With respect to the implementation of the Gwich'in claim, our revised figure at this time for the amount of money that we spent -- which we will get back from the federal government -- is about $109,000.

The revised forecast for 1993-94 for implementation of the TFN claim is $146,000.

Mr. Chairman, as I said earlier, our best guess for the money spent to date for this year is $109,000 for the Gwich'in claim. The actual figure for 1992-93 is $28,000. This is money that we spent on behalf of the federal government for implementation. We do get this money back. I am not certain if the Member is asking for how much money this government has spent in taking part in negotiations for finalizing the Gwich'in claim, or if he's asking for more specific details on how this $109,000 and the $28,000 were actually spent on implementation on the Gwich'in claim and the TFN and if he wants detail of the actual breakdown of that. If he is, we can provide that. We don't have that here now.

Mr. Chairman, I understand what the Member is asking and we can put together a chart or some sort of sheet that would show where all the expenditures are made by this government, for instance in implementing the TFN, the Gwich'in and the Inuvialuit claims. We can indicate which are as a result of work we are doing on behalf of the federal government, which we get back. We can indicate which monies are as a result of our participation in these agreements and detail other figures.

The Member mentions the $3 million going to the TFN claim. That was done as part of this government's commitment to support the TFN's call to establish a wildlife harvesters' assistance program. In the course of negotiations, the federal government had turned that down and it was a major setback. The previous government had committed to cost-share such a program and the agreement was we would contribute $15 million over a five year period, at $3 million a year, to a trust fund while the TFN would provide and match the same amount. The trust fund is to be administered by a board which would come up with ways that the money would be used to support wildlife harvesters, hunters and trappers, in the Nunavut area.

Mr. Chairman, the aboriginal people have business to settle with the federal government that has been outstanding for many years. They can do it through a comprehensive claim approach, they can do it through treaty land entitlement, or they can come up with another mutually agreed to process. That is primarily business with the federal government. As a territorial government, we've been trying to support and encourage all aboriginal peoples to be clear about how they want to go about settling outstanding issues and claims.

For instance, in our meeting with the Deh Cho leadership this summer in Kakisa, we said that if they do not agree with oil and gas exploration happening at this time, we would support that and convey it in very strong terms to the federal government. But, oil and gas and minerals are still very much the prerogative of the federal government. It's unfortunate that when processes break down or when the federal government or aboriginal groups withdraw from negotiations, it's the aboriginal people who are left exposed and unprotected.

I say that because I know that whatever you thought of the comprehensive Dene claim, that process, as long as it was in place, provided interim protection to the Dogrib people and the Chipewyan, for instance. But, as soon as the claims process was shut down then all the land was made available to stakers and people who wanted to make claims on that land. In the absence of the interim protection that the comprehensive claim provided, the Dogrib people have really had most of their traditional lands alienated through this massive staking activity that has gone on during the last three years. There is an interest. We are interested for more than just trying to settle things, to support aboriginal people in getting some process going because we see it as the best avenue for protection. We continue to support Treaty 8 in their recent efforts to try to come to an understanding with the federal government. They have come out with a specific suggestion. It is something we can work with. Once the Deh Cho does that, we will be there to support them as well if we think it can go. Thank you.

Yes, Mr. Chairman. After the Inuvialuit settled their claim, for instance, it became very clear what the rules are for engaging in development in their settlement area. The Inuvialuit have been doing business with old companies for a number of years on Inuvialuit lands. It is very clear -- including this government. When we go on their land, we have to engage them under a certain set of rules. There are certain expectations on how we do business. There are, in fact, laws that we have to follow. It is the same for the TFN claim, Gwich'in claim, and will be the same for the Sahtu claim. It becomes very clear what the rules of engagement are for development and the aboriginal peoples.