1. CONSULTATION GUIDELINES IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE June 2007

2. GUIDELINES DEVELOPMENT AND ROLE OUT  Policy May 2005  Draft framework for Guidelines released December 2005  Final Framework and first draft guidelines released May 2006  Final guidelines released September 2006  Public information sessions in 4 locations involving 500 participants in September 06

3. GOA IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS  Staff orientation and training August through December 2006  Staff knowledge survey fall 2006  Review of staff requirements and submission on additional resources fall 2006  Documentation requirements clarified  Issues management process established

4. FIRST NATIONS RESPONSE  Varied response across the province by individual FN  Political statement of rejection and request for a model based on a requirement for FN consent prior to development approvals and compensation when development occurs in FN traditional territory  Emergence of “Consultation Fees”

5. FIRST NATIONS PRACTICES  Some FN’s approach consultation as information sharing and opportunity for dialogue with industry  Outcomes sought are mitigation of impacts and opportunity for economic benefits to the FN through direct involvement in the project

6. FIRST NATIONS PRACTICES  Other FN’s are demanding that all development in their traditional territory be subject to their review and approval  Outcomes sought are a model based on consent, FN control of development and compensation paid to the FN by government and industry

7. RESPONSE FROM INDUSTRY  Increased contact by most companies with FN’s  Growing awareness of the requirements of the policy and guidelines on industry  Constant flow of information from industry to government through CAPP and GAG

8. GENERAL INDUSTRY CONCERNS  Consistency of delegation by GOA  Consultation Fees  Role clarity vis-à-vis GOA and EUB  Traditional territories definition and overlap

9. RESPONSE FROM GOA STAFF  Some uncertainty on how to decide when to delegate  Some uncertainty on the, “adequacy of consultation”, decision making process  Uneven levels of knowledge and skill in managing the consultation process

10. GOA STAFF CONCERNS  Work load impact  Legal risk issues  Impact on government’s role as the manager of all public lands in Alberta  Impact on the role of all statutory decision makers

11. All Crown Land Traditional Areas Traditional Use Data Accepted Land Claims Reserve Lands Land Management Decision Making Consultation = Participation in Decision Making Consultation ≠ Control Consultation ≠ Co-management Government Responsibilit y First Nations Responsibilit y

12. FRAMEWORK MEASURES OF SUCCESS  Engagement by all parties in the process  Reduce adverse impacts on rights and traditional uses  Timely review of project specific consultations  Focused review on projects with the highest potential to impact FN’s

13. FRAMEWORK MEASURES OF SUCCESS  Increased access to and use of Traditional Use data in the decision-making process  Information and plain language documents provided to FN’s in a timely manner  Timely response from FN’s  Meaningful engagement of FN’s in planning processes  Impacts are avoided, mitigated or accommodated where appropriate

14. NEXT STEPS  Ongoing issues management  Work with FN’s on “47 Assessments” to clarify when and who to consult  Provide GOA response to the Fees and charges issue  Establish some clear expectations on time lines for the consultation process

15. NEXT STEPS  Modify the guidelines based on the feedback and analysis effective July 1 st 2007  Monitor implementation and review in June 2008  Review Policy 2009