Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Today the committee would like to consider the operations and maintenance budgets of these departments in this order, please: Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, the Department of Executive, the Legislative Assembly and, time permitting, the Department of Finance. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mrs. Groenewegen. Does committee agree?

Alright. We’ll start with Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations after a short break.

---SHORT RECESS

I’d like to call Committee of the Whole to order. Committee, we’ve agreed to start with the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations. Minister, do you have opening comments?

Introduction

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to present the 2010-2011 Main Estimates for the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations.

The department, on behalf of the Government of the Northwest Territories, is responsible for representing the interests of all NWT residents at aboriginal rights tables, and through our intergovernmental relations with aboriginal, provincial, federal and territorial governments.

The core business of the department directly supports the 16th Legislative Assembly’s goal of a

strong and independent North built on partnerships. This is evidenced through the partnerships that have been formalized with northern governments and our collective efforts to work on areas of common interest, find solutions for community, regional and territorial issues and most recently work towards a common vision for political development of the NWT. The department also continues to focus on doing its part to building a solid foundation for intergovernmental relations by working effectively with its federal and aboriginal partners to finalize land, resources and self-government agreements in all regions of the NWT.

In total, the department’s main estimates proposes total operating expenses of $8.18 million for the coming year, which is an increase of 17 percent, or $1.373 million, from last year’s main estimates.

Political Development of the NWT

Mr. Chairman, a large portion of this increase is in support of advancing the 16th Legislative

Assembly’s priority of a common vision for the political development of the NWT. One-time funding of $864,000 is included in this budget to support the work of the Northern Leaders’ Forum on political development that has been established to oversee this work.

This funding will also be used to engage with NWT residents and other northern stakeholders in the development of a common vision. Through public consultations, this will provide opportunities to learn from the past as we seek to chart a course for the future of the NWT.

The Northern Leaders’ Forum is comprised of leaders from the seven regional aboriginal governments, the president of the NWT Association of Communities, myself as Premier and two Members of this Legislative Assembly, Mr. Krutko and Mr. Ramsay. Through the work of the forum we hope to provide a strong and clear common vision for the NWT that will enhance our collective ability to successfully advance key issues of importance for northern governments. Northern leaders are committed to working together and engaging with Northerners to help unify our northern voice.

Mr. Chairman, this budget also includes $210,000 in investments from two of the key strategic initiatives for the coming year to help the government achieve its vision.

Maximizing Opportunities

As this government looks for ways to promote the NWT as a place to visit and live, the department proposes to invest $80,000 through the Maximizing Opportunities strategic initiative to undertake the initial planning work in advance of the NWT hosting the 2011 Western Premiers’ Conference. This work will include identifying potential host communities, securing venues, developing promotional material, soliciting volunteers and arranging for entertainment.

Hosting the annual Western Premiers’ Conference provides us with an opportunity to showcase the natural beauty and pristine nature of our Territory, promote economic and tourism potential and provide a financial benefit to the NWT.

Managing This Land

Through the Managing This Land strategic initiative, a proposed $130,000 investment is included to provide the project management for a comprehensive review of all GNWT negotiating

mandates that guide the GNWT’s participation at all land, resources and self-government negotiations.

This project is being undertaken to ensure consistency with the context, complexities and circumstances of evolving and new negotiations in the NWT. The resulting new or revised mandates will be responsive to lessons learned from the precedence set by finalized agreements in the NWT and elsewhere in Canada, to changing case law regarding aboriginal rights, and to new, innovative and creative governance models proposed by aboriginal parties.

While much of the project will be technical in nature, it is essential that the work undertaken be guided by a politically endorsed vision of how the NWT should be governed and the future role of the GNWT in a post self-government environment. I look forward to continuing to work closely with members of the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Infrastructure over the coming months in developing the principles of a governance vision.

Concluding Remarks

Mr. Chairman, I am confident that the proposed main estimates will enable the department to represent the interests of all NWT residents at 15 aboriginal rights tables and through our intergovernmental relations with aboriginal, provincial, federal and territorial governments.

That concludes my opening remarks. I am prepared to answer any questions committee members may have. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Minister. Do you wish to bring witnesses into the House?

Yes, please, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Does committee agree?

Sergeant-at-Arms, please escort the witnesses in.

Thank you. Could I have the Minister introduce his witnesses?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, joining me at the table is the deputy minister of Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, Ms. Gabriela Sparling; and to my right is Mr. Richard Robertson, director of policy and planning. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister. We’ll start with general comments. Committee, open for general comments. Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, my comments are going to be specific to the

comments I heard from the Minister. Through the discussion of details, I will ask the Minister about some things I’d like to know in detail.

Regarding political development in the Northwest Territories, we have some issues that are pretty sensitive right now to the aboriginal governments in the North here. Here, we try to build a common front for political development to look at some bigger issues on the table regarding resource revenue sharing, devolution, the common vision for people in the Northwest Territories. How do we all get along? We’ve got some issues here that this government has rubbed up against some of the aboriginal groups, governments, in terms of rights, working together. The Minister has indicated that he has close to $800,000 in the budget to develop some common front here. Within the time frame that we have and the state we are in with some of the aboriginal governments, I am curious and wondering about this department’s strategy in terms of how do we get everybody onside to say we’re in this together, we’re going to work on this towards the end of this government here to sit down with Ottawa and hammer out some of these bigger issues here.

I think the one thing that we really need, and it’s not there anymore, is the Aboriginal Summit. We kind of broke up the aboriginal governments here. We have a couple of the aboriginal who are on with the Aboriginal Summit, but some of the aboriginal governments are not with the Aboriginal Summit. It’s a fragmented coalition or front and that really concerns me in terms of moving forward there, Mr. Chair.

Another one is the self-government funding, self-government requirements, you know, the costing out. Once you start negotiating these self-government agreements and we start to see the finalization of these agreements and costing out of these agreements here, it’s going to take quite a considerable amount of effort by this government and the aboriginal governments to put down a final number on self-government agreements here.

Mr. Chair, the Minister did talk about, on page 3 of 3 on a revised mandate, a new negotiation of the Northwest Territories, the result, new or revised mandates will be responsive to the lessons learned and precedents set by the finalized agreements. I want to maybe ask some questions when it comes to this section in the details in terms of the revised mandate, in terms of our side being included in the loop of things, in terms of what is the revised mandate, where does it stem from and how it’s going to be impacted in terms of the agreements that are going to be put in place in terms of self-government agreements.

Mr. Chair, this is a very important department for me. It has to deal with lots of aboriginal rights, treaty rights, Metis rights, so I really wanted to also

ask the Minister in terms of his draft frameworks, I think it’s a draft framework on consultation. I know I have some information, what I got from the website there in terms of what the department is looking at in terms of consultation. It’s something I look forward to having the Minister come forward with in terms of finalizing it, in terms of finalizing the consultation policy and the framework and see where we can go with that there.

So, Mr. Chair, those are my comments for the Minister. Again, as I said, this is a very important, for me, it’s a very important document. This is a nation-to-nation building document for myself. We have aboriginal governments that believe strongly in their treaties, aboriginal governments believe strongly in the land claims settlements, aboriginal governments who are negotiating their own government through a self-government arrangement, yet we have the federal government sitting there waiting to see, you know, how are we going to work together in this small Northwest Territories. We’ve got aboriginal governments that own huge tracts of land, you know, even had the power on it.

I was in Deline over the weekend and people are talking about where did we let the one government have power on our land. There are agreements. When did those agreements come in place in terms of aboriginal and treaty rights? So they want to have that kind of discussion. Where did we sign over? So I guess that’s part of the political development I see. Key areas that need to be answered, that need to be discussed and they need to be talked about. Maybe that’s kind of the guidelines for consultation with the aboriginal government.

Metis rights is one that still bothers me today. It’s a university entry program they have with the federal government that says aboriginal people can apply for that program. You ask the federal government and they say only Inuit and First Nations, but not Metis. We administer a program and it still bugs me today. I talked to Minister Strahl, Minister Prentice. The last government said they were going to look at it. They never looked at it. And Metis is still not included in there. That’s a shame, you know. They said that they’re breaking their own law that says aboriginal. In the definition of aboriginal it says Metis, Inuit and First Nations. What is the government here doing to help us to include Metis into that university entry program? This is what you guys should be fighting for us, fighting for the Metis people to be included in that program. I’ve got Metis members in my home region there that are saying this is discrimination. Yet, two federal Ministers said they were going to do something about it and to this day, six years later, there’s still nothing done. This is totally ridiculous in this day and age. And that, Mr. Chair, that’s only one program.

That’s how I see our Premier, part of his role as a Minister for Aboriginal Affairs. I could be wrong here, but that’s what we’re looking for from our leader here, is protecting, enhancing and strengthening our treaty and aboriginal rights. It’s key here, this department, it’s very key, especially today in terms of how we’re going forward. We just talked about one issue here in the last couple weeks on the animal. You know, that’s key, and I don’t want to raise it again, but I think I will leave the rest of my comments for the detail, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Committee, we’re in general comments. Does committee agree that there are no further general comments?

Thank you, committee. Minister Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Yakeleya has covered a number of significant areas that we’re involved with as the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations. Our role is to be involved from the GNWT side to ensure that we promote the best practices as the Government of the Northwest Territories in a number of areas. The Member has touched on, as I said, a number of key ones.

Political development, as we go through, is one of those key pieces of how we go forward as the 16th Legislative Assembly, and working with our partners in the Northwest Territories. We’ve been holding a number of meetings now. We just recently held our seventh meeting, I believe, with regional leaders, and from there we had our second meeting on political development. As we’ll be dealing with that budget item later, we can get into more detail. That political development is about building a common vision for the North and how we approach the federal government in a number of key areas where they still impact on delivery of services and programs here in the Northwest Territories.

So as we do that work, we do that work recognizing the aboriginal rights that have been established through treaties, through court decisions, through land claims agreements and, for example, through the self-government agreement that’s been signed in the Northwest Territories with the Tlicho. All of those things come together to help us form our position that we could work together on, and that’s recognizing each other’s roles when it comes to program delivery services in the Northwest Territories.

The area of the Aboriginal Summit, well, the regional leaders’ meeting, in a sense, is the evolved version of that. The Aboriginal Summit came together as an initiative in the last government. It may even have started in the 14th Assembly to do

some of its initial work. That, after a while, wasn’t including all of the groups at the table. Whereas, the political development piece or the Northern Leaders’ Forum, as we call it, includes everybody at the table, and the GNWT isn’t the one setting all of the agenda. We, in fact, work together as leaders to put the agenda items on the table for discussion. Our next meeting, hopefully, is near the end of March, and we’ll be talking about that political development piece and formulating for more certainty the future working arrangements of the Northern Leaders’ Forum. I look forward to having that further discussion. I think that will bring us the furthest of any Government of the Northwest Territories in solidifying our relationships with aboriginal governments in the Northwest Territories.

Further to that, the revised mandates, we’ll be able to speak to it in a little more detail later on as well. But we’re working with committee on that and, hopefully, we’ll be able to sit down here soon. I believe we have some time set up to start that work in going through our mandates. Some of those mandates are quite old and, as talked about earlier, the common vision, developing that, the aboriginal rights established today, some of these mandates outdate the new agreements that are in place and the new interpretations that have happened from either agreements that have been put in place by aboriginal governments and public governments as well as the courts. So that work is meant to update that.

The consultation framework is something we’ve worked with the Assembly and committees. We gave them a document a while back on the consultation framework the process was undergoing. We then did training modules with departments and from going forward we will serve, along with the Department of Justice, as the tool that department can use when it comes to satisfying the requirement of consultation when it comes to dealing with aboriginal governments and organizations.

When it comes to the Metis, the Government of the Northwest Territories treats Metis as aboriginal groups. We recognize them in delivery of programs and services. We do not differentiate like the federal government does, and we will continue to advocate on that issue when it comes to the peoples in the Northwest Territories.

The Member talked about the sensitive area of the animals and rights legislation when it comes to conservation and so on. We continue to work with the groups up and down the valley, and that is a very complex issue. Much like water, much like land, animals are a very important part in the fabric of who we are as northern peoples, aboriginal peoples in the Northwest Territories. So we have to make sure we do the best we can in ensuring that our future generations can have what we’ve taken

for granted with what we have established as our rights. So we continue to work with that, but in a complex environment, for example, with the land claims that are in place, there are co-management bodies that have worked very, very well for us when it comes to dealing with conversation issues, harvesting rights, as well as legislation. The Species at Risk, for example, is an example of that, and the Wildlife Act that’s being worked on is another example of a more collaborative working arrangement on developing legislation that this government will put in place.

It gets a little more complicated when you come to the areas where there are negotiations ongoing where some of the groups that are negotiating feel they don’t want to sign off on some of the legislation we’re working on because they feel it might prevent them from taking a more active role in their own direct negotiations. One of the things I say to our aboriginal partners in the North, no matter what happens, as we draw down that authority from the federal government and self-governments then get signed off and then implemented in the Northwest Territories. That will then pass, if it is just for the sake of discussion, Mr. Chairman, from the federal government to ourselves, as the GNWT, and then to the self-governments as those agreements are signed and then implementation goes into place. The one place we have more clarity is, in fact, with the Tlicho Government, for example. That is the self-government that has been signed off and enshrined in the federal legislation, as well as ours, and there is a working relationship established there. As they go towards implementing and drawing down their powers, we will continue to work with them on that side of it.

So it is a complex environment. When it comes to representing the interest of the peoples of the Northwest Territories in general and then more specifically on the rights issues that are established and being defined on a day-to-day basis as well.

So I look forward to having the discussion with Members as we go through this work. One other area that the Member discussed was self-government financing. That is an issue we feel is very serious. In fact, we took it upon ourselves to look at all the negotiation tables that are negotiating and what is being requested through those negotiations and we came up with a model. Now it’s not the be-all/end-all but it is the basis of a starting point. We came up with cost estimates on that model and put it to what we deliver in today’s environment. We’ve identified a gap of between 24 and 30 million dollars if we were to implement every self-government table across the Northwest Territories. We’ve raised that with the federal government. In fact, we’ve held bilateral meetings between aboriginal organizations and governments and ourselves to show them the work we’ve done, so they are well prepared and looking forward in

dealing with the federal government to have them recognize that as they sign these agreements, there’s a need for additional resources to be able to implement these agreements and make sure that in signing those agreements, everybody fully understands those cost implications of doing that as well. We can get into that detail as we go further on into this budget process. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Does committee agree that we go into detail?

Thank you, committee. We’re going to defer page 4-7, the department summary, operations expenditure summary. We’ll start with page 4-8, department summary, Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, infrastructure investment summary. Questions?

Page 4-9, department summary, information item, Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, active position summary. Questions?

Page 4-11, activity summary, Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, corporate management, operations expenditure summary, $2 million... Mr. Yakeleya.

We’re probably going to get a similar answer if I ask the question, but I have been asking it ever since I’ve been here. About the Metis core funding, I think it’s averaged out. I think it’s $13,000, if I can recall. Every year this funding has not increased. That’s one of the complaints I get from my region, is that the Metis get core funding. I know it’s a nice thing to do for this government here. There really is no funding for them except some Metis are under a land claim settlement and they have other kind of funding. This one for the GNWT, I guess it’s a nice gesture to recognize the Metis government and to support it through a core funding initiative. I think it’s about $14,000. I am not sure if this is ever going to increase or this is something that we maybe should discuss on another level. Regarding this funding, are the Metis going to get any more than what they received the last four or five years? I believe it’s about $13,000 per Metis local organization. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Minister Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thank the Member. He is consistent on this issue. The Member is right; on an annual basis, core funding is provided to Metis organizations that are eligible for $13,235 and the total amount we have set aside is in the neighbourhood of $225,000.

What Metis organizations need to do is to qualify for that by having their registries in good standing. That’s the only requirement we have. We’ve been working with the NWT Metis in this area. We’ve had discussions. It hasn’t progressed at this point, but we’ve had discussions that they may be interested in taking over the actual delivery and allocation of those resources. What I said in that area is we would be willing to consider that if they were to have agreement with the Metis councils through the Northwest Territories to have that happen. Until that, we will be going through this programming as it is established.

Right now, this does not include an increase in that area and we would have to discuss that as we go forward. They are also eligible for special events funding to aboriginal organizations and that total amount is $75,000. That is by application based for different events that we can provide funding for. Thank you.

This requires agreement in this House to increase the funding. I am not too sure if we even have an appetite for this by the Members. Of course, we have to find funding elsewhere and it’s got to go through a whole process here to seek an increase for funding. I am not sure if there’s an appetite, like I said, to increase the Metis funding for the locals here in terms of their operation. It is a good gesture by this government. No doubt about it. You know, for the Metis people for $13,235. You know how much it costs now to operate an office? Even ourselves as MLAs, we get budgets here to operate our own office here. You are talking about a Metis Nation of people who are working hard to establish themselves here. There is different Metis funding and this is nice funding to have. I will let the Minister know that the Metis in the Sahtu that I represent certainly appreciate the funding. It’s something that this government has done more than the federal government in terms of funding. I am not sure if we can entertain some kind of funding review of this.

As I said, Mr. Chair, I have been here for the past six years and this has always been the same, even with the increase of doing business in the North. I just wanted to know if there is any type of appetite to look at an increase of this part of the budget here. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

This budget itself doesn’t represent an increase for core funding. As it is, it’s a small amount, the Member is correct, when it comes to operations in any community in the Northwest Territories. Again, this is an example of how we do things different as the federal government doesn’t have any core funding for Metis, which they do for bands across this country.

I would be prepared, if Members of this Assembly want to take a serious look at this level for the next business planning cycle. If Members are interested

in this area, I would be prepared to sit down with Members to see if we can incorporate any possible changes as we go forward. Thank you.

From this side here, I certainly appreciate the Minister’s willingness to look at this. There are certainly no guarantees in any type of reallocation or jigging of the numbers here or even to increase it. So I do appreciate his openness to see if we can get some support to have a look at it and maybe come back in the coming year to see if we can do something with this.

I do want to talk to the Minister regarding the special event funding for aboriginal organizations. Is it okay for the Minister to provide us with a list of the type of organizations and funding we can have? I know some of the groups I have in the Sahtu want to have access to this funding. This is very popular funding because there’s not much money here, but it’s a good thing. More of a request of information from the Minister and then I’m done, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

I will provide a note to Members about both the special events funding. It’s $75,000 a year; $5,000 per application for each regional aboriginal government organization to help offset costs for holding special events such as general assemblies or special assemblies and celebrations that mark milestone anniversaries of settled agreements, for example.

Also part of that fund is $1,000 in support to community-based aboriginal organizations and that’s band councils, Metis locals, community corporations, Native Women’s Association, to help celebrate National Aboriginal Day. We have a list of how that funding has been allocated in the past and we’ll get that provided to Members. Thank you.

I’m good for that page.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Questions on page 4-11?

Mr. Beaulieu.

Just one question on the special events funding to aboriginal organizations. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if the Minister could advise me if this budget is fully taken at the end of the fiscal year each year.

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the funding is usually fully subscribed; in fact, oversubscribed. It is not a large amount. For example, with the Dene Nation, there is more than one assembly they’ve had and they’ve qualified a number of times for that. So we go up to what we can. If there is any possible funding we have in other areas of the department, sometimes we top it up. But that information will show, as it

goes around to Members, the previous years’ allocations. Thank you.

One more comment on that page. I would also support to see core funding increased to Metis locals. I have one Metis local in Tu Nedhe, so they are always finding ways to get funding to do various initiatives in the community. They are fairly active and so on. That is something I would support as well. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. I didn’t hear a question there. Committee, we are on page 4-11, Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, activity summary, corporate management, operations expenditure summary, $2.421 million. Agreed?

Page 4-12, activity summary, corporate management, grants and contributions, grants, total grants, $300,000.

Page 4-13, information item, corporate management, active positions.

Questions?

Page 4-15, activity summary, Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, negotiations, operations expenditure summary, Mr. Yakeleya... Mr. Beaulieu, excuse me.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am wondering if this section of the department is responsible for the land use plans from the various self-government organizations.

Thank you, Mr. Beaulieu. Minister Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, in the negotiations section we would be involved, for example, when it comes to the negotiation time of it and what’s being negotiated, but for actual land use framework plans, I believe it is within the Department of Environment and Natural Resources that deals with that area specifically. Again, this area of negotiations, we’d be involved with at the negotiation process and then the further section on implementation, we would have some involvement on that side of it too. Thank you.

I’m wondering if the Minister could advise me if there’s any involvement at all such as taking the position in how the land use plans are laid out from the various aboriginal organizations, like any position at all in the area of land use plans. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, in consultation with other departments, specifically in the one with land use frameworks, we would be in consultation with the Department of Environment and Natural Resources to come up with a position that would be accepted by, for example, Cabinet. We would have to get a mandate to set the framework in place, and that mandate would be worked with other departments, then be accepted by Cabinet and go forward on that basis. That, for example, we discussed earlier, the mandate review that is happening and those are basis of our negotiation discussions. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, I’m curious about how come some of the land use plans have been moved forward and so on, I guess, from looking at what has developed in other negotiations, what would be upcoming, I guess, for Akaitcho, although I am not heavily or very minorly involved with the negotiations, Akaitcho. I’ve never sat in on any, but just talking to people and so on. There might be some pitfalls with the land use planning system or the land use planning process, because of the position the GNWT might take in the area of lands set aside for resource development or land set aside for protected area strategies and the various types of positions that the GNWT could take. So if we’re talking about Protected Areas Strategy, the responsible Minister could be ENR. If we’re talking about lands set aside for resource development, I’m not sure if that’s an area that’s set aside for the Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment, or it that’s the responsibility of the Minister of the Department of Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, usually on the land use plans that are developed, they are developed and the principle is set up in, for example, a land claim agreement. Those are the ones we have examples of, and then, as they’re signed, implementation then goes into developing the actual land use plan. But we’ve also had tables that are in negotiations now working on a land use plan at the same time or, in fact, have probably got the land use plan further ahead than actual negotiations of the main table, in a sense.

For, again, different aspects, as the Member highlighted and I responded earlier, as ENR helps with the land use framework itself and land use planning. For allocations, for example, when we set a target of a percentage that would be set aside for economic development purposes in the future, that would be an initiative that would be between the Executive and Aboriginal Affairs and other departments. We’d pull them together. So Executive would be the coordinating role in pulling information from all the departments to come up with what we think would be the best solution possible, taking into consideration demands for programs and services. If we were to actually take

down full authority, and knowing that there’s a shortfall in the dollars that we have in today’s environment, needing to come up with some new resources in the future. Economic potential for whether it is the GNWT who ends up delivering a program and service or the aboriginal self-government who delivers that service, they’re going to need a revenue base to deliver that. That is what we take into consideration. For example, we use the MERA, and that’s the Minerals, Energy… Oh, I’ll have to get the proper terminology, but I think Members are familiar with the acronym of MERA, and that is to do an assessment of the mineral potential in the area and we would take that into our discussions of what we could work with and what the future may be for economic development in a particular region. So that helps us put that together.

All of that, though, as we discussed earlier, is in the mandate reviews we will be doing. We will be putting that forward. What we don’t want to be doing... No matter what we do at the end of the day, we want to ensure that there are enough resources available for whether it is a public government delivery or a self-government delivery, that the revenues are in place to deliver services that the people expect to have as these agreements get implemented. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, I’m just asking, because of some caution in the future that I wouldn’t want to see a land use plan that consists of when everybody put all three governments -- the federal government, the territorial government and aboriginal governments -- put in their land use plans and then the area that each of them wished to… It’s not, I guess, essentially claimed for the various activities, whether it be resource development or parks or protection of the land or something that’s set aside for future resource development, that adds up to 100 percent and not 140 percent and everybody’s caught up in the fact that nobody wants to move off of their position and the land use plan doesn’t advance. So maybe just a comment that I hope that doesn’t occur when it’s time to settle the plan in Akaitcho. That’s just a comment, Mr. Chairman.

I would agree with the Member. That is one of the areas that is of concern to us when there are so many different levels of government at the table. That is why, for example, at the regional leaders’ table we agreed to work on a land use framework process. That work is ongoing and, in fact, moving ahead, I would say, at a fairly good pace, considering the complexities across the Northwest Territories, and we continue to put that effort into it. Hopefully, before the life of this Assembly, we’ll have something we can agree on together with aboriginal governments and ourselves. But that is the very reason why we need to have something like that in place, because in the past are too many examples where one agreement

is signed and then a different agreement is signed. It’s a piecemeal approach and that leaves it for very confusing and frustrating time when it comes to actual implementation of some of these agreements. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister Roland. The next on my list, I have Mr. Hawkins.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, one of the things that often comes up, in my view of some of this process, is there anything that could help accelerate some of the self-government agreements being developed and, certainly, implemented? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Hawkins. Minister Roland.

Well, a supply of unlimited resources would help. We know that’s not a possibility in today’s environment. Because it is such a challenging environment and the different interests at the table, at times, as it’s negotiations, it's a tough process to come up with the right balance and from the different interests and different perspectives, at times, but we eventually get there. In fact, we’ve stepped it up, as we highlighted as we went through this process at the last main estimates review, of increasing our presence and getting the dollars. So we’re at 15 tables now in trying to help with the negotiations process.

On the implementation side, again, that’s another one where we have to… Part of the agreement is in place…have a clear plan on implementation. We could go through that section. That is the next section we can go through. If Members wanted more information, we can go through that at that point. But it is difficult because if we were to ask that same question of the federal government, you’ll get one response. If you ask it to us, I’ll give you a response. If you ask it to an aboriginal negotiator, they will tell you a different response, as well, because there’s all different interests being looked at in trying to come up with the best balance. But I think the timing of some of these agreements, in fact, if we were to all follow the Acho Dene Koe in Liard, that has been the fastest moving table we’ve seen in the history of the Northwest Territories. But even that has its concerns of how we can go forward on that basis. Then the issue of within the Northwest Territories we have some groups that overlap each other that need to be taken into consideration, as well, when we talk about negotiation positions. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, I guess my question next being is: has it ever been put to these organizations, each of the individual 15 tables, about would it be in their interest to consider accelerating negotiations and searching for principles that would work to accelerate it? Has that question been put to them? Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, that direct question hasn’t been put to the organizations, but through just the negotiation process there are different avenues taken at times when it’s felt that negotiations have gone as far as they can and then it’s time for the political masters to sit in a room and iron out the rest of the process and details. Thank you.

What stops the Premier, or in this role, the Minister, of putting those questions about finding a comparable path together to accelerate negotiations? Is there anything that stops the Minister from doing this? Thank you.

No. Maybe a little further to that, Mr. Chairman, that, in fact, when you look at our Northern Leaders’ Forum, in trying to come up with a common vision of the Northwest Territories, that is one of those areas where we can come up on our own, working together and finding the principles we can agree on and move forward on and probably move things along a little further. But, again, each region is somewhat different, even when you’re looking at the types of programs and service delivery that want to be drawn down. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, I’m wondering if the Minister would be willing to engage the 15 tables to ask them if they have an appetite to find a way to accelerate the self-government agreement process. And furthermore, if he’d send one more letter to Canada in that regard, which would speak to the same issue? It, perhaps, would be in Canada’s interest if we were in support of a process that was accelerated. So would the Minister be willing to find out if any of these tables would be interested in an accelerated process for self-government agreements? Thank you.

I’ll use the regional leaders’ table to pose that type of a question if they want to take part in something like that, but we have to recognize, for example, that these negotiations start at a point, for example, a treaty that’s in place that is defined by the federal government and in their instance, and then defined by the aboriginal group that is negotiating at a different level. At times, there is just not going to be an easy solution, because it is negotiating what that agreement actually is as a starting point and then where it’s being pursued to in improving to a modern-day treaty, as we would call it. So, at times, that just takes hard work and much effort to get to those conclusions. We’ve got a number of Members here who could speak to that work as it’s been done and they’ve been involved in it. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, are there any steps that the Department of Aboriginal Affairs does to ensure that the negotiators aren’t leading the process vis-à-vis they are keeping the process alive

as opposed to putting the challenge of bringing negotiations to a close? Thank you.

While there are definitely times when an aboriginal group or even the federal government may say that we’re slowing the process down there are many occasions when we help move things along. For example, in helping writing the proposals and the frameworks as we go forward and one of those examples, again, in sharing information upfront is the self-government financing piece where we went to all of the groups to identify the model we put together and showed them that model and what that, as a basis, potentially meant for implementation and the cost of implementing these agreements. So that’s an example of where we’ve worked together to try to help move things along and get a better understanding of what could be coming down the road. Thank you.

Just on that financial note, has any work been done specifically to show that it’s in everyone’s best interest to fulfill negotiations on these types of agreements to kick off the financial process for self-government? Thank you.

If I understand the question correctly, the work we’ve done around self-government financing in fact has shown and has been endorsed by the negotiators at the table that are involved in that to help them as we prepare our way forward, and then we’re working on trying to come up with a package of how we would advance this to the federal government. Ultimately, when it comes to the self-government financing, it is the fiduciary responsibility of the federal government. Although, for example, when an agreement is signed and it draws down a certain jurisdiction that we have as a GNWT, whether its transportation or housing or one of the programs we deliver, they would draw that down on the delivery based on today’s expenditures, for example, and the program as it exists and once they take it over they could redesign, but that dollar value is the same. It does not enhance it, because we don’t have that ability as a GNWT and that is sort of the work around the self-government financing piece, because the capacity issue is one that’s being dealt with. We’ve agreed, for example, in earlier discussions around devolution and resource revenue sharing, that we would use some of those benefits of resource return from the investment on resource revenues to help with the capacity side as a GNWT, but that still falls short of what would actually be required. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I would just see it as in everyone’s interest if this question was posed to individuals. When I say “individuals,” I mean individual tables, that is, but I would see this question to everyone’s benefit if it is posed individually on their own timetable, that is if they would be interested in

advancing their own negotiations. As well as the fact that could the territorial government find a capacity to support this? I would be surprised that there would be very few people not willing to consider this as a viable direction. I would be very surprised if Canada felt this was stalling the process or ruining it. You know, I would believe strongly that there would be an opportunity and certainly an interest from their perspective that anything to accelerate these negotiations that could bring them to a closure would be in everyone’s interest. In other words, we would have closure of agreements, as well as access to money, access to authority and access to self-determination. So, Mr. Chairman, from my perspective, and certainly one that’s been encouraged to me by many people is the real question, is what’s stopping an accelerated program considering that we have a number of agreements that we could agree and few outstanding issues we could deal with separately? Thank you.

The self-government financing piece is an example of how we’ve worked together with the aboriginal governments and negotiators. We’ve worked with every table and given them the information around that self-government financing piece, but it is still a difficulty in getting it to a successful conclusion because the partner that would come to the table... Well, let’s use the example since we’re talking about aboriginal issues, bring to the potluck with a potlatch would require the federal government to bring their end of this bargain and that is still an area up for final conclusion, I guess we would say. We are very concerned about it and that’s why we’ve worked with all of the negotiation tables to share this information with them.

The other one, as we work through, as I was speaking earlier about land use frameworks and a Water Strategy, knowing that those are near and very important to the people of the North, are areas where we’re working with a common purpose. It still doesn’t mean it’s an easy process, but there’s a common purpose in trying to bring these things to conclusion, because they affect so many and are very important culturally and economically as we go forward. Thank you.

Thank you, Minister. Next on my list I have Mr. Yakeleya.

Just one question if I can see if I can get a satisfactory answer, then I’ll be done. I wanted to ask the Minister about the negotiations. In the details he had talked about the Northwest Territories realizing the economic potential in the Northwest Territories. Does the Minister have an idea or assessment as to the economic potential in the North right down the whole valley? I know some organizations have put some numbers to it, you know, in the amount of millions or billions. Has this

department put some numbers to the potential for economic potential in the North? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Premier Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The process we’d be involved in directly from there is getting the information from the appropriate departments, for example. That is, again, when we set up our percentages we would like to be open to development, we’d be working with ITI, for example, or with Environment and Natural Resources, as well, to look at the overall potential. We use things like the mirror process to look at what potential is in the area. We look at the oil and gas, the minerals, all of that to see what the potential may be. Now, it’s very difficult to come up with a number because, again, market prices affect things. A couple of years ago or just over a year ago we wouldn’t have, I don’t think anybody in the Northwest Territories was prepared for $140 for oil. Thankfully we’re back down, but it’s creeping up again. Or gold that was down to almost just over $300 an ounce and now it’s almost $1,000 an ounce or hovering at that mark. Thinks really do change. When you do estimates, you do it as sort of the estimate is based on the time frame and what’s there.

There is huge potential in the Northwest Territories when it comes to realizing economic potential in the Northwest Territories right from our natural resources when it comes to hydro potential, for example, that is a return on investment. It’s a very high cost initially, but it pays dividends for lifetimes. When it comes to our wood products, for example, is another area that’s available and I know, for example, when we talk about biomass strategies, could we develop that potential in the Northwest Territories to our non-renewable resources that are in the ground that can return investment again to the groups that would benefit from that. For example, some groups now, through their land claims, do benefit from that in a small way. They do get some resource royalties, a small portion, mind you, and we aim through our negotiation processes as we go forward overall government and there would be a part of that is, for example, on our discussions around resource development or devolution, resource revenue sharing as well. It’s a multi-departmental effort to come up with all of the different aspects that are affected here. Again, working in partnership with the aboriginal groups and that is one of the areas we’re having further discussions on with the regional leaders as well. Thank you.

Just about got it there. So I’ll ask the Minister about realizing the economic potential. Is the Minister willing to share with the House in terms of some initial estimates or just as to what

he’s talking about? Is that saved for the negotiations when you have negotiations with aboriginal governments or the federal government? It’s an interesting subject, because just myself in the Sahtu region, there is economic potential for oil and gas, hydro potential, minerals, even the Mackenzie Valley Highway construction. They had an economic analysis done on that and it showed a good return on economics. I want to leave it at that. I will respect the negotiation process in terms of not showing our cards on the table. I will leave it at that, Mr. Chair.

We work with departments on this where we do get information with potential estimates and we share that with groups involved and, again, there are different levels here. For example, where a land claim is established and a park is a part of that, we hope to have all the information on the table for the decision-makers to make a decision considering long-term benefits to that, whether it’s establishment of a park or establishment of mineral potential that’s there or oil and gas potential. We need to make sure we get that information to them and we would work with the Department of ITI, for example, and other departments that we can gather this information. What I’ll do is request the departments to pull something together to give some indicators and see if we can share that with Members. Thank you.

Thank you, Premier. Committee, we are on page 4-15...

...activity summary, Aboriginal Affairs and Intergovernmental Relations, negotiations, operations expenditure summary, $2.748 million. Agreed?

Information item, page 4-16, negotiations, active positions. Questions?

Page 4-19, activity summary, implementation, operations expenditure summary, $643,000. Mr. Yakeleya.

Just in my own region with regard to implementation in the Sahtu Land Claims Agreement, are we... I am hearing we are slow on implementation. I have heard it’s a difficult implementation, from not only us but the federal government. Agreements have been in place for 15 years and we are finally starting to see some implementation here. Are we on par in terms of implementation specific chapters of the Sahtu Land Claims Agreement?

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the implementation process is one where once an agreement is signed, then each party then establishes or puts their folks on the implementation committee. From the information I have, there are three meetings a year set out and those are usually established in the agreement initially; how often they would meet and so on. So there are three meetings per year and outstanding issues are addressed through that if there are issues that come forward. They could be specifically identified, for example, if the area of responsibility lies within the federal government. Then it is for them to implement or come up with a plan for implementation on that and again an agreement with the party bringing it back to their principals. From the information I have for the GNWT side, we have no outstanding issues on our implementation file that have been brought to the table, and that process is established in how they can get the issues to the table. What I have been informed in the Sahtu, there is no outstanding issues of implementation from the GNWT side.

The issue I have with the implementation is with the... I guess you look at it in terms of once you settle your negotiations and start implementing, the lay of the land really changes in terms of how our government is going to be in terms of our working relationship. It’s going to change quite considerably. Have we had some discussions in the House regarding the implementation, the potential benefits or potential things we need to be aware of in terms of implementing our self-government agreements?

Plus, this department is at a number of tables here negotiating self-government agreements. That’s a huge impact. God forbid if you settled all of it yesterday. The things like what kind of government we’re going to have. So I just wanted to raise that point. I am not sure if there’s a question there, Mr. Chair, but our future certainly could change significantly of how we operate as a territorial government and how our working relationship is going to be with the aboriginal governments, especially with the number of self-government agreements that are happening across the table here.

Mr. Minister indicated what it costs for one...(inaudible)... That’s a huge number there. That’s a huge chunk out of our budget. I don’t know even as MLAs if we’ll have jobs here. Anyhow, I’m getting more philosophical. I want to ask the Premier in terms of his discussions and strategy work with his departmental staff.

I think the Member has hit on a matter that is important, very important, as we look forward. If every agreement was to be signed and implemented, what would the Government of the Northwest Territories be? Would

it be a relationship, for example, and this is much too simple of a way of doing it, but if it was a relationship like the federal government to the GNWT right now where there are a number of agreements in place that you have to meet the minimums on for delivery of a program or service and you get a transfer payment, delivery on the day-to-day basis will be by that regional government depending on the authority they actually draw down. That becomes the big issue, is to ensure that as we do this, we ensure that we can implement what we’ve agreed to in these agreements and the funding would be there. That is something that is very important for us as we go forward. What will we be? We will need to have that discussion. In a sense, that is why the intergovernmental relations piece is part of this department because we talk about negotiation and then there’s implementation and if that implementation is fulfilled, then it becomes a government-to-government relationship and how we interact with each other and how we sign agreements together for delivery or programs and services. Will there be a reduced role for the Legislative Assembly and a Member from each riding? Well, that’s yet to be determined, but that’s important that we look at that, and that is one of the reasons why I believe the starting of the work we have within the Northern Leaders’ Forum around political development, we need to have that debate amongst the people and leaders in the Northwest Territories. That’s what that process is meant to do, is have that discussion, put it out there for a good, healthy discussion about what the future may hold for us. Thank you.

The last question will be to the Minister regarding his department working with the federal government, Sahtu and Gwich’in on the land access information for companies and people coming into our region. Sometimes they are not aware of the agreement or not interested in looking at how we access our land and they should know. I think there is someone working in this department on land access pamphlets. I will ask the Premier if he can give me an update.

I think that falls in a number of categories. The area we would be involved with is probably in support of the end product of a devolution agreement. Who has those authorities? When do they make them? What kind of consultation do they do in making a decision? There would be areas where there are joint initiatives that we have some authority of and we would go to the appropriate department; for example, Environment and Natural Resources and some of those areas that they would be involved with. There would be some areas that ITI would be involved with, for example. Those specific issues we would be able to address with departments. I think that goes towards the bigger picture overall

about devolution and how decisions are made and how that decision is shared at the end of the day. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, committee. We are on page 4-19, activity summary, implementation, operations expenditure summary, $643,000.

Page 4-20, information item, implementation, active positions. Questions?

Page 4-23, activity summary, intergovernmental relations, operations expenditure summary, $2.368 million. Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to ask the Premier regarding the Northern Leaders’ Forum Fund, $304,000. I am trying to see where I read about it. However, I’ll ask the Premier about that fund.

Thank you. I see some details on the next page, 4-24, but, Premier Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The Northern Leaders’ Forum Fund is the money we support the regional leadership in attending the Northern Leaders’ Meetings, as well as the work we are about to do under the political development area. So this is in helping them get to the table as well as establishing those community consultation meetings, and having a wrap-up to all of those meetings and, hopefully coming out with an agreed upon process for all governments in the Northwest Territories. It is an ambitious work that we have set out for ourselves in the next year, but I believe it is critically important.

Part of the discussion we had earlier was that we start to move on this side of it having a better understanding and a common vision of just what areas we’ll all be responsible for, whether it is on the aboriginal government side or the public government side or even, to a degree, the federal government side. Thank you.

Thank you, Premier Roland. Once again, committee, we are on page 4-23, activity summary, intergovernmental relations, operations expenditure summary, $2.368 million.

Page 4-24, activity summary, intergovernmental relations, grants and contributions, grants, total grants, $654,000.

Thank you. Page 4-25, information item, intergovernmental relations, active positions. Questions? Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess I could have asked this question previously under the active position summary for the entire department, but I’ll ask it under intergovernmental relations. In the past, the committee has brought up the fact that the department has been low in its number of aboriginal employees and senior management. I am just wondering if the Minister could update us on the strides the department has made, if any, in the area of aboriginal people in senior management within the department. Specifically, because we are on this page, Mr. Chairman, intergovernmental relations, most of the work this government does, although some of it is with the federal government and other provinces and territories, I would say predominantly that’s dealing with aboriginal governments. Of the six employees shown on this page, how many are aboriginal? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. Premier Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The issue of the department’s human resource plan and affirmative action, more specifically, has been one that we’ve dealt with for some time, some initially would say, and challenged us to step up to the plate here and make some changes in the area of delivery. I must say that, or sometimes I would say, the concern about our aboriginal affairs status or percentage of employees is one that we’ve taken to heart. Although, I must say that our success has also been our challenge in the sense we’ve had some of our managers go through here and then get picked up by other departments and move on. One of the things we’ve been working on, along with the Department of Human Resources, is to come up with our human resource plan in the area of looking at our aboriginal content within the department. An example of what we’ve done in this last year is the associate director position where we’ve gone through and we put out for a position that aboriginal people could apply for. They had to be an affirmative action candidate and come into the department at an associate director position and get additional work in that area. We had very good success in that area. Of course, there are many more candidates that we would like to see pursue along these plans and, in fact, I think this example should be undertaken overall by the government through our Department of Human Resources and look at this area so we can have similar positions with our departments to move forward.

Specifically under this section of intergovernmental affairs, there are only six people in this section. One is an aboriginal P1 candidate; two are non-

aboriginal but long-time Northerners. So 50 percent of this section make up those stats. Thank you.

I guess, if the committee will allow me to ask this question on this page, maybe if the Minister could just speak to the… I didn’t hear him say it, but overall, the department, the senior management or the department, has there been any improvement there with the number of aboriginal employees in senior management inside of the department? Thank you.

I would say there has been an improvement in the way we’re doing our business when it comes to our human resource plan. Number one, we’ve put a plan together. We’ve worked on the associate director position. We’ve also done a number of internal transfer assignments so we could have managers in training, and how we structured our negotiations teams, as well, has been positive. But for more detail, I’ll go to Mr. Robertson.

Thank you, Premier. Mr. Robertson.

Thank you, Mr. Robertson. Thank you, committee. We’re on page 4-25, information item, intergovernmental relations, active positions. Questions?

Page 4-26, information item. Lease commitments, infrastructure. Questions.