlife Act may take a period of time to get through, and it would be my wish that this particular issue start being addressed and that the bill be put before a committee to look at, and at the end of the day, let the Members decide whether it should proceed or not. In the interim, you will have at least a consultation process that has taken place on this issue and a broad viewpoint.

It would be my wish that there would be very extensive consultation on this whole area, and that we do obtain the viewpoints of all people so that we can formulate a process. Should this particular bill not pass, at least we have gone through the process to be prepared for the final, the large section of the Wildlife Act that needs to be revised, so that we can deal with it.

Otherwise, I foresee an opportunity here for the Wildlife Act to be held up for a long period of time. It may take a great deal of time in the first place. I would like to see it proceed. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ootes. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes, Mr. Allen.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I too, as the representative for Inuvik Twin Lakes, cannot support this bill. I think I stated back when I tabled a document, a profile of Inuvik Twin Lakes, which says that we have a large proportion of our residents who still subscribe to the subsistence harvesting way of life. It is important for them to have some say in how we decide how we put this proposed bill into effect.

We are dealing with the same context as the gun law. This gun law really prohibits many of our subsistence hunters to exercise their rights because they are somehow governed by laws and other regulations that prohibits them from continuing to practice hunting and securing wildlife for food and clothing.

It is important for me as the Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes to support the ongoing subsistence harvesters so that they can maintain what they feel is their legal and legitimate right to continue to practice that tradition. Mr. Speaker, I will not support this bill. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Allen. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Inuvik Boot Lake, Mr. Roland.

Mr. Speaker, listening to a lot of the comments I have heard regarding this proposed amendment to the Wildlife Act has left me torn. Torn, Mr. Speaker, between my cultural background -- that of my father, who is a hunter and trapper, and has done well in that area. Torn between the history I have as an Inuvialuit and that of my children, who are moving forward in a more modern era. They love to travel the land and hunt and fish.

Mr. Speaker, it is something that we have to consider as a very serious issue. It is unfortunate that we find ourselves at times making these decisions that seemingly pit one group against another, being aboriginal and non-aboriginal, as this bill seems to do. I do not think that is the intention, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we have heard of the timing of the Wildlife Act and that process is ongoing. In fact, during the business plan reviews that were tabled in this House, I think it identifies that it would be concluded in about 2003, which is at the end of our mandate. There is no guarantee there that it will be dealt with during this Assembly.

I know the Wildlife Act amendments were raised during the 13th Assembly for a different reason; in the area of this government moving forward on the wishes of the aboriginal groups, who had concerns that this government was not implementing what has been put forward in the land claims agreements.

Mr. Speaker, I have tried to weigh this as it first came up in first reading and the Member approached me on this issue. I spoke to a number of people back home. I have heard the comments that some Members have raised here, that there is a process. The Wildlife Act amendment is under review by the department. Let that go its process. In fact, as we heard from the Member for Nunakput, this has been an ongoing discussion for decades.

Mr. Speaker, I do not take lightly what we must do as Members of this Assembly and how we must proceed. That is why it is very difficult, but I understand that we will, from time to time, have to make some decisions. I understand as well that we are at the process where we decide if we go to the standing committee stage. If this passes, we will go to the standing committee, which I would be involved with, along with other Members of this House. All Members would have an opportunity to take part in that process to one degree or another.

It is a decision of whether we stop it here or move forward to the next level to get more input.

One of the things I have to look back on, Mr. Speaker, is a commitment I made to the people who elected me, to afford me the opportunity to be in this forum. One of the things, Mr. Speaker, that I made a commitment to in the very first election I ever took part in, was that I would treat everyone with an open mind, no matter where they come from, what their cultural background is, if they are employed or unemployed, young or old. I said if you come to my office, I will treat you with due respect.

So I find this draws me to the commitment I made to my constituents of Inuvik, that I would take all aspects fairly and weigh them evenly.

Mr. Speaker, I find myself at this time in a position where I think there is a need to go to the next level, so that we could have the standing committee listen to our constituents. As Mr. Steen stated in this House, we will have to listen to those in the small communities as well, because they are the ones who are directly, every day affected by the hunting and fishing that goes on in the Northwest Territories.

Believe me, Mr. Speaker, I know making this decision will have some impact back in my community, because I have a large family, an extended family who is directly involved in the hunting and trapping tradition. In fact, many of my family right now are at the coast, whether it is Kendall Island or Whitefish Station, taking part in the seasonal whale hunting activities -- something that I have missed, Mr. Speaker, since I have become an elected Member. I have not had much opportunity to get out. I look forward to getting out this summer, though, at some point.

Mr. Speaker, it is only for the reason of going to the next level that I can support this bill. I want to hear from more of my constituents who would have a say in this process. If they come back clearly and tell me no, then that is the way I would vote on the final outcome. However, for the purposes of getting it to the next level, Mr. Speaker, and only for that, I would support this bill to go ahead to the next level.

Let no one make the mistake that I am supporting this right through to the end. I want to see it go through the due public process. With that, Mr. Speaker, I will support this on that basis and on the basis of the commitment I made to my electorate. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Yellowknife South, Mr. Bell.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to speak in favour of this bill here today. I believe it should go to the next level, as Mr. Roland has indicated. I think at the committee stage, it will get due consideration. We will hear from people in larger and in smaller communities. We need a public consultation on this matter.

I would not be comfortable if we were talking about making the exemption for certain people based on their occupation, such as military or RCMP. I think it is important that we look at everybody equally. That is what this bill proposes to do.

I am confident in my colleagues on the GED committee that they will hear from all segments of society in the Northwest Territories and make the most reasonable decision that they can.

I know it is a contentious issue, but I do have confidence in my colleagues that they can hear from all sides of the issue and come up with a recommendation. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Bell. To the principle of the bill. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Handley.