Mr. Chairman, the Member has highlighted that under the implementation side there are a number of areas at the actual implementation tables. The groups all have their committee representatives from each group. For example, the Gwich’in have their person

they have named at the table. The federal government has their person named and we would have a person named. At the actual implementation side of those tables, I have been informed there are no outstanding issues. Now there are issues that are being discussed at the political level about the level of implementation or what is expected or the interpretation of those and that is the area we find ourselves more challenged in.

The Member has used a number of things, for example, the Wildlife Act, the Species at Risk Act, the Canol Trail, and the Gwich’in Territorial Park. To a certain level or another, other departments have devolved. For example, Environment and Natural Resources are dealing with the Species at Risk Act that is out there now. They are involved in the development of the Wildlife Act that is being co-developed now with the aboriginal groups. The challenge is because there are so many tables being negotiated from right up and down the valley from Inuvialuit, Gwich’in, Sahtu, who have signed land claim agreements and other groups that are negotiating and some are doing a comprehensive approach, both land and self-government is the challenge that we face as to what kind of legislation can be brought in to implement some of the claims groups and not affect the negotiations of other groups. Because when legislation comes in, that’s the concern that it starts to take away from the negotiation approaches of some of the groups. That’s been a concern.

Where we can find the agreement amongst groups, like the Wildlife Act, like the species at Risk Act, come up with an approach that is beginning to bear fruit, I guess is the term, that is showing some results there...

One of the concerns the Member has raised talked about municipal lands within communities. The Member is aware, because of his own past experience as a negotiator, that those lands within a community are selected and operated within the jurisdiction of the municipality. For example, if there are exchanges of land between the self-government body and the federal government, they can select some land within a community but those lands would still be operated under the operation that is in place. So taxes and so on would still be due unless the federal government sets up how they would pay the tax piece of it to the community that the exchange has occurred in.

So that is the process that is there in place. We use existing processes that are in place and understood and follow on those processes.

As for your continued interpretation of some of those things, that can come up from time to time and be challenging in trying to come up with the understanding and have parties agree that that

interpretation or an older interpretation still applies. So that is something that continues to be worked on. Thank you.