Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The line of my questioning is going to relate to aboriginal Canadians, the 1.2 million Canadians who are in the lowest income earning capacity currently. They're the youngest, fastest-growing, highest percentage of incarcerated, lowest-educated population in Canada. Fifty per cent of them make under $10,000 a year in annual income.
The Fraser Institute has put out several publications, and I know it's neither one of your gentlemen's expertise, as far as I'm aware, but I do want to ask you if you see a correlation between resource revenue and wealth for aboriginals. Specifically, because I am from Fort McMurray, what I've seen over the last 30 to 40 years in Fort McMurray is that there is definitely, in my mind, a serious correlation between resource development in our north and riches of aboriginal Canadians.
For instance, Dave Tuccaro, who I've known for about 40 years, I think has been identified as the richest aboriginal in Canada, selling his businesses just recently for over $100 million. I know many others, including many relatives of mine, who have more than $1 million in cash in the bank who are aboriginal Canadians born on reserves and are treaty aboriginals.
But I do also see that there is a great disparity among aboriginal Canadians. What I didn't realize until I researched what the Fraser Institute has looked at is that Inuit Canadians actually make more money on average, more median income per average, than non-aboriginal Canadians, which surprised me somewhat. There is a correlation I think as well with the north's resource development and Inuit. It would support my thesis that resource development is very important to aboriginal Canadians and the wealth transfer to them.
Of the two gentlemen, I know one is appearing individually. But would you two gentlemen from the Fraser Institute agree that resource revenue is very important to the increase in wealth for aboriginal Canadians, who are among the poorest, lowest educated, and highest incarcerated in Canada's population?