Thank you, Madam Chair. I also would like to join my colleagues in saying that a massive amount of work has been done towards this legislation and I would like to compliment the Minister and his staff on their efforts and attempts to deal with and wrestle with, really, the considerable shortcomings of past work. I’d also like to acknowledge our chair and colleagues on the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Infrastructure which have also had many prolonged discussions and fruitful consultations with people across the Northwest Territories. Thanks to all of those. Those have been real and meaningful conversations because wildlife is of such critical importance to the people of the Northwest Territories.
Wildlife are a form of life which all of us understand are representative of the natural world and our dependence on it and our relationship with it. We all come from the natural world, as I have noted before, and we will all return there. We could say we have a molecular connection to wildlife that is perhaps even closer than other parts of our ecosystem, all which are crucial in providing the ecological services we depend on. I think we’re basically born with this knowledge as creatures of the natural world. As a result, it is no surprise that looking after and using wildlife is so critical to people and even an emotional issue for many.
I would like to quote from the last time I spoke to this bill, as well, where I said, “We as a government have an opportunity and responsibility to respond to our residents in the responsible management of such an esteemed public resource as our wildlife and their habitat. In reviewing the bill, I look for recognition that this is a public resource, I look for acknowledgement of special Aboriginal and treaty rights, I look for inclusiveness in management and I look for evidence of full consultation with all our residents. Finally, while fully accounting for the special Aboriginal and treaty rights provided by law, I expect to see a commitment to acknowledging all people’s interest in using wildlife and to maximizing their opportunity within the bounds of conservation.” That stands true today, as I look over the current bill before us. Because of treaties and land claims, there is not an equal opportunity to use wildlife for all residents. Special rights are preserved for those with Aboriginal and treaty rights. These are not available to others. This is a potentially divisive issue, but in my work as a wildlife biologist in a past life, working on the land with Aboriginal people and non-Aboriginal people, I have seen the potential that can be achieved when, as the elders say, we all work together, this potential divisiveness disappears. Unfortunately, although this bill recognizes the overriding precedence of land claims legislation, it does not serve the purpose of bringing all people together in the management of this public resource. Instead, it is divisive and does not ensure a single tent under which we would gather annually for a full discussion. The collaboration that Art was looking for remains incomplete.
There are no provisions to ensure that decisions made by those with authority are made in an open and transparent manner. While this doesn’t mean it won’t happen, to me this is not something that should be left to chance. We need to provide a clear format within which all Northerners can shine.
Much of what should be in the act, actual wildlife management, is left to regulations or completely unaddressed. In contrast, much of what is already law and should be addressed in regulations is laboriously and confusingly dwelled upon in excessive, painful detail in the act. Major decisions
and mechanisms for dealing with issues remain unresolved, again left to regulations and their development.
The public and Members demand a clear and public commitment for meaningful involvement in the development of these regulations, but this is a vulnerable commitment as Ministers can change such commitments that have no legal substance. It is not right that the public should be left in this position.
The absence of draft regulations before dealing with this bill makes it difficult to understand the full implications of the legislation. Again, we’re being asked to pass this law blindly, then go to a lottery later to find out what it means in translation into regulations.
Because of its unnecessary length and tangled forest of detail, the public is left with a confusing and opaque situation that, once passed, will only be resolved by a massive public information campaign, with clear and transparent maps and information on who can hunt, what, where and when, with what permits and under which authority. I do not envy the hunters’ dilemma whether he be one with Aboriginal treaty rights or not, he or she.
There was a somewhat improved attempt to consult the 50 percent of our residents without Aboriginal and treaty rights. I want to fully acknowledge that. That hadn’t been done in the past. It was a very shallow, if any, effort in the past and I’d say this time there was a very specific effort. But unfortunately, according to all reports, there was very little weight given to their input. That is obviously problematic. So that, again, makes this a somewhat hollow achievement. Nevertheless, to me it’s a fundamental step in the right direction and I want to thank the Minister for that action. Obviously, were this only true in the act, I’d be much happier.
As the MLA for Weledeh, it is of concern that the Yellowknives Dene First Nation have, at a very high level, decided not to participate in the development of this legislation and they do not support it. Also, I’ve been contacted by other constituent groups that oppose this legislation. These are obviously of concern and indicate, perhaps what other colleagues have already said, that this is a very challenging piece of legislation. It’s very difficult to please everybody here.
I want to acknowledge that some changes have been made and my quote from my earlier comments, the acknowledgement of public resource, there has been an attempt. Although the preamble is a non-legal part of this legal document, there was objection from different fronts to recognizing the public nature of this resource, but some wording was put forward and is in the current version suggesting that wildlife is a natural resource and as that there’s a responsibility for stewardship
of wildlife and habitat. So there was some attempt. That was a common comment that the committee heard. Perhaps not common, but a frequent comment. I think other amendments were made as an attempt to address some of the concerns and those, for example, on reporting harvest training and so on, appeal process, were not successful.
So, I’m running out of time I see. The Minister may seem committed to dealing with these other issues through the development of regulations, but is this right? Is that the way legislation should be handled? Can the fundamental basis for wildlife management measuring harvests be left out of regulations or left out of legislation and left to regulations still to be developed through an unknown process?
So that’s it. I look forward to further discussion and consideration of any amendments that may come forward. I will be keenly listening and monitoring the support of the House in hopes to try and make this a piece of legislation that I can support. With that, I conclude my comments. Mahsi.