SOMBA K'E/YELLOWKNIFE - MLAs are in the dark about how the territorial government is responding to the National Energy Board (NEB) and this could have long-term implications if the proposed Mackenzie Gas Pipeline goes ahead, says Weledeh MLA Bob Bromley.

The NEB held final argument hearings in Inuvik last week and on Friday, Bromley said he's been hearing about the territorial government's position second-hand.

Last week, proponents gave final arguments to the NEB on the proposed 1,200 km pipeline that would transport natural gas to the south.

Bromley was concerned after hearing the GNWT didn't ask for any conditions on future expansion of the pipeline.

He said a strong socio-economic agreement is needed to ensure development is environmentally and economically sustainable.

Socio-economic agreements recognize the impact of resource development on neighbouring communities, and typically involve guarantees on job creation and opportunities for local businesses.

"We're abdicating our responsibility (as a government) if we don't participate in requesting conditions under which development proceeds so we can respond to the hopes and fears of people for this project," he said.

Bromley said the GNWT has a responsibility to help lay out guidelines for future pipeline expansion.

He said the government's current objectives reflect a "We want as much money as fast as possible" attitude.

"It doesn't respond to the incredible size and magnitude of the project and the likely social, financial, environmental impacts and the mitigations that are required," he said.

The GNWT's response, said Bromley, appears not to have changed since 2007 when the previously elected government signed a watered-down socio-economic agreement. He said this agreement was "absolutely a pitiful document."

"There's no spine in it. There's no guarantees in it and there's very little funding to help with it."

He said the pipeline socio-economic agreement is like night and day compared to those signed with the diamond mines.

Bob McLeod, minister of Industry, Tourism, and Investment, said the territorial government formulated its response to the NEB in February. He said information was shared with the Committee of Economic Development and Infrastructure and MLAs were aware of the GNWT's stance.

"We just reiterated our position (from February) and responding to questions that came up during the National Energy Board hearings," he said of last week's presentation, made by government lawyers.

McLeod said he doesn't share Bromley's concerns.

"There's a difference in opinion in what should be involved (in the territorial government's response). Mr. Bromley had concerns with the socio-economic agreement. Although a pipeline, in my mind, is very different than a diamond mine, he's indicated that the social-economic impact should be similar. The reality is, a pipeline, once it's constructed, would only provide for about 150 jobs or so," he said.

Right now, McLeod said, the GNWT is focusing on transportation and health agreements.

"We still need to negotiate it but the overarching agreement, the principles will be the same," he said.

The territorial government will be releasing a formal response along with the federal government to the Joint Review Panel's 176-recommendation report this summer.

McLeod said MLAs can debate the government's position when the legislative assembly resumes May 11.

Bromley said the in-depth discussion of the GNWT's response isn't likely to happen now.

At this point, Bromley said the best MLAs can hope for is to raise these concerns when the legislative assembly meets in May and hope the ministers responsible take their comments into consideration.

"It won't give us the nitty gritty debate that would benefit the responses of putting them through committees."

He said the wait-and-see approach is "absolutely wrong according to the principles of consensus government."