Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, the fundamental premise is the best interests of the child. That is what is the driving force in this legislation. If an aboriginal child is going to be adopted then there are checks and balances and consultation processes built in to consult appropriately. The fundamental person involved is the parent. They have a strong say in laying out what they would like to see happen. The ideal would be that adoption is not necessary. The other process is custom adoption. If a child comes into care and adoption becomes one of the options being anticipated and contemplated, then the legislation as it is laid out is followed. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Krutko.

Just using the Minister's scenario, if an aboriginal person living in a social economy knowing that your wage economy is a lot less than, say, a non-aboriginal economy, if that is one of the factors that you look at - which in 90 percent of the time it is - and because you are so-called "unfit" your child will be taken away because of the status you have of being who you are. That is my concern. The system we have in place, using the rules that we do use, has always been a hindrance to aboriginal people because that was the excuse used to take children away and send them off to school, to residential schools, to the hostel system, and here we are again using that same argument.

As a parent or a family member, the welfare of the child should include consideration of its cultural background -- the family connection and the family unit that we have within aboriginal communities - not looking at it as a social or economic stamp that you put on somebody because your value is less than someone else because of the social conditions that you live in.

That is why so many of our aboriginal children have been taken away from aboriginal communities and put into homes outside our communities and in the south. I think we should learn from that. For aboriginal groups that have been fighting to try to get land claims, trying to get self-government and trying to get the status to determine our membership, this falls totally against that notion that we are trying to establish a system of keeping our children within the families and keeping them at home with their parents or grandparents, their nephews and nieces.

Thank you, Mr. Krutko. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, if one reads through the Adoption Act and through the Family Law Act, especially if you put it beside the old child welfare legislation, one would see very clearly and starkly that we share the same concerns as Mr. Krutko and that the very checks and balances that he talks about are there. We are in the process of trying to set up plan of care committees in the communities and we are very sensitive to the issues that he raised. This particular amendment speaks to the definition of "spouse" and takes nothing from the obligations laid out in the current legislation. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I just want to make a couple of more points. I stated earlier that I found the process very flawed and it is really strange the way this whole thing has been handled. Even the media has been criticizing some of us and pointing the finger at using arguments of moral values and religious views. It seems like we are expected to remove any sense of compassion on this issue and just look at it strictly from a logistic point of view.

However, my opinion and my problem is that there was really no consultation, and I am very disappointed with the Social Programs Committee for not doing so, but the Minister in his position could have done it. He has the authority to instigate the consultation process. One of the options he has at his disposal is to go into communities and consult, but he chose not to. I would like to know why he thought that he had no responsibility to go into the aboriginal communities. From my point of view, it is the aboriginal communities that I am concerned about because for the most part that is who I represent. I want to know why the Minister felt, decided and chose to ignore the aboriginal people of the North when dealing with this piece of legislation.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, no one was ignored. There was a process, obviously not to the satisfaction of my colleague, and he has the right to disagree, as it is my right to say I took the steps I deemed necessary and the Social Programs Committee did as well. Here we are today to decide on an issue before this House. There were no strong representations made to me from any aboriginal governments, and this is an issue that has history going back to the 13th Assembly. There have been many things said here today that will be in Hansard and that is where they will stand, but in this particular case the Member and I will just have to choose to disagree and I do not accept his assessment. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Maybe the Minister could explain here and now to the people of the North why he felt he does not have to consult with them on this issue.

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, in my opinion there was consultation, there was an opportunity for feedback and there was an opportunity for presentations. Steps were taken that were deemed appropriate given the circumstances, and here we are ready to go into a clause-by-clause review of the brief amendments being proposed. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I cannot see how the Minister can sit there and say that there was consultation. There was a public hearing in Yellowknife. Is he going to try and convince me that a public hearing in Yellowknife is considered consultation? My colleague is telling me that there was not even a public hearing in Yellowknife, so I would like to know if he could explain to me what he means by "there was consultation."

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, we put advertisements in all the papers across the Territories for, I believe, two consecutive weeks inviting people's feedback. That was the course of action that I deemed appropriate and that was what was done. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. McLeod.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, one final comment. I would like to ask the Minister if he feels that maybe the rights of the aboriginal people have been ignored and lost the opportunity to make any type of amendment to this piece of legislation by not going out there and consulting, or does he feel confident that this is the best way he handled it and it was all proper?

Thank you, Mr. McLeod. Mr. Miltenberger.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I am of the opinion that the appropriate steps were taken in this case. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Miltenberger. Mr. Dent.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, we are having some extended discussion on this issue. I think it is an important issue and I think it is important that we try and conclude it so I move that we extend hours to conclude this item.

There is a motion on the floor. The motion is in order. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion is carried. We will continue until this item is concluded. Mr. Dent, did you have anything further? Mr. Lafferty.