I'd be happy to.

The department did submit a brief to the committee on the development process of this bill. I've had the pleasure of being at this committee several times and speaking about these actions, and I'm happy to briefly summarize them again.

In short, the consultation process on this bill was unprecedented in the history of Indigenous Services Canada. It really began in 2018, with engagements with first nations, which AFN led and we supported. Those were accelerated in 2020 with the posting of two consultation drafts online for all Canadians to review, which was a first time that's ever been done in the history of this department.

We sent—at least by my memory—three pieces of correspondence from the minister to every first nation to access and review the legislation. We opened up daily town halls in order for people to support engagement. We engaged directly with rights holders, based on their assemblies and based on their wishes, coming to their lands, from coast to coast.

Also, because some previous comments were attributed to comments I made at this committee previously, I did state that there are 634 first nations and about 580 of them are bands. Approximately 130 first nations chose to engage in that process. It does not mean that this consultation outreach was limited to that, but the window of opportunity was there, and we tried to socialize that as best we could. Maybe we learned some lessons in that process of how we can do better. However, I can absolutely say that the efforts we undertook were new. We can continue to do better. It was a lengthy process.

I would say, because the national chief was here as well, that AFN led a parallel engagement process, which was concurrent with and in addition to the aforementioned process that Indigenous Services Canada led with the minister. It was certainly comprehensive, and certainly there were a variety of views and interpretations of what consultation, co-development and consent meant.

Thank you.

Transcript

Discussions (0)