Thank you, Mr. Chairman. One of the building blocks of the Agenda for Change was to take action on aboriginal issues, and I recognize that we did not appeal the Noel case when a Treaty 8 elder was hunting on the Ingraham Trail and in a no shooting zone and he won his case. But after he won his case and we did not appeal it, the government chose to move the no-shooting boundary closer to Prelude Lake on the Ingraham Trail, which is where most of the people live. Rather than respecting the aboriginal right so that you just do not prosecute the aboriginal people with the treaty right to hunt there, they move the whole boundary so that everybody could hunt there, which greatly increased the amount of hunters in that area than if they would have just allowed the aboriginal hunters to hunt there. What I would like to know is, why we moved the boundary back, closer to where most of the people live rather than just leaving it where it was and not prosecuting the people with the treaty right to hunt? Thank you.
Roy Erasmus on Committee Motion 2-13(5): To Amend Committee Motion 1-13(5)
In the Legislative Assembly on October 23rd, 1997. See this statement in context.
Committee Motion 2-13(5): To Amend Committee Motion 1-13(5)
Item 19: Consideration In Committee Of The Whole Of Bills And Other Matters
October 23rd, 1997
Page 131
Roy Erasmus Yellowknife North
See context to find out what was said next.