That would be great.
I want to come back to Mr. Clarke for a moment.
In your testimony you indicated, and I think all committee members would agree, that the best way to address poverty in communities is through economic development. I want to come back to this report from the chamber for a second, because it references a couple of things, and one of them is on page 15: “Infrastructure that will attract business investment”, and they reference a whole bunch of areas, but I want to focus on three: water, housing, and health care.
I know when the aboriginal affairs committee did some travelling in the past and looked at the economic development north of 60, those issues were critical in terms of business investment. So I think there are two pieces to this.
First, you talked about the historical context for many first nations in remote communities, and the reality is that first nations were forced onto some of those lands through a reserve system that didn't meet their needs. That's a bit of an historical context for some first nations. Secondly, there's been resource development on their lands where they receive absolutely no royalties, and Attawapiskat was mentioned. The De Beers piece is an interesting case where first nations are not benefiting from the resource development on what has been their traditional territories. Thirdly, there simply hasn't been the infrastructure investment in housing, water, education, health care, rail lines, whatever it is; there's a whole list of things in this report.
So in your view, to look at economic development in rural and remote communities, particularly with a view to first nations, Métis, and Inuit, what are the two or three critical things you think need to be in place for that to be successful?