Mr. Chair, the majority of these royalties that we’re talking about comes from Dene territory, from the groups that are not party to this agreement, regardless if it’s the Tlicho, the Dehcho, the Sahtu, the Gwich’in, and I for one feel that you cannot take resources out of anybody’s treaty area without their consent. That is exactly what you’re doing here. I think it’s important to realize that we have to basically agree.

I was at the northern leaders’ meeting a couple of weeks ago and it was pretty clear from all of the Aboriginal leaders that spoke there, that if we cannot resolve the devolution process, why are we even talking about a northern vision if we can’t come to finding a way to work that issue out and find a way to go forward. The way we’re moving on this thing is spend $2.8 million, railroad the negotiations into overdrive, get an agreement in a year and, sorry, if you miss the bus, well, we’re taking your royalties anyway. For me, that is not a process that’s fair to the people in the Northwest Territories, especially for the Dene people up and down the Mackenzie Valley.

Mr. Chair, again, we’re spending $2.8 million for a negotiating process that’s not fair,

it’s not inclusive, but more importantly, it will have a long-term political effect on people in the Northwest Territories and especially those areas, those groups that have not signed on. I’d like to know again from this government exactly what are we going to do to ensure that those groups have land claims or land claim settlement areas be excluded from this process.

Again, Mr. Chair, there are land claims agreements in the Northwest Territories. There are three claimant groups that basically have not signed on -- the Gwich’in, the Sahtu, and the Tlicho -- which makes up almost two-thirds of the settlement of the Northwest Territories. I’d like to know, as a government, and I have a letter from one of the former federal Ministers basically making it clear that he would not negotiate provincial-like powers to the Government of the Northwest Territories if there are large parts of the territory who do not want to be included in this process, regardless of who they are, and that, again, can’t happen.

I’d like to know exactly what is this government going to do. Will you consider negotiating with those groups that have signed on and not with those… If you’re not going to have those groups that have not signed on have that opportunity to partake in this process, that you’d exclude those areas from this process and you only negotiate with the Inuvialuit and the Metis.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. In regard to the devolution process, what happens if an Aboriginal group does not want the devolution negotiations to apply to their settlement regions? In regard to the Gwich’in, or the Sahtu, or the Tlicho,

make the unilateral decision at an assembly this summer saying that devolution negotiations will not apply to their settlement regions and you only negotiate the devolution agreements in those areas that the individuals that signed on have to negotiate for those resources in those settlement regions, the Inuvialuit or wherever the Metis settlement region is. I’d like to know what is this government going to do with that scenario.

Again, I mean, for me the way that this thing is set up is you pay the people. You can call it a signing bonus. The people that signed on get a signing bonus. The people that didn’t sign on don’t get anything. The only way that you’re going to get something is you have to sign onto a bad deal. For me that’s exactly what’s being projected here. The funds are based on both individuals who have signed on will get the funding. Those groups that haven’t signed on, sorry, you either sign on in order to get the funding. That’s bribery.

I’d like to ask the Minister why it is that this government is playing with the Aboriginal people’s lands and rights. You talk about all this money that’s going to the people of the Northwest Territories. Well, excuse me, who’s got the poorest health system? Who’s got the lack of infrastructure? It’s Aboriginal communities and not where the government is set up.

Fifty percent of the public funds in the Northwest Territories is spent on this government’s bureaucracy, which doesn’t really work its way down to Aboriginal people and Aboriginal communities. That’s why Aboriginal people don’t trust this government, because of exactly what we’re doing here is the whole reason that they can’t trust us is because we are not being fair. This is a perfect example of how this money is going to be distributed through this $2.8 million and it is not going to benefit Aboriginal people who basically are there to protect their lands and resources at all costs. If that means waiting a little longer, well, let’s wait a little longer.

Again, Mr. Chair, I have to disagree with that notion. I believe that this is a land grab by the Government of the Northwest Territories and the Inuvialuit and the Metis for lands throughout the Northwest Territories on the backs of Dene people and Dene treaties and land claim agreements that clearly stipulate that there are settlement regions in the Northwest Territories. There are regions in the Northwest Territories which are clearly defined in regards to maps, Treaty 8, Treaty 11, which have our historical treaties. But yet, as a government, we seem to be railroading ourselves into a system of taking over a land grab at the expense of Dene people.

I totally disagree with the way this process is going and I think as a government we have an obligation to ensure that we have a workable situation that we get the parties to the table and not go full speed ahead with two groups at the table, which is a minority interest and who do not have anything at stake in regard to those lands in the Gwich’in Settlement Region, the Sahtu Settlement Region, the Tlicho region, the Dehcho or the Akaitcho. I believe that is the issue that we’re missing here, and I see that the majority of the money is going to go to two groups who have everything to gain and nothing to lose, and the Dene people have everything to lose and nothing to gain. To me that is the issue here.

I’d like to know how you can spend $2.8 million and not allow a system to resolve this outstanding roadblock that we’re at by having those dollars invested to getting the parties to the table and getting those issues on the table. If that means putting the devolution agreement aside, we’ll find in those areas that we basically can agree to disagree and work with the federal government to say, look, the agreement is not acceptable to the majority of people in the Northwest Territories, especially the Dene people up and down the valley. You basically find a way to work around that.

What I’m hearing from you is that let’s run a process where we speed up the devolution process. Let’s try to get everything done within the year and forget the people that don’t want to sign on. Whatever agreement we have, well, you can pick up the scraps or crumbs or whatever is left over. We’ll basically allow those groups who don’t

have a stake in the Mackenzie Valley to benefit from royalties and resources throughout the Mackenzie Valley, which they technically don’t have an interest or don’t have a legal leg to stand on when it comes to the distribution of those royalties through the Dene-Metis land claim.

I’d like to clarify if you would re-profile these dollars and establish a fair distribution to allow for all Aboriginal groups in the Northwest Territories to have the means and resources to be full, active members, regardless if it’s on a side table or a table, to find a workable solution to this bypass.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, I believe that the way this money is being allocated is not fair, and also it does not take into consideration that we have a fiduciary obligation under land claims agreements to the Gwich’in, to the Sahtu, to the Tlicho, and their land claim agreements clearly states that they shall be involved in the development of a northern accord or basically what you call devolution. It clearly tells me that we do have an obligation to those organizations, especially in regards to the land claims, regardless if it’s at the negotiating tables or even at a side table, but we do have an obligation to take into consideration of their views, regardless if it's in the written form, or else in regards to the whole overall process of inclusion and not exclusion simply because you didn’t agree to sign a bad deal. I think that that is the issue that’s still out there, and I think from the Aboriginal leadership throughout the Mackenzie Valley and all of the Dene leaders, that is the issue. The issue is that the Dene people cannot agree to the notion that someone else is going to take royalties and resources from Dene lands where they have treaty rights. They have modern day treaties, and Treaty 8, Treaty 11 rights in the Northwest Territories, but they’re being excluded from a process that has been initialled off by groups that do not have an interest in the Mackenzie Valley where those treaty lands and those treaty rights pertain to the Mackenzie Valley.

So I’d like to ask the Minister why is it that you’re identifying a majority of those resources for two groups who do not have an interest by way of lands interests, by ownership, or a land claim agreement, and yet we’re allowing groups that don’t have an interest on negotiating resource revenue sharing throughout the Mackenzie Valley, yet those people do not have an investment in those lands that you are willing to sit down and negotiate away without the Dene at the table?

Is committee agreed?

I’d like to call Committee of the Whole to order. Consideration in Committee of the Whole of bills and other matters: Tabled Document 9-16(6), I’d like to ask what the wish of committee is. Mrs. Groenewegen.