Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to make one point, though, I think that earlier today, when there was a matter of concern that was raised about a number of issues related to the matter of the text, that there was some suggestion that people in the communities are not all lawyers. I want to inform my colleagues that does not mean that the people in the communities do not understand the words in the document. I want to make that point. I can say to people, from my experience, and I know the Inuit Members will
probably agree, after their process is done with their claim approval, people have begun to understand the details of their agreement.
I can say even from my experience with the Gwich'in comprehensive agreement, that all the elderly people began to understand. They knew what the words were, and they understood the details. The intent of an information session was in fact to give them an ability to understand. I just want to make that point. I think there is some suggestion, earlier, that we do not all have to be lawyers to appreciate or understand what is written in legal terms.
Another point, Mr. Chairman, I want to say that I am concerned about the implications if consensus cannot be reached on the legal text in the political accord, because if there is no arrangement reached, then we are back to square one again. We are all the way back, having approved, in fact having approved the agreement, even in a vote, then there is no agreement on the legal portions, then what are the contingency plans. In other words where do we go from here. If the legal text is done, the vote is "yes", what then.
Maybe that has not been considered, but I am wondering if the Minister or the special committee has thought about that and is, in fact, preparing plans to address that particular matter, including the potential of the legal text not reflecting our concerns.