Mr. Chairman, I have just have one final comment before question is called. I support the electoral boundary, but when you have a situation where aboriginal organizations are negotiating with the federal government, third-party interests are not an issue. I think that is what happened in Jim Antoine's area. Even though he has been impacted by Sahtu claims, there is no avenue for him to express his concerns. The territorial government is aware of that, too.

I suppose it was Mr. Antoine who brought up the whole issue of the mandate of the Electoral District Boundaries Commission. They only had the mandate to change the boundaries based on the political line, and nothing else. But, I think Mr. Antoine also brought up an issue that would never have been addressed if he hadn't, and that is even though he is being impacted by the Sahtu claim -- and I'm sure it is the same way with all the other claims -- it is a boundaries issue. The Deh Cho region is caught between the Dogrib claim and the Sahtu claim. We are not saying we are going to be pursuing claims, but we are certainly impacted by them and this is the only arena, I believe, where we have the opportunity to bring up that point.

But, I support the motion because the lines mean the same, and they don't go into areas.