Mr. Speaker, I must say the Member is correct; the Regular Members have put together a brief paper on the devolution agreement. I believe it is very brief. To do this document justice, we are going to have to go into much more of it. I have already done a number of interviews with CBC, the call-in show, to try to address some of the specific concerns that are coming out there. But to do this justice, to get the accurate information in front of the people in the North in their own language as well as in English, we want to make sure we have done this right, and the interpretation right as well. We are going to be

doing that in reaching out. In fact, I think the very one of our early stages here is by tabling the signed agreement-in-principle, and we can refer to the very specific sections now as we go forward. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. The honourable Member for Weledeh, Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. At last week’s signing ceremony for the agreement-in-principle the Premier looked awfully lonely, flanked by only two of the seven Aboriginal government leaders who are necessary partners in this deal. We all heard the Premier’s invitation to Aboriginal governments to sign on as partners. Unfortunately, we also heard that the federal Minister responsible for Aboriginal people refused to meet with those very same leaders who want their concerns heard before becoming a part of this deal. Can the Premier explain to this Assembly why he agreed to be the one stop shop for NWT Aboriginal concerns on constitutional development and resource management and how he ever expected our Aboriginal leadership to go along with this arrangement? Thank you.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The simple fact that we have worked as a cooperative group across the Northwest Territories since 2001 -- and if Members want, we can table that type of information for Members and for the public to see if we want to go down that path -- but I think the way forward on this one is we have done the work together. In fact, the signing of that agreement is one that, yes, and I met with leaders Sunday prior to that, in the hopes that we can do some adjustments to the protocol work that we were involved in, and unfortunately that wasn’t able to come about. In reaching back out to the leaders now and the chiefs, I want to see if that document can be used as the format for a schedule and how we would work together going forward in negotiations, realizing some of the negotiations.

I’ve said this to the regional leaders, some of them are bilateral GNWT/federal government, some of it bilateral Aboriginal governments/territorial government and there will be positions where we’ll need to formulate from a northern perspective to Canada’s. So there’s lots of work going forward and that’s one of the reasons to reach out.

The one thing I will say is, the Constitution piece that is to be dealt with at a different forum. I’ve met with, for example, early in the life of this government, Bill Erasmus on this issue, and as we looked at it, we fully recognize that future governments of the North will need to sit down and

talk about what a constitution could look like. But at this point I’ve expressed, from a GNWT side we were concerned that first and foremost we need to deal with the authorities that are now practiced by people in Ottawa and here in the North under the federal government watch, to move that to the North and then move on to next steps. Thank you.

My second question is recognizing the Premier’s statement that this is a good deal for the NWT and NWT Aboriginal people, this is something I could take more seriously if indeed the Aboriginal governments were lining up to sign this agreement. Obviously, they were lining up with signs rather than to sign. As Aboriginals said in this building just before the signing and outside at their demonstration and elsewhere, their trust in this government has been destroyed. Now, if that’s the case, how does the Premier expect to lure these partners back to sign on when the process he has used apparently has alienated them so much? Thank you.

We’ve heard clearly for quite a number of years that some of the groups, in their opinion and their position developed, is one that clearly they feel they need to deal with their process first before any agreement-in-principle was to be signed. In fact, in our protocol work it was talked about having key issues dealt with first before having any signing, and those issues, as I expressed to the regional leadership, are actually in the agreement-in-principle talking about how we go forward in building that relationship in a formal way, so there is jurisdiction and sharing of the delivery where there is an overlap. For example, look at our land claims that are in place where there are co-management boards, those types of things exist and could be used in that area. It’s a sense of not luring them back, but as we have consistently said, the table is open for them to join us and that we’re looking forward to them coming back to this table, because to influence the overall outcome and decisions made, they need to be in the tent earlier rather than later. Thank you.

Thank you. Two First Nations say the deal threatens their Aboriginal treaty rights and threatens the just resolution of their land claims. Others are insisting that it fails to meet their settlement requirements for involvement. At the very least, First Nations governments are, or will be, major land and resource managers, as I mentioned in my statement. Setting out to conclude new management arrangements one at a time can only further add to the complexity of this regulatory regime. How does the Premier intend to meet with Aboriginal governments even outside the discussion framework of the AIP and come to an agreement on these complex issues and processes to accommodate them, or at least how can we deal with this complexity? Thank you.

I’ll go with this in a couple of pieces. One, first and foremost, the language in this agreement-in-principle clearly states for everyone to see the position they hold and signed on to. By signing this agreement, we will hold those positions as we have in the past, that we recognize the land claim agreements are modern treaties and constitutionally protected, which gives them authority over what we can do and any law that we will try to set in place. Where there is a conflict between the devolution agreement and a land claim, the land claim would prevail. Where there is existing claims, anticipated devolution included, the status land claim would not prejudice the devolution of the jurisdictions from Canada/GNWT. There are clauses already built into those claims. As well, we include specific protections for existing Aboriginal treaty rights and settlements, as well as future ones. There’s a clause in here that says that once a transfer is to occur, if a settlement happens that establishes larger areas that will be transferred for Aboriginal-specific ownership, they will come back and remove that land. That clause is also built in. So we’ve taken all the necessary precautions and this was done so with the technical folks and lawyers that worked with the Aboriginal groups at the table that influenced those decisions and that’s what we’re asking going forward in this next phase, is be at the table, help influence those decisions. Thank you.

: Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final supplementary, Mr. Bromley.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and thank you to the Premier for those remarks. With the climate surrounding this AIP, it looks like a final agreement will be a very long time in coming, which has some positive aspects to it. One of which is that it gives us time to do the work that we know we need to do. For example, the staging of a full and meaningful consultation with all NWT citizens on how to build a new sustainable resource management regime. The requirement to enact mirror legislation is somewhat paternalistic and I think it doesn’t recognize that we have a lot of problems with that legislation. Will the Premier take the opportunity we have now and begin immediately, full consultations on a made-in-the-NWT regime to put in place soon after the devolution of resource management responsibilities? Mahsi.

There’s much work to be done as we look at this next phase and begin the work of preparing for setting mandates and negotiations. Those negotiations and the final outcome will then give us a clearer picture of what those exact authorities are drawn down and what areas of legislation that we will have our hands on as Northerners that we can rewrite. So we’re preparing a work plan and getting the pieces together to see just the timelines that we’ll have, the

people we’ll need to put in place to help us with this process, the relationship with our Aboriginal partners on those initiatives that are bilateral, specifically for GNWT and Aboriginal governments. So there’s lots of work to be done and I can commit to say we’ll go down and do this one piece on legislation in how that legislation may look.

What I intend to do is we start to pull these pieces together now and what it will mean as we go forward. We’re looking at documents; for example, the Yukon model as to what happened after their signing and implementation negotiations process and from our own work with the self-governments and at the Aboriginal tables and want to come back to Members to say this is what it looks like, this is what we’re going to have to start to do and lay out those priorities in how we will progress on that. I expect that we will be able to start to highlight which pieces that we’ll start to be able to put the energy into when it comes to looking at what specific pieces that we’ll need to alter soon after we take on that authority. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. The honourable Member for the Sahtu, Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Minister responsible for Aboriginal Affairs, Mr. Roland.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would say when you look at the work that was done since 2001, to rush this is not a proper use of our language in the sense of definitions here. The fact that the 2007 agreement that was signed by the Government of the Northwest Territories this day and for the Aboriginal partners, this agreement brings even further clarity and in fact is enhanced in a number of areas. When we’ve had groups sign on to this prior to that, they’ve been involved in a process as we started this up in 2010 and went through that process. At main table discussions all the groups were updated on some of the bilaterals specific to the GNWT and the federal government.

For example, human resources assets that are used by that department in those areas, that would be transferred. Things of that nature which are specifically bilateral, those are all still brought to the table for further discussion.

It is challenging at most times, even at the regional leaders’ table. We’ve often said that as we come together and share our issues and hope to gain support for some of them, we fully realize at times there will be no agreement on some of the initiatives. I am hoping that as we go forward and by writing to the regional leaders and their chiefs to ask them to sit down with us and go on looking on a forward basis how we bring people back together, we look at the AIP and sort of set out a roadmap as to what’s there before us, those challenges, time frames, resources that will be needed to bring success to this next phase.

We’re just about at the end of our term as legislators. Let’s talk about hypothetical here. There is going to be a federal election in springtime, not too sure. This agreement here has been an issue. We don’t have critical mass in terms of the strength to go ahead with the AIP in terms of making it a truly northern deal. The parameters have been set to negotiate some of the finer details of the agreement. That’s why I use the term “rush,” in terms that it may not be well taken by the Cabinet. However, that’s the way it’s been looked upon by some of the people in my region.

The important question that I want to ask this Cabinet here is how we now build a relationship with the majority of signatories of the Aboriginal governments. How do we start building that relationship? We certainly deteriorated the trust and good work that’s been done over the years. How do we put together a unified, certified northern people to say, yes, this is a good deal? That’s the question. How do we mend these broken hearts out there?

That will be, I guess, the big question, is how we bring the folks back to the table for meaningful involvement in helping set the course of the next months, years, of discussion and to a final agreement stage. As we’ve laid out, as the Government of the Northwest Territories, the regional leaders’ table model, where we bring all the regional leaders together and at times bring the chiefs along for other discussion, I am offering that to the regional leaders to meet with them, whether it’s at a large group setting or if they want to do region by region with their community chiefs involved, to go through this process to see how we move to the next stage and how we would move through that next stage, and going forward on that basis.

I believe it’s through that work, the continued commitment to keep the door open, keep offering the meetings and the chance to sit down on the way forward. I think we will be able to bring some of

the people back to the table. I fully respect positions put out by some of the leaders where they say they want to work on their process. That’s where I come in.

As I said earlier to a question, this AIP does not take away from the existing land claims and self-government, and even the ones that are in discussions. We’ve made sure that wording is in place in this agreement.

I consulted with some of the self-government governments in the Sahtu and I would agree to disagree with the Premier’s comment in terms of taking away some of the existing land claims agreements or self-government issues here. I’ve not yet completed my analysis, but I’m hoping to bring it up sometime within the next couple of days to have a debate with the Minister.

I want to ask the Minister again in terms of bringing forward this and building a relationship with the Aboriginal governments in terms of is the Minister looking at, say, for example, the Dene Nation are going to be having a chiefs meeting sometime this month. Is this something that this Cabinet will look at to say we want to work with you and is there funding available for groups who do want to come together or governments who want to come together and look at this and say how can we go forward on this? Is there available funding to the governments?

Through the Department of Executive we have agreements signed with the regional groups for their participation in the devolution talks. We have a funding agreement for the regional leaders’ table to have those meetings, as well, in this process.

Our process has been to work with the regional leaders. I have spoken to Mr. Erasmus of the Dene Nation and he did talk about seeing if he could pull chiefs together. We’re open to working with the regional leaders, and if the regional leaders choose that venue, then we’re prepared to sit down with the regional leaders through that approach. Ultimately it will be through the agreement of regional leaders how we proceed on this initiative and involving all the partners that would help move this forward.

I must say I was thankful for the call I had from Mr. Erasmus suggesting that this may be a venue, and we are looking at those options.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Final supplementary, Mr. Yakeleya.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to ask the Minister about releasing the document. I understand it’s going to be released shortly. I want to ask the Minister why it’s taking so long to release this document. It’s so important. I’ve asked before that it should have been released before. It looked like such a secretive document. Just now, because of the initialling, it will be released to the public.

Now even one of the leaders in the Sahtu is saying that we don’t understand this document. I’m wondering why it’s taking so long to be released to the public here.

The process is, as I responded to a question in a previous sitting about how we would go forward in respecting the process, we have already at the table with Aboriginal negotiations on self-government and land claims and resources, we honour that process, as it was not a signed document. The leadership across the North received letters from the chief negotiators, including ourselves, at the end of September, and from that process were involved in trying to come to a place where we could have mutual agreement on that. We’ve tried to stay out of the business of telling regional groups how they need to do their business, as we’ve learned from our history of allowing them to do their work, but as a way forward we’re hoping that we will be able to find a satisfactory way of including the community leadership in providing them all the necessary information.

Thank you, Mr. Roland. Before I go on, I just want to ask Members if they would respect their own rules as far as question period is concerned. We’ve got half the clock used up and we’ve only asked three questions so far. The honourable Member for Nahendeh, Mr. Menicoche.