Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Over the course of our deliberations, we have tried to examine the sovereignty issue to some extent. Land occupation is a very important consideration. It seems that no one disputes the fact that Inuit have occupied the land in the north since time immemorial.
But there are other avenues that we are also pursuing. There is the whole issue of the extension of the continental shelf. As you know, in 2013, Canada will have to make its proposal and explain how it sees the issue. Furthermore, an additional 300,000 km were recognized as belonging to Norway.
And there is the whole matter of land control, and I would like to hear your thoughts on that. In terms of the Northern Strategy, we, the Bloc Québécois, find there is a lot of talk about militarizing the north. I think I heard you say earlier that you are not opposed to having a bit of a stronger military presence in the north. One of the measures put forward by the government is the modernization of the Rangers. You cannot object to that.
But I would like to hear your thoughts on the military training centre in Resolute Bay, the building of a deep-water port in Nanisivik, the presence of an ice-breaker, the new offshore patrol ships and the Polar Epsilon project, which, along with RADARSAT-2, will monitor and track vessels entering and travelling through the Northwest Passage.
Do you acknowledge that the issue of land control can go as far as to include the range of military measures put forward by the government? On one hand, do you share that opinion? On the other, are you consulted on all the dynamics when a decision is made to do this or that? Are your governments consulted? Does Canada ask for your help with all of these projects?