Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  That may be, but from what I've witnessed, this is going to be about land because it's already being brought forward at the consultation tables. I—

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  I'll have to take your word for that, but this is not what this one is about. I beg to differ about this one.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  I'll tell you again, based on my experience, they're definitely talking about land on a regular basis. They're also talking with proponents about getting into resource agreements. I mean, it's clear and evident, and they're purchasing land, so just to talk about....

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Yes, that's okay. We can leave it.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  The expertise I have is only from my own practical experience as a leader at the negotiation tables with Canada and Ontario. Since the framework agreement with the MNO, and what we're facing, that's the practical experience I have seen. Regarding expert experience, I am not an expert.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Do I have a bit of time or none?

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  As I said earlier, I don't think there's a possibility of an amendment. This bill has a lot to do with land. Even if it were not about land, Canada has to do its due diligence to make sure it's not recognizing the section 35 rights of groups that don't have the history that confers such rights.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  I'm sorry. I'm thinking of the wording. It does say that it's opening the door in the bill to treaty negotiations. When you're talking about treaty, as I said earlier, it's about land. I don't think that.... Let me see here. Excuse me.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  No, because there's a lack of due diligence. You're giving them rights that did not exist and were not well established before effective Crown control in our area. You didn't talk to us at all, so it's missing our law. We have Anishinabe Animakee, and we have a governance structure that was existing prior to effective control, and we have not been consulted.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Powley was about hunting moose. This is about self-government. That is what you're talking about, and you're talking about treaty. In the bill, it does say “treaty”, and you can't talk about treaty without talking about a land base. Powley was about harvesting rights. We have cases that we've taken to court, hundreds of them, about harvesting rights as well.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  I would say no. This treaty that's mentioned in the bill is about land—and it has to be, if it's a self-government-based agreement. The Anishinaabe Nation in Treaty No. 3.... When we asked Canada to explain to us what information it was relying on in entering into these agreements with claimed Métis within our treaty territory, we were stonewalled.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Lands or no lands, Canada must do its due diligence and make sure that it's not recognizing section 35 rights of groups that do not have those inherent rights.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  [Witness spoke in Anishinaabemowin and provided the following text:] Ziigwaanikwe nindizhinikaaz. Mooz dodem. Animakee Wa Zhing doonji. [Witness provided the following translation:] My name is Ziigwaanikwe. My clan is Moose. I am from Animakee Wa Zhing. [English] Good afternoon members of the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs.