Thank you, Chair.
I'm just wondering about.... Even if the second “consent” word was changed to “agreement”, the impact of this amendment, if it were passed.... We're talking about differentiations right now, with “jurisdiction” in clause 6 and then “agreement” in clause 21.
While I appreciate your feedback about the importance of outlining it in the “Jurisdiction” section, when we're talking about clause 21 and “agreement”.... This is feedback similar to what I've shared about how important it is that first nations are finally given the legal platform to have their voices heard on these kinds of things. This is because, while I appreciate the first “consent”—that the minister has obtained the free, prior and informed consent—of first nations governing bodies, I'm a bit more concerned about the governments of the provinces and territories.
You mentioned earlier, for example, that the agreed-upon approach could be used by way of letters. Would that be a strong enough indication to show that the first nations governing bodies will have the interpretation that these agreements will use their voice and that their first nations laws or their first nations law-making powers will be able to be incorporated in the section on agreements?
I'm sorry. It's not on agreements. What is this section? Am I missing a page? No, I'm not.
I'm sorry. It's the protection zones.