I would say the comprehensive claims policy does need to be replaced with something that is co-developed with first nations on an equal footing. I think the process needs to be guided by both parties equally. It doesn't need to be dictated by one party to another, whereby if you want to see redress for your lands, this is the process you have to use. Instead, I think the process needs to be negotiated fully as equal partners.
I think the cede and surrender clause is a significant issue with comprehensive land claims. I know that with my own community, when we signed the global settlement, that was a big, divisive issue for the community. There were a lot of ambiguities around that clause.
I think another issue with those claims is not being able to pursue further claims after the claim is settled. I can't remember the exact clause itself. If something comes up later on and you find out and want to pursue that claim, you can't if it's related to that original claim. I think that's also an issue.
It's just an outdated process. We've been using the same comprehensive claims process now since the James Bay agreement. I think it's time to update it.