Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I do appreciate the discussion on this and the concerns raised.
I think it's important, of course, to note that there are not many places throughout this bill where free, prior and informed consent is mentioned. This amendment aims to include that. I know that NDP‑40 was withdrawn in favour of this one to ensure that first nations' consent is included.
In terms of the agreement of the provinces and territories, I appreciate the concerns raised; however, I worry that without that agreement right from the get-go, a scenario may arise, as was described, in which perhaps there's a province that is not willing to agree or co-operate. In such a scenario, I think that without this amendment we're going to see this bill tied up in challenges.
We've talked about the fact that we don't know exactly what a protection zone will be. It may include land that is currently governed by the provinces. We've talked about what “connected” means in terms of rivers and how vast that could be. I think we run a real risk of tying this up in battles and challenges without provincial agreement.
Of course, we talked at length off-line about the word “agreement”, Mr. Chair. Although that is not defined explicitly, I think it gives the government some latitude on how they achieve that agreement, and we've seen many examples of the government being able to make agreements with the provinces and territories on a number of their programs and initiatives that they like to boast about. I won't advertise them for them, but they can if they'd like to.
I think that this is the balance we need to ensure so that first nation rights are respected, that the provinces and territories are respected and that we can put this into action and have a tangible effect, rather than just having it challenged over and over again.
I'll end there, Mr. Chair. Thank you.