Thank you.
To our representatives from Walpole Island, I'm having a difficult time understanding exactly what you're asking for.
Let me ask you this question. There seem to be all kinds of consultative processes inherent in this act. There is NACOSAR; there are other bodies like SARAC. You have emerging groups from industry and environmental groups coming together in frustration, trying to arrive at some kind of consensus.
Let's say one serious consultative process could be struck with aboriginal peoples, environmentalists, industrial interests, academics, and perhaps even labour representatives, representing in large part the interested stakeholders—I'm not trying to reduce aboriginal peoples to stakeholders, so bear with me. It would have more meaningful processes--for example, there wouldn't be a group chaired by an assistant deputy minister of the federal government, which in my view is a conflict. How do you chair a process that makes recommendations to yourself, for example?
Could you accept the notion of having one consultative body, where aboriginal peoples were fully and comprehensively represented, to advise on improving, or advise on these matters?