Thank you, Chair.
Thank you, Minister. I'm going to call you “Minister”, but you can call me Gary, okay?
In your opening comments, you talked about rights, Minister. I'm sure you've been following the committee's work on this bill and much of the discussion around recognition of rights. I think we would all acknowledge that there's a lot riding on the outcome of this bill for a lot of stakeholders who are very interested in this.
A lot of the concerns people have are because of failed relationships in the past. There's a lack of trust. I would say that this bill has tested your government's ability when it comes to some of those relationships. A lot of that is due to communication, or the lack thereof, because that's what builds the trust, if that's a fair comment.
Minister, when we were considering UNDRIP, you were the lead on the government side, and it was the Conservatives who pushed for a definition of “free, prior and informed consent” so there would be clarity in the relationship going forward.
With no definition of consent, we have no clarity. Without clarity, we have a hard time building trust. Without trust, we have a hard time building relationships. I think that's one of the reasons this bill has become so contentious, in fairness. Frankly, Minister, this process has pitted one group of indigenous people against others, and that's frustrating for all of us, I think.
Can you reconcile for me...? In your comments or your answer to one of the other questions, you talked about how there was no need for a duty to consult. Can you clarify for me, maybe, the discrepancy between the need and the desire to consult and maybe how improved communication could have left us in a better place today?