Thank you, Madam Chair. Again, as I stated, the MLA has pointed out that I am not good at communicating with standing committee. I guess I'll take ownership. I was in the last Cabinet. I thought the same MLA had said that we were better than the last Cabinet, but perhaps not, and did state that the next government has to do better. I do believe, Madam Chair, that we all have to work at being better all the time. So I do think that's a process.

But I also think, Madam Chair, the Member has many times stated about consensus government. Consensus government is not about just getting your way, Madam Chair, in my opinion. Consensus government is about sitting around the table looking for compromises, looking at flexibility. When this was brought forward to myself, as the Minister applicable for this, by committee, we did make a compromise with committee. But I'm hearing now that the Member doesn't like the compromise. And that is consensus government. It's about being flexible. It's about compromising so that all Members' needs will be ideally satisfied. Maybe not get a hundred percent of what you want. But that's the reality of consensus government; we all have a say. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. So this concept of shared agreements comes actually from the BC legislation, the United Nations Declaration there. We had much discussion on that at the working level when we were drafting this bill.

The agreements might come in different forms. Martin Goldney can expand on that later. We don't know yet. We haven't had that experience and that's why we were careful with it as well.

But I do want to say, Madam Chair, that there's many agreements. The MLAs are not always part of every single agreement that the executive branch makes. For example, we make agreements with land claims, self-government agreements that are often not shared with MLAs until later, if ever. We have agreements with the federal government, Madam Chair, that we make. I mean, often the federal government binds us and says we're going to do this with you but you cannot say anything to anyone until we announce it publicly. So this is not a differing aspect of how we work. This has been done with other governments. We're just expanding this to Indigenous governments. We have it already with the federal government. Why should it be any different with the Indigenous governments? Okay, thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate committee's careful consideration of the bill and that there is a strong interest in the future work of the action plan committee to be established. The action plan committee will have important work to do that will further guide the implementation of the United Nations Declaration for Indigenous People. It will help ensure that our laws and policies align with the principles of the declaration. This is a key feature to this legislation and the two other examples from Canada like it.

The action plan committee does not change the fundamental roles of Cabinet and Regular Members. We continue to have process conventions on the sharing of information, committee review of proposed legislation, and the opportunity to review policy changes. None of that changes as a result of the action plan committee meant to provide a place for Indigenous governments and the GNWT to work collaboratively on areas of shared priority.

To speak as plainly as I can, consensus government does not require MLAs to participate directly in the workings of the executive branch. That is why this Assembly elects Ministers from within its ranks to serve as Ministers. And Ministers are then responsible to consider the interests of all residents of the NWT. Indigenous governments do not want to muddy the waters of accountability and do not want to unnecessarily complicate the work of reconciliation. The concern from Indigenous governments is a real one. They are concerned that legislatively requiring MLA participation, even as observers, potentially challenges the hard work of reconciliation and could further complicate the balancing of interest that may be required as the United Nations Declaration for Indigenous Peoples matters are considered. Indigenous governments know that Ministers are accountable to MLAs. But they also know that Ministers must represent and promote the interests of all residents of the Northwest Territories. GNWT officials at intergovernmental meetings are accountable to Ministers.

And Indigenous governments organization officials know that their governments have their own intergovernmental relationship with Ministers as the heads of the executive branch of government. The same responsibilities and obligations are not part of the accountability of Regular MLAs. Their accountability is to their individual constituents. MLAs should and will continue to have oversight of government business, but we do need to keep a distinction between the executive branch and the legislative branch in our intergovernmental work. As stated, Madam Chair, the Indigenous governments and organizations are not in support of this motion and, therefore, Cabinet will not be supporting this motion. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. There is a difference. And, Madam Chair, the Member is right. There is a Regular Member that's invited to the Intergovernmental Council table, and there's a Regular Member that's invited to the Council of Leaders table. Those tables, both the Intergovernmental Council and the Council of Leaders, are the leaders of the governments - GNWT, Indigenous governments, and organizations. They are chiefs, Ministers, Premier, presidents, whatever chair, whatever the title may be. The difference, Madam Chair, is that this is an action plan committee. There may be the occasional leader there if that Indigenous government or organization deems that they need to be there. But the majority of them, my guesstimate, will be officials. And as stated before, and right up to this morning when we asked about it again, it was really clear from the Indigenous governments that doing this will put them in a very challenging position of having to consider bringing their own political leadership to the conversation. They stated very clearly that it might jeopardize the good collaborative working relationship that we have built on this file.

We have taken four years to work on this file, Madam Chair. And to jeopardize it -- and even, Madam Chair, I have to clarify. Even myself, as the Premier, was not at every single meeting. I had faith in my officials to be able to carry the concerns of my own and the government's and the general public forward. So that is the difference. Those two tables that the Member identified are leader tables. This action plan working group might not all be leaders. Thank you, Madam Chair. And there is power imbalance.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Perhaps I wasn't loud enough or clear enough when I started with saying what a Minister should do. A Minister should be making statements in the House about the work they're doing. They should be offering briefings to standing committee. And, in my opinion, they should have an open door whenever a Member has a question or a comment or a concern, they should be available to them. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. There's several methods that the Regular Members can use to determine progress on the action plan committee. In theory, Madam Chair, the Minister that's applicable would actually offer that to standing committee or make a statement in the House. But if that doesn't happen, then the Regular Members have the option to ask questions in the House of the applicable Minister and the applicable standing committee can ask the Minister to present to standing committee either as a technical or as a political one. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Madam Chair. Every one of the motions that were brought forward by the standing committee were brought back to the Indigenous governments. The comment was made that this will be the Premier's legacy. This is not the Premier's legacy. The Premier did not direct this. This was done at the table. The GNWT was one member at the table of the Council of Leaders. This is the Council of Leaders legacy, Madam Chair.

So within that spirit of working together in consensus, every single suggestion was brought forward to the Council of Leaders table. When we brought this motion forward and said, you know, the Regular Members would like to have a say in it, the Council of Leaders pointed out the power imbalances.

Within the act, it does state that the Members will be appointed by Indigenous governments, organizations and the Government of the Northwest Territories. That action plan committee will be taking off, probably in the next government. They can elect to have their officials there. They can elect to be there themselves if they wish to.

Any official that works for the GNWT is well aware that they report directly to the Minister, in this case myself, and they have accountability with that.

When we brought this forward, the officials had concerns, Madam Chair. They talked about the power imbalance. They know that -- they know the structure of the Legislative Assembly. They know that when Members -- Ministers are elected by the Regular Members, they represent all residents of the NWT, but they also know that Regular Members don't necessarily have to represent all members of the -- all residents of the NWT.

In fact, they are mostly reportable to their constituents and often will lobby for their constituents' needs versus all needs although there's some overlap often. So when we brought it forward, they said no, it would put them in a place that they weren't comfortable. If they had to have representation from the Legislative Assembly as the Regular Members, then they would have to consider inviting their leadership and then there couldn't be the frank discussions that happen at that table. So there was a real concern about the power imbalance, about the obligations, about the freedom to speak at will, because often when your Minister or your chief or your leader is there, you don't have the -- you have to be very careful what you say. Thank you, Madam Chair.

I will pass that question to Mr. Goldney. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'd like to start and then pass it to Martin Goldney for additional comments.

The role of the executive -- so within consensus government system, Madam Chair, Regular Members, all of us 19 Members, determine our Cabinet. And the reason we pick Cabinet is so that the Cabinet can take oversight of the government programs, developing legislation, etcetera. What was --