That's a good question, and I think it's the $22-trillion question.
We're talking about politicians who are concerned about their constituents' priorities, and indigenous people are not the priority in Canada. It's pretty evident. We have spoken about the return of lands, which includes national parks. I live in a community that is the oldest existing Mohawk community. It was there long before Europeans arrived. We have Oka National Park. The government has stated uncategorically that this piece of land is not part of the discussion for land back.
Our traditional homelands need to be accessible. We need to have a say over what happens on those lands, but we need to have the restoration of a community land base that provides sustainable development and sustainable economic security, and also food security—not just for us humans. We hunt deer and moose, and we fish. Where I'm from, you can't do any of that anymore because so much land has been taken for development.
If the federal government and provincial governments want to chip in together to buy back land that should never have been out of our hands, that is a reconciliation action they could do. However, we are always forced under a racist guide. Where I come from, the neighbouring municipality of Oka sees us as villains and criminals. Villains and criminals exist in and outside the community. We are trying to restore a traditional land base use and a guarantee of that. It would be something you could include in any sort of discussion, but it always goes back to colonial laws. It needs to incorporate indigenous laws and how we take care of the land.
I don't know whether that answers your question.