The outstanding claims that are there, then, for the purposes of looking after the environment.... This is the question, as far as I can wrap my mind around it. Without the delineation of those authorities, without the appropriate governance structures in place, confusion is created, which is why, in the report, we've seen courts getting involved and setting aside permitting, because it's just not clear.
Now, in the judicial decisions to put aside these permits, has that been because of the lack of representation or a lack of consultation with first nations? Has that been the judicial ruling for these, or is it simply because the judge in the case doesn't find enough rules, enough rubrics, around the governance structure, so that they simply put these things aside?