Question has been called. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried.

---Carried

To clause 22 as amended. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I move that paragraph 22(2)(b) of Bill 34 be amended in each of the subparagraphs (i) and (ii) by striking out "or historical" and substituting "historical or municipal." Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. There is a motion. The motion is in order and is being distributed. To the motion. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. This section of the bill is all about this idea of restricted areas. This gives Indigenous governments the ability to request temporary restrictions on areas of up to one year, that can be extended to two years, for a number of purposes including areas that might have unique, archaeological, cultural, ecological, geological, or historical significance. Of course, they have to cover the minimum area, and the area can be no larger than something that might be prescribed by regulations.

This would add in to those reasons why an Indigenous government may want to seek protection of an area so that it could serve municipal purposes. Of course, some Indigenous governments actually serve as municipal governments; one being the First Nation Council in Lutselk'e or Sambaa K'e or Wrigley. I think even in Tsiigehtchic, the council is basically the First Nation government.

What this would do is give those Indigenous governments the ability to say, if there is something that serves a municipal purpose, say, water or sewage treatment or a landfill, that they could request that that area receive temporary protection and that they could request that of the Minister. It is about extending this to include municipal purposes. Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. To the motion.

Question has been called. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I would request a recorded vote. Thank you.

The Member has requested a recorded vote. All those in favour, please rise.

All those opposed, please rise.

All those abstaining, please rise.

The results of the recorded vote: four in favour, 11 opposed, one abstention. The motion is defeated.

---Defeated

Clause 22 as amended. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. Before I go on to something else, I would like to ask the Minister a question about: is there anything in this section that gives municipal governments, community governments the ability to request temporary protection of areas within their boundaries that might be covered by key municipal infrastructure? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. O'Reilly. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. No, there is not. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Can the Minister explain why that isn't in here? Is there a rationale? Is there some reason why this could not be extended to community governments? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Minister.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. The intention of what a restricted area is to be is more to protect sensitive areas that are set for a set amount of time for the long term and find long-term use solutions. Moreover, restricted areas are justified by unique attributes, fragile attributes that could face irreparable harm, significance tied to ethical values rather than public utilities or economic worth, urgent need for temporary protection until long-term measures may be secured. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Are there any sort of legal impediments here to providing this ability to request restricted areas to municipal governments? Are there any legal impediments to doing that? Thank you, Mr. Chair.