Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thanks to all of you for coming here today.
I'm struck by your closing comments that much more has to be done, and I appreciate that. I was also struck, as you went through your presentation, by your acknowledgement that post-secondary education is a result of social policy dating back several decades and is not a matter of law.
What I'm interested in is that the Constitution recognizes that the provinces have responsibility for education, but I don't know that it means education for just K to 12. You've said here today that INAC's position is that post-secondary education is a matter of social policy rather than, in my words, of fulfilling a legal obligation. How does the department justify this position? What options has the department brought forward to clarify which government has primary responsibility for supporting first nations post-secondary education?
A subsequent question is this. If the federal government views post-secondary education as a matter of social policy and not of law, and since INAC has the fiduciary responsibility to ensure adequate education for first nations, while recognizing, as you indicated, that first nations are not getting the opportunities or are perhaps failing within the post-secondary education system, my question is, why aren't you reacting—or perhaps why isn't the federal government reacting—in a more aggressive manner?