Fisheries committee  It's a tough question to answer. We've heard that from DFO for a while now, and there have obviously been a number of Supreme Court cases since 1980, since section 35 was introduced into the Constitution. We're hopeful that further engagement does occur and that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, like all of government, works in first nation communities to accommodate first nation interests, and also works on other projects such as economic development ventures and on how first nations can alleviate some of the poverty constraints they currently find themselves in.

Fisheries committee  On that, I do have to leave. I apologize. My two colleagues are here. Thank you.

Fisheries committee  I haven't looked at those. No, we haven't looked at those particular aspects. Again, this was very rushed. As far as we're concerned, we hoped we would have had more time. But again, that would be something that this committee could potentially ask the affected the first nations themselves to get their thoughts on that.

Fisheries committee  I'll try to answer that. We feel that the act itself definitely has some problems. It can definitely be improved in certain areas to provide more certainty in, as I mentioned, the definition of aboriginal fisheries and how it applies to some of the historic treaty provisions and promises.

Fisheries committee  I'll start off by talking about consultation, then I'll move on to your second question. With respect to consultation, first nations and Canadians have a special relationship. We tend to view it as two societies coexisting in a land mass. That is consistent with the historic treaties and the modern treaties that are being developed, the modern self-government agreements.

Fisheries committee  With respect to the land claim agreement and the definition, as you know, land claim agreements are usually done where there's no treaty at this point. That will mainly be in parts of Quebec, Atlantic Canada, and B.C. With respect to other treaties, such as the numbered treaties and the pre-Confederation treaties, there's a whole slew of areas within the Canadian land mass that may not fall into the land claim type of definition.

Fisheries committee  I mean, clearly we would like it to be as clear as possible. By indicating that they hoped they would fall into a definition.... We'll have to see if that's the case, but clearly if it's spelled out properly in the act it would provide more certainty to first nations communities.

Fisheries committee  Thank you. Before I answer, I'd like to introduce two of my colleagues, Dan Pudjak and Audrey Mayes. I would also inform the committee that I have an engagement with some colleagues at Corrections Canada at 10 o'clock, so I'll be leaving around 9:50 a.m. With respect to the question, we would agree that consultation in its proper form, especially with respect to the criteria set out by the Supreme Court regarding first nations communities, hasn't really been met through the engagement DFO has undertaken to this point.

Fisheries committee  I thank the committee for inviting the Assembly of First Nations to be here today. Do you want me to go through my ten-minute statement now?

Fisheries committee  Once again, on behalf of the Assembly of First Nations and National Chief, Shawn Atleo, thank you for the invitation. My name is Stuart Wuttke. I am general counsel for the Assembly of First Nations, and I appreciate the opportunity to be here today on behalf of the AFN. I have several remarks to put forward with regard to the definition of “aboriginal fisheries”, the prohibition against obstructing passage of fish or waters, and the environmental damages fund.