Thank you, Madam Chair. I, too, had some comments. This is the first of a series of legislation that are going to be mirrored to move the devolution forward. I just wanted to highlight a couple of comments and end off with a question.
Throughout this process as we contemplate this mirror legislation, what got us here was the negotiations process towards devolution. Usually in a negotiation process you have parties, and each party that’s represented at the table reports to their principals. Of course, in the negotiations process, parties agree to the subject matter that needs to be negotiated and, at the same time, consider at least the parameters or the framework of just the scope of perhaps the subjects to be negotiated. Then after that, as the parties roll up their sleeves and hopefully come to the point of an agreement-in-principle, which we will witness. Beyond that, it’s basically the final stretch towards the final agreement. Where we’re at, at this point, is we’re poised to move towards April 1, 2014, and we’re going to be implementing or operating the provisions in terms of how the Devolution Agreement is supposed to work.
The key in that, for me, is understanding the role of the principles, the role of the principals of the
GNWT and the parties, of course. In that role in the relationship is how the whole devolution process came about. I don’t really want to dwell on the “should have beens” but the fact of the reality is we’re here today.
In saying that, as legislators, our role, as I understand it, we represent our constituents on very important and pressing matters we raise in the House. If there is enough common support amongst our colleagues, we work in consensus and arrive at a point where we can move towards legislating actions to remedy concerns. That’s the role I believe we have.
The comfort in this process at this point is, indeed, the Premier has committed that at some point there will be a review process and perhaps an amending mechanism in terms of some legislation in what is before us.
We also have to reflect on what brought us here. For a long time, being a student of politics and First Nations, especially at the community level, seeing my grandparents and my parents and my uncles in leadership roles, what the struggle was all about was the land in terms of lifestyle. We are a nomadic people, the Dene, who roamed throughout this land and developed their culture around the seasons, springtime, summer, fall and winter, and moving to where the fish were, the inlands of big land masses. We moved to the shores of bigger lakes where moose were more plentiful. That became the fundamental basis of the First Nations and ensuring their lifestyles were maintained. Their very innate relationship with the land or the environment was connected all the time. We try to maintain that culture for as long as we can. That became the premise of the movement of First Nations towards protecting the land and our culture.
So this is where we’re at. It’s basically about the land. Some people say that perhaps the land has changed. Some people would also say we’ve changed, the land hasn’t changed; it’s us. So, in that respect, we look forward to the dawning reality of April 1st , a new age of the NWT, of perhaps
looking back and ensuring that what we have learned from the past, we’ll put in our pockets like our elders did, that rock on the trail of going very courageously into the future and making the best possible place in the world for future generations to come.
I feel comfortable today that that plateau has been reached by the leaders of the day. Of course, the parties that were involved in the process were the government, the federal government and the Government of the Northwest Territories. As we move forward, there are still outstanding issues that need to be resolved. Fundamentally, there is still a strong stand in terms of the relationship that became what is the treaty of 1921 and 1899, that puts into relationship First Nations and the federal
government. That is still strongly standing. Some groups have gone to modernize those treaties and called them land claims. In modernizing their treaties, those land claims were put into the constitution, Section 35. That’s where we’re at today.
For the most part, a lot of the key initiatives were based on a lot of the accomplishments of land claim agreements, some benchmarks, the Dene/Metis Agreement-in-Principle, some discussions on constitutional advancement, the Bourque Commission, those laid pillars of discussions that will signal to the parties that we need to define the framework of this House so we can all sit at the table equally, not one sitting below another.
I would like to, at some point, witness the day when that time will come. Many of the leaders who have passed before me, many elders who have walked this path, I am hoping to witness that at some point.
In saying that, my question the other day was to the Premier. A lot of the key initiatives that government has reached are based on co-management and collaboration. As we make changes to the devolution process, key pending agreements and major initiatives, we’re trying to improve things, make things better. One of the key things that we’ve pushed forward is we’re going to set up a new structure that supposedly is to be very effective and timely in terms of decision-making processes.
I would like to know, once again, what kind of land management regime should we expect after April 1, 2014? Mahsi.