I assume that you've done your homework, read the first debate, and have some of the concerns that were outlined by previous witnesses.
As my colleague just said, a number of points were brought up by the witnesses and in our speeches, at least on this side in the House. So I'll give you a chance to comment on whether you have any suggested changes to or defence of those particular items.
I don't have my speech here from the debate, but the points I remember were: first, the aboriginal people said there was a total lack of recent consultation on this particular initiative; second, as we heard yesterday from the Law Commission, there should be a derogation clause to make sure that in something so sensitive, rights aren't impugned; third was definitely a longer implementation time period for something so difficult, in order to give people time to adjust; and my last point was an interpretive clause.
If any of my colleagues can think of any other major points.... Also, as sort of a corollary, do you have plans for training and also to provide resources?
Obviously, band councils that aren't used to this could cause all sorts of complaints and court cases against themselves, if they're not properly trained. It would help to train them, and that would be preventive. Second, they'll need some money to go to court and some training in advance so that hopefully they don't have to.
Did we hear any other major complaints from the witnesses? I think those are the major points. If you could respond to those, because I'm sure you're prepared and have heard them.... I think it was pretty universal between members of the opposition and the witnesses that those were areas of concern. I think they're fixable, but I'd be interested in hearing your responses.