Thank you. Member for Thebacha.

I think the Member is having difficulty, because I am not getting any answers to some of my questions, Mr. Chairman. I believe that is my right as a Member to ask whatever I want to ask, as long as I am within the rules and guidelines of this House.

Mr. Chairman, the Minister stated that he has faith, and that is probably why traditionally native women have been having difficulty acquiring equality, whether it be within the band council or politically. Ms. Kuptana stated yesterday, that Mary Simon and Ms. Cournoyea were the only women at the table, and that is probably why women were absent in the minds of politicians, and not taken into consideration when this accord was developed.

I would like to ask the Minister what type of assurance does he feel should be given in regard to, particularly, when a band council does not use the not withstanding clause, to override the gender equality rights in the Charter? What assurance can he indicate that, that band council will not use that not withstanding clause, Mr. Chairman? Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Kakfwi.

Thank you. Any general comments? Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Can I ask the Minister, or for that matter, any Member of the special committee who represents me and my colleagues in this House on constitutional matters. The framework agreement proposes a constitutional content that will set out a new framework for the interpretation of treaties between First Nations and the Government of Canada, and it proposes a treaty should be interpreted in a, "just, broad, and liberal manner, taking into account the spirit, and intent of the treaties, and the context in which the specific treaties were negotiated."

Maybe the Minister, Mr. Gargan, Mr. Bernhardt or Mr. Lewis, can clarify for me what the implications of this constitutional provision are, with regard to Treaties 8 and 11?

Thank you, Mr. Kakfwi.

Thank you. Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you. I wonder if the Minister or the colleagues can indicate to me if you have prepared any documentation or legal documentation in this particular area. Also, one other matter, if the Minister might indicate to me if there has been any analysis that has been done that would reflect this particular portion of the framework arrangement on the D.I.A.N.D. policy, requesting, for instance, extinguishment, or, whether, or not, the whole request for requirement that has been historically included in agreements may, in fact, be challenged under this particular provision?

Thank you. Mr. Kakfwi.

Thank you. At this time I would like to recognize in the gallery the grade eight French immersion class from William McDonald Junior High School and their teacher, Mona Matthews. Welcome.

---Applause

Further general comments. Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There is one principle, and I appreciate, I guess, the remarks that were made by Mr. Kakfwi, unfortunately other Members have not commented on it. I would have hoped that they could give me more detail, as representatives, and other Members, are not on the special committee.

I wanted to ask if you could, at some time, deal with the matter more specifically with Mrs. Marie-Jewell about what it is that you have done to get your own opinion, and I mean legal opinion, on the matter dealing with the rights and the protection relating to women.

I think that despite our own concerns right here it is incumbent upon us to assure the aboriginal women, and women generally, are not being overlooked in the process.

I do want to raise one concern about one of the principles in the Consensus Report that, for me, may raise troubles, and that is with regard to court action relative to treaty definitions, and applications for five years. I raise the point, because I am not sure if there is a concern with regard to aspects of Treaty's 8 or 11, or other treaties across the country, and whether, or not, the restriction in the principles adopted in the Consensus Report may have a bearing on proceeding on treaty court action.

Thank you. Mr. Kakfwi.

Thank you. Mr. Nerysoo.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will not argue the point with Mr. Kakfwi that no gains have been made. I think it is clear that gains have been made for aboriginal people, but in achieving those gains, there are some limitations, you might say, or perceived limitations as to how far you can go immediately. Trying to interpret those rights, and I think that in trying to sell the agreement, you have to assure the people that their own efforts to try to get some interpretation will not be refused, because there is a five year, so-called arrangement, that court proceedings are not to be considered.

The way I read it, it may not have a bearing, but on the other hand, there is nothing to suggest, in the agreement, that we cannot proceed with court action relative to treaty definitions, or applications. Now, that is not clear to me, and maybe Mr. Gargan, our legal advisor, can clarify that for me about the courts because it is not clear to me.

Thank you. Mr. Kakfwi.

Thank you. Are there any further general comments? Mr. Ningark.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am going to be very brief and straightforward. I believe that we have nothing to lose by endorsing the Consensus Report on the Constitution that was concluded in Charlottetown. I believe we are moving forward according to what I can understand from the context of the report.

I believe that, especially, the aboriginal people, the native people, the communities, and the aboriginal women have something to gain by asking the political leaders within the N.W.T. Legislature to approve the report.

It took us many, many years, Mr. Chairman, to be a part of the players within the national government. Not only within the national government, also being in the same game with the other jurisdictions, the provinces. I think we have to move forward, and this is only the first step. If we approve this, then I believe the committee will go out and inform the public, within our jurisdiction, about the context of the report.

This is only a step forward. I believe that we have nothing to lose by approving this, but everything to gain. I believe that if we strive to get more from the agreement without knowing, it may jeopardize what we have already gained. Therefore, I will be voting in favour of the endorsement. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Is there any further general comments? Mr. Lewis.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will not respond to all the comments that Mr. Nerysoo has raised, but they were all valid ones.

As we know, this was a very complicated process, and if you were to listen to all the commentators that have reported on this Consensus Report over the last couple of weeks, you will hear all these issues raised, we are dealing with very, very complex matters.

The report however, was the best effort after a long, long period of time, and we should take some comfort from the fact that this was a process of consensus. It is called a Consensus Report. In other words, there was a long period of give and take among an awful lot of people. So, we should feel pleased, I suppose, since we are a consensus assembly that this was the approach that was taken. There was no battering of doors down, or bullying. A tremendous amount of patience, trying to cobble together a Consensus Report, and I know that some Members are a little bit concerned about trying to put on a report, because that is what this is, it is a report as a result of the process, which contains the substance of what eventually, we hope, will be a new Constitution.

I know that some Members are worried about the use of the word endorse. Some of us believe that it is such a significant step forward that we should be prepared to put our stamp, if you like, to endorse something means to say "yes". When you bang your hand down three times with your piece of rubber, I guess, and say this is something we approve of, it has our approval, then we endorse it.

As I said yesterday, Mr. Chairman, there is no Constitution that has ever been written as a perfect document. It has not happened yet, and some people believe that if you use the word endorse, that means that you are putting your stamp of approval on an imperfect document. That seems to be the way I hear people talking. It is the best effort that some very, very dedicated and clever people, the cleverest people we have in this business, I suppose, could come up with. For that reason, we felt that because it was the best effort of an awful lot of people, that we would not be too shy, that what we would do is to endorse it.

It could be that people want to debate the kind of approval we give to this best effort over a long period of time by a lot of people. Some people may want to say they just want to support it. Some people may want to say that they only want to support it in principle. The fact remains, though, Mr. Chairman, that we have some kind of obligation to give our opinion of it in this Assembly, and Mr. Nerysoo has advanced this quite considerably today by bringing up the kinds of issues that people are raising all across the country, about what is in the report, and what concerns may have been raised.

Well, I can assure Members, though, that in the discussion that took place, many of the provisions that appeared in the document appeared as a result of the concerns of various interest groups in the multilateral conferences. Things like, for example, a fair, equitable, and reasonable, description and treatment of the treaties. It was something that the Assembly of the First Nations really wanted to have.

Now, I was not about to question why somebody would want to have a long standing agreement between aboriginal people and the Crown. It would not be my position to argue, well, you know, why do you need to have something like that, an old historical dusty document, which describes your relationship with the Crown, because to some people that is a sacred relationship. It matters greatly, so it was not in my opinion, my position, to really question whether that was something that should be in an accord like this, or a Consensus Report.

Many of the things appeared in the document because of that process. Things appeared that mattered to people. Mr. Chairman, if we are going to proceed with a proper ventilation of all the issues that people would like to have discussed in this Assembly, then what we want to avoid doing is going through all the steps that took place over a long period of time. It is a very complex business, as Mr. Nerysoo, Mr. Kakfwi, and Mr. Arvaluk know, they have been through all this. They know what a complex path that you go through when you are trying to get something agreed on by a lot of people.

The discussion has been well advanced and many of the issues have been raised, which should be raised. We are going to have to decide very soon, Mr. Chairman, in my view, what position we are going to take as an Assembly, on the Consensus Report. That is what it is, a Consensus Report.

Whether we want to endorse it, as the recommendation of the committee suggests we do, or we in fact, look at it, and say it is not absolutely 100 percent perfect, and we would not want to put a stamp like this, so firmly, on something that is not perfect.

I am prepared to do that, as an act of faith. I am prepared to endorse this, as the best efforts of the people of goodwill have worked with patience over a long period of time. When we get to it, Mr. Chairman, that will be the nature of the debate, I think we should engage in. Thank you.