Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will be voting in favour of this motion. I'm not going to get into the debate of whether or not the Sahtu and the Deh Cho have proper boundaries between them. This is an electoral boundary that we are talking about. As far as I'm concerned, the boundary between the Sahtu and the Deh Cho should be solved by the chiefs of those regions and the Metis people, not here. That is where it should be settled.
The commission only received one written submission and that was from Treaty 11. So they didn't have public hearings. At previous hearings, they referred to that. In 1989-90 is when they heard about land claim issues and that the boundary should conform to land claims issues. But that was previous issues and they shouldn't have even referred back to it. This is a new issue and it was from this Assembly. So we made our direction very clear. Then they went way beyond their mandate, as far as I am concerned. They had no business at all in realigning other boundaries. The only boundary they were supposed to do was the boundary between our territory in the west and Nunavut.
If they would have sent out a public notice telling people that they were going to realign all the boundaries according to all the claims, I know they would have had a bigger public response because people would have been concerned. That is the reason I am going to support Mr. Antoine's motion. We shouldn't be looking at the boundaries within the western Arctic. It was only to be the split between the east and west. The rest was irrelevant. If that is to be looked at, then pass another motion and let them go back and look at that. Thank you.