Kevin O'Reilly

Kevin O'Reilly
Frame Lake

Statements in Debates

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 87)

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I understand that this is going to be dealt with by regulation, what a notice of intended work is going to look like, but we are talking about a requirement that it actually be disclosed on a public registry after the Minister negotiates some kind of an arrangement through a regulation to protect business interests. This is about encouraging good working relationships, good neighbours, and avoiding land use conflicts. I am trying to understand what the problem is in saying that that should be part of the public registry now. Thanks, Mr. Chair.

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 87)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I would request a recorded vote, and I will be better at it next time when I ask for that. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 87)

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I am still confused. Can I ask the law clerk who determines whether this other arrangement is satisfactory and what happens if there is a dispute? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 87)

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I support this motion. I have made statements in the House already about Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and how I believe our government should adopt this as a number of other governments around the world have. I have made statements in the House about how some of the mining companies that operate here have already accepted this initiative and the kind of reporting that would be required.

The federal government already has in place something called the Extractive Sector Transparency Measures Act. The problem with that act is that it is based on self-reporting...

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 87)

Thanks, Mr. Chair. This is going to be a long evening. Sorry for that. I haven't heard a commitment out of the Minister to actually make this fiscal regime review that he has talked about actually open to the public. He talks about how he is willing to make sure that the regulations that are developed in the future are going to be open to the public but not the fiscal regime review.

I have also heard some arguments that this somehow is ridiculous that this kind of disclosure might be required and that payments to Indigenous governments might have to get disclosed or something. Actually, the...

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 87)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I know that is a mouthful. The drafting of this motion is to say that there are two sets of rules that apply, one inside a zone and one outside of a zone. The way this had been drafted, it looked like, to me, that there was the potential for two sets of rules to apply within a zone: the special rules established by the regulation setting up the zone and then the general regulations established under this act. That is what the purpose of this is. One set of rules, whether you are inside or outside of a zone. When you are inside, you live with the rules that are established...

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 87)

Thanks, Mr. Chair. Well, we are going to deal with this issue. It is contained in the bill. In fact, the Minister has the ability to exclude information, is required to exclude information that could be detrimental to business interests that even go above and beyond what's in the Access to Information and Protection of Privacy Act. The Minister has extensive powers there that go above and beyond what we've already legislated. The Minister has the ability to prescribe what this notice of intended work is going to look like. In fact, good companies already do this. TerraX already does it here...

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 87)

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I move that clause 22 of Bill 34 be amended by adding the following after subclause (7.2):

(7.3) The Minister shall, upon request of a municipality, consider designating an area as a restricted area within which interests in minerals may not be issued for a period of up to one year, if

(a) the Minister considers that the designation is required urgently and for a temporary period;

(b) the area is located within the boundaries of the municipality;

(c) the area contains sufficient municipal infrastructure or public utilities which could be negatively impacted by mineral...

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 87)

Thanks, Mr. Chair. I can support this motion. I raised this issue when the Tlicho Government appeared before committee. Their land rights agreement actually contains provisions for the beginning, at least, of negotiations on a major mining project that is over $50 million in value, and there is a list of benefits, not unlike other ones that we've heard about here tonight, that a company has to at least initiate discussions with the Tlicho Government around. I said, "If the Tlicho Government actually reached an agreement under the Land Rights Agreement, do you think that would satisfy the...

Debates of , 18th Assembly, 3rd Session (day 87)

Thanks, Mr. Chair. So, yes, committee did hear concerns around the impacts of mineral exploration and development within municipal boundaries and where this has led to some issues of land use conflicts, particularly in Inuvik. I am certainly well aware of a number of prominent cases that have been in the media around land use conflicts in Dawson around Placer Mining. Although committee tried to work with the Minister on this to try to find ways to provide notice and opportunities for temporary restrictions linked to municipal interests and purpose within communities boundaries and so on, we...