I cannot speak for the Metis or Dene leadership or the different aboriginal organizations or anyone else. I just know that when this understanding was reached, it was felt last year that one way or another the boundary issue is going to be resolved and people may or may not like that. But that is not going to be the only basis on which people are going to vote. The consensus was that the way that people want to approach it is to support division
if they can get sufficient development of the constitution in the West that, for instance, a commission was set up and it talked to all the people in the communities and it came up with sufficient outline of what a future constitution might look like in the West, that would be sufficient for people to vote. It would give you enough substance to say, "Well, based on where I see the boundary is, based on what I know about the possible western future constitution, and based on what I think I know about the cost of division, that sort of thing, I am in a position to make an informed vote."
There was no provision requested by the groups to say, 'We want this much money for a commission and yes, we also want this much money set aside for a campaign in the West to get ready for the vote on the plebiscite." That was not in the discussions at all. It was for the East but it was not for the West. The question can only go back to the committee of western leaders to say, "Now that we are at this stage, are they going to reconsider?" The question might go back.