Let me say, Mr. MacGregor, that we share your passion for ensuring that that language in particular gets preserved, as well as the rest of the languages that were on the verge of extinction prior to the passage of the Indigenous Languages Act.
I think they're a bit divorced, but what I would say to you is that as far as the Indigenous Languages Act is concerned, which was Bill C‑91 in the 42nd Parliament, it is a freestanding entity and it's coupled with an official languages commissioner and robust resources investments that we've already made. In terms of the volition of our government to continue to replenish those resources and maintain that strong preservation and integrity of official languages, that volition is there.
I think where this provision will help is that it will allow a review court, if it comes to that, to look at what we've done with the Indigenous Languages Act and to interpret it in a manner that abides by and promotes aboriginal and treaty rights. That would beg the question.... If a specific group had a treaty or had established an aboriginal right—and there's a legal test for that as well—and if that could be established in law, the interpretation that would be given to upholding and promoting that language would be emboldened by this kind of amendment.
I think it works in the same direction, in terms of advancing reconciliation and advancing indigenous rights, including, in this particular case, indigenous language rights.