Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks for the opportunity to offer opening remarks on Bill 29.
I just, first, want to thank the law clerk who assisted with the research, drafting instructions, and legal advice in preparing the bill. I want to also acknowledge the work of the Department of Justice staff who assisted with the drafting of the bill. And I also want to acknowledge the separation of my role on the committee and as sponsor of the bill. I always declared a conflict of interest if the bill was discussed at committee.
Madam Chair, I'm going to take a few minutes to actually go through a number of things. And I realize it's a three clause bill but it's been a while since we've talked about this. So I'd like to talk about why this bill is necessary, what it does, and what it does not do, engagement that was undertaken, and to briefly respond to some concerns that I've heard. At the end, of course, I'll be pleased to try to answer any questions raised by committee. Let's start with why this bill is necessary.
The current mineral and petroleum management legislation and regulations have been interpreted and applied in a manner that does not allow for the sharing of any royalty information with MLAs or Indigenous governments. The only information available to us and the public is in the public accounts and main estimates where combined resource royalties for mining and petroleum development are found on an annual basis. The Minister of Industry, Tourism and Investment initiated a review of the Mining Fiscal Regime in October of 2020. It's hard to see how a meaningful and comprehensive review can take place if more royalty information cannot be shared on a confidential basis with MLAs. Sharing information with Regular MLAs is at the foundation of how our consensus style government works.
So what kind of royalty information might be helpful to know in reviewing the fiscal regime for mining?
The only information on mining royalties held by GNWT is that submitted on an annual royalty return form. It's three pages. I've looked it over. There's information there about mineral production for individual mines and the value of that production, various deductions in the form of allowances and depreciation are recorded and calculated on those forms as well.
In evaluating the performance of the current system and options that could improve or maximize retention of benefits, it would be helpful and perhaps even essential to be able to understand how deductions and allowances are used and what alternatives there may be. All of this can and should be done in a confidential manner to protect business interests just as Regular MLAs get confidential information on issues such as taxation, program changes, or infrastructure. This is how we make informed decisions in our consensus government system.
There are still no publicly available proposals, plan, or schedule to fix this problem. There are still no concrete proposals for mining royalties or even improved public disclosure after four years of this Assembly. Bill 29 is my attempt to address this problem in the least intrusive manner possible by giving the Minister the ability to share royalty information on a confidential basis.
I also thought and believe that if MLAs could get such information on a confidential basis, so should Indigenous governments. They fought very hard to get to the table in terms of co-drafting of legislation and regulations in the last Assembly and that has now been formalized in the recent legislative development protocol and process convention.
What Bill 29 actually does. There are three small, targeted changes to the laws that govern mineral and petroleum rights administration. The language of the bill is modeled after what is already in the mining regulations as of June 1st, 2018, and the Mineral Resources Act passed in 2019. There are already provisions in our legislation for royalty information to be shared within Government of the Northwest Territories for, quote, "use in the development and evaluation of policy for the GNWT." End of quote.
This means that royalty information is already available to be shared with Cabinet and other departments. This was modeled after what Ontario does. This bill would extend that possible sharing of royalty information to include MLAs and Indigenous governments who could receive it at the discretion of the ITI Minister and with conditions to protect its confidentiality. Bill 29 does not provide for any public disclosure of royalty information. It does not require any additional reporting from the resource sector or industry. It does not allow MLAs or Indigenous governments to access any royalty or other confidential information from the private sector that has not already been disclosed to GNWT.
The bill simply gives discretion to the ITI Minister to share royalty information with Regular MLAs and Indigenous governments for the sole purpose of development and evaluation of policy for the GNWT and on a confidential basis. This is not unusual as such information sharing is at the core of consensus government and our new way of working with Indigenous governments.
I started work on this bill in February 2021. Research and drafting took until May when a copy of the bill and a briefing note were provided to Cabinet and Regular MLAs almost four weeks in advance of the May/June sitting. I invited comments and concerns and suggestions for changes. Nothing in writing was received. I acknowledge there was no engagement with Indigenous governments or industry about the bill before its introduction. This is a reflection of the limited resources available to Regular MLAs and the available opportunities to introduce new legislation. At the same time, I was also concerned with the review of the Mining Fiscal Regime continuing without the ability to share royalty information. After the bill was referred to committee, I sent copies of the bill and a briefing note to the members of the Intergovernmental Council and non-IGC Indigenous governments with an offer to engage if there were any questions or concerns. No responses were received.
I had informal meetings and exchanges with some Indigenous government staff and advisors over the summer of 2021. I also offered to meet with the Chamber of Mines. I also met with the ITI Minister to better understand any concerns or issues there as well. I followed up with a further letter to Indigenous governments in July 2023, and I tabled those letters earlier today, but I did not get much feedback.
Standing committee could not reach agreement on how to proceed with the bill. However, standing committee did recommend that the bill should receive further consideration in Committee of the Whole when it reported back on November 23, 2021. What I heard and have seen from those discussions and the submissions on the bill are some of the following:
Concerns that the Private Member's Bill goes outside the Legislative Development Protocol with Indigenous governments. I acknowledge this new way of working together. The minor nature of the changes in the bill and the fact that they don't establish or take away any rights but simply allow information sharing appears to have generally addressed these concerns. There has been some support for the bill as it can enable an informed discussion of royalties and benefit retention. Some have suggested changes to the bill to make the provision of royalty information sharing mandatory. I continue to support discretionary authority for the Minister as the least intrusive method of enabling royalty information sharing while protecting confidentiality.
There is some misunderstanding of the scope, purpose, and nature of these changes proposed in Bill 29. This includes statements on duplication with federal reporting of extractive sector payments, sharing of information beyond royalties with the public or competitors, adding additional reporting by industry, and the timing of the bill with regard to the overall review of the Mining Fiscal Regime.
I have waited four years for the development of mining regulations to get to the point of detailed analysis of royalties, options, and public debate, but we are still not there yet, and time is running out on this Assembly. This bill is an interim step to ensure that there can be a thorough and informed review of mining and other resource royalties. I have concluded that it is still in the public interest to proceed with the bill to allow this work to take place in the next Assembly. This bill simply allows the ITI minister to share resource royalty information on a confidential basis with MLAs and Indigenous governments. Nothing more, and nothing less. No public disclosure, no new reporting or sharing of other information. However, royalty information sharing with protection of confidentiality is consistent with how consensus government already functions and how we work with Indigenous governments. It will also support an informed review of the Mining Fiscal Regime that is already underway and needs to be concluded in the 20th Assembly.
Thanks for the chance to offer opening remarks, and I would be happy to answer any questions or concerns of committee. Mahsi, Madam Chair.