Absolutely.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak about that, because this does fall within a greater and equally important discussion around the country about the rights of your peoples and their inherent right to do the very basic thing—the trapping of nationhood—which is to govern themselves.
This agreement is not the end of the discussion, nor is it the end of the relationship with Canada. There are many other items to be discussed. I think Councillor Royal alluded to them when he was speaking about some of the historical grievances that will remain after this with respect to their presence in Canada and some of the redress that will need to accrue to them as part of any discussions after the passage of this treaty. This does deal with reserve land and, essentially, its conversion to something that is self-governing outside the Indian Act, but there's an untold and unfinished story that has to be dealt with. That has to be fully fleshed out in the context of the adoption by Canada of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People, which mentions in article 4 not only the right to self-determination but autonomy in how they comport themselves and in the broader principles that are also fleshed out in UNDRIP.
We are about to introduce an action plan, which we have promised as part of the implementation of the act we adopted two years ago. That's coming up very shortly. I think that will be the opportunity to have a much greater discussion on the structure we need to surround these negotiations.
Despite the 13 years of forceful advocacy and negotiation around the negotiating table, these are essentially one-offs. Having a structure around Canada where people can exit the Indian Act in dignity and in a context where they don't have choices imposed on them is extremely important. This is still a structuring, racist document that continues to wield its weight in very predictable and unpredictable ways.
This is one example of compliance and UNDRIP potentially at work, but there will be a lot more work to do with respect to other communities—those under the historical treaties—that, when we work with them on self-government and even discuss modern treaties, are very reticent because they have seen their relationships breached since the signing of those historical treaties. They ask those to be honoured before we start proceeding to the next point, which is the modern treaty.
The overlay of the Indian Act is an extremely heavy weight that weighs on all these discussions. It will be the subject of more discussions and conversations—respectful ones, hopefully, outside the courtroom—on how we essentially do a very basic thing in human nature, which is govern our relationships with each other from positions of equals, which has not been the case in the past.
I see this as an example, but it is an example that has persevered despite everything that's existed in Canada to prevent the success. I think it is a testament to the leadership of this community that they've been able to do so.
