I am not willing to take away from what the author of the report might say, but in the community we already have existing community government structure. In some communities it is a band council, in other places settlement councils. In each community, as well, a lot of the services are delivered in a departmentalized fashion that has no reportability to the single government system in the community level. For example, education in some instances reports to a divisional board. You have a small community education committee, but it does not report to the hamlet council or the band council. It is not an internal organization of those functions. We have an economic development officer. The economic development officer does not report internally to the community. We have social service committees who report outwardly, and health committees that report outwardly, but not to the community council, and this has been a matter of discussion in a lot of the communities, that everyone can do their little role and you do not have a central collection of who is responsible or who they are responsible to. It is always to someone else, another board, or another department.
A lot of the communities say that if they can take over those functions, by and large the flexibility is there. We might need a little more help to do that, but if you have one reporting function and the accountability is there, then that would enhance their ability to make, if we can allow them the flexibility, decisions on what their priorities are. If there is some money for social services programs that might have a flexibility part of it, who makes that decision? Right now a little social service committee may exist that would deal with a regional office, but it is not centred toward that community.