Is the Decision to Resume the Northern Table Talks A Good Decision.

What is a good decision? Here is one answer from the Quaker tradition.

A good decision is never a victory for one view or another. A good decision is one that not only results in sound practical consequences, it is one that maintains the community.

A good decision has to be concerned for the good of all the First Nations as a whole, rather than to defend personal interests or the interests of a specific community.

A good decision is made not by majority vote, nor by consensus, but by unity.

Unity requires active participation: where there is division over an issue, it is especially important for everybody to be heard.

Even should there be those (seldom more than one or two) who cannot unite with the decision arrived at, they may be willing to stand aside trusting the wisdom of the meeting.

Time is also essential for important decisions. Sometimes decisions must be deferred for reflection.

It is unusual for a sense of the Meeting to be achieved over one or more objections.
Similarly, someone may propose that unity actually has been reached and suggest that a Decision should be recorded.

It must always be remembered that the final decision as to whether the Decision represents the sense of the meeting is the responsibility of the meeting itself.

No doubt we will be seeing some letters that challenge the notion that the NAN Chiefs achieved unity on the decision to resume the bilateral talks with Ontario.