Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There are a number of common concerns and I’ll try to just speak to the broad areas of alternate energy, the forestry issues, the wildlife issues, recycling, traditional knowledge and climate change.
The Alternate Energy Plan that has come before this House is spread among a number of departments. It is the first time the Government of the Northwest Territories has actually put serious money towards getting things done in a whole host of areas. Up until now we’d been studying a number of projects but never had the capital to move forward on them. So the intent is during the life of this Assembly to show significant, actual progress on projects. We’re trying to cover a broad range of projects.
A lot of the focus is cost of living oriented. Looking to communities that are reliant on diesel and trying to come up with ways to get them off of that. This is the first year and the message hopefully for the life of this Assembly that we’re going to be working very hard to carry out the plan. The hope is that the 17th Assembly will see the value of this work and
the need to continue it. It’s not going to be complete in three years.
If we move towards biomass, for example, we have to be able to prove out the technology and then we have to come up with funds to look at implementing it across the North where it makes sense. We are very seriously considering the value-added industries that could come with biomass, specifically the manufacturing of pellets. Right now there is a big, fixed site plant in La Crete and we believe and know that there’s technology for portable, smaller pellet-making operations which we think have, in the longer term, greater applicability
across the North and that communities could manage on their own because there is an industry here that could be community specific. We are looking at biomass.
The mini-hydro as well. We recognize that there are far more sites than just Lutselk’e and Whati. The key, as was indicated yesterday by Mr. McLeod and Mr. Vician, is that we are also doing the mapping and we want to identify all the other sites that are there. Deline has been of interest, but the two that are farthest along in our opinion were Lutselk’e and Whati. The intent is to carry on that work but look as well to other communities in the coming years.
The wind turbines we, as well, believe are going to be portable once we get it operational in Tuktoyaktuk to get it done. The broader issue of the Taltson project, we’ve spent a significant amount of money getting it ready. It’s into the environmental assessment phase. The upfront cost, as Mr. McLeod indicated yesterday, is that this is a half billion dollar project. The investment we’re making is recoverable by a lot of standards in terms of required upfront investment. It’s a good investment and we understand that there are still serious discussions underway with De Beers, and we have to take the long view with De Beers and the diamond mines that once we’re through this current downturn, the long-term prospects are good. Right now there is a benefit to proceeding because steel costs, for example, are at not an all-time low but the lowest they’ve been in decades. Those type of costs, the costs of wire, the costs of copper, have all come down. There’s a benefit to that.
We also, as we look at the alternate energy piece, there are short-term things, long-term, and midterm things we want to do, and we’ve applied money, as well, to beef up subsidies to encourage people to in fact convert to more energy-efficient appliances, to get into wood. In fact, we’ve got money in the budget to work with communities to reintroduce wood burning and sort out some of the issues of installation, insurance and those type of things.
This is one of the most significant issues we have, I believe, in terms of making serious impacts on cost of living, alternate energy, greenhouse gases, and those type of areas that are of significant concern to us. Part of this is going to be...There’s about a sixth of the Territory that’s been mapped out with forest inventories. We have to proceed and continue on with the mapping as we look at things like biomass and what resources are there and what’s the best use we can make of those resources. We are going to continue with that work.
We’re also going to continue with communities to develop and complete, where they haven’t been completed, the community energy plans as well as the inventories around communities.
We also do have a FireSmart Program where we’ve identified communities where work is being done. We know there are a lot of communities in the boreal forest area that should be looking at this and our staff stand ready to work with communities to get started on that process. There are things individuals can do. There are things communities can do. There are things ENR can assist in doing, as well, to get each community fire smart where there is a risk of forest fires.
We are also, if I could speak quickly now about legislation. The forestry act is about 50 years old and, like the Wildlife Act, we’re committing to getting that done. We recognize fully and will involve the co-management boards and aboriginal governments in the development of these pieces of legislation the same as we have with the Species at Risk Act. We have set the model with the Species at Risk Act. The Wildlife Act currently has had a number of meetings and is moving, we believe, very effectively and efficiently based on the trail broken through the Species at Risk Act process. We believe that same approach will be used with the Forestry Act, recognizing that we have long-overdue commitments as a government that we are required to honour through the land claims that have yet to be honoured. We are very sensitive to that issue as it pertains to many of the aboriginal governments with the land claims that have been settled.
The Species at Risk Act, there was some concern raised about polar bears. The polar bear issue is not based on our Species at Risk Act. It is because there is a difference of opinion between the experts in Canada, COSEWIC in particular, and what the American government decided to do in terms of recognition of the polar bear. We saw it as a species of concern. The Americans decided their assessment was more significant and severe than that and, as a result, they’ve put restrictions on that have affected the ability to move polar bear hides across into the States, which has put a significant damper on the polar bear outfitting.
The work on caribou we intend to continue with. The Yukon government and the Americans are going to try once again to do the assessments of the long-overdue inventory of the Porcupine. We are going to look once again at the Cape Bathurst, the Bathurst, or the Bluenose-West and Bluenose-East, and the Bathurst. We did work last year on the Beverly, which gave us pause for serious concern. We’re working with Nunavut looking at the Beverly. Sorry, the Ahiak and the Qamanirjuaq. The work to date has not given us any pause to celebrate. There are still significant concerns, we believe, that are out there. We’ve committed, though, until we can finish a more thorough assessment with the outfitters in the North Slave, especially to maintain the 750 tags that are
currently there per year. We’ve also committed to working with the outfitters in terms of the process of how tags are allocated to come up with a way that is more timely. If there are going to be tags that are not used, to have them come back into some type of pool where they can be accessed before the hunting season is over.
The issue of recycling. We believe we are going to hit about 100 million containers by June since the start of this program that have been recycled and not put in the landfills or scattered across the land, which I think is an achievement which should be celebrated, which we intend to do. We also estimate that there are roughly nine million or so single use bags every year that go into landfills, which is why we’re putting the levy on. It’s a consumptive levy that people can avoid. We anticipate that we’re going to be able to fund some of our other recycling beverage container initiatives with some of the funds that are going to be collected through the levy. We are working with, for example, Alberta, who has an Electronic Recycling Program that we would like to partner in with them on rather than try to set up our own. We are looking at options on the milk containers. The best way to do this that it’s going to have the minimum impact and not negatively impact the consumption of milk on both these areas, we will be coming back to committee before we launch the final program.
I also forgot to mention, as I talked about alternate energy, we know that there is significant interest in two areas specifically -- Yellowknife and the Simpson area -- on geothermal. We want to work with those communities to look at the proposals they have underway. Yellowknife has already invested a significant amount of money and we would like to see how we can assist in that area.
The Bison Strategy, I know the Member for Nahendeh has been concerned about that. We anticipate that within two to three weeks we will be able to sort out a date with the community of Liard, for example, to have the meeting that we talked about in this House. We are committed to do the proper notification and make people aware of the issue to try to get as good a turnout as possible. We are definitely interested in consultation and feedback both in that area. And we take the advice and concern raised by the Member in terms of the cadmium levels in the Mountain moose.
Climate change is probably one of the underlying issues that are driving a lot of our concerns across the board. As we look at all the things we do with housing, with capital projects, with trying to sort out what’s happening with the animals, we recognize that climate change is one of the factors and it’s affecting things like permafrost, it’s affecting things like invasive species, insects, the rate of predation. It’s making things more accessible. We have to pay
more and more and better and better attention to this in all the work that we do. The Climate Change Committee that Mr. Bromley and Mr. Krutko sit on is in the process of working collectively to develop a policy lens that will help us look at how we look at these issues as a government, and where there’s a need as we look at things through our macro-economic lens, we also want to be able to look through things through this climate change lens to make sure we’re paying the proper attention to this issue.
Traditional knowledge has been on the books now since 1997. The intent is within the life of this sitting to be able to table in this House the plan going forward. The step prior to that is going to be to send a package to Priorities and Planning of everything that’s been done to date in terms of getting ready to roll this out as a government so that they can have an opportunity for some feedback. But our goal, as we try to beat the clock, is to have this ready to go forward to the public by early April. It’s going to be, as people will tell us, in many cases, long overdue. We’ve heard it over the years from Members about getting it done. Well, we’re ready to in fact do that.
A final two things I’ll just quickly touch on. The issue of water is one of the major issues for this Assembly, this government. We’ve been working very hard on our Water Strategy, which we will hit our deadlines in terms of having a document that we can bring forward to this House, to the Members and to the people, the results of the last 14 months’ work. We hoped by fall to be able to have a policy that we can accept and adopt as a government and as a Legislature. We’re also hoping, because of all the work we’ve done and the fundamental concern about this issue, that we will have the aboriginal governments on side as well. We’ve been working with them as we develop this. We’ve spent a lot of time. We’ve listened very carefully. We’ve heard over and over again over the years from the aboriginal governments the concern of all governments, every Northerner we’ve talked to about this issue of water. Both transboundary issues, but also how we deal with water in the Northwest Territories. I know there’s a lot of concern about what’s happening to the south of us and the issue of cumulative impact. There are many things happening in Alberta in terms of resource development, proposed dams. The folks from B.C. are here talking about Site C, the Bennett Dam. We also know that in the headwaters in the mountains, the Rockies, the glaciers are disappearing and the snowpack is diminishing as the temperatures rise. There’s more extraction and impoundment. We have a whole host of challenges.
But as we look south we must not forget our own backyard. If I can use two examples, we have 320,000 metric tonnes of arsenic trioxide sitting in mine shafts in Yellowknife below the level of the
lake that we’re trying to come up with a way to conclude the securing of at least in the interim. Across the lake we have what is left from Pine Point and the tailings ponds that are there. When you fly over that it looks very similar in many cases to some of the pictures that you see on Google Earth of what’s happened in Alberta. So we have to be comprehensive in our approach. We have our own issues in the North, as well, that we have to make sure we pay attention to. Those are just two examples. There are other mines we’ve tried to deal with, including Port Radium. So it is a major issue for us and we’re going to continue that work because it is so important and it’s going to tie into the land use framework that we’re doing that’s going to give us, as a government, the ability to have our thinking clear so we can be constructive and supportive when we go to the tables that are there negotiating land use frameworks that have been highly recommended by Mr. McCrank, for example; one of the recommendations that we think has significant pertinent value to us as a Territory.
So there are many things we have on the go. I appreciate the kind comments and I do support the recognition of the hard work that the staff has been doing and continues to do.
Finally, we are looking at the values at risk for forest fires. We know this is a concern. We’ve had values at risk for some time. There is concern that circumstances have changed, as climate change increases and the forest fire seasons expand, and there is loss of habitat for caribou, the issue of how we are doing values at risk has been brought into question and we’ve committed to look both at values at risk and the command and control of how decisions are made on fighting fire so that we can be as responsive as we can as close to the fires that we can. We recognize that over the years we’ve had a concentration on decision-making that may not have always worked in our best interest. Thank you