Again, I guess I would draw back on even the Member’s own history as a negotiator. A framework agreement, there is no process for arbitration. When you negotiate a final deal, you do build into those final deals a process of dispute resolution, arbitration processes like what’s established in the land claims and self-governments. Setting paramouncy for legislation and so on. I think we’ve already begun to reach out to try to come to a place where we want to draw back the groups, and as I pointed out in response to a question earlier, that with response to the letter we’ve sent out we can begin that process of bringing people back to the table, but quite clearly there are a couple of points that are very significant. One and earlier meetings it has been discussed publicly as resource revenue sharing of 50 percent. I think that that is, as you look at chapter 12, a negotiation item to be had as we go forward in this. The other of jurisdiction and chapter 5, chapter 6 probably more so, again, another negotiation item. So I think those are things that by signing the agreement we can begin that work and talk about what mandates are and how that would work going forward on that basis. So I guess what I would say is we have extended the arm out to say we’re ready to work with regions and come up with a budget, at least in the process of understanding the AIP as it sits now.
The concern becomes one, as I’ve heard some of the discussion that happened over in Dettah, was can they look at the AIP and renegotiate it? Well, again the Member knows from his past experience as a negotiator the authorities that set the mandates have set their mandates in the past and they’ve lasted through this whole process.
Other issues that are out there, for example, Norman Wells, even though the federal government continues to say that’s off the table we say that’s an area still of discussion that has to occur. The 2005 numbers to be escalated, we have put a marker down to say that is a point we will continue to discuss and negotiate on going forward. Ultimately if the deal that does come back is one that cannot be supported by the groups in the North, whether it’s the GNWT not happy or the federal government, maybe there’s some bilateral arrangements that aren’t successful, we’ll have to see how that plays out. That’s a future government discussion. Our role is now we’ve got to get to this next stage of getting to the table and looking at those work plans, looking at the actual areas of transferring down what that would really mean, how that impacts on the working relationships in those co-management boards, for example. There’s much work to be done and we would like to be prepared for that and we
understand fully that the groups will need to be prepared for that as well. Thank you.