To situate the PRI’s findings within a broader context, this paper considers the nature of ILM and outlines available information on the role of the Canadian government, before proceeding with an analysis of the focus group results. [...] Some have argued that collaboration is the opposite end of the spectrum from the traditional management role of the federal government, which is characterized as “top down.” This has been partially attributed to the vertical accountabilities of the Canadian version of the Westminster tradition, which does not naturally lend itself to horizontal partnerships. [...] Some factors include differences in provincial and territorial responsibilities, the existence of First Nations treaties or memorandums of agreement, the involvement of international interests, the presence of federal jurisdictional considerations, and the nature and scope of the ILM process as outlined by ILM participants. [...] It has also been observed that the consultation process allowed for the reduction of future conflicts, led to a greater acceptance of the results by the community, and built a base of understanding and acceptance for the possible launch of new initiatives (Fast et al., 2005: 115). [...] Methodology - Structured Focus Groups Given the promise of ILM and the concerns expressed regarding the lack of clarity with regards to roles, this series of focus groups aimed to gain a better understanding of perspectives on the federal government’s role from participants working on the ground.