Floyd Roland

The only changes that would occur in the NWT Act -- and that being under the control of the federal government -- would be following a final agreement signing, that would change things and transfer authorities over. That would amend some of the deliveries. At this point there would be no changes required.

The processes we would undertake following a signing of that agreement, following those discussions and what was agreed to, would potentially change some of our own legislation here in the Northwest Territories as well as those under existing federal control today. Thank you.

The draft AIP that’s been sent out to the aboriginal governments and organizations for their input has been done because the mandates of the chief negotiators have breached. It is up to the governments to decide what the next steps are and we’re in that process of making those decisions, waiting for the input of the aboriginal organizations and governments for their response to the chief negotiators’ letters. We’ll have to decide what the process is going forward from there, and when it comes to some of the issues that I believe are outstanding are ones that I believe would be identified...

The process that we’ve gone down, in fact, on the basis of the AIP started off fundamentally in 2001, has worked through, in fact, in the 15th Assembly, four groups signed on with the government-of-the-day to forward that draft on to Canada and the Sahtu was included in that signing at that time. We, in the 16th Assembly, had halted the process to start the regional leaders table to try to build a more common approach, and when the re-engagement happened with the federal government, there was a number of technical sessions and negotiations that were involved at the regional level process and...

Mr. Speaker, at the chance of being chastised by Members for going ahead without putting the plan before them and coming up with a funding source, that would be difficult. My preference is to wait for committees to respond and give us suggestions on our business plan process and we can go forward on that basis. Thank you.

We do, indeed, want to receive feedback from the constituents of the Northwest Territories on our program delivery, whether it be medical travel, student financial assistance, transportation, licensing and so on. There are so many areas we are involved in that, it is difficult to keep the pulse on all of it all the time. That’s why it’s important that we look at how we deliver that program or the many programs we’re involved with, and that is why, through our Strategic Initiative committee Refocusing Government, we’ve started a program so far, as well as Public Works and the Minister of...

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. That does get into the AIP itself. We’re waiting for the response from the chief negotiators’ letter that went to the aboriginal governments and their representatives to provide a response that would see them continue in those discussions. As I was saying earlier, there is a process in that agreement that has bilaterals, and that subject matter would be discussed through those processes.

The process, the questions that were raised in there at one time or another have been discussed and some of these are the fact that they will fall into the bilateral discussions we will have government to government between the GNWT and aboriginal governments. So that’s the process that it would fall under and it would be addressed through that manner. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I move, seconded by the honourable Member for Deh Cho, that Bill 12, An Act to Amend the Liquor Act, be read for the second time.

This bill amends the Liquor Act to add a provision authorizing an inspector or a peace officer to seize and remove anything referred to in a warrant for the search of a dwelling-house. The use of force will not be permitted in searching a dwelling-house unless specifically authorized in the warrant. Minor amendments are also made to ensure consistency of terminology.

Once again, we are awaiting the response from the chief negotiators’ letter to the regional governments, aboriginal governments and organizations to seek their continued involvement in the final phase of negotiations. At that point there will be a decision as to whether there’s a go forward. So this is all hypothetical about what may or may not happen. We’re waiting and we’re honouring the process and waiting for the response of the regional organizations and governments. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker. There has been no decision on our part to exclude anyone. In fact, the process that we’ve entered into through the regional leaders table is to set up a regional leaders table specifically. So the Sahtu has been included. We don’t go to the Sahtu to say how they then work from the region down to their community levels, like we don’t do with the Gwich’in or the Inuvialuit or the Dehcho or any of the groups. We worked at that table to have the regional leaders bring their issues to the table.

This agreement that is out there has been worked on since 2001. We realize that...