Kieron Testart

Thank you, Mr. Chair. What I am trying to seek clarity on is, A, how broad is this, and I think we've learned it's fairly broad; and B, given that, most likely, this will not change from its current form tonight, let's give crystal clear certainty what the government plans to do with this moving forward.

The Minister can say that there are no concerns from industry or investor confidence. We've got correspondence that says this section is very vague. So if he could just put on the public record tonight that this is just codifying what is currently going on in the Northwest Territories and there...

Thank you, Chair. The intention of this motion is to be consistent with other pieces of Territorial legislation. The sole example is the Petroleum Resources Act. This same provision exists there. It allows opportunity for the public to review regulations as they are published and to provide them with an opportunity to comment. This is something that we heard from civil society, from industry, and from Indigenous organizations, as well. I think it is important that we give the public the opportunity to weigh in on these regulations.

As this is a consistent theme that we have heard throughout the...

Thank you. Which part of the subclauses of clause 24 address the prospecting permit instrument? Thank you.

By working with the IGCS and other partners, does the Minister mean a co-drafting of regulations, or merely consulting with the IGCS?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I am keenly interested in some of the rationale that we have heard from the Minister. I would just like to pursue that further. Does the Minister agree that there are sufficient protections included in the act to allow the Minister of the day or the government to prevent the disclosure of information that would be harmful to business interests in the public registry? Thank you.

Just once more for clarity, the Minister will confirm that the government's position on this clause is to continue the practice of best-effort socio-economic agreements moving forward into the regulations? Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Nothing further, Mr. Chair.

Clauses 54 through 110 inclusive approved

Mr. Chair, a point of order. I am looking at the copy of the motion that has been distributed, and the French translation does not seem to match the English translation. There is a subclause 4, and I can read the French if you like, but I believe you have a copy of this motion as well. I believe this motion is out of order as both sections do not match.

My apologies, Mr. Chair, but that did answer my question, and that is what I was looking for.

Let's turn to regulations, then. Again, this is a section that is key for the detail coming out in regulation, and that is why my questions veered into hypothetical territory. I won't do that now, but I think that it is imperative that Indigenous governments have a say on these regulations, so that they can be assured that their perspective, especially in unsigned areas, is reflected in benefit agreement requirements.

We also need to have a role for industry so that industry is comfortable with what is...

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Again, I think that we have heard a commitment from the government that there is going to be this comprehensive financial review of everything that is at play with natural resources, including royalties, including transparency, including reporting.

I have great confidence that the 19th Assembly will be dealing with this issue. I view these recommendations as more of guidance to the next Assembly on what this committee's experience was and to take those lessons on in building that review and ensuring that it addresses the concerns that we have heard and the evidence that we...