Mr. Speaker, the Member is correct; those are the areas that we, as a department, work with other interdepartmental as well on the stats collected on statistics. Not only that, Mr. Speaker, the information that we receive will be helpful as we move along. Based on the consumer price index and the cost of living, we continue to monitor that. Once we increase the minimum wage in this fiscal year, the following year, we need to find ways of how much we can increase or status quo at that time. This is an area that we will need to discuss further within my department and with other departments as well. Mahsi.

Mr. Speaker, thanks to the Minister. I guess I have to take from his answer that work has not started yet on this aspect of future increases to minimum wage. I would like to know from the Minister, he is talking about talking to other departments and getting information from statistics. I think that is wonderful. We should be doing that, but what kind of work needs to be done cross-departmental in order to determine future minimum wage increases tied to the cost of living? Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, we need to gather information from other departments and business sectors as well. We need to hear from the people. We have done that in the initial stages. We collected information and data from them and heard their concerns and heard their ideas, as well, and suggestions. That is how we came forward in

the House here. That is important information that we will continue to collect from the general public and also interdepartmental areas as well.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. Your final, short supplementary, Ms. Bisaro.

Mr. Speaker, thanks to the Minister. I appreciate that the department is doing consultations. I think that is valid. I did forget to say to the Minister that I appreciate that there has been some ongoing evaluation of the effect on businesses and workers. It is also nice to know that there is a positive response. I would like to know from the Minister when the House or when I could expect some kind of an idea as to how future minimum wage increases will be determined. When can we expect the results of the work that he is talking about? Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I have to follow up on a specific or detailed information what the Member is referring to. I will get back to Members on the status of our findings and provide that information to the Members. Mahsi.

Thank you, Mr. Lafferty. The honourable Member for Kam Lake, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. The honourable Premier, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Northern Leaders’ Forum got its life out of the Regional Leaders’ Table as it was through the Regional Leaders’ Table where we set up the side group to include leaders from across the North, look at a common vision. We had a meeting following or just prior to the AIP process. Not all of the people who were involved initially were able to attend as they were preparing for the agreement-in-principle process. With what we received, our partners were there. We were incorporating their work, for those

that submitted documentation. We are going to send that out to the leaders who weren’t there, to see if they will provide input on what was provided and hope to have another meeting sometime in the spring. We haven’t ironed out that date as of yet.

As for our process forward, I believe it can be one of those avenues where we build on the strength that we have as a Territory and look at all the pros that present themselves in a sense of...as well as the challenges that present themselves as a result of the signing and how we need to proceed. I think that can be incorporated as we look to the future of what it means to have now the authority, once that is drawn down. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, I have always been supportive of the Northern Leaders’ Forum and trying to come up with a common vision, a way to work together with other governments in the Territory to move this Territory forward.

During my Member’s statement and also the Premier in his sessional statement today alluded to all the good things that can come out of this agreement. I think we have lost so much, Mr. Speaker, in fighting with the federal government, fighting with ourselves for the past 20 years, and at some point in time I think we have to start putting numbers on paper, talking about what the opportunities are, talking about what we have lost and what we stand to gain. That is every government here in the Northwest Territories. I would like to ask the Premier if the government can look at putting some of that work together so that we can sit down and talk about what the future does hold. We need to get the leaders back to the table. April might be a little too far away, Mr. Speaker. I think it should happen sooner than later. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, first and foremost, the April meeting or the spring meeting we are talking about, Northern Leaders’ Forum, is to do with the work that was presented and we sent that back out. As I committed earlier, the regional leaders and the chiefs in the communities, we’re going to get a letter out if not by the end of the day, first thing tomorrow to the leaders to ask for a meeting specifically to do with this phase of the agreement-in-principle, how we can work together going forward. We are reaching out. As stated, we would rather have all the groups sign on and stand together as we do some of this work as it is going to be required of us in the very near future. Thank you.

Mr. Speaker, the signing of the AIP and eventually a final agreement with the federal government on devolution and resource revenue sharing is absolutely a game changer here in the Northwest Territories. I think going forward, coming up with a vision prior to the signing of the AIP and even the thought of us having a final agreement,

that vision would look much different than a vision that I think we can come up with today that is post-devolution, post-resource revenue sharing here in the Northwest Territories. I would like to ask the Premier, that’s changed, and how can we articulate or how can we get our message out to the leaders across the Territories on what these opportunities are post-devolution for everybody? Thank you.

Thank you. I believe there’s a number of ways we can do that and as we set out a roadmap for the next steps we need to take since the signing of the agreement-in-principle and the work that we need to do in negotiations, and that we can pull that type of information together to show people what It could look like as we go forward. The challenges there are sometimes what we want to negotiate in the final deal might not be exactly as we’ve presented, so we have to be careful there as well. But we do know some of the facts based on our net fiscal benefit discussions, for example. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Your final, short supplementary, Mr. Ramsay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I think it’s things like that that will go a long way to helping people to come to the table. If you look just recently, the numbers on exploration dollars spent in the three territories, we’re $60 million behind exploration money spent in the Yukon, we’re $180 million behind Nunavut, we need to be looking at opportunities to get investment in our Territory, and I think investment in our Territories means something for all governments here in the Northwest Territories, and I think as much information we can pull together, the better off we’ll be in these discussions. So, again, I’d like to thank the Premier for his efforts in that. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Ramsay. I didn’t hear a question there. The honourable Member for Great Slave, Mr. Abernethy.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. My questions are for the Minister responsible for Environment and Natural Resources in follow-up of my Member’s statement where I was talking about the consultation process for the proposed new Wildlife Act.

I attended the meeting with the NWT Wildlife Federation on the 15th of January and at that

meeting the director of wildlife started off saying we want to hear what you’ve had to say, we want you to tell us what’s wrong so that we can fix it. Towards the end of the presentation the same director said, you know, we’re going to be putting this bill in front of the House in late February or

early March and we’re not planning to make any substantive changes, we’ll make some editorial changes, which seems like a giant contradiction to me. This is supposed to be public consultation. How can we have confidence that this consultation that’s been going on since before Christmas is open and real and genuine when the director is saying clearly that they’re not planning to make any substantive changes, only editorial changes? How can the public have confidence that their voices are being heard with respect to the new proposed Wildlife Act? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Abernethy. The honourable Minister responsible for Environment and Natural Resources, Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. This Wildlife Act was identified by this Assembly and by this Cabinet and government as one of the big pieces of legislation they wanted to see done after a process of some 10 years or so of work. We, as well, developed a unique approach with Aboriginal governments towards drafting this legislation where we had lawyers, working group members from the Aboriginal governments, as well as GNWT staff and lawyers working, and they’ve been working and put in thousands of hours over the last couple of years. They’ve gone to every community. They have come up with a process that’s unique and does not exist anywhere in this country that I know of.

It’s unfortunate the Member has chosen on the basis of one comment that he thought he heard in one meeting, at the tail end of one meeting, in spite of the hundreds and thousands of hours, the hundreds of hours of work and all the communities that have been visited and the dozens and dozens of groups that have been consulted with, to condemn the whole process outright.

There have been 54 drafts done of this bill; 54, Mr. Speaker, based on all the work that’s been done, the feedback we’ve gotten. I’ve got a list here of 56 pages of the feedback that we’ve received and that we’ve responded to. So for the Member to say how can we have confidence, the proof will be in the pudding.

If you took the first draft and the 54th draft, I can tell

you we haven’t just been spending our time changing commas and looking at making it a little tighter from a grammatical point of view. So the process is there. It’s been bought into by all the Aboriginal governments, it’s a unique process and it’s going to bring to the table a piece of legislation that is 10 years overdue. Thank you.

For the record, I said earlier that I actually applaud the department and the Minister for the unique process that they put in place. I think it’s important, I think they did the right

thing, but we’re still a public government and we still need to make sure that we hear the other half of the population, 50 percent of the population that don’t feel that they’ve been heard, and it’s the consultation process. Hay River had a problem with the consultation process. The Minister’s department went in there, they advertised somewhere, nobody is quite sure because nobody showed up. Turns out there was no advertising or not adequate advertising in Inuvik and they’ve had to rerun those same meetings. That’s clear that consultation is not going as clearly or as well as the Minister thinks.

Also, just for the point, it’s not something I thought I heard at the meeting with the NWT Wildlife Federation. The director said it. I was there. I heard the director say exactly what I said she said. That concerns me. If they’re only planning to do editorial amendments, are they listening to the people?

The Minister has said they’ve had 54 drafts. I’ve got a question for the Minister. If there were 54 drafts, how many of those drafts, those drafts where it’s gone or changed significantly, have occurred since this consultation has ended? How many have resulted since the consultation ended in January? How many have resulted in substantial changes, or is it all just editorial? Thank you.

We’re going to be briefing committee and we’ll provide you with the very many pages of all the groups that were consulted, all the individual feedback we received, public from all corners of the Northwest Territories. There has been full and adequate consultation. This is the most consulted on bill, in my memory as a legislator here for 15 and a half years. We’ve spent hundreds of thousands of dollars, thousands of hours of time and we’ve gone to every community and we’ve asked for feedback, and there have been substantive changes. The Member should know this. You’re not going to do 54 different drafts on editorial comments. You will see that there have been substantive changes and there are some issues in there of great concern to the NWT Wildlife Federation. Though I must point out, Mr. Speaker, the Wildlife Federation has shown a resurgence as of late. While this government says we fully support and recognize Aboriginal governments, that we respect Section 35, this group advertised their meeting to say that the changes have less to do with the preservation of wildlife than with the granting of special and exclusive privileges to special interest groups in the Northwest Territories.

So we have a fundamental disagreement, but in spite of that, we have made substantive changes, and yes, we went back to Hay River, we’ve gone back to the places we’ve been asked to go. So no one can say that there has not been consultation, that there has not been involvement and that we

are not serious about the changes. We’re bringing forward the best possible act possible. Thank you.

I hear what the Minister is saying, but I still question the comments that were made by the director and that were actually made, I just didn’t think I heard them. I’m still concerned that the consultations ended in January. They plan to put a bill in front of us in late February or early March. I want to know that the groups have been heard and what kind of changes have taken place since the last round of consultations. Can he guarantee to me that they have heard these individuals and that since the last round of consultation there’s been more than just editorial changes, as the director said they were planning, and that people have been heard and, where appropriate, substantive changes have been made? That’s what I’m asking. Thank you.