That is good to know. I think all of us agree that Quebec issues have to be handled with a lot of sensitivity. I just want to get it on the public record the approach the Minister wanted to take with these issues.

I personally don't have a problem with a slow approach with Quebec, but I still strongly feel that on economic issues we should be taking a strong high-profile approach. But it would be useful if the Minister kept Members informed as to what is happening in Quebec. All of us should keep in the back of our minds that there are more important ramifications to the Northwest Territories than just whether we ship through Montreal or not. If the centre is slashed, if Quebec leaves, the edges of confederation are hurt the worst; not as much blood pumps through half a heart, as it were. So it is a very, very significant issue for us. It has to be handled with a lot of subtlety. But what we always have to keep in mind is that we -- at the end of the day -- can probably be the most adversely affected of anybody with Quebec separating.

Or on the other hand, an area where I definitely think that the Minister should be meeting with his federal and provincial counterparts about is what happens if they don't separate, so we can have some input to whatever the fallout would be from either a referendum being delayed, or a referendum losing, and another constitutional round begins. As the Minister knows, you can never get in the game too early.

So, my question to the Minister is, is the Minister, or is the Premier's office, being kept up to date -- as I know all other Premiers are -- as to what is actually happening? And if new thinking evolves out of what happens in Quebec, can we be confident that we will be right in there on the ground floor, we won't find ourselves in another Meech Lake situation where the die is cast and we have to get into the game after the fact. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.