Thank you, Mr. Speaker. I am not going to attempt to repeat what some other Members have said, only to say that, behind the scenes, when the standing committee is working on developing some of these pieces of legislation, oftentimes it is a back-and-forth process, where bills are sent in draft form only to be returned and worked on again. I can think of some successful examples of that; the Mineral Resources Act, the Petroleum Resources Act, bills before this House. Those went through that kind of collaborative effort. This bill did not.

The quality of the legislation is a very important consideration when considering the merits of this bill, and there are certainly some troubling concerns with how it is going to be implemented. Is it really, fully-cooked and ready to be taken on the road, ready for public consultation, or does it need more time?

Setting those issues aside, we have to look at the very serious issues that have been raised by Indigenous nations in the Northwest Territories through various forums. This government made a commitment through the Devolution Agreement and through the Intergovernmental Agreement on Land and Resources to co-draft legislation with Indigenous governments and organizations as it relates to land and resources management. I think that it is very important that we live up to those agreements, and there is an expectation that those agreements will be followed. This means more than discharging the legal requirements of a section 35 consultation; it means full nation-to-nation collaboration on laws like this Forest Act.

These issues concerning the involvement of Indigenous nations were shared with me and with other Members of this House, in addition to being made public through the media, and they are serious concerns. Many of the pieces of correspondence that I have reviewed have encouraged the government not to proceed with introduction of the bill, and I have seen no correspondence since that has changed the perspective on that. This is not one or two; this is the vast majority of our Indigenous partner governments.

Reconciliation is something that I believe in, Mr. Speaker, and the concerns raised by Indigenous governments are enough to make me question the merits of voting in favour of this bill. We must do more than talk the talk. We have to walk the walk and live up to our promises to Indigenous nations and work together for our common interests. That was the promise of devolution, and that is the great promise of the Northwest Territories, a jurisdiction which always promotes our shared culture, our shared experience, our shared histories, and our ability to offer Canada a vision of what reconciliation looks like. That must permeate everything that we do and every bill that we create, especially bills that we acknowledge need to be co-drafted.

I believe that moving ahead without the involvement of Indigenous governments on the current form of the bill will imperil the positive nation-to-nation process that has been developed since devolution in respect to these co-drafting agreements. The bill should be withdrawn and returned to the technical working group so that we can ensure that the views of Indigenous nations are properly represented, along with their constitutionally protected co-management systems.

Unfortunately, withdrawing the bill is not an option at this time. This House must make a decision, and that decision is: which is more important: the political expediency of this government's legislative agenda, or the rights and recognition of Indigenous nations in the Northwest Territories and the agreements that we have signed with them?

If there is even a hint of a shadow of a doubt towards meaningful engagement with Indigenous peoples, I do not believe that this House should take the risk. Therefore, I will not be supporting this bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker, and I request a recorded vote.