Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, all I want to do is bring baby Alma home as soon as possible. The Archaeological Sites Act defines an archaeological site as any location where an artifact typically is over 50 years old with no continuous chain of possession. If found, if the Minister maintains that the marked graves of children in an active cemetery are not archaeological artifacts, then why is she invoking this legislation to classify their remains as such? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Member from Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh. Minister of Education, Culture and Employment.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, our current legislation was drafted some time ago. It needs to be updated to reflect human remains, especially unmarked graves and especially in regards to our residential school legacy across Canada.
I can advise the Member, and confirm for this House, that that piece of legislation is due to be updated, and that is work that we are undertaking over the course of this Assembly. It's something that will happen under our Intergovernmental Council protocols because that's a piece of legislation that will be co-drafted, and that work has been jump-started by myself already. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Speaker. If the Minister is creating precedence where remains are over 50 years old can be designated as archaeological artifacts regardless of being marked and located in an active cemetery, does that clarification now extend to all remains in Lakeview Cemetery here in Yellowknife that meets this criteria as well, or is this elective interpretation being applied only to the remains of Indigenous children? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, within the piece of legislation, it is defined as anything that is over 50 years old.
It is my understanding as well, Mr. Speaker, that if a community can confirm for certain that human remains are of a certain person and have a firm belief that it is clear that this -- the remains are of that person, that the Archaeological Sites Act does not apply in that case.
I think it is also important here, Mr. Speaker, in regards to this conversation, the Member has referenced the oath that we all took as Members where we swore to honour and respect all treaties in the territory. And many of our modern treaties in this territory speak to the remains of their members, and also confirm and compel the government to make sure that we are doing engagement and notification of all Indigenous governments, not just in the Northwest Territories but Nunavut as well, given that children from across the Northwest Territories and Nunavut attended residential schools in multiple different areas and not just their traditional territory. So it's really important that we're able to honour those treaties as well. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you, Minister of Education, Culture and Employment. Final supplementary. Member from Tu Nedhe-Wiilideh.
Yeah, thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I have an issue here that, you know, we have a mandate letter from the Premier to the Minister. All we got to do is implement that. And why do we have to wait years to bring baby Alma home? My question is the Minister mandate includes implementation of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, the TRC Calls to Action, and the MMIWG Calls to Justice. How does interfering with residential school investigations into the death of these children align with those commitments? If the Minister cannot even allow such an investigation to proceed into the death of these children, is there any genuine intent to uphold Indigenous rights during her term? Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this is something that is incredibly important to me and something that I definitely intend to uphold. Mr. Speaker, within this legislation -- sorry. Can we come back to this question, Mr. Speaker, please. Thank you.
Thank you, Minister of ECE. Oral questions. Member from Inuvik Boot Lake.
