We have engaged in the federal government on a number of fronts on this because it is a very important matter to us. The MVRMA is a product of land claims negotiations in the Mackenzie Valley. The goal of this legislation is to provide a single process. It provides a voice for each of the groups. Although the legislation is federal, it is the result of a collaborative process. In our minds there are three types of activities right now, all linked to the MVRMA.

First and foremost is the fact that, as the Member indicated, Canada made a number of changes to the MVRMA that impacted the North. It is not clear to us if Canada is doing the background work necessary to implement these changes, for example, consultation guidelines. We have also raised the matter of participant funding, as the Member has indicated. We have asked as to where the federal government is going with that. We know the federal government has stood down on the Tlicho legal action. But it was not clear to us, and they haven't indicated where they are going with that. We also have the fact, as the Member stated, that Canada has made commitments to restore credibility to environmental assessment commitments that would include reviewing the MVRMA. They have indicated that we would be involved in a joint review of the MVRMA. We are holding them to that. Of course, in the devolution agreement, Canada committed to review the devolution agreement provisions related to MVRMA. The previous government agreed to five years. We have told this government we think we could do it sooner. Also, there are requirements itself that the government has to put in place to fully implement devolution through the MVRMA process, which we are still waiting for indication from the federal government as to how they are proposing to do it.