Resource Committee — Department of Labrador & Aboriginal Affairs — 27 March 2001

2001-03-27

Newfoundland and Labrador — Committees

March

27, 2001 RESOURCE

ESTIMATES COMMITTEE

The Committee met at 5:30 p.m. in the House of

Assembly.

CHAIR (Mr. Walsh): Order, please!

Just some housekeeping items before we start. Our

meeting for tomorrow morning, of course, is being held this evening, and our

meeting for 5:00 p.m. tomorrow will have to be rearranged. The minister is out

of the Province on the Queen's business.

I would like to identify myself. I am Jim Walsh, MHA

for Conception Bay East & Bell Island, and Chair of the Committee. I would like

to welcome Minister McLean and his officials, while we do a review of the

Department of Labrador & Aboriginal Affairs. I would ask the minister to

introduce himself and his officials, for the record. Then, I would also ask the

members of the Committee to introduce themselves.

The format we will use will be similar to what we did

in other sessions. We will allow it to be as freewheeling as much as possible.

The government members will probably allow the opposition members of the

Committee to freewheel a little bit, and then we will get into the Estimates;

but if, at any time, a government member would like to participate, just let me

know and we will go back to the five minute-five minute rule.

Minister McLean.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you, Mr. Chair.

It is a pleasure to be here to do the Estimates for

the new Department of Labrador & Aboriginal Affairs. I have with me Sean Dutton,

who is one of the new ADMs that was appointed. Sean will basically handle the

St. John's part of the department that we can get into very shortly. It will be,

for the time being, developed into two sections. One piece of the department

will be functioning out of Goose Bay, and that is where I will be. The minister

and the deputy minister will be up there, and there will also be an ADM position

up there, along with the staff. We do have the land claims negotiating team; we

are not moving out of St. John's because it would have been a huge disruption to

the process that is already well on its way in terms of the Labrador Inuit

Agreement. We are kind of halfway there with the Labrador Innu land claims

process.

Let me just say, because it is a new department, that

the reason for the new department being set up, and set up in the way that it

is, with its main focus in Labrador, is to provide three major themes. One of

those is to ensure that we improve and expedite government programs and services

in Labrador, and the other is to forward and process the land claims in a timely

fashion. I guess perhaps the most important reason why the department was

established was to ensure that we, in Labrador, deal with the major issues that

are confronting us over the next number of years: basically, the development

issues such as Voisey's Bay, the Lower Churchill, forestry, the fishery,

tourism, with the development of the new Trans-Labrador Highway, and many

others. For that reason, the Premier felt that it was necessary for us to create

a greater presence in the area that will show a great deal of development over

the next few years.

I guess one of the things that we needed to deal with

is that we had to try and establish some sort of criteria for a budget for this

particular year because it is totally new; there was nothing there. The Labrador

division of the department established just three years ago only had three

staff. They were: a director, an analyst and a word processor. It was not a real

big budget that was already up there, so we had to do some work to establish the

kinds of positions that we required for the Labrador portion of the department.

We do have, I guess, an organizational chart established that would show

somewhat the type of department that we want to see at the end of the day.

Because we are only in, I guess, the very early stages of the department

structure, these all have to be confirmed, but some of the figures that we will

deal with in these Estimates will identify some of the positions that we have.

Just very briefly, we have basically looked at leaving the land claims

negotiators, and the policy and planning that go with the land claims, here in

St. John's, and we operate on the sixth floor of the tower on the east side.

In the Labrador division, what we anticipate doing is

putting a Labrador Affairs division there which would probably involve about

five staff - that would be analysts and researchers - to aid and abet in

developing the development projects that we are dealing with, such as Voisey's

Bay, the forestry, the fishery, and working cross-departments so that all other

existing departments up there will have kind of a home to look towards when we

are dealing with the kinds of issues we need to deal with up there in terms of

programming and services that we deliver. The other side of that is, because we

have an Aboriginal component as well, because Wally Andersen is the Aboriginal

secretary to the minister, he will be handling the Aboriginal issues, other than

the land claims. There are many social issues and program issues and educational

issues that the Aboriginals have to be dealing with on the ground in Labrador.

He will have a small staff as well, which is probably about three to four

people, made up of researchers, analysts, and secretarial support.

That is the premise on which we base the budget

allocation for this year. As we go through it, I will identify for you. There is

one huge figure in there - I think it is about $2.5 million, or something like

that - which is the native people's agreement and I will explain as we move

through.

Mr. Chair, I will gladly now take questions and try to

answer them.

CHAIR: The floor is open for any questions or

comments you may have. I ask that you identify yourself for the sake of Hansard.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I notice on page 1, Minister, it

talks about the gross expenditure in excess of $7 million, and then related

revenue, a current amount of $3,912,100, almost $4 million. I am assuming that

is federal revenues, is that correct? Where it says: Less: Related Revenue

Current $3,912,100, is that the federal contribution?

MR. McLEAN: If you go to page 55, the Inuit

Agreement, it identifies there a total of $3,320,000. That is the

federal-provincial agreement that is signed and administered by the Province for

supporting the Aboriginal communities.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Is that 100 per cent federal

funding?

MR. McLEAN: No, some pieces of it are 70/30 and

some pieces of it are 90/10. That is why we have to have the administrative

salary in here, because we administer this on behalf of the federal government;

but the split is: for every 70 cents that the federal government puts in, we put

in thirty. It applies differently on a different scale for the different things.

Water and sewer, I think, is 90/10; core funding for the communities is 70/30;

housing is 90/10; and the educational component which is put towards programming

in the native communities is 70/30. There are different splits in the way the

funding is allocated. That is the $3.3 million.

These are long-standing agreements. They have been in

place since 1964. That was the first one. They have been going every year, year

over year. Usually they are five-year agreements, and in 1996 we went back to

three-year agreements because they were supposed to be direct funding agreements

from the federal government to the Labrador Inuit Association, which still has

not happened, so they continue year over year to extend the agreements.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: I notice on the title page, I

guess we will call it, which is the unnumbered page, it says that the department

provides leadership in advancing major economic development opportunities in

Labrador, such as the Voisey's Bay and Lower Churchill projects, among others.

For example, what role would the department play - just to use Voisey's Bay as

an example, and there are some suggestions that talks have begun or are about to

begin, or whatever stage we are at - what role would this department play in

conjunction with, for example, the Department of Mines and Energy or the

Premier's Office or other governmental departments?

Secondly, is the role limited to land claims

discussions and negotiations, or is there more to it than that?

MR. McLEAN: On the first question, we will not be

negotiating. Mines and Energy will be negotiating. What we will be doing in

terms of providing support to the Department of Mines and Energy on information

that they need to have in terms of the implementation of the Land Claims

Agreements, of the Inuit Impacts and Benefits Agreements, the Innu Benefits

Agreements, the whole issue of whether or not the Innu and the Inuit are going

to be reasonable in terms of these developments. We will gauge all of these

things for them and we will meet with all of these different parties on behalf

of Mines and Energy, to be supportive to the negotiations, basically.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: So, your department's role in

conjunction with ongoing discussions that may take place on the Voisey's Bay

agreement would be limited to primarily land claims discussions and

negotiations?

MR. McLEAN: Not necessarily. We will be certainly

dealing with other agencies, with the local communities in Labrador, to keep

them posted and to identify along with them things that they want to see and

things that they deem necessary for us to move forward in terms of the

negotiations. So, we will kind of liaise with a lot of the municipalities in the

development organizations. The Chambers of Commerce, for example, will be on the

ground dealing with those on a very regular basis.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Minister, could you perhaps give

us some indication where we are in these negotiations in terms of land claims

negotiations, like an update, because it is something we know is ongoing and has

been ongoing for awhile, but perhaps can you give us some indication where we

are and what you anticipate in the immediate future?

MR. McLEAN: I can certainly do that. I will do it

individually; I think that is the best thing to do. Take the Labrador Inuit

Agreement, to start with. As we stand today, the negotiations of the initial AIP

which was signed back in 1999 are basically complete. There is a ratification

process that has to take place, and we are in that stage right now where the LIA

have ratified their portion of the land selection process and also they are

working on the self-government process. What the provincial government has to do

now is to ratify, by Cabinet, the land selection process which is nearly

complete. At the time we ratify that and the federal government ratifies that,

then the whole AIP document, along with all of the identifiers with it, the maps

and everything that goes with the land claims within the lease area and also

within the land owned by LIA, which is called LIL lands, that will all be put

out to public scrutiny once the provincial government, the federal government

and LIA all sign it off. That document will then go to the public for

approximately eighteen to twenty-four months of public scrutiny before the final

agreement is put in place and the transition starts in terms of the way the

agreement is going to unfold over the next number of years. That is the LIA

claim. There is a lot of work being done. The self-government piece is well on

its way.

The Innu is a little bit different. The Innu came in

with a proposal that the provincial government totally rejected in terms of land

quantums and those areas, and went back to the Innu to again modify their

submission and bring it back to us, which we have not seen to date. That is

where that is right now. The federal government and the Innu and the provincial

government, to some degree, have kind of set the land claims negotiations aside

for a number of months while we are dealing with the issue of registration of

the two Innu communities, Sheshatshiu and Davis Inlet. That would bring them

under the Indian Act. If we register and bring registration in, they will have

reserve status, which will provide them with federal funding to deal with a lot

of the issues that they currently are mixed in; some provincial, some federal.

It will bring some clarity to it. What they have done is, they have kind of set

the land claims agreement process aside for the time being to deal with those

issues and also to deal with the social problems that we all heard about and we

all understand were they are.

With some success in Sheshatshiu, I must say, we are

starting to deal with the social issues in the community. Davis Inlet is another

situation. We still have kids in the Grace. There is no real agreement with

Davis Inlet to deal with the social issues and the kids on their end. We have

not reached an agreement on that yet.

Most of this is taking place with Health Canada and

our Department of Health and Community Services. We are apprized of this almost

on a daily basis, but they are taking the lead in dealing with the social

issues. Once those things are clarified, and once those things are dealt with,

we will more likely start to reactivate the land claims process again for the

Innu. Whether that is going to be next month or six months down, it is very

difficult to tell because we are dealing with the federal government who are

driving these things. It is very difficult to read sometimes as to which way

they are going to go with this. Of course, leadership is always an issue with

the Innu. They have elections coming up again this year, so we may see some

changes in that.

In relation to the Labrador Metis issues, they have a

claim in to the federal government for assessment for the last four years. There

has not been a decision made on that. It has made it very difficult for us to

try to deal with them, because we do not know whether they are going to be

accepted by the federal government as having a legitimate land claim in their

grasp, or whether or not they are going to be rejected. Then we have to deal

with them as another organization and try to support them in certain other ways.

It has caused us a little bit of difficulty in that.

In the general sense, that is where this whole process

is. As you can probably understand, it is not an easy avenue to deal with. It is

one of the most difficult issues that I have been involved in myself, in trying

to undertake to see resolutions to some of this stuff. It is a very difficult

thing to deal with.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Hypothetically, if there were a

successful conclusion to negotiations on the development of a major project such

as Voisey's Bay, for example, and if land claim agreements are not reached, is

it fair then to say that we have reached an impasse in terms of where we can go,

in terms of major development in Labrador?

MR. McLEAN: That could very well be, but let's

take Voisey's Bay for example. What has happened in the Voisey's Bay issue is

that the Aboriginal groups, the Innu and the Inuit, have kind of said: Look, as

long as we are moving along with the land claims process, we are also

negotiating impact benefits agreements with Voisey's Bay. These are independent

negotiations that are taking place from us altogether. These are directly

between the Aboriginals and Voisey's Bay, but they still want to see the land

claims forces moving forward. If we stopped Voisey's Bay, or stopped the land

claims, and said: Look, we will do nothing with land claims until Voisey's Bay

is done, they would have a great deal of problem with that. They want us to move

forward. As long as they see that, at the end of the day, we will have some

resolution to the land claims, I do not believe there would be a huge

impediment. If we decide that we are not going to negotiate land claims, it may

be a different issue and they may start or decide to use the court system. That

is always possible in that regard, not only for Voisey's Bay but probably for

the Lower Churchill and maybe for forestry operations, which is another big

issue.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: In terms of these land claims

negotiations, presumably there is a separate staff for each negotiation, I

guess.

MR. McLEAN: Yes.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: What are the numbers? How many

numbers of individuals are we -

MR. McLEAN: Right now, there are seven people

involved in the negotiations for the LIA agreement, land claims settlement, and

there are six working on behalf of the Innu. These are individuals who are part

of the planning - they do planning and policy and they also are negotiators, so

the full shop is that number. There are two separate groups, you are right in

terms of being able to separate out because you would never be able to flip back

and forth from one to the other. You would not be able to keep up with what is

happening, because sometimes it moves really quick and other times it slows

down, it comes to a screeching halt. Then you have to focus everything in that

direction again to get everything back on track. So it is not a smooth process

like reading from one page to the next; it is a very up-and-down issue. I think

that is the way we will see it right through to the end.

CHAIR: Any more questions?

Mr. Taylor.

MR. TAYLOR: I have a question. It is related to

the page that is not numbered, I guess. Coming out of Labrador City, Wabush, the

symposium - how long ago was that, a month ago?

MR. McLEAN: Yes, close to it.

MR. TAYLOR: There was, I guess, sort of an

agreement on two fronts. One was the final link, so to speak, in the

Trans-Labrador Highway between Cartwright and Goose Bay. I was wondering if you

could update us on what progress might be made on that front, if any so far, or

since then; I know it has only been a month now. The other one is that there was

an agreement, I think, from most of the groups, when we broke off in our groups

and came back and reported to the whole, that we move ahead on a feasibility

study for the Straits link for the tunnel or whatever. I was wondering if you

might be able to update us on that also.

MR. McLEAN: On phase three, which is the

Cartwright to Goose Bay link of the Trans-Labrador Highway - which we call the

final link, that is right - we are trying to get it as quickly as we can.

I think the one thing that came out of that meeting

and the one thing that we have been pressing all along is to ensure that we do

not slow down the process. Therefore we are seeking funds, as of today and for

the last month or so, to see the environmental process and the routing begin for

phase three. There are a number of reasons why we should do that, and a number

of reasons why we believe that this will be starting very soon. I guess the

latest one is the fact that the Mealy Mountain national park will see a

feasibility study take place probably starting now in the developmental stages

of the committee and that sort of thing. So if we want to see the road developed

from Cartwright to Goose Bay in the routing that we anticipate, it will go

through the park. We have to be prepared to take

part in this Mealy Mountain

national park study, so we have to have our people and our process started prior

to that.

It is a two-year process to see this completed,

because we believe that there is going to be a number of very steep hills that

we are going to have to climb to get through this environmental process on the

routing. Some of those deal with the Aboriginal issues that we have to deal with

as well. Of course, environmentally we have to fight with people who want to see

the park left without any access - highway access, anyway - because there are

those who believe that the park should be left like that and there are others,

and I am one of those, who argued that if we are going to develop a national

park we should have a road through it so we can get more people into it. The

whole point of having a park is so that you can preserve and view. That is the

issue on phase three. We are anticipating that in the next two years the

environmental process will be finished and at the same time we have developed a

proposal for funding of this; $100 million is anticipated, give or take a few

depending on the final routing and that sort of thing. It is being put forward

to the federal government so that once we get the environmental work done in two

years we will be able to start the construction.

On the other piece of the fixed link, there are a

number of things happening in that area in terms of a feasibility study. There

have been a fair number of meetings take place on the feasibility study, and I

think that probably within the next two or three months you will see some

concrete action going forward on that particular issue.

I will say to you, Trev, that after that meeting in

Labrador City, one of the things that the committee that was formed at the end

of that - they are meeting in Sept-Iles on April 20, at which time myself and

Percy Barrett plan to take a trip down there and meet with the Quebec minister

at the same time. It will show another sign of goodwill between the two

provinces; because I have heard, since we had those meetings, from people in

Quebec, that it was the first time they have ever gone to an interprovincial

meeting with Newfoundland and Labrador and really taken

part in it. As Yvonne

has seen and you have seen, they did take

part in this one. Normally they are

just viewing from the outside. We thought that we would keep this in order and

try to encourage them to keep going the way they are going. So this is what we

will be doing over the next couple of months.

CHAIR: I am prepared to call for the Estimates.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Excuse me, Mr. Chairman, could I

ask one more question?

CHAIR: Go right ahead.

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Thank you.

It has to do with the point you made earlier about the

children at the Grace Hospital, children from both Sheshatshiu and Davis Inlet.

Perhaps, Minister, could you give us some update on that? The issue at the time,

of course, when the children arrived in St. John's, it was a very public issue,

and keeping in mind it has been and continues to be a very sensitive one. Since

the children have arrived, it has not had the publicity that certainly it had at

the beginning. Therefore, the question is - obviously your department is very

close to this and I am sure keeps on top of what is happening on a day-to-day

basis. I am wondering, for our benefit, could you give us some update as to how

the treatment regime is working?

MR. McLEAN: I will take it on, and if I make a

mistake she will pick me up on it. There are only children from Davis Inlet at

the Grace. All of the Goose Bay children who were initially assessed and treated

or put through the detox process are all back in either Goose Bay or

Sheshatshiu, or gone elsewhere to seek -

MR. OTTENHEIMER: Weren't there children from the

Grace who are now in Goose Bay?

MR. McLEAN: There are some. Some have checked

themselves out, I understand. There are more for whom we are looking to find a

place to put them. The reason being, the Davis Inlet community wanted them to be

in Goose Bay or somewhere in that area. They cannot take them in Sheshatshiu

because there is no place to take them. The treatment facilities are full with

their own children. We did anticipate moving them back to Goose Bay into a

facility that unfortunately burned down about a week before we had realized that

we would have been able to get this through. The proposal was to try and get

them all out of the Grace by the end of March, because they have gone through

the detox process and they are all now clean, if you want to call it that, and

they are ready for further treatment now, the next stage. I guess there have

been a lot of ongoing discussions, and the Department of Health and Community

Services are basically doing the discussions. We only fit in where there is a

requirement to deal with the leadership and try to facilitate a few things.

Mainly, the Department of Health and Community Services and Health Canada have

taken the lead on many of these issues.

The Davis Inlet situation is a little more difficult

to deal with, it seems, than the Sheshatshiu. Right now, Health Canada has

agreed with the treatment program for Sheshatshiu, for their children, and we

are working along with them now to ensure that program gets off the ground and

gets functioning, because that is what we need in order to eliminate, as much as

we can, the disconnect between the kids and the adults. We have to have that

program in place so that the parents will be a part of this program.

Davis Inlet is going to be a little more difficult.

The Department of Health and Community Services are directly negotiating with

the leadership and dealing with Health Canada to try and come up with a proper

conclusion, a good program that the kids will benefit from, and that is the

underlining thing: we have to ensure that the kids are benefiting from these

programs.

CHAIR: The hon. the Member for Cartwright-L'Anse

au Clair.

MS JONES: I just wanted to make a couple of

comments, Minister.

First of all, I am very pleased to see that there is a

new Department of Labrador and Aboriginal Affairs. This certainly means a lot to

the people in Labrador, as they have been lobbying this for some time through

various administrations. It is important, I guess, for a number of reasons. We

feel, in Labrador today, that there are a number of issues that are being dealt

with at this level of government that quite often do not have the input and the

consultation that they should have in Labrador. We are glad to see that, through

this department, it will now have that and people will be given the opportunity

to have full participation in all aspects of development, both economically and

socially, whether it is dealing with Aboriginal issues and land claims or

whether it is dealing with projects like the Voisey's Bay development.

The only other comment that I would like to make, and

I guess it was brought up here this evening, was with regard to transportation.

In my district in particular, I cannot emphasize enough the importance of

completing the Trans-Labrador Highway network, in particular the

section between

Cartwright and Happy Valley-Goose Bay. I know, Minister, that this is something

that you have highlighted in your department as well as in the Department of

Works, Services and Transportation. While I realize there are a number of needs

in transportation across Labrador, this is no doubt a priority and it is one of

the pieces of infrastructure that will contribute to economic development for

all of the communities in Labrador. I just encourage you to keep plugging away

at it and take whatever steps necessary to see that piece of highway completed.

Thank you.

CHAIR: The Chair will accept the motion to move

the Estimates for the Department of Labrador & Aboriginal Affairs, items 1.1.01.

through and including 2.1.03.

On motion, subheads 1.1.01. through 2.1.03., carried.

On motion, Department of Labrador & Aboriginal

Affairs, total heads, carried.

CHAIR: Minister, thank you very much for your

attendance, and allow me to also wish you well in your endeavors. When one looks

at the department structure, it may not look large but I am one of the ones who

realize that any department of government that intends to be involved in any

activity in Labrador will have to channel their energies through your

department, so indeed you are the front line for some fourteen or fifteen other

departments and I wish you and your officials well in your endeavors.

Thank you.

MR. McLEAN: Thank you very much. I thank Sean for

coming in.

CHAIR: Thank you, Sean.

Before we leave I would like to move the minutes of

this morning's meeting, which includes the names of all those who attended and

those who also appeared, as well as the officials and the minister.

There are three items I would like to highlight. One,

on a motion by Ms Jones, seconded by Mr. Ottenheimer, Mr. Walsh was elected

Chair. On a motion by Ms Jones, seconded by Mr. Taylor, Mr. Ottenheimer was

elected Vice-Chair. The Committee reviewed and approved, without amendment, the

Estimates of the Department of Forest Resources and Agrifoods; and, on a motion

by Mr. Wiseman, seconded by Ms Jones, the Committee adjourned at approximately

10:30 a.m.

On motion, minutes adopted as circulated.

On motion, the Committee adjourned.

Document details

Collection	Newfoundland and Labrador — Committees
Citation	2001-03-27
Type	committee
Volume / chapter	committees_standingcommittees_resource_ga44_2001-03-27_rc-laa_.htm
Language	en
Format	html
Source	PROVINCIAL
Identifier	a4dc5119e1b89e8574bd1bbf2c83ba0a419131ec

Source file is stored in the law ingest library (html).