Thanks, Mr. Chair. I know that this is kind of convoluted, but this is the main motion about this issue of how municipal governments can relate to what is happening in the Mineral Resources Act. This is where I think we should have the main discussion and debate around this issue.
The bill now outlines a process for Indigenous governments to request temporary restrictions for areas that are of interest to them with regard to whether they have unique, archeological, cultural, ecological, geological, or historical significance. What this motion would do is basically replicate that process and allow municipal governments to request areas of temporary restriction for municipal purposes within their boundaries and no larger an area than necessary and that the Minister would consult with Indigenous governments in carrying out the consideration of that question.
Maybe the department didn't hear about this when they conducted their original consultations, but certainly committee did, and for the Minister to say that, because the department didn't hear about this in their consultations, I'm not going to do anything about, that's not why I am here; because that is what he just said, that the purpose of this is to allow for Indigenous governments to seek temporary protection. Well, here is a clause now that would give municipal governments the same sort of capability. This doesn't take away from what Indigenous governments want to do in any way. In fact, there is a requirement in here for the Minister to consult with Indigenous governments before that restricted area could be established.
I don't really understand why this is not something can be accomplished. This is about trying to avoid conflict. It's consistent with encouraging good relations, building good relationships, and in fact, in some cases, First Nation governments actually are a municipal government. I mentioned that. In the case of Lutselk'e, Wrigley, Sambaa K'e, Tsiigehtchic, those First Nation governments actually service the municipal governments. They already would have the ability to ask for restricted areas, not for municipal purposes quite yet, but why wouldn't we give this ability to request restricted areas? It's all at the Minister's discretion. The Minister doesn't have to do this.
If the purpose of this bill is to try to avoid land use conflicts and encourage better working relationships, why wouldn't we give this ability to municipal governments to protect key infrastructure? I just don't understand it, Mr. Chair. In any event, I look forward to the debate and discussion. Thank you, Mr. Chair.