AAND Committee Meeting

STANDING COMMITTEE ON ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS AND NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT

COMITÉ PERMANENT DES AFFAIRES AUTOCHTONES ET DU DÉVELOPPEMENT DU GRAND NORD

EVIDENCE

[Recorded by Electronic Apparatus]

Monday, November 17, 1997

• 1543

[Translation]

The Chairman (Mr. Guy Saint-Julien (Abitibi, Lib.)): We are meeting to discuss the future work of the committee pursuant to Standing Order 108(2).

Our first item of business is the report of the Sub-Committee on Agenda and Procedure. We discussed the possibility of travelling to the West, more specifically to Yellowknife. Our clerk has investigated the matter and has come to the conclusion that it would be impossible to make a trip there at the present time. Christine can perhaps explain to you the reasons.

There will be between 4,000 and 5,000 people in Yellowknife at the time we expect to go there. Excuse me, I should have said between 400 and 500 people. If we went there, we would just add to the crowd. Everything is booked solid and it would be impossible for us to find accommodation. I'll let Christine explain it to you.

[English]

The Clerk of the Committee: Yes. It's very busy in Yellowknife at this time of the year. A lot of the industries take advantage of this end of the season to hold their annual general meetings. The Geoscience Forum is meeting there, and the legislature is meeting, so no meeting rooms were available to the committee. It was also extremely difficult to get any sort of agreement from hotels that they could reserve rooms for us when we weren't quite sure how many people were travelling and so on. With the logistics and the very short time period it was just impossible to set up travel at that time.

• 1545

Mr. John Finlay (Oxford, Lib.): And you knew, Mr. Chairman, that Claude and I couldn't go up there ahead of time and build enough igloos to look after us.

Some hon. members: Oh, oh.

Mrs. Nancy Karetak-Lindell (Nunavut, Lib.): There's no snow in Yellowknife.

Mr. John Finlay: There's no snow in Yellowknife. We'd have to cut down some trees.

Mrs. Nancy Karetak-Lindell: You can't make igloos in the tree line.

[Translation]

The Chairman: It's unfortunate because many of us, myself included, would have liked to go there to meet our friends in that part of the country. The opportunity may come up another time.

Are there any other comments? No? Thank you.

Our second item is the work plan for Bill C-6. You will find a draft on the squared sheet of paper with the names of groups possibly appearing as witnesses. You will note that our meetings begin tomorrow on November 11 at 11 o'clock. First of all we'll be hearing from departmental officials and then representatives of the Deh Cho First Nations. On Thursday November 20 we will receive the Gwich'in Tribal Council at 11 o'clock, at 12 o'clock, from Inuvik, the Gwich'in Interim Land Use Planning Board and the Gwich'in Interim Land Use and Water Use Planning Board.

[English]

Mr. John Finlay: Monsieur le président, is that by teleconference or are they going to be here?

[Translation]

The Chairman: It will be a video conference with Inuvik.

[English]

Mr. Derrek Konrad (Prince Albert, Ref.): Excuse me. Would it be possible to mark which ones are in person and which ones are by videoconference so that we would know how this is to be—

[Translation]

The Chairman: On the first sheet you will see the names of the cities of Inuvik and Yellowknife are in bold type, that means that we will have a video conference with them. Any comments?

Mr. Finlay.

[English]

Mr. John Finlay: Mr. Chairman, there are some here, like the Dogrib Treaty 11 and Dene Nation, that say they want to come to Ottawa. I take it, Mr. Chairman, that we simply haven't had time to set those up yet. Is that the point? We have to communicate and—

[Translation]

The Chairman: The committee clerk will give you the explanation.

[English]

The Clerk: You'll see on the chart that when the date is in bold on the right-hand side, that means the group has been confirmed and they are definitely appearing.

The Dogrib are in town now. They're in negotiations with the department. We can have them appear before the committee, but I haven't been able to set up a date yet. The Dene Nation would like to come to Ottawa, but I haven't heard from them exactly what their plans are.

You'll notice that the industry people are scheduled very late in the agenda. The Northwest Territories Chamber of Mines felt much more time was needed to revise its brief to the committee. There were briefing sessions in Yellowknife last week with the first nations and the industry people, so they're working from that information in preparing a revised brief.

• 1550

There are other aboriginal groups contacting my office right now, asking if they can make a presentation. This is the first time I've heard from them. So we're trying to weave them all into the agenda. The work plan is very much a rolling document.

For example, BHP Diamonds said they were ready to make a presentation by videoconference from Yellowknife on November 27. They called this morning to say they would wait until the Chamber of Mines was ready, and they would make a joint presentation on December 4.

[Translation]

The Chairman: I'd like to thank you for the details you've given to us about the various witnesses. Our clerk points out to me that it may perhaps be advisable for us not to wait until the last minute before starting our clause-by-clause study if we wish to conclude before the adjournment of November 12. I prefer to discuss it with you right now to hear your views on the matter.

[English]

Mr. Derrek Konrad: Is there any need to have this done by adjournment? I presume the government wants to get this passed before the Christmas adjournment.

[Translation]

The Chairman: I think so but I cannot give you any confirmation. I'll be honest with you, Mr. Konrad, and with all the committee members. I haven't received any directives on this. In my opinion, committee members can discuss it among themselves. If our study of the bill goes well, I don't see why we shouldn't do so.

Mr. Finlay.

[English]

Mr. John Finlay: I know nothing in particular, in answer to Mr. Konrad's question. I think if it could be done, yes, it would be preferable, but if the chair is not...and I'm not terribly keen on that last week, unless it was Monday or Tuesday or....

[Translation]

The Chairman: We have four weeks left. As chairman, my role is not to put pressure on you but to facilitate a good solution. For the Westerners it would be preferable to have a concrete solution before the adjournment.

Mr. Bachand.

Mr. Claude Bachand (Saint-Jean, BQ): Mr. Chairman, I personally prefer not to wait until the last minute. There's no point in waiting until the eve of December 11 to start our clause-by-clause study of the bill. I'd like to remind the committee that this bill was tabled in the previous Parliament and that it died on the Order Paper. People from the West should be familiar with the ins and outs of this bill. I think it would be appropriate to adopt the bill before the holiday season. If we want to do so, we should set aside the last week for our discussions.

Given that this is an old bill which died on the Order Paper, we would have three weeks to notify witnesses that we want them to appear by December 4. After December 4, if there are no further developments, we will consider that we've gone through all the witnesses and we will keep the last week to draw up the committee's report and have it tabled in the House. That is how I would see us proceeding.

The Chairman: Any other comments?

Mr. Wilfert.

[English]

Mr. Bryon Wilfert (Oak Ridges, Lib.): Mr. Chairman, the last witness, presumably, is December 4. Unless there's something in the presentations that changes us in terms of our course, the last week should be a reasonable timetable for adjournment. We can see what happens, but I think if we strive toward that it would be reasonable given that the cut-off for witnesses is December 4.

• 1555

Mr. Derrek Konrad: I'd just hate to start clause-by-clause until we've heard all of the witnesses; otherwise we're working with incomplete information.

Mr. Bryon Wilfert: So we've agreed that December 4, 1997, is the last day for witnesses, Mr. Chairman?

Mr. Derrek Konrad: I would agree with that.

Mr. Bryon Wilfert: Thank you.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Mr. Bachand has raised a good point, that witnesses should be heard by December 4 at the latest. Do all committee members agree? Anyone against? No dissent. That's fine. Thank you very much.

We will now move on to item 3 on the agenda.

[English]

Mr. Derrek Konrad: Mr. Chairman, will it be made known to the people from the north that December 4, 1997, is the last day—

[Translation]

The Chairman: Pursuant to Mr. Bachand's recommendations, the clerk will send a letter indicating the deadline.

The motion is as follows:

That the Committee adopt the Workplan for the study of Bill C-6, the Mackenzie Valley Resource Management Act, subject to change at the discretion of the Chair.

(The motion is carried)

The Chairman: We will now move on to approval of the committee's budget.

I wanted to indicate to you that under item 5 on the agenda, I have a notice of motion from Mr. Konrad. Is that right, Mr. Konrad?

I don't want to take any one by surprise. Agenda item number 5 will therefore contain a paragraph (a), namely Mr. Konrad's motion:

That the Minister of Indian Affairs and Northern Development appear before the Committee to discuss the main estimates for the Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development, before the 20th of November 1997.

We will discuss this when we come to item 5.

Do you all have your information sheet on the budget?

The total for the committee comes to $154,500, distributed as follows: Reports, $2,600; Contracts Consulting, $3,000; Advertising, $2,000; Temporary Help, $1,100; Witness Expenses, $130,000; Video Conferences, $10,600; Miscellaneous, $5,200.

We will begin with the budget item Reports. This concerns costs associated with special reports and extra copies of issues for a substantive report on Aboriginal matters, planned for March 1998. This report will also be available on the Internet. We will print 1,000 copies for a cost of approximately $2,610. We have allocated a budget of $2,600 for that purpose.

Any comments? Do you agree?

Mr. Bachand.

Mr. Claude Bachand: I don't know if I am a bit behind. I haven't seen you for two weeks. Last week in fact I was with the First Nations in Quebec City. However, we are now adopting the report and I would like to know how the report was developed. Furthermore, I don't know if there is a French version. The version I have is only in English, but you seemed to be reading a French version.

• 1600

The Chairman: Mr. Bachand, I apologize. It's my mistake.

Mr. Claude Bachand: Unless there is one. I didn't have one.

The Chairman: Yes. You'll be given a copy immediately.

Mr. Claude Bachand: That's fine. Thank you.

The Chairman: Our apologies.

Mr. Claude Bachand: How did you draw up the budget, Mr. Chairman? In the case of Bill C-6, there seems to be a lot of video conferences. Not everyone will be coming here. There will be a few witnesses. You have earmarked $130,000 for witness expenses. Do you have some idea of what legislation we will be dealing with after the holidays? That kind of budget would suggest that we will be working quite hard. Is this just an approximate budget or do you know already what the legislative agenda will be after the holidays?

The Chairman: Well as you know, it is an estimate.

Mr. Claude Bachand: A very approximate one?

The Chairman: Yes. It is an estimate based on information from the department, indicating that there are a number of bills coming up. One hundred and thirty thousand dollars has been allocated.

Mr. Claude Bachand: I see.

The Chairman: I was reading a little bit quickly earlier, but I thought that things were going very well.

Mr. Claude Bachand: That's fine.

The Chairman: You've raised some good points. The $154,500 is just an estimate. We may have spent under or over by the end of the year. But on the basis of our clerk's experience and your experience, Mr. Bachand, I think it is a realistic figure. That's why I wanted us to discuss it item by item.

You went directly to item number 6, which contains the largest amount. I can understand why you would want to know the reasons for the allocation of $130,000. I have not received any instructions in this regard, but according to the clerk, there are a number of bills coming up and she has projected a reasonable amount of money to allow us to hear witnesses. I want to be frank with you, Mr. Bachand.

Mr. Claude Bachand: I see. So it is in anticipation of the legislation we will have to deal with.

The Chairman: That's right.

Mr. Claude Bachand: But, as you indicated, the budget is very approximate.

The Chairman: That's correct.

Mr. Claude Bachand: Thank you.

The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Bachand. Any other questions? Will we discuss the budget as a whole or individual items? Mr. Wilfert.

[English]

Mr. Bryon Wilfert: Mr. Chairman, earlier there didn't seem to be any disagreement about the budget in general. When you come back, you have the months of February and March. I presume that when this was put on paper you looked at what the legislative agenda was for the months of February and March and this covers it. It is an estimate, but I presume it was based on some realistic forecasting.

My understanding was that there seemed to be no opposition to the budget as presented. Also, while obviously these figures have been apportioned based on the eight areas indicated, I presume that if there's a shortfall in one area...it could be moved from one to the other.

So I'd be quite happy to move the budget.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Some members of the committee will ask for changes, and I will not be drawing up the budget alone. That is why we are talking about it today. The decision will be taken by committee members as a whole. If we were to need more money later, we could make a supplementary request. On the basis of your past experience, Mr. Bachand, does that seem reasonable?

Mr. Claude Bachand: Yes, I could even support Mr. Wilfert as regards approval of the budget. I do not see any point either in going through it item by item.

The Chairman: That's fine.

Mr. Claude Bachand: We should vote on the budget as a whole, insofar as what you told us is in fact the case, namely that an amount can be transferred from one item to another. If this can be done by March, I don't see any objection to voting on that immediately. I did not want to make a big deal about this. I just wanted to know whether you prepared the budget with a view to the legislative agenda. That seems to be the case. Therefore, I am quite satisfied.

The Chairman: Thank you very much. I am new here.

Mr. Claude Bachand: Yes, but you were here long before me.

The Chairman: Thank you, Mr. Bachand. Ms. Longfield.

[English]

Mrs. Judi Longfield (Whitby—Ajax, Lib.): Actually, I think most of the questions I had were already raised. I'm in agreement with the budget and I think there is an opportunity to move it back and forth. Given that we're only dealing until March 31, it's an appropriate amount.

• 1605

[Translation]

The Chairman: Ms. Karetak-Lindell.

[English]

Mrs. Nancy Karetak-Lindell: I have a question on number 2, that there are no funds for travel. If we were going to go to Yellowknife as planned this week, where would that have come from? Would that then have been taken out of number 6?

The Clerk: When the committee asks for permission to travel, it has to submit a specific budget for that study and have that approved. It comes out of a separate budget; it doesn't come out of this budget.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Thank you very much. Any other questions?

[English]

Thank you very much.

[Translation]

Mr. Konrad.

[English]

Mr. Derrek Konrad: I don't think a budget is a licence to spend; it's a planning document. We're talking about moving money around between various items within a budget. When we present this to Parliament will we be simply presenting the bottom line we would like—$154,500—or do we really think our planning is sufficient and is supportable in all of these areas?

I have a concern when we sort of look...well, there's $154,500, and this is how we might use it. If we have a blanket amount and we sort of shift it around within the budget, willy-nilly, without any rationale, I have a problem with that.

[Translation]

The Chairman: That is why, Mr. Konrad, I said earlier that all committee members might be asked in the future to decide on transferring money from one item to another. What you have before you is an item-by-item breakdown of a realistic budget of $154,500.

Mr. Wilfert.

[English]

Mr. Bryon Wilfert: Mr. Chairman, you've settled my point.

Essentially, you have to have a figure, and within that figure, as we get into the deliberations, there may be a need to shift money. Hopefully, we won't have to spend the whole $154,500, but obviously we have to set a certain amount of money aside. We may find we would need more dollars in temporary help and less in advertising. Who knows? But that will be something the committee will have to decide on as the work plan is developed, and we may find that in fact the needs may be more crystallized as we get into the process.

Mr. Derrek Konrad: My question, though, is this. Is it still a total we're giving?

[Translation]

The Chairman: That's right. Mr. Konrad would not want to have to go to the House to ask for $154,500 without explaining the details of the budget. In any event, it will be tabled with the other committee.

[English]

The Clerk: Once the committee has approved the budget, it goes to the budget subcommittee of the liaison committee—that's the subcommittee chaired by Mr. Graham—and they review. Now, all the committees are sending in their budgets until the end of the fiscal year. They look at all of the items and generally agree if it seems reasonable.

I think this is within the boundaries, particularly with the witnesses' expenses. That's the large item, but when you see that at least 15 of these groups will need expenses of some kind, it adds up very quickly.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Any further comments? Can we consider it as adopted? The motion is as follows:

That the Committee adopt the budget for the remainder of the fiscal year ending March 31, 1998, in the amount of $154,500.

(The motion is carried)

The Chairman: We move now to the fourth item on the agenda: the Minister's appearance. Mr. Finlay, please proceed.

• 1610

[English]

Mr. John Finlay: I only question the date, Mr. Chairman. Is it before November 20? I don't know whether we've asked the minister or not, but....

[Translation]

The Chairman: Mr. Bachand.

Mr. Claude Bachand: Could we ask Mr. Konrad to explain to us the rationale for his motion. Why would it be before the 20th? It will soon be the 20th; this week I think.

Therefore, perhaps Mr. Konrad could explain to us why he wants the Minister to appear before the 20th. There must be an explanation.

The Chairman: Mr. Konrad.

[English]

Mr. Derrek Konrad: Mr. Chairman, there's no use if the minister doesn't appear by then, because the estimates are deemed adopted anyway. There is then no purpose in asking because nothing can be changed. We can't move any amendments, or even suggest any.

[Translation]

Mr. Claude Bachand: I have confidence in Mr. Konrad. Is it the case that after November 20, the budget for every department is sent to committees? Is that the case? Is it to meet these deadlines?

The Clerk: Yes. The deadline for adopting the Main Estimates has not yet been announced. That is still a mystery. If you have any new information about

[English]

the seventh day, which is opposition day.

Mr. Derrek Konrad: We understood November 20 was about the third day before that seventh opposition supply day.

[Translation]

The Chairman: The seventh opposition day for whom?

[English]

Mr. Derrek Konrad: We would like to have the minister in.

The Chairman: Mr. Wilfert.

Mr. Bryon Wilfert: Mr. Chairman, if I read the motion correctly, the minister would have to be here tomorrow. That's unlikely. If we're not sure that this date is November 20, Mr. Konrad, I presume you could change the motion to “as soon as possible”, obviously before the fixed date of the estimates has been established. Otherwise, this won't be communicated to her until tomorrow morning, and I don't think we'll see her tomorrow morning. Also, keep in mind that we've adopted a work plan that may require a special sitting in order to meet with the minister to go over those estimates, especially given the fact that we also have a work plan that looks fairly heavy.

So I would certainly support a motion that would ask her to appear as soon as possible, but given the concern with regard to the date of the estimates, let's see when she is available. If it requires a special meeting of the committee at the call of the chair, then presumably it can be arranged.

Mr. Derrek Konrad: Are you suggesting that the minister appear prior to the last, before the seventh?

Mr. Bryon Wilfert: Yes, and I believe that's your intent.

Mr. Derrek Konrad: Yes, and if that means right away, I guess you would support that.

Mr. Bryon Wilfert: I would support that, and I would also say that if the chair has to call a special meeting to accommodate it, that's fair enough.

Mr. Derrek Konrad: Okay, I could live with that. It gives the intent of my motion.

• 1615

[Translation]

The Chairman: We don't know the Minister's schedule for this week, but the clerk indicated to me that at 3:30 p.m. on the 26th we will be examining the Estimates and the Minister will be here then.

[English]

The Clerk: Originally the committee passed a motion, I believe, that the minister be invited to appear on or before the 25th. I put that request to the minister's office and the reply was that she was available on the 26th. Her schedule was so tight it was the first date on which she could make it. So as it stands now, the minister is due to come in on the 26th unless the date for main estimates is over.

[Translation]

The Chairman: I didn't know what the answer was, but the clerk did her work following our request.

Mr. Wilfert.

[English]

Mr. Bryon Wilfert: Mr. Chairman, again following up on Mr. Konrad's original motion of what I was suggesting he might move, which I would second, the 26th is fine if it addresses the issue of the main estimates. If the main estimates for the department are before the 26th, then it's rather redundant, because obviously, if the minister is here on the 26th.... The intent of Mr. Konrad's motion is to have her attend before the estimates are heard.

I would therefore ask the clerk, through you, Mr. Chairman, to find out from the minister's office what that date is and whether or not that date will meet the intent of the motion, if the motion passes.

Mr. Derrek Konrad: With all due respect to the minister, our concern here isn't to accommodate her schedule, as tight as it may be, but to discuss the main estimates. I think Bryon Wilfert and myself are in agreement that it would be pointless to have her in to discuss them if they're passed. My information is that the seventh supply day has been called as of the 24th.

The Chairman: Mr. Wilfert.

Mr. Bryon Wilfert: I'd say pass the motion, and as an adjunct to the motion you're requesting to find out what the date is in order to know whether or not the 26th is going to be feasible in terms of what we're asking for if in fact she's not available until the 26th anyway. In any event, I think it should be communicated to us when the estimates are going to be confirmed.

The Clerk: Is the 24th the supply date?

Mr. Bryon Wilfert: Again, we're batting numbers around, but we don't really know.

[Translation]

The Chairman: I would like to make a suggestion to you. If the clerk takes the necessary steps, we could have answers by the beginning of tomorrow's meeting. That might be preferable. There will be a meeting tomorrow at 11 a.m. Following the work of the clerk immediately after our meeting we will have a full report before voting on the motion, if Mr. Konrad agrees to waiting until tomorrow.

[English]

Mr. Derrek Konrad: It can wait until tomorrow.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Thank you very much. We will deal with that motion tomorrow.

Any other questions?

[English]

The Clerk: In the adoption of the work plan, where it says “subject to change at the chairman's discretion”, this is simply to start the meeting at 10 o'clock rather than 11 o'clock in order to accommodate the witnesses who are available that day, or perhaps to sit in the afternoon of our normal sitting days, or on a Wednesday afternoon. I am mentioning this so that when a notice comes to you with an unfamiliar time on it, you'll know that it's necessary in order to hear the witnesses within the time.

• 1620

Mr. Bryon Wilfert: Mr. Chairman, just to indicate my own situation, I will start at 9 o'clock tomorrow with HRD and then I will extricate myself at some advantageous moment to run out of here and go over to the Promenade building for the aboriginal meeting. I'm sure others may be in the same situation. In other words, you may have meetings at 10 o'clock or whatever other time, but it would be very difficult for me to get somebody for tomorrow, at the last moment, to come in at 10 a.m., or whenever it might be. I would have to have some advance notice.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Mr. Wilfert, as indicated on the list, it's at 10 a.m. on the 25th, but it is also very possible that it will be at 11 a.m. on November 27 in Yellowknife. That will depend on the availability of the witnesses. They have busy schedules and there is also a question of transportation. Maybe that will happen twice. We will not make a habit of it, Mr. Wilfert. Do you agree?

Thank you very much. No other questions?

[English]

Ms. Louise Hardy (Yukon, NDP): Are the main estimates, which this motion is about, available to us right now?

The Clerk: I believe all the main estimates were sent to members' offices. You should have a copy; it's blue.

[Translation]

The Chairman: Yes, that's right. You were talking about the Blue Book. I see. Thank you very much.

The meeting is adjourned.