Thanks, Mr. Chair. I agree with what may colleagues on the committee have said here. We were getting correspondence from Indigenous governments, and after the closure date for public submissions, that wanted to submit additional information and, in some cases, actually better understand what the process was. So I think it became clear to committee that there was not really a lot of understanding of the legislative process and what the role is for standing committee. We are not the government. We are not the ones who wrote the legislation in the first place. Our job is to actually review it and seek to make improvements based on the input and the public interest. I think it's pretty fair to say that there wasn't a very good understanding of that amongst the Indigenous governments, all of them, and that some of them wanted to better understand the process and so on.
However, I think, although this recommendation is aimed at the technical working groups and so on, I think it's fair to say that the same applies to the staff in some of the departments. They did not understand what role standing committee had, and they did not really get what our role was and that we could actually propose and make changes to the legislation, the bills, as they went through the public review process. So that needs to be, I think, improved upon, as well. That is not meant as a criticism of anybody, but I think we just have to find ways to make sure that people understand what role the standing committee plays and that we respect the division between the executive and the legislative branches' functions of government. That is the way our government has been set up, and I think there could be a lot more effort put into public education around that. As I understand it, some of those issues are going to find their way into the transition report, as well, but that is something that committee had observed. Thanks, Mr. Chair.