Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have a couple of questions here with regards to land in and around the city of Yellowknife. For quite some years now we’ve had an interim land withdrawal around the city. I think it started in 2006 or so. It’s been extended a number of times, and my understanding is it’s now set to expire November of 2015. So, is

there an intention on the part of Lands to extend it again? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Deputy minister.

I guess that tells me that you haven’t heard from the local Aboriginal government, but the intention, and I guess the policy is that this land withdrawal will stay in place until there’s a land claim agreement. Is that correct?

To the Minister: I have to say, on behalf of my local government, that’s a very far in the future date, in my estimation, when we’re going to get a land claim agreement with the local Aboriginal group. So, you know, for my community government it severely hampers what they can do in terms of acquisition of land in and around the city.

My second question has to do with the Yellowknife harbour, so to speak, and it’s no secret that the city is investigating the development of a harbour plan and they’re looking at trying to put some system in place to get some revenue from houseboats. Some of them are apparently willing to pay some taxes or some sort of a fee.

So can I ask where the department sits in terms of turning over the lakebed, or the bay bed, for lack of a better way of putting it? Where are things at with the City of Yellowknife in coming to some kind of agreement to give them control over the bay? Thank you.

So where would that responsibility lie? Which department? Thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Bisaro. Minister McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I really couldn’t give the Member an answer at this time. We’ll do some research and we’ll come back to the Member and committee. Thank you.

Thanks to the Minister. I appreciate that commitment and look forward to some more info.

Lastly, it’s my understanding from the conversations that Yellowknife MLAs have with City Council – we do that fairly regularly – the city has asked for a number of parcels in and around the city and that some of them, in negotiating with the GNWT, are going to be not turned over to fee simple but are going to be turned over as leases. I wonder if I can get some kind of an explanation. That makes me frown. As an ex city councillor I don’t understand why we would want to force the city to take over a piece of land as a lease instead of in fee simple title. Thank you.

If its land that’s within a municipal boundary I would think that would be a MACA issue because MACA still deals with land within the municipal boundary. If the Member is able to provide us with some detail, I will commit to the Member that we will investigate. I’m a little surprised to hear that myself. I would think it would be something that’s covered under MACA if it’s still within a municipality. Thank you.

Thanks to the Minister. I will provide that info. I am struggling to understand why MACA would have responsibility for municipal lands. I thought all Commissioner’s lands had been turned over to the Lands department. Does this mean that our communities are applying for lands in two places? Thank you.

I apologize if I’ve confused the Member. I was made to understand that we do the block land transfer within the city, like the hinterland would go through Lands. Dealing with city lots is still through MACA. So we would do the block land transfers and we do all Commissioner’s lands within municipal boundaries too. I apologize if I confused the Member. I just assumed that MACA took care of everything like it normally does. Thank you.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I have no further questions.

Thank you. Next on my list I have Mr. Dolynny.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would like to welcome the department here today, because this department is still in its infancy stage and Members are still trying to grasp all the roles and responsibilities here. Because we’re talking about operations, it’s important for me to understand what Lands’ role is when we have a real encompassing fire season like we had in 2014.

Could we get a brief overview as to what role the department plays in working with ENR and DOT and the different stakeholders? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Dolynny. Deputy Minister Warren.

I thank Mr. Warren for that. Do you see the role moving to anything else other than what we just heard today? Do you see this as a progression of the department for fire seasons in terms of playing a more significant role with your partners?

I appreciate that. It’s good to have that background information.

Changing gears, Mr. Chair, with your indulgence, with the regulations of the Wildlife Act, what role does this department now play in the drafting of those regulations? Thank you.

As Members, we have to get used to a new department and what roles it plays. I apologize if I may seem a bit outlandish with some of the questions. I do appreciate the response.

Just a question on the operations side, if I may. We see an amortization entry for $25,000 in the 2014-15 year and then we don’t see any amortization entry. Was there something that was completely amortized in one year, or was that at the tail end of something that we acquired? I would just like a clarification because it’s odd that you see one entry of amortization and then no entry after that. Thank you.