Procedures for consultations with indigenous peoples - Experiences from Norway
••
The consultation processes had improved the possibility of the Ministry for Labour
and Inclusion gaining an overview of the various Sami affairs addressed in other ministries and contributing to the discussion and resolution of those cases (Minutes,
30.06.2006).
The parties further agreed to conduct an evaluation of the consultation procedures in 2007.
At the June 2007 meeting, the President of the Sámediggi emphasized that it would attempt
to follow the consultation procedures as faithfully as possible, both with regard to responding quickly on issues, and making its positions clear both orally and in writing, and would
contribute with information on cases and be flexible with regard to when and how cases were
treated at the political level (Minutes, 04.06.2007).
The President also highlighted the positive experience of consultation in the context of the
Planning and Construction Act (Plan- og bygningsloven). He stated that, in this case, the
Sámediggi had access to all information from the beginning, the agreed arrangements for
consultations were followed, the Ministry had a mandate to consider various solutions and
the Sámediggi had access to the comprehensive final document, which was in line with the
proposed bill, with the result that the plenary of the Sámediggi could satisfactorily consider
the proposal (Minutes, 04.06.2007).
The Sámediggi expressed its hope that these positive experiences could constitute a model
to be followed, while a number of negative experiences were also cited. In these other cases,
it noted as follows:
••
The administrative and political leadership of the ministries did not have adequate
scope for undertaking real consultations where different solutions could be explored.
••
The Sámediggi was being given inadequate information and background material in
the consultation process and this, in turn, was creating grounds for mistrust and the
perception that it might be necessary to consider worst case scenarios.
••
Many important cases were being relegated into parallel processes or deferred.
The Ministry of Labour and Social Inclusion reported that there would now be an internal
evaluation of the procedures for consultation within the ministries (Minutes, 04.06.2007).
In 2009, at the biannual meeting in December, parties discussed the structure of the meetings and related routines. The Ministry and the Sámediggi agreed that the biannual meetings
should be better prepared through written submissions in which both parties presented the
cases that they wanted to discuss. That, they believed, should facilitate tangible outcomes of
the consultations (Minutes, 15.12.2009).
At the June 2010 meeting, parties again discussed the experiences gained in implementing the consultation procedures. The minutes record that the parties regarded the agreement on consultations as an important tool in the interaction between the Sámediggi and
the Government. They saw the agreement as an aid to achieving a good dialogue. It was
also underlined, however, that consultation was not everything and the agreement could not
replace all meetings. There was general agreement that the parties should be better at calling
one another by phone beyond the consultations (Minutes, 14.06.2010).
30