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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The status at this point, although delayed by the federal election, there has been no formal negotiations. We have been working with the parties, northern parties that have signed the AIP, on a work plan. So that is where we are at this point. We expect that over the summer, negotiations may begin on initial pieces being put on the table, but we’ll have to wait to see with the appointment of a federal Minister how they will re-engage on this file. Thank you.

During the winter session the Premier made a commitment to Regular Members to meet with residents of the Northwest Territories throughout the Northwest Territories to provide some clarity and information on the devolution process and what devolution means to the residents of the Northwest Territories. Could the Premier tell us what steps he has taken to meet with the residents of the Northwest Territories to provide this information and clarity? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Since the signing of the agreement-in-principle, we’ve taken a number of

initiatives to get as much of the facts out to the public as we could. We did a householder, radio ads, as well as had meetings; for example, at the request of the Sahtu, travelled up there and had a meeting with a number of the communities on the agreement-in-principle. We went again into the Sahtu more with a Chamber event and spoke to them about the agreement-in-principle. We took the opportunity to raise the issue in Hay River with the Chamber there as well as in Inuvik. As well, as the Member stated, we’ve taken advantage of all opportunities when Members or leadership make requests to travel into their communities. We will be looking to add to that as we begin negotiations and use, for example, this evening’s town hall with Members of Yellowknife and the public to further discuss the AIP.

In my poll, one of the questions was: Do you support the GNWT moving forward with negotiations on a final devolution agreement? The most popular response, with 42 percent of the vote, was yes, but make every reasonable effort to include all Aboriginal governments and organizations in the negotiations. Could the Premier please let me know what steps his office is taking to include Aboriginal governments and organizations in the negotiations of a final Devolution Agreement? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The process that we’ve engaged in, and will continue to engage in, in bringing partners to the table is one where we’ve communicated prior to the signing of the AIP of a process. We looked at establishing a protocol; unfortunately, that wasn’t successful.

Since the signing of the AIP, we’ve informed and keep all groups informed of the work we are about to do. Hopefully in the near future we’ll send another letter to all of the leadership explaining the work we’ve done setting up a work plan, and continue to urge them to come back to the table for more discussions and signing of the agreement-in-principle to look at how we could continue. The door remains open going forward on the basis of moving forward on an agreement-in-principle and we hope again that they would take the opportunity to come forward, whether it’s days or weeks coming up towards negotiations.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. In my Member’s statement I talk about the infrastructure in our small communities and I specifically spoke about the potholes and Fort Good Hope’s chipsealing program that the government has eliminated. I want to ask the Minister of MACA, in

light of all the initiatives we have done to empower our communities to make their own decisions and the limited amount of funding the communities have to compete with other priorities, is MACA looking at other options within the municipality in the NWT Federation of Municipalities or even the Government of Canada to look at how we can help small communities deal with chipsealing issues, repairs or just to get these programs into the communities because we have such a limited budget here in the North?

Thank you, Mr. Yakeleya. The honourable Minister of Municipal and Community Affairs, Mr. Robert McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I’ve stated on a number of occasions in the past, responsibility for community infrastructure now lies with the community. We have been fortunate that we have been able to access the Building Canada Plan money, the infrastructure stimulus money, as well as all the infrastructure money that we give to the communities. They have received a significant amount of money. If there are any projects that are meaning to be done in the community, it would be a community responsibility to identify the projects and work with the funding that they do have.

With the amount of responsibilities that we give to the communities, there needs to be the matching dollars to go with the responsibility. I want to ask the Minister if there are any discussions, either with his Cabinet or his own staff, to look at other additional support funding such as the ones that he’s listed off. We appreciate it, but there are ones we could look at within the life of this government to see if funding like this could be discussed at a federal-provincial level to look at chipsealing programs and dust control in our communities.

With the responsibility that we’ve given the community, we like to believe that we’ve given them a significant amount of money to help them with that. It’s a benefit to the community in a number of ways.

In all our dealings with the NWT Association of Communities, meeting with the mayors and councils and that, we’ve really had no concerns, and we continue to work with them and making sure that they have the capacity, that they’re trained to take on the responsibility. My understanding is the Minister of infrastructure, Mr. McLeod, will at his first opportunity be raising with the federal Minister, once he’s named, our desire to explore other funding options for the Northwest Territories.

I look forward to that. It’s good news that the Minister has noted that the Minister of infrastructure along with the honourable Minister to look at how they can support communities. I want to ask the Minister if he’s going to involve the other

municipalities in the North to look at how they can get their message to the Minister of infrastructure once the meeting is held with this government to look at dollars that could be supported in the communities for infrastructure such as the potholes or if we want to somehow initiate some partnership on chipsealing some of the communities.

Each community has five-year capital plans and I’ve had the opportunity to see some of the plans. They’ve identified some of their priorities in the community and I want to commend them for doing a very good job. We have a very strong NWT Association of Communities membership. The president sometimes attends the Federation of Communities and Municipalities, FCM, and they have opportunity there again to raise any concerns that they might have with funding from the federal government to the Northwest Territories. It is an ongoing work but we continue to support the communities with a lot of technical expertise and training. We’ll continue to go along those lines, but the communities themselves have done a very good job at working with the money that’s given to them.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I want to ask the Minister, with the support of technical and training to the communities, has the Minister entered any discussions with a company called Easy Street that can look at repairs to the chipsealed roads that are already done in the communities that have done main street chipsealing?

That is a program that is no longer available. This was before the communities had the responsibility of making their own decisions. I’m sure if the community has some concerns, then they will initiate discussions with Easy Street and see if it’s something that’s feasible for them to apply to their roads. At the end of the day, I’d like to point out that the ultimate responsibility and the decision lies with the community.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I’ve received a copy of the recent e-mail from INAC’s Ottawa-based director of resource policy and programs updating agencies and groups on progress under the federal government’s May 2010 Action Plan to Improve the Northern Regulatory Regime. The memo refers to work on developing

an NWT surface rights board act. I don’t recall committee receiving any information on this. Certainly I’ve heard nothing on any action that could redefine the jurisdiction of the NWT Water Board. I’m wondering if the appropriate Minister could tell me whether his department is aware of and/or participating in these surface rights consultations.

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

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As we discussed somewhat in this House last week, this process is driven by the federal government. They’ve, for the most part, treated the GNWT as just another stakeholder. There’s been some improvement in that relationship since the signing of the AIP. The proposed surface rights legislation which is contemplated in the MVRMA, there was a first draft done in 2010 and we’re still waiting for a possible second draft. Things were delayed because of the election.

I appreciate the Minister’s remarks. I just hope the others that are being consulted include their membership a little more efficiently, or at all, than our Minister has. So far my best source of detailed information on the Mackenzie Valley Resource Manage Act, surface rights and Water Board matters is an industry journal and the sharing of information by public parties. Yet principle three, as you know, of the 10 Guiding Principles of Consensus Government, includes “open and respectful communication between all Members is the most essential feature of consensus government. While it is impossible to reach unanimous agreement on all issues, the opportunity for all Members to have meaningful input into important decisions is fundamental.” I would suggest that the MVRMA is important to our Members. Can the Minister explain how the record of consultation with Members on these amendments honours the 10 Guiding Principles?

The Member has been quoting from documents that I don’t have. I take his point about consultation. This is a federal process. This is federal legislation. We have been, for the most part, up until recently, treated like a stakeholder, much to our chagrin. They’re expecting the second draft. Most of the changes being contemplated at this point are legislative in nature. There’s been no significant reply to our response to the McCrank Report that we submitted back in 2009 where there was significant changes put forward and recommended by Mr. McCrank, some of which we took exception to and did not support. That report is public and filed. This process so far is federally driven and is focussing a lot, by our estimation, on legislative changes.