Yes, on the nature agreement—I think one of the concerns we have with the provincial-federal nature agreement is that there is very limited first nations input into even the drafting of the document. We had heard, I guess through outside means, that there were maybe two or three advisers, potentially, to the work being undertaken, but the draft of the nature agreement as well as any input from those nations related to the barriers we face in terms of protecting the lands are excluded.
Typically what happens within the province, and I guess within the federal government, is that something is drafted and then brought for comment. One of the really important factors that need to be considered is that the nations need to hold the pen. I think we are most experienced with the barriers we face when it comes to the protection of biodiversity and food sovereignty on our own lands. We face the legal mechanisms that are barriers more recently for IPCAs. We were unable and are still unable to get the province to make a commitment to move forward with IPCAs. They're telling us that they have no current policy and that now they're looking at the biodiversity framework as a mechanism, but again, we're excluded from those conversations.
I think what's important is the potential for those nations who have bravely moved forward with their IPCA declarations to include us in those discussions and to include some very key principles that come from all of our perspectives, whether they be from the north or the south. We come from very diverse areas and very diverse ecosystems. Those things need to be considered in the policy documents that are moved forward through both Canada and the province.