Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just on this motion, as the Government of the Northwest Territories, we’ve said on a number of occasions that nothing we can do could take away from the established land claims authorities that are there that are constitutionally protected in this country. We’ve said that and have that in some of our legislation, as pointed out. Those pieces of legislation that are included are, in fact, ones that are much larger, that effect direct impact on some of the co-management areas. The Member has raised the Wildlife Act, for example, because it directly involves a relationship with the land claims groups and Aboriginal governments. We need to be very clear on that.
There were a couple of points, just for the record, because there were a couple of points that were raised that need to be clarified for the record, so we don’t have this as down in history of that point being specific.
For example, Indian Affairs branch land, I believe it’s called, or IAB. When the transfers occur from the federal government, they don’t come and tell us and consult with us and negotiate with us. They transfer. They have an Order-in-Council and they transfer and we end up picking up some of those pieces, whether it’s the Housing Corp or other areas in the community. The times we get involved are when we work with the bands to possibly look at land exchanges within community boundaries. So for that, I know the Minister said he would get additional information on that, but just so we get it on record.
The other piece is land claim selection. Now, when land claims were negotiated and land selected within communities, those were treated in the sense that when an Aboriginal group -- and we have examples of those -- selected within community boundaries, the lands they selected were treated as any property owner in a community. Dollars were exchanged for that property and treated fee simple, I guess is the word to use, which then in community planning and development, the community would have to approach the land owners in the community about certain developments. So there is the right
and the role of a land owner in a community to deal with the community development that is being proposed or asked about. That community council/government, would have to take that into consideration.
So I wanted, for the record, to point that out. Yes, there are land selections, but when they made land selections in the community, there was an exchange of value as the claim was settled and the federal government exchanged cash for property that was provided to the Aboriginal group as part of their selection. But then that property in the community became, as a taxpaying community, part of fee simple ownership and their right to go to a community council/government and say we disagree with certain developments in this area. So that exists. I think that is why the approach was initially by the department to say it applies. Those rights are already established as fee simple title holders in our communities.
On top of that, overall as a government we clearly state that nothing we can do as the Government of the Northwest Territories can take away from. The other side is we have to be cautious to ensure that at the same time we are not, through an act of the Legislative Assembly, giving more powers or more authority than was negotiated in the land claims. So we have to be careful on that side of it too. That is why there was some caution raised at the stage as it was.
We hear, and I’ve heard from Members, about the inconsistencies, and I think that goes from the fact that some of our earlier pieces of legislation that were put in place when we first signed some of these agreements was we found examples of where there were inconsistencies of application. Quite clearly now, we’ve gone through this a number of times and as more claims are settled, we are updating our claims or legislation to recognize the rights that are established and constitutionally protected.
So I just wanted, for the record, Mr. Chairman, to put that forward. Thank you.