There is a tendency, at the negotiating table, to put aspirational, unobjective language into the agreements, because you are moving from the old relationship, often within the Indian Act, to a new relationship, which is very important for that community. We've just done that with a number of British Columbia communities. It is a modern treaty with the crown. It is extremely important to the aboriginal people in question, so there is a natural tendency to put some language in to characterize the hopes for the future.
I would prefer that we try to dial down the language to something we can track and trace. The most important part is that when there are honest disagreements about implementation issues five years or ten years later, there are more effective dispute settlement mechanisms: implementation panels, implementation boards, greater use of arbitration.
We're not going to have perfect harmony, any more than we would between the Government of Canada and the Government of Ontario. We'll have an ongoing relationship, and we need more effective tools to see if we're on track and to resolve issues when they come up.