Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a question on the devolution resource revenue issue and the complexity of the whole negotiations and the various unlimited amount of issues that are still outstanding and probably will remain outstanding for the next 10 years if we don't change the approach on negotiations. I just want to ask the Premier about the approach that we are taking. We want the resource revenue sharing deal and the devolution deal all wrapped up in one sweet package and delivered here in the North. If it is going to take so long and it looks pretty bleak that we are going to have a deal here in any near future, looking at it like that, why don't we change the tactics on negotiation and try and...Is it possible that we could have a diamond resource revenue deal separate from an exploration resource revenue deal, separate from an oil resource revenue deal, gas resource revenue deal and just sort of piece it along as we go? At least we are getting something as we are going instead of, okay, we have half of it settled but we still have half of it outstanding so we really are not getting anything anyway. So it really doesn't make much sense to me to try and get some back revenue out of Norman Wells oil and gas for the last 60 years if that is one of the main issues that is still outstanding. Can we just piecemeal it? At the end of 10 years, we will have a resource revenue devolution package there to present. It is something that maybe has been put together over 10 years piece by piece. Is that approach possible or been thought about? Thank you.
Robert Villeneuve on Committee Motion 48-15(5) Establishment Of A Boards And Agencies Review Unit, Carried
In the Legislative Assembly on March 7th, 2007. See this statement in context.
Committee Motion 48-15(5) Establishment Of A Boards And Agencies Review Unit, Carried
Item 16: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters
March 7th, 2007
Page 1313
See context to find out what was said next.