Thank you for that question. As I said at the outset, the fact that there are differences between certain provisions or measures in the agreement troubles me greatly because that undermines our credibility at the negotiating table with other aboriginal groups. Having said that, we are making progress. We have just signed two treaties in British Columbia and we have just settled claims with the Inuit in Northern Quebec, and so on.
As I tried to explain, following the signature and the celebration of a treaty there is a relationship between the government and the aboriginal group that begins. As Mr. Campbell said, most of the obligations are ongoing, and there are unresolved issues in terms of financing. It is clear that we have not done our work with certain land exchanges, that I admit. We are now trying to complete as many transactions as possible. As Mr. Campbell explained, the agreement involves approximately 80 obligations in different categories. Two of them have been identified as deficiencies in terms of transactions, and there are outstanding disagreements on two very important issues: acquisition policy and economic development. We are trying to make progress.
To answer your question, I would say that yes, we do audits and evaluations internally, and from time to time, the Auditor General's office helps us. We appreciate it because it is an accountability measure. There are 21 agreements. Those that were signed at the beginning of the cycle, such as the James Bay and Iqaluit agreements, do not have the same implementation structure. We have learned lessons from the past, and the new treaties include implementation and dispute resolution measures that are much more robust.
