Absolutely. Thank you, Dr. Hanley, for your representation of Yukoners in Ottawa and for that question.
I want to highlight the fact that among Yukon first nations, there are 11 modern treaty holders. We get to create our own citizenship code. Most of those nations have something defined in the citizenship code that looks at your familial ties to a nation. From our Kluane First Nation perspective, you have to tie your ancestry back matrilineally to Kluane First Nation from 1949 and prior. We get to determine those who become citizens of Kluane First Nation, and we provide services to all those citizens.
There are some weird anomalies in which we have individuals who are status Indians—maybe they were in the sixties scoop or they were adopted out—and who do not want to be citizens of Kluane First Nation but have applied to have their status under Kluane as Indian Act status members. Those two things don't reconcile. That's one issue.
The larger issue we see in implementing our modern treaties is the fact that we've established our citizenship list. This is not recognized by Canada at the negotiation table when it comes to negotiating our financial transfer arrangements with Canada for programs and services and for core dollars. There are complex equations applied to that. Our status numbers are used. As Shelagh mentioned, those numbers are decreasing because of the diminishing ability to have individuals registered as status Indians. It directly affects our modern treaty holders in Canada because of the inability to register our citizens as status members.
I was going to give an example about my grandpa and my grandmother, who have very different lines when it comes to status citizenship, but I'll leave it there.
There is definitely an impact on modern treaty holders in the territory.