Thank you. Mr. Thompson.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Have we gotten written confirmation from these groups that this is what we are doing, or has it been a gentlemen's agreement? I guess that's the question, Mr. Chair. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Hagen.

Thank you. Minister Sebert would like to add something.

Yes. I just want to add that, by our estimate, there are more than 700 structures on public land that do not have tenure. This is a problem throughout the North, and I understand that a pretty high percentage of these structures are actually in the area around Yellowknife. Now, some of these may include cabins that are associated with an assertion of Aboriginal rights.

It is a complex issue, but it is an important issue, because there are, as I say, hundreds of structures. Not all of those are cabins; they may be something less or something more than cabins, but it is an issue that is going to take time. It is complicated, also. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Thompson.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and I thank Mr. Hagen and the Minister for that. I understand it's a complicated issue, and so I just wanted to make sure I understood, because some organizations have said they do not want to do it. Some have come up with some really creative solutions, so I am just trying to understand how the department was working towards making sure things are dealt with properly. I am content with the answers I received here today. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Mr. McNeely.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. My contribution is more of an information statement here, just to share some light on the Sahtu land use planning. The organization shares office with the Sahtu Land and Water Board, and it seems to work out very cooperatively, operating both staff in the same building. Looking at the four settlement corporations here, to have one regime that is straight across the board that covers 66 percent of the territorial land quantum gives me comfort that the land use planning should go ahead so that it's all in compliance throughout forced settlement areas, with the same regime applicable to each department or each land area. I just share that with my colleagues here. Thank you.

Thank you. More of a comment from Mr. McNeely. Next on the list, Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I realize I am the only thing standing between folks and dinner. I want to ask about the fabled project assessment policy, because it does not seem to be working out very well. The Tlicho All-Season Road, I guess it was used there, and the Mackenzie Valley Environmental Impact Review Board was highly critical of our government's involvement in that environmental assessment. Can the Minister confirm for me that the project assessment policy was applied to TerraX in their recent application for exploration in the Yellowknife area? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Mr. Hagen.

Thank you. The Minister would like to add something. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to let the Member know that the Department of Lands is coordinating a GNWT-wide review of the project assessment function to identify areas where we might make improvements and to identify priorities. Also, we are coordinating, the department, a GNWT-wide "lessons learned" exercise on the Tlicho All-Season Road environmental assessment, so we are looking at the past to make sure that we can make improvements on the future. My final statement is one I know will be accepted well by the Member: the GNWT manages its various roles as proponent and regulatory decision-maker to avoid any real or perceived apprehension of bias.

Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks. That is great. I appreciate that sentiment from the Minister. I did want to reply to one of Mr. Hagen's comments. It's not me saying that the GNWT did not participate well in the Tlicho All-Season Road. That comes from the review board itself, in the developer's assessment report. The review board was highly critical of our government on the Tlicho All-Season Road. TerraX is not proceeding with its exploration this winter. This project assessment policy does not seem to be working very well. The Minister talked about how there is going to be a "lessons learned" coming out of the Tlicho All-Season Road environmental assessment. Has that been completed, and can the Minister share that with the standing committee? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Mr. Hagen.

Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.

Please, Mr. Chair. That didn't really answer my question: has that exercise been completed, and, if so or if it's going to be happening in the future, can the Minister agree to share the report with the standing committee? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Minister Sebert.

This review of lessons learned or this exercise to examine the Tlicho All-Season Road assessment, we are coordinating, as I say, a GNWT-wide "lessons learned" exercise. That has not yet been completed. If it is and when it is completed, if I have the ability to do so, I will share it with committee. I do appreciate the Member's concern about this whole area, and I did not mean to make light of the fact that we are the proponent and regulator on some projects. It does have its complexities, which I understand. I can't think of a different or better way of being both proponent and regulatory decision-maker, but, certainly, we have to review our project assessment function to make sure that it's transparent and works well. This is going to be an ongoing issue, and I just want Members to know that we are looking at making improvements. I think perhaps Mr. Hagen would like to elaborate on that. Thank you.