Madam Speaker, the First Nations that met are of the view -- some of them -- that we should not go ahead with this agreement until 50 per cent of the management board for the water basin is comprised of aboriginal people. They also believe there should be some signature involvement of First Nations, including the 32 First Nations that signed the agreement, before the agreement can be executed.

I'm of the view that this is a management document committing governments to work cooperatively, share information and to deal with concerns about water quality and monitor upstream activities. There is strong reason to go ahead with the signing since it has taken over 20 years to get respective governments, for example the governments of BC, Alberta and Saskatchewan, to agree to such a cooperative approach in the first place.

This is not a forum to resolve constitutional and treaty issues. There is simply a vested interest on everybody's part, including the First Nations, that we have all-party commitment to work together. That is what the document is about. The people who are the furthest downstream, the Inuvialuit, the Sahtu and the Gwich'in, are the ones who are in favour of going ahead with the document at this time. Thank you.

Madam Speaker, the negotiations have been going on for a number of years and it's unfortunate that First Nations were not directly involved in those discussions, or at least to the extent that they should have been. I think it's shared by all First Nations that the master agreement should not be killed, as they say, but that they would like to negotiate some changes to the provisions. Namely, to see if we could put off the signing until there is clarification on the rights of First Nations with regard to water and the management and control of water.

As I said, there are some 32 First Nations that may possibly be required for signatures of such a document. I'm not certain that waiting to get those things clarified at this time is going to see the master agreement survive. So I'm not certain that the first interest, which is to see the management agreement as outlined in the master agreement survive such a condition. I think we are faced with either going ahead with it as is, with a political commitment to see what we can do to ensure that First Nations are more intricately involved in the execution and ongoing implementation of that agreement may be the compromise. Thank you.

Madam Speaker, without wanting to give an indication as to the status of First Nations with regard to ownership or rights to decide on use and control of water, I believe that there can be some arrangements made through the existing agreement and the proposed bilateral agreement with respective governments to reflect the co-management approach that Renewable Resources has taken to all resources with aboriginal people. So I think it's possible to work on a co-management approach, if that is what the Member is suggesting, and to try to have that reflected in the bilateral agreements. Thank you.