Again, just to reiterate, I think it's about recognition. It does flow back to the recognition of the jurisdiction. Over 633 first nations governments, all working to rebuild their nations, are coming out from a legacy of disconnection and internal conflict and divide, perpetrated in large part by children being taken from their homes and not having the opportunity to spend time with grandparents out on the land, with the environment. I think it's incumbent on us, in the spirit of reconciliation, in the spirit of the residential school effects, to move back to full inclusion and involvement.
To reiterate the suggestion we made on the point that you're asking about, we have examples of first nations who have implemented their own governance tools to protect such knowledge and to establish processes or protocols on how such knowledge can be accessed or used. We would suggest that this is a way to recognize, and embrace and involve, and respect the protocols of not only the knowledge that first nations hold but the implementation of the treaties.
We have to remember that we're in an exercise of helping to rebuild families and communities here, with the recognition that governments, through legislation and policy, unleashed tools that divided. We need to recognize, throughout all of our work, that in fact we're supporting the rebuilding of nations and communities. We have to respect the history that we heard the elder articulate here.
So with great respect, I'm just suggesting that there's still a strong link between the jurisdictional recognition aspect.