Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Frame Lake.

Merci, Monsieur le President. My questions are for the Minister of Environment and Climate Change on the environmental guideline for contaminated site remediation. I mentioned in my statement that there's no specific legislative authority sited in the document. The most logical would be the Environmental Protection Act. But can the Minister tell us whether this guideline is intended to be legally binding and enforceable? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Member for Frame Lake. Minister responsible for Environment and Climate Change.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the guidelines has existed in the NWT since 2003 and has now been updated. The guidelines is one of the many tools under the Environmental Protection Act that is administered by ECC. The guideline describes the general contaminant sites remediation process. Although not legally binding, it sets soil, surface water, and groundwater quality standards for the site remediation to act in compliance with the Environmental Protection Act. Most of the contaminant sites that the guidelines apply to occur on private lands within communities. And in these cases, environment and climate change officers can direct or order remediation of contaminated sites to the standards specified in the guidelines. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Merci, Monsieur le President. I want to thank the Minister for that. It might be helpful to actually amend the document to cite the Environmental Protection Act. But I also wonder whether this guideline will apply to privately-owned lands or a contaminated site might be located even if the contamination has not escaped the site. So can the Minister tell us whether this guideline will apply to privately-owned lands and how? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. The Environmental Protection Act and this guideline applies to the whole of the Northwest Territories, including privately-owned land.

Environment and climate change officers, under the authority of the Environmental Protection Act, can direct or order the remediation of contaminated sites even if the contaminants had not escaped the site. The land use permits, and water licenses issued under the authority of the Water Act or the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, boards can choose to apply the guidelines or select their own standards. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Merci, Monsieur le President. I want to thank the Minister for that because I know one site, in Yellowknife, I'm going to direct his way, probably right at the end of this day. In my statement, though, I also said that the only mention of the public in this document is as a recipient of some sort of vague notice that a site is found to be contaminated. There's no role for the public in the remediation process, nothing about whether any of the information or decisions are public. So can the Minister explain this failure to include any role for the public in the remediation process as set out in the document? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, as I mentioned previously -- or mentioned before, most of the contaminant sites that this guideline applies to occur on private lands within the communities. The site remediation process is primarily between the owner of the residence or business and the environment and climate change officer. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Minister. Final supplementary. Member for Frame Lake.

Merci, Monsieur le President. I want to thank the Minister for that. Sometimes neighbours want to know what's happening next door, and this doesn't provide any mechanism for that to happen. But the site closure section of this document is particularly troubling. It would enable GNWT to accept contaminated sites where there could be residual environmental liabilities without any financial security and could allow GNWT to accept sites requiring perpetual care at taxpayers' expense. So can the Minister explain why this guideline would allow GNWT to accept financial liabilities and perpetual care at public costs without any public disclosure? Mahsi, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Yellowknife North.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. As I mentioned earlier when I asked the Premier some questions about progress on land claims in the spring, there was some perhaps minor optimism that she would sign a document in the life of this government. I'm just hoping the Premier can update this House whether there will be any signatures in the life of our government. Thank you.

Thank you, Member for Yellowknife North. Madam Premier.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I'm glad the MLA's hopeful. I'm hopeful. We've got an extra month, but I'll see. If not in this government, early in the next government. We have a couple that are on the -- really close. One final self-government agreement is out for section 35 consultation, the Norman Wells agreement. Pending the outcome of that consultation, it could move to the ratification process. I'm hopeful that that'll be probably the soonest one. One reconciliation progress agreement is out for section 35 consultation, the K'atlodeeche First Nation. Pending the outcome of that consultation, it could move to the final agreement negotiation stage. And two final transboundary land and resource agreements are on the verge of starting the ratification processes - the Athabasca Denesuline and the Ghotelnene K'odtineh Dene. Pending the outcome of the ratification, these deals could be finalized. So we're hopeful, Mr. Speaker. But it's not really good to count on hope. If not by the end of this government, then my projection would be really early in the next government. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. You know, that's a slightly different list than I heard before, that we had Norman Wells self-government. We had the two transboundary; I was aware of those. There was the KFN reconciliation agreement there and hopefully leading to a treaty land entitlement. I understand that is largely federal negotiations. But there was no mention of the Akaitcho AIP which last time I asked this question was out for consultation. Does the Premier have an update on whether the Akaitcho agreement-in-principle is still on track? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I would say it's still on track. We had agreed on a draft agreement-in-principle in the fall of 2020. We thought it was going to go out to consultation. The Akaitcho has asked to hold off a while on that one. They want to do some internal review of that as well. So one step forward, one step backwards, that's the way of negotiations. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Speaker. I don't usually ask open-ended questions because -- you know, but it's the end of the Assembly, and I'm just wondering if the Premier has any sort of reflection or a lessons learned, or perhaps that is something the negotiators are doing, about, you know, how we could perhaps speed up some of our negotiations. We have over 17 tables and, you know, to get something signed in four years is, I think, a disappointment. Is there any sort of reflecting occurring either by the Premier or within the department to look how we could speed some of these tables up? Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I love open-ended questions; I can just answer them wherever I want. The reality is is that, Mr. Speaker, if I was to reflect back, there is -- advice to the next government would be always be flexible, always be open minded, truly hear what people are saying, not just what they speak but what they mean by that. Negotiations take decades is something I've realized. So, you know, I'd like to take credit for all the work. I'd like to be envious a little bit of the next government being able to sign some of these really early on. But the reality is is they take decades; there's three parties that have to come to agreements.

I think the biggest thing that I reflect on in this government's work, though, Mr. Speaker, is that we listened. When I first got elected as Premier and took on the file, I talked to the Indigenous governments. They said there was two things that were really -- and the MLAs -- that were really obstacles. One was the core principles and objectives. Many of the Indigenous governments had problems with that, standards that the GNWT in fairness couldn't even meet ourselves. After many discussions with our own departments, we took that off. And so that will forward negotiations.

And the biggest thing, Members at the beginning asked me what is the negotiating mandate not realizing that it's not one mandate just to get some settled, it's negotiating mandates. Every area has a mandate. So I think I was challenged, correct me if I'm wrong, but by Members in the House to publicize them. So, again, I took it to the department and asked them and reflected on it and after many, many discussions, we published them. And, you know what, Mr. Speaker, we never heard a lot of flack from the Indigenous governments. I think that by publishing the core mandates of the negotiating process and taking off standards that no one else could expect to meet will be -- serve us well going forward in all future land claim and self-government agreements. That's my reflection. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you, Minister. Oral questions. Member for Kam Lake.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, my questions today are in regards to the homelessness strategy A Way Home. The homelessness strategy was tabled earlier this year and my first question that I'd like to gain some perspective on is who is ultimately responsible for homelessness and the homelessness strategy within our government? Thank you.

Thank you, Member for Kam Lake. Minister responsible for Homelessness.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Who's -- there was a couple questions. Who is responsible for homelessness, and who is responsible for the strategy within our government?

Many factors impact homelessness, Mr. Speaker. I think all of society has to look at that and how we treat people, how we give opportunities to people, because I think we all have a role in that to look at. I think that government departments, each department, we have a Minister responsible for Housing. She's responsible to make sure that we have houses on the ground. But we have a justice Minister here. We have an education Minister. We have a health Minister. We have ITI. We have -- all Ministers have to take ownership and look at what they can do within their departments to address housing and homelessness specifically.

As for the homelessness strategy, Mr. Speaker, the MLA's right. We waited five years for that strategy, and there was no way I was going to leave this government without one. It's where my passion, my heart is as well. So the homelessness strategy has now been taken in under the Premier's portfolio under Executive and Indigenous Affairs. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I'm wondering if the intent is for this strategy, in the life of this strategy as it works through all of the deliverables, will remain with the Premier's office or if the intent is to eventually shift it to housing or into department land, or is that going to be seen moving forward as almost like a new unit that then lives within EIA? Thank you.