Thank you, Mr. Vanthuyne. The motion is in order. To the motion. Mr. Vanthuyne.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will let other Members elaborate a little bit more on this, but generally, the genesis of where this motion comes from is recognizing that, while this particular bill didn't undertake any detailed specifics as it relates to royalties, there was a sense out there from folks who partook that they wanted to see some degree of a review on royalties and, also, as it relates to other mining financial or fiscal aspects.

I think that we recognized that the department is willing to undertake a two-part review of the financial or fiscal regime of mining and oil and gas and royalties in general and taxation in general. We commend them in that regard. This motion speaks to starting an independent panel that would be a part of undertaking that process. Of course, this would allow an opportunity for some public input. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mines in the Northwest Territories or the minerals industry in the Northwest Territories pays a lot more than just royalties. Our fiscal regime is very unique in that we charge rents and other forms of revenue-generating fees to active mines that produce revenue that is used for public purposes outside of that royalty regime. I think that what I learned, at least, and I won't speak too much for committee here, but this is a much larger issue than just royalties. It is how we deal with public benefits by raising revenues from the minerals industry across the board.

If we are going to address this, we need to address all aspects of the system, not just one approach. This is, I think, a sound amendment, because it addresses that and asks that it be an independent review. It is not an in-house review that comes forward in the form of a document that is laid on the floor of the House, but it is actually an independent review that can give a fair assessment and a transparent assessment of the benefits of extractive natural resource industries in the Northwest Territories. I think that that would settle a lot of the questions that people have of the benefits of the minerals industry in particular, and the oil and gas industry as well. It needs to be undertaken, but we have to make sure that it is done right, and that it is done in a way that people aren't going to criticize because it was an in-house review that perhaps doesn't have the best terms attached to it. Clear terms of reference; independent panel; that's the way to go.

I think that we will get answers to a lot of the questions that have been raised. We will get the facts as to how much these industries contribute to our economy and contribute to our government. We can make those adjustments that a lot of people have been calling for over the years and ensure that we have a sound system. I think that there is, again, way too many moving parts here to just confine it to royalties. This process is going to greatly improve on how we manage our fiscal regime if it is done right and if it goes to an independent panel. Thank you.

Thank you. To the motion. Mr. Nakimayak.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don't agree with this motion. This takes away from the mining industry, working out those agreements that they have with Indigenous governments, and also with the GNWT. I think that this motion kind of undermines that and their working parts. They are doing things already to take care of this, and this seems like an expensive add to what is going on here. I think this takes away from the negotiating capabilities from Indigenous groups, the mining industry, and the government-to-government relationship that the GNWT has with industry and with Indigenous groups. It doesn't really make sense to me, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. To the motion. Mr. O'Reilly.

Thanks, Mr. Chair. When ITI went out the first time to talk about the Mineral Resources Act, the idea of royalties was part of the scope of those original consultations. They said that they were going to conduct a review of the royalty regime. That was what was promised. We didn't get it. I think I understand why: because it is very complicated. That is what they promised, and they didn't delivery. It is part of the post-devolution promise of "We are going to devolve and then evolve."

Now that our government has taken over something as significant as mineral resources and how we manage those, I think we owe it to our citizens to look at the revenues that accrue to this government as a result of mineral extraction. That is what any reasonable jurisdiction would do. The federal government didn't really do a very good job of this. That is not going to change under this government, at least during the 18^th Assembly.

Of course, this doesn't take away from Indigenous governments' rights, and so on, because they already have rights in their own agreements that enable and entitle them to be involved in any kind of review, and that that could be a separate, bi-lateral discussions, negotiations, and so on. I am sure that our government will do its best to respect that. In no way will this take away from the inherent rights of Indigenous governments.

Certainly, when the department talked about this initially, I said, "This is going to be very complicated." It is not just royalties. It is about taxation. It is about the property taxes that mining companies pay, and the general taxation area, as well. It is also about taxes that the workers pay, and that is usually the biggest amount of revenue that accrues to our government.

I understand that this is complicated, but that shouldn't prevent it from happening. That is what the public deserves.

I talked about the mixed role of this department in promoting mining and regulating it at the same time. There is an inherent conflict there. I don't think that this kind of review is something that should be handled internally by the department. That is why this recommendation has suggested that there should be some independent experts who can be brought to bear on this and give advice with public input. The review really does need to be conducted by an independent panel, not an internal review conducted by the department.

The last part of this of this motion is about making sure that there are opportunities for public input. That should include, of course, the mining industry itself who obviously has a stake in this, NGOs, the public, businesses, the business community. They should all have an ability to participate in this kind of review.

I think this is a sound recommendation. I will support it. I look forward to the 19^th Assembly dealing with this matter, ensuring that it is independent and there is expert advice brought to bear on this and that there are opportunities for public to be engaged. Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. To the motion.

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

---Carried

Mr. Vanthuyne.