Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Quite clearly, I think there is a lot of consistency in the statement. The fact of the way we’ve behaved as a government. When you look at the agreement-in-principle, that got its origin… The Member talks about the Northern Accord of the Dene/Metis comprehensive process. That agreement never got signed and moved forward. That’s why the Gwich’in were the first to do a separate agreement, followed by the Sahtu and now the Tlicho. Other groups are negotiating. In those claims that are settled, those groups that have settled are already benefiting from royalties as part of the claim process. That’s one thing, for example, the Inuvialuit don’t have, because theirs was the first and that option wasn’t on the table.

There are groups benefiting from royalties of developments already in the Northwest Territories. Not this government but some of those groups. The invite, as I’ve worded in my statement, is there, the table is set, the chairs are there, they are ready to be filled if they want to come to the table. They have been a part of the process. They have developed the agreement-in-principle that was signed. They helped pen some of the sections. When you look at chapters 5 and 6 of those

sections, those are the strongest parts of an agreement that actually put in place in a final process a government-to-government approach. Not just ad hoc but an actual process that would be protected going forward. So the table’s there and the chairs for all of the groups are at the table. They just need a body to fill them. By signing and moving forward, they would be full participants once again, and the option’s there for them. They have to make the decision to come to the table.