First, in relation to transparency and accountability, we are running into a really interesting problem. We have a very defined constitutional status. We have a very defined relationship with the Government of Canada.
We are up against something that is almost nebulous. It doesn't have a centre. The groups we often end up fighting don't have the same constitutionally protected status that we have. They don't have agreements or recognition of status, but they are somehow in the same catchment for eligibility for procurement, education or other benefits.
Unfortunately, there is a political element to this. Somehow, in the governing of this country, in the relationship between the Crown and Inuit, we have to figure out how to overcome the very real political challenges of the consequence of any government telling somebody or a collective they aren't indigenous, even though it's in the business of doing it every day.
With regard to the recommendations on procurement, we can give a comprehensive list to the committee. First and foremost, we know some of the barriers. Often, the barriers, as I mentioned previously, are in the structure of the procurement opportunity. It almost imagines a successful bidder and excludes any number of factors that are often present in our communities, whether they be scale, lumping together a number of different opportunities into one or the specific requirements of the successful proponent.
We need to be more understanding of the space that first nations, Inuit and Métis businesses are in and ensure that we can unlock their potential without undermining the success of the opportunity itself.