Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I want to thank the witnesses.
Of course, I'm going to preface my statement by saying that I think it's incumbent upon the Crown to consult, then legislate, and then look at a transition period.
I am not a lawyer, but my understanding from Ms. Mandell's testimony the other day was that she actually talked about the existence of aboriginal right or title, so there is a question around aboriginal right, and many would argue that this particular piece of legislation has the potential to infringe on aboriginal rights.
I have two questions around that. Again, I'm not a lawyer; I'm sure you know this legislation far better than I do, but my understanding is that there's actually an ability for the government to put a question to the Supreme Court about whether or not it has a duty to consult--I think it's section 55 of some piece of legislation--so there's that question about why in this particular case, in which it seems there's confusion about whether there's a duty to consult, we would not put that question to the Supreme Court for clarification before developing legislation.
Second, it seems there is some jurisdictional question here. Are you in effect saying that first nations do not have jurisdiction over human rights and therefore the government must step in?