This is page numbers 4163 - 4204 of the Hansard for the 19th Assembly, 2nd Session. The original version can be accessed on the Legislative Assembly's website or by contacting the Legislative Assembly Library. The word of the day was indigenous.

Topics

Question 1066-19(2): Inuvik Mike Zubko Airport Expansion Project
Oral Questions

Page 4172

Katrina Nokleby

Katrina Nokleby Great Slave

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I guess, Mr. Speaker, can the Minister speak a little bit to the fact that this project hasn't been underway for that long and given that it really only got started in the last year, how did we get to $40 million in cost overruns without this being flagged prior to now? Thank you.

Question 1066-19(2): Inuvik Mike Zubko Airport Expansion Project
Oral Questions

Page 4172

Diane Archie

Diane Archie Inuvik Boot Lake

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, when the national defence announced in September 2019 that the federal government would provide the GNWT with $150 million over five years, you know, given some of the circumstances that's happening right now, it has exceeded the proposed budget. Thank you.

Question 1066-19(2): Inuvik Mike Zubko Airport Expansion Project
Oral Questions

Page 4172

The Speaker

The Speaker Frederick Blake Jr.

Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary, Member for Great Slave.

Question 1066-19(2): Inuvik Mike Zubko Airport Expansion Project
Oral Questions

Page 4172

Katrina Nokleby

Katrina Nokleby Great Slave

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don't think that answered my question. There clearly needs to be a look at investigating how this project got so far over scope or out of budget before it ever was flagged. We should not be at a point where a project is at $40 million over budget without it raising alarm bells long before that.

I guess my last question, though, is around will we actually save this construction season? Is there a push regardless of who's paying for it to get the trench that my colleague was mentioning on Monday or the critical work that needs to be completed this season -- is there a push and a will from that department to get it done regardless of whether the feds are paying for it or not? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Question 1066-19(2): Inuvik Mike Zubko Airport Expansion Project
Oral Questions

Page 4172

Diane Archie

Diane Archie Inuvik Boot Lake

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I understand that there was a productive meeting held this morning with national -- DND as well as the Indigenous government. So the understanding is the next steps are a technical conversation.

You know, the GNWT is committed working with the joint venture contractors negotiating and evaluating options that will allow for this important project to meet its five-year schedule to be done within the available budget.

I know from my experience, Mr. Speaker, the successful negotiations take two willing parties to have -- to work in mutual respect and trust. Thank you.

Question 1066-19(2): Inuvik Mike Zubko Airport Expansion Project
Oral Questions

Page 4172

The Speaker

The Speaker Frederick Blake Jr.

Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Great Slave.

Question 1067-19(2): Inuvik Mike Zubko Airport Expansion Project
Oral Questions

March 30th, 2022

Page 4172

Katrina Nokleby

Katrina Nokleby Great Slave

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. It's my day to be on oral questions, I guess.

With the Minister's comments around -- sorry, my questions are for the Minister of Infrastructure continuing along this line.

With the comments about there being a mutual conversation that needs to be had, that worries me, Mr. Speaker, because we don't have a lot of capacity in some of our areas to do this type of work, and I'm worried that the department is not going to be able to negotiate with this contractor in good faith in order to get this work done.

Can the Minister speak to what the contingency plan is should they not be able to come to an agreement with the contractor and proceed with them? Thank you.

Question 1067-19(2): Inuvik Mike Zubko Airport Expansion Project
Oral Questions

Page 4172

Diane Archie

Diane Archie Inuvik Boot Lake

Thank you -- sorry. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. So like I said, my understanding is that the Department of Infrastructure is working with the Indigenous governments to be able to look more at a technical scope in how we move this project forward.

The -- the narrative that this project is behind schedule and that we need to forgo proper planning, project planning, as well as funding and technical review in order to meet the five-year project window is not true. We need to get negotiations done and start the work for these projects that are happening with the -- in partnership with Canada and as well as National Defence. Thanks.

Question 1067-19(2): Inuvik Mike Zubko Airport Expansion Project
Oral Questions

Page 4172

Katrina Nokleby

Katrina Nokleby Great Slave

Thank you. Now I'm super confused because it is my understanding that if this technical piece of the work, the trench, isn't completed within time, that there will be a delay.

So I'm not sure where this conflicting information is coming from. But can the Minister speak to whether or not if that trench is not dug this year, can it be dug next year with no delays? Thank you.

Question 1067-19(2): Inuvik Mike Zubko Airport Expansion Project
Oral Questions

Page 4172

Diane Archie

Diane Archie Inuvik Boot Lake

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, to be clear, I'm not prepared to negotiate this contract at the floor of this House. So I'm going to take notice. Thank you.

Question 1067-19(2): Inuvik Mike Zubko Airport Expansion Project
Oral Questions

Page 4172

The Speaker

The Speaker Frederick Blake Jr.

Thank you, Minister. Colleagues, our time for oral questions has expired. Written questions. Returns to written questions. Mr. Clerk.

Return to Written Question 37-19(2): Use of Indigenous Languages on Official Documents
Returns To Written Questions

Page 4172

Deputy Clerk Of The House Mr. Glen Rutland

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I have a Return to Written Questions asked by the Member for Kam Lake on March 9th, 2022, regarding use of Indigenous languages on official documents.

1. Who sits on the Indigenous Fonts Working Group?

A Terms of Reference for an inter-departmental working group on Indigenous fonts and diacritical marks was approved in early 2020, to advance the work to support GNWT technical solutions for implementation of NWT Official Indigenous Languages on GNWT- issued identity documents. Unfortunately, due to the response to COVID-19 the working group has not met. The working group will be co-chaired the Departments of Health and Social Services and Finance, and the Office of the Chief Information Officer. Membership on the working group includes representatives from all GNWT departments. The co-chairs met in March 2022 to review the Terms of Reference, and the intent is for the working group to resume in April or May 2022.

2. What GNWT systems will be impacted?

Any information system that requires the individual's official name to be entered into the system, supported by a GNWT-issued foundational identity document, such as a birth certificate, will potentially be impacted. One of the deliverables of the working group is to "assess the upstream and downstream implications of changes to the collection and sharing of information using Indigenous fonts and diacritics for affected programs and services to minimize disruption and impact to clients." This will determine the scope of affected programs, services and associated GNWT systems that will be impacted.

3. What are the technical needs of the Government of the Northwest Territories to see this change?

The working group's assessment of the scope of programs and services that will be impacted to minimize disruption and impacts to clients will be used to then assess technical needs. GNWT staff will review the technical requirements and financial implications of changes to the existing information systems. This will inform the next steps and timelines needed to generate NWT vital statistics documents with Indigenous fonts and diacritics.

4. How are other jurisdictions implementing Indigenous fonts on vital statistics documents?

At this time Indigenous fonts and diacritics have not been implemented on vital statistics documents in any of the provinces or territories. We continue to canvass and connect with other jurisdictions, on an ongoing basis, to be aware of any potential discussions or developments.

5. What impact will this change have on a national level?

The focus has and will continue to be on taking proactive steps to avoid unintended consequences for holders of NWT Vital Statistics documents, which are foundational identity documents. Without a coordinated approach, clients would potentially be adversely impacted when trying to access programs and services at the provincial/territorial, federal and international levels. Potential impacts may include, but are not limited to, access to federal programs such as Canada Child Benefit, Employment Insurance, Canada Pension Plan, Old Age Security, Social Insurance Numbers and Canadian Passports, accessing programs and services in other provinces and territories, transfer and receipt of electronic data with provincial and territorial partners, and impacts to services with banking and financial institutions. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Return to Written Question 37-19(2): Use of Indigenous Languages on Official Documents
Returns To Written Questions

Page 4172

The Speaker

The Speaker Frederick Blake Jr.

Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Returns to written questions. Replies to the Commissioner's address. Petitions. Reports of committees on the review of bills. Reports of standing and special committees, Member for Yellowknife North.

Committee Report 27-19(2): Special Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs Interim Report: What we Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Negotiating Agreements
Reports Of Standing And Special Committees

Page 4173

Rylund Johnson

Rylund Johnson Yellowknife North

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Your Special Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs is pleased to provide its Interim Report: What we Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Negotiating Agreements, and commends it to the House.

Mr. Speaker, the chair of the committee, the Member for Inuvik Twin Lakes, has asked me to read the executive summary today. But I would like to thank her, and all the members of this committee, for their work.

Executive Summary

On October 29, 2020, the Legislative Assembly unanimously passed Motion 21-19(2) to establish a Special Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs. The Assembly tasked the Special Committee to seek and encourage discussion and recommendations on opportunities and challenges in meeting the Assembly's priorities.

The Special Committee began work on December 4, 2020, and has since held 15 hearings. Throughout 2021, Committee heard from legal experts, scholars, researchers, Indigenous governments and nations, and the Government of the Northwest Territories.

Five public presentations by experts and scholars are available on the Legislative Assembly's YouTube channel. Committee received ten in-camera hearings, including eight from Indigenous governments and organizations, and two from the GNWT.

We are not identifying individual voices in this interim report unless explicitly advised that we can share the information publicly. We respect the confidentiality requirements of ongoing negotiations and the confidentiality commitments of the Indigenous governments and nations.

The report is organized into four chapters summarizing what we have heard so far. Chapter one arranges the information received from experts and scholars and provides an overview of discussions around the implementation of the Declaration. Chapter two summarizes what we heard about existing key challenges in applying the Declaration in the NWT, and Chapter three encapsulates the key challenges in concluding agreements in the NWT. The final Chapter lists areas for potential future recommendations by the Special Committee.

What We Have Heard about the Declaration

Themes that emerged when Committee listened to experts, scholars and Indigenous governments and organizations reflected many discussions taking place in the Canadian context. These discussions included observing the Declaration as a minimum standard for human rights and as a tool for self-determination. The Declaration was acknowledged as designed to be a global benchmark, while some suggested that it was not intended to be a specific legal instrument to be directly implemented as law.

Discussions about the Declaration

Committee heard implementing the Declaration's Articles should not be seen as the end goal but rather the beginning of the effort.

We heard that challenges arise when aligning the Declaration, an international human rights document, with domestic law. Adopting the Declaration in domestic legislation has been criticized as too vague and noncommittal. It has been described as misleading in that it would make promises that cannot be kept, thereby taking the risk of repeating the cycle of broken promises, particularly promises broken by governments.

Committee heard fundamental disagreement on whether the Declaration is legally binding. It has been pointed out that it is an aspirational document designed to be a global benchmark for Indigenous rights but is not considered law and, therefore, not legally binding.

Others noted that viewing the Declaration as aspirational ignores its intent: to guide action. We learned that customary international law applies directly unless expressly stated otherwise. Human rights treaties must be implemented through domestic legislation either implicitly or explicitly.

We heard that in the NWT, the Declaration might serve different purposes for different nations:

  • For those that pursue self-government agreements, the Declaration may serve as a replacement for the GNWT's Core Principles and Objectives.
  • Treaty holders may use the Declaration to identify and fill gaps in implementation. Committee heard that modern treaty implementation and self-governance agreements are at a critical point in the NWT, and processes to secure funding will require rethinking to ensure the treaties and the Declaration are fulfilled.
  • On the other hand, we heard that the Declaration may distract Modern Treaty holders from continuing treaty implementation and may impede further progress on a path that has seen considerable investment in the past.
  • For those without land agreements, the Declaration would allow land rights and self-determination. Nations without land agreements expressed the desire to develop their own mechanisms and processes to move land agreements forward.
  • Committee heard that openness is needed toward more progressive and contemporary co-management approaches that include renewable and non-renewable resources. The NWT's co-management institutions have developed from arrangements under modern treaties and may not be a workable model for areas without land agreements or reserve lands.

Challenges in Declaration Implementation

  • International human rights obligations and domestic law: We heard concerns about the fundamental compatibility of the basic principles of the Declaration with the existing jurisprudence in Canada. Different views exist on the future approach to address the complexity of section 35(1) of the Constitution Act, 1982. We also heard about confusion amongst Indigenous rights holders about this section in relation to rights under other laws.
  • Options for Implementation: We heard that implementation may be more manageable if the Declaration was broken down into applicable sections. This process would avoid ambiguity, better allow incremental allocation of resources and would put meaning behind each Section with specific mechanisms.
  • Implementation by Law: Scholars have cautioned that confusion could arise if a divergent variety of implementation laws are developed in regions and across the country. Should all provinces, territories, and municipalities develop laws in addition to federal law that makes commitments to the rights of Indigenous people, the question would be how to ensure the process is harmonious. This would likely be more applicable to the Territories than to some of the provinces.
  • Co-developing legislation: Committee heard that co-developing legislation is the realization of reconciliation. However, how to arrive at the result of co-development is not entirely clear. For some, past examples of co-development of legislation in the NWT were not sufficiently inclusive and in compliance with the Declaration principles. Others regarded the process used to develop the laws as examples of consent implementation and government collaboration.
  • Legislation and Consent: We heard that the core question of the Canadian debate on consultation is whether, or possibly to what extent, consent would be needed to achieved before developing legislation to implement the Declaration which requires consent.
  • Consent and Self-determination: Consent has been accepted as a key principle of the Declaration, intended to enable Indigenous self-determination. In discussions about consent, we heard that the principle of free, prior and informed consent, known as FPIC, can be perceived as a vehicle to advance long-term relationships and allow for the coexistence of a plurality of legal orders. Committee was told not to underestimate the role of FPIC in establishing a different and positive relationship between Indigenous peoples and non-Indigenous segments of society.
  • Consent and Consult: Disagreements exist on the achievability of FPIC in relation to rights under the Canadian Constitution Act. And while free prior informed consent is the tool intended to make self-determination happen, tensions exist between efforts of defining the terms and interpretations of the broader goal of Indigenous participation and protection of rights.
  • Operationalizing Consent: We also heard how consent could be operationalized through Declaration legislation. Examples of operationalization include creating leadership tables, secretariats, and joint cabinet-Indigenous committees. Other examples include processes outside of Declaration legislation such as modern treaties, the regulatory regime and assessment processes, Indigenous-led assertion and enforcement, or through the courts.
  • Contentious Articles: Committee heard that several Declaration articles might be contentious in their relationship to the Canadian Constitution Act, 1982. We heard that Articles 26, 32, and 46 have been particularly contentious.
  • Monitoring of implementation: There are no independent bodies to monitor how governments will perform in implementing and applying the Declaration. It has been said that this will lead to interpretation gaps in implementation.
  • Regional and inherited approaches: We have heard that some fear that the Declaration may interfere with existing agreements; others pointed out that the Declaration will help realize inherent rights and reconciliation. To understand the situation of Indigenous nations in the NWT, we were told to look at the historic treaties, and the extinguishment of rights and modern land agreements.

We heard that existing representative bodies may not align with current views of authority and self-determination, and existing agreements may not fulfil the views of land rights and self-government.

Challenges in Negotiations

  • The slow pace of negotiations due to increasing complexity of agreements, frequent leadership changes, the desire for legal certainty and to be comprehensive, as well as the increasing size of negotiations all raise the challenges.
  • Negotiation mandates: Indigenous nations perceive themselves as being stuck in a negotiation structure inherited from the past, with little room to move forward or break out of. The GNWT was described as having been inflexible in the past. All NWT witnesses agreed that governments need to get away from the fixed and predetermined principles at the negotiation table, be more flexible and not change core principles and objectives unilaterally.
  • Competing interests: Overlap in land use combined with the absence of land agreements, we heard, created an untenable and undesirable situation.
  • Finding a way forward: Despite, at times, the critical language describing the past and current experiences of negotiations in the NWT, we were inspired by the positive and forward-looking tone used by all witnesses.

We heard a deep sincerity in seeking and finding solutions to the challenges of the status quo. The diversity among NWT Indigenous governments and nations was noted as an opportunity to build on what has proven to already work in the NWT. Examples included existing collaborative models of governance and legislative co-development.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank all of the presenters of the committee and all of the committee members for their work. This is simply the interim report. We look forward to many (audio) and to future recommendations to this Assembly. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Committee Report 27-19(2): Special Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs Interim Report: What we Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Negotiating Agreements
Reports Of Standing And Special Committees

Page 4174

The Speaker

The Speaker Frederick Blake Jr.

Thank you, Member for Yellowknife North. Member for Yellowknife North.

Committee Report 27-19(2): Special Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs Interim Report: What we Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Negotiating Agreements
Reports Of Standing And Special Committees

Page 4174

Rylund Johnson

Rylund Johnson Yellowknife North

Mr. Speaker, I move, second by the Member for Thebacha, that the remainder of Committee Report 27-19(2) be deemed read and printed in Hansard in its entirety. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Committee Report 27-19(2): Special Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs Interim Report: What we Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Negotiating Agreements
Reports Of Standing And Special Committees

Page 4174

The Speaker

The Speaker Frederick Blake Jr.

Thank you, Member for Yellowknife North. The motion is in order. To the motion?

Committee Report 27-19(2): Special Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs Interim Report: What we Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Negotiating Agreements
Reports Of Standing And Special Committees

Page 4174

Some Hon. Members

Question.

Committee Report 27-19(2): Special Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs Interim Report: What we Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Negotiating Agreements
Reports Of Standing And Special Committees

Page 4174

The Speaker

The Speaker Frederick Blake Jr.

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

---Carried

Committee Report 27-19(2) is deemed read and will be printed in Hansard in its entirety.

Committee Report 27 - 19(2):
Standing Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs Interim Report: What we Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and the Negotiating Agreements

Member for Yellowknife North.

Committee Report 27-19(2): Special Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs Interim Report: What we Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Negotiating Agreements
Reports Of Standing And Special Committees

Page 4174

Rylund Johnson

Rylund Johnson Yellowknife North

One moment, Mr. Speaker.

Oh, Mr. Speaker, I move, seconded by the Member for Thebacha that Committee Report 27-19(2): Special Committee on the Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs Interim Report: What We Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Negotiating Agreements be received by the Assembly and referred to Committee of the Whole.

Committee Report 27-19(2): Special Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs Interim Report: What we Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Negotiating Agreements
Reports Of Standing And Special Committees

Page 4174

The Speaker

The Speaker Frederick Blake Jr.

Thank you, Member for Yellowknife North. The motion is in order. To the motion?

Committee Report 27-19(2): Special Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs Interim Report: What we Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Negotiating Agreements
Reports Of Standing And Special Committees

Page 4174

Some Hon. Members

Question.

Committee Report 27-19(2): Special Committee on Reconciliation and Indigenous Affairs Interim Report: What we Heard about the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples and Negotiating Agreements
Reports Of Standing And Special Committees

Page 4174

The Speaker

The Speaker Frederick Blake Jr.

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

---Carried

Committee Report 27-19(2) has been received by the Assembly and referred to Committee of the Whole. Thank you.

Reports of Standing and Special Committees. Member for Kam Lake.

Committee Report 28-19(2): Standing Committee on Social Development Report on the Review of Bill 39: An Act to Amend the Post-Secondary Education Act
Reports Of Standing And Special Committees

Page 4174

Caitlin Cleveland

Caitlin Cleveland Kam Lake

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, Mr. Speaker, your Standing Committee on Social Development is pleased to provide its Report on review of Bill 39: An Act to Amend the Post-Secondary Education Act and commend it to the House.

INTRODUCTION

Bill 39: An Act to Amend the Post-Secondary Education Act (Bill 39) was first introduced by the Department of Education, Culture and Employment on November 24, 2021, and then referred to the Standing Committee on Social Development for review.

The Department proposed changes to the Northwest Territories' Post-Secondary Education Act that would add details on quality assurance review, correct errors, and ensure alignment with the implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. Bill 39 proposes changes to:

  • Remove a pre-condition to being recognized as an Indigenous institution;
  • Allow for the charging of fees and costs related to applications and quality assurance review processes;
  • Require a quality assurance review of an application for registration as a private training institution and for a renewal of that registration;
  • Clarify the role of a Post-Secondary Education Advisory Committee;
  • Give the Minister additional powers concerning the establishment of a committee and standards a committee must follow;
  • Allow for regulations to prescribe the quality assurance body to which a particular type of application is referred and to prescribe matters relating to that referral;
  • Allow the Minister to order a refund of tuition fees on suspension or revocation of an authorization;
  • Require specific Boards or other governing bodies to establish quality assurance processes for programs of study offered by an institution; and,
  • Improve the use of consistent language throughout the Act.

The proposed amendments focus on addressing gaps and inconsistencies as identified by the Department when drafting the regulations required for implementing the PSE Act. The Act received assent in August 2019 and is not yet in force.

The main changes proposed by the Standing Committee include:

  1. Narrowing the powers of Post-Secondary Education Advisory Committees to quality assurance matters.
  2. Requiring a minimum of half of the members to Post-Secondary Education Advisory Committees to be Indigenous.
  3. Increasing consistency within the legislation.

The Standing Committee wishes to thank all those who participated.

WHAT WE HEARD

The Standing Committee held a public engagement period from December 22, 2021, to February 4, 2022, and a public hearing in Yellowknife on March 24, 2022.

The Standing Committee received written submissions from Aurora College, the City of Yellowknife, and the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of the Northwest Territories.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would now like to pass the reading of the report to the MLA for Great Slave. Thank you.

Committee Report 28-19(2): Standing Committee on Social Development Report on the Review of Bill 39: An Act to Amend the Post-Secondary Education Act
Reports Of Standing And Special Committees

Page 4175

The Speaker

The Speaker Frederick Blake Jr.

Thank you, Member for Kam Lake. Member for Great Slave.