Thank you very much. I have probably about another three minutes left in my time.
With Jordan's principle, and also in clause 9, it discusses the concept surrounding the following:
(e) in order to promote substantive equality between Indigenous children and other children, a jurisdictional dispute must not result in a gap in the child and family services that are provided in relation to Indigenous children.
The federal government is saying that no matter what happens in clause 22, which talks about jurisdiction between provincial laws, indigenous laws and the laws passed by indigenous governments or even federal laws, that at no time should there be a gap—meaning in funding or in the types of services because we're talking not simply about funding but also the quality of the services offered for children.
Do you believe this is enough in this legislation to lay it out? If, for instance, some government decided not to fund indigenous child welfare at the federal level, if there were a different government that said this was not their priority, could you take them to court and obtain redress?
We can talk about it with Natan or Jenny.