Thank you, Mr. Chair. Committee would like to consider Bill 37, An Act to Amend the Oil and Gas Operations Act; Committee Report 24-18(3), Standing Committee on Social Development Report on the Review of Bill 48, Post-Secondary Education Act; and Bill 48, Post-Secondary Education Act. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Does committee agree?

Thank you, committee. We will consider the documents after a brief recess. We are in recess.

---SHORT RECESS

I call Committee of the Whole back to order. Committee, we have agreed to consider Bill 37, An Act to Amend the Oil and Gas Operations Act. I will turn to the Minister responsible to introduce the bill. Minister Schumann.

Thank you. I am pleased to introduce Bill 37, An Act to Amend the Oil and Gas Operations Act. The purpose of this bill is to address critical first-step changes to the Oil and Gas Operations Act. Its aim is to enhance transparency and public accountability and address administrative and technical issues with the current legislation.

To enhance transparency and public accountability, this bill proposes extended authorities and requirements for both the Minister and the regulator related to oil and gas activities in the Northwest Territories.

For the regulator, the bill would allow them to conduct public hearings, specify what powers they may exercise in those hearings, and expand their authority to issue guidelines and interpretation notes, providing guidance on the application and administration of the act and regulations.

For the Minister, the bill would enshrine in legislation the requirement for an annual report on activities of the regulator to be tabled in the legislature.

The proposal also requires both the Minister and the regulator to make more information public that is related to oil and gas activities, while clarifying obligations pertaining to confidentiality of information received by either party.

On the administrative and technical side, this bill clarifies authorities of the Minister and the regulator to delegate their powers, duties, and functions to other qualified persons and also clarifies requirements surrounding proof of financial responsibilities of holders of oil and gas authorizations.

This bill is part of the government's work to improve the Northwest Territories land and resource management regime to ensure that Northerners are able to make decisions that support sustainable, responsible development and protection of the environment while respecting Indigenous rights. This made-in-the-North legislation will help ensure that Northwest Territories residents are making decisions about how land and resources in our territory are developed and used on behalf of current residents and future generations.

To that end, this bill was developed through an extensive policy development effort, including legislative research; multiplatform engagement campaigns, where the public, industry, Indigenous governments, NGOs, and other interested stakeholders were invited to comment; feedback from other Members; and close collaboration with Indigenous governments through the Intergovernmental Council. The Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment also prepared plain language materials to support the public engagement process.

The Department of Industry, Tourism and Investment has worked with the legislative division of the Department of Justice on this bill. The department does not anticipate that new regulations are necessary for this initiative, but does anticipate working with the Office of the Regulator of Oil and Gas Operations to ensure that appropriate guidance is developed before bringing these changes into force, should the bill pass.

I wish to commend all Members on their continued engagement with constituents as this bill as moved through the legislative process, and I welcome any questions that the Members may have. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. I will turn to the chair of the committee which reviewed the bill. Mr. Vanthuyne.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Bill 37 was referred to the Standing Committee on Economic Development and Environment on February 22, 2019. The committee sent letters inviting input from an extensive list of stakeholders, including municipal and Indigenous governments in the Northwest Territories, as well as a number of non-governmental organizations and stakeholders.

The committee travelled throughout the territory and held public hearings in Inuvik, Norman Wells, and Yellowknife. The committee thanks everyone who attended these meetings or provided written submissions sharing their views on Bill 37.

The committee would also like to thank the Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment and his staff for the collaborative approach on the review of the bill.

The committee concluded its review of Bill 37, An Act to Amend the Oil and Gas Operations Act, on August 2^nd, with a public clause-by-clause review held at the Legislative Assembly building. The committee moved two separate motions to amend Bill 37. One was carried with concurrence from the Minister.

With that, Mr. Chair, individual Members may have additional comments or questions as we proceed with consideration of this bill. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. I see a number of witness chairs, so I will invite the Sergeant-at-Arms to escort the witnesses into the Chamber. The Minister may take a seat at the witness table. Would the Minister please introduce the witnesses for the record.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. On my left is Menzie McEachern, director of mineral and petroleum resources. On my immediate right is Joel Marion, senior legislative advisor. On my far right is Christina Brownlee, the drafter. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Welcome back to the witnesses. I will open the floor to general comments on Bill 37. Any general comments from committee? Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. First off, I guess I would like to clear the record. Yesterday I said that there were no submissions from the oil and gas industry with regard to the development of these bills, and when I went back and checked, there indeed was a letter from the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers dated May 3, 2018. It was sent to the department in terms of development of these bills. It is 13 pages long, and I can confidently say that all of their concerns were addressed and have been incorporated into the bill, which is good news, but the standing committee did not receive any submissions from industry on the bill itself.

I do want to note that this made-in-the-North approach did not include amending section 53 of the act itself, and this is where a copy of each regulation that the Commissioner and Executive Council proposes to make shall be published in the Northwest Territories Gazette, and a reasonable opportunity shall be provided to any interested person to make representation to the Minister with respect to the proposed regulation.

That was something that the federal government had put into the legislation. We were required to mirror that approach, so thank goodness that the federal government had the good foresight to put that into the bill. In this made-in-the-North approach that our government has adopted to resource management legislation, why didn't they take that out of the bill? That is a question for the Minister. Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Our approach to this bill, as I said in the opening comments, was administrative in nature and improving transparency in the bill, as well. When we did public engagement, this was not an issue that was brought up, so it was not brought forward. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I am glad to see that that stays in the act. I think that this issue is going to come back in terms of reviewing some of the other bills that are still before the House. I will leave it at that for now.

This might be a bit of an interesting question. In the report that committee made on the bill, there were some recommendations. I had better go back and check this. If I could just have a moment, Mr. Chair. Yes, there are a number of recommendations in the report of standing committee on the two bills.

The committee spent a lot of time and effort on the road gathering evidence and a lot of time and effort over the summer to prepare these reports. Of course, time is going to run out. There is no requirement for an actual response from the Minister on these recommendations in the report. Is it the intention of the Minister to respond before the election to the committee recommendations in this report? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We will respond to the recommendations in this report by the end of this Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I appreciate that commitment, and I know that everybody is working flat out on this. I appreciate that it is going to create extra work for the departmental staff, but I think that it will help close the accountability loop, so I want to thank the Minister for that.

Mr. Chair, I do have some additional points that I will raise on some of the clauses as we move through the bill, but that's it for now. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Mr. McNeely.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. In reviewing the Minister's opening remarks, there were a couple of paragraphs that made me reflect on last year's occasions that I had to support industry, as well as keeping an open mind on the local concerns. More specifically, this is related to the Enbridge Pipeline 21 repair just a bit upstream from the community of Fort Providence.

As I listened to the presentations made at the National Energy Board, the NWT Land and Water Board, and the many engagements and correspondence that they had with the surrounding community groups, as well as site visits, having knowledge of the legislation and regulations that we have in the House made me very confident that the proceedings leading up to the actual completion of the job, right from application, to the permit, to executing the permit, to executing the work, to inspections and site visits by stakeholders, which I was privileged to attend -- I believe it was until the 21^st of 2018 -- advocating for the project in the spirit of responsible development while maintaining an open mind on section 35, which was brought up by local Indigenous groups.

As a result of everybody's collaboration and accommodation, there were joint management arrangements made between local Indigenous groups and the developer. At the end of the day, the oil field in Norman Wells was reactivated and brought back into operation in October of last year.

If we can reflect on some of the media coverage that project had, it was never done in the history of the Mackenzie River on a successful horizontal drill program at the depth of 100 metres below the riverbed and a length of 2.5 kilometres. The environmental audits that were repeatedly done by the monitor is really, to me, a showcase of the department's statements as made on page number 2 of 3 of the Minister's statement, when you look at the written material there, that the department has engaged with numerous groups.

This really, in my confidence, gives me support there that the engagements were done and now we have an end product, similar to what was done last year under the old regime. I just mention that story of last year's project, and I think it should be actually acknowledged moving forward on some of these pieces of legislation that we have to reflect that the system works. Community groups had time to make their presentation, their arguments through both forums when the application and engagement session came. Having said that, I have confidence that we as a government, all 19 Members, have done our homework, and now we have a revised Bill 37. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Seeing nothing further, we can move into the clause-by-clause review of the bill. We will consider the bill number and title after consideration of the clauses. I will call out each clause individually. Please reply accordingly, based on whether you agree or not. I will give committee a moment to open up their binders. It looks like everyone is ready to begin.

---Clauses 1 through 4 approved

Mr. O'Reilly, to clause 5.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. This clause would give the regulator the ability to hold public hearings, and the proposed change to section 19.1 of the act says, "The Regulator may conduct a public hearing in respect of the exercise of any of its powers," and so on. In committee, we had a discussion about this, and a motion was moved to not just say that the regulator "may conduct" a hearing but actually in addition to require the regulator to conduct a hearing based on whatever set of criteria that they may develop. Why was this drafted in a way that does not set the floor for when a public hearing should be held by the regulator? Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's not clear what circumstances under the Oil and Gas Operations Act would require a mandatory public hearing. As a result, we need to maintain some flexibility here. We believe the best approach is to allow the regulator to develop a list of principles that the regulator will apply on a case-by-case basis to decide whether to conduct a public hearing. Should these bills pass, my understanding is that the regulator will be publishing guidelines and interpretation notes to provide additional guidance on the application and administration of its power to conduct public hearings, which would include principles for holding such hearings. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I am glad that the Minister came well-prepared for the Committee of the Whole review of the bill. I was not suggesting in any way that the list or criteria needs to be set out in the bill itself, but there should at least be a floor in here that says that the regulator "shall" prepare such a list, but the Minister was not able to concur with that. I am just wondering if he can explain why. Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Clause 5 provides the regulator with the authority to hold a public hearing when it determines doing so would be in the public interest. A decision would likely be made by the regulator with input from the chief conservation officer, the chief safety officer, and other senior staff, and will be based on a review of concerns related to a particular application or activity. As I said, it's not clear what circumstances under the Oil and Gas Operations Act would require a mandatory public hearing. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. Yes, and I am very mindful of the Minister's opening remarks here about clarifying authority and ensuring Northerners are able to make decisions that support sustainable development. All of these things are good things that he said, but setting a floor for or at least requiring that there is a floor for when public hearings should be held, this clause doesn't do that. It just says it's up to the discretion of the regulator on a case-by-case basis, perhaps. I am not sure how this actually creates any certainty or clarity moving forward as to when a public hearing might actually be held. The reason why I raise this again is Northerners are used to water licensing, where there is a class A, class B water licences. A class B water licence, the thresholds for those are set out by regulation. Those thresholds require hearings on class A licences and amendments to class A licences. Class B licences, no problem; go ahead, and the board can issue a licence after it gives consideration. However, there is no floor here; there is no requirement for a floor. I say this because that is the kind of system that Northerners are used to through our co-management approach, is having a floor and setting clear expectations of when a hearing is going to be required. This bill does not do that, and maybe I would just ask the Minister why that certainty, that clarity is not provided. Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. What I am going to say about this is these guidance notes will provide guidance when we move forward with this bill, and this will also allow for a public engagement process, so I do not see the need for doing this. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. O'Reilly.

Yes, thanks, Mr. Chair. Yes, so what I will say is that this bill does not deliver on the made-in-the-North approach in terms of providing certainty and clarity as to a requirement for the regulator to develop that list. It may happen. That's great, but there is no requirement in the bill for that to happen, so I don't think we have delivered on the promise. Thanks, Mr. Chair, and that is all I have for this clause. Thank you.

Thank you. Clause 5?

Thank you, committee. Clause 6. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I move -- or shall we wait until the motion is on the floor? I want to move this motion. Thanks, Mr. Chair.

If you have a motion to move, you can move the motion and the motion will be distributed after it is moved. Mr. O'Reilly.