I would like to discuss strengthening the protection over our traditional waterways within Bill C-69. Wolf Lake First Nation is a non-reserve community and, like many first nations communities, assigns great importance to the protection of our waterways.
The 2012 amendments to the Navigable Waters Protection Act affected first nations from coast to coast to coast. As I mentioned earlier, the free and unencumbered use of the waterways on our territories is critical to our culture and ability to exercise a range of section 35 rights, and for other important economic purposes like running our tourism businesses.
Recently, in your parliamentary standing committee hearings, Kelly Block asked the honourable Transport Minister Garneau to provide an example post-2013 where navigation was negatively impacted due to the Navigation Protection Act being in place, and said that not one witness throughout the regulatory review hearings in 2016-17 was able to make a comment.
What Ms. Block outlined in our view was the failure in consultation and setting adequate timelines for the legislative process. Both Kebaowek First Nation and Wolf Lake First Nation were not aware of the hearing opportunity, but did describe, in our written comments on reforms to CEAA 2012 and the Navigation Protection Act, how navigation was impeded on not one, but two, locations on our territory since 2013.
These cases were not on unprotected waterways, but even worse, were on an actual scheduled waterway under the new Navigation Protection Act, namely the Ottawa River, the main highway of our nation.
The following examples demonstrate that this new idea of scheduling waterways really provides no protection for navigation under the act.
Our first example is a three-metre chain-link fence installation on the historic La Cave portage by Ontario Power Generation, while they conducted minor maintenance activities at the Otto Holden Generating Station. Here, the OPG took the liberty to install a permanently locked fence installation on our historic portage. This was without consultation or notice, and was followed by OPG's subsequent refusal to grant continued access for our community members or our canoe business clients navigation without the presentation of a third party insurance. The gate remains in place, and the issue is unresolved.
The second incident was at the Public Works Timiskaming Dam Complex replacement project on the upper Ottawa River at Long Sault Islands where Wolf Lake First Nation operates a branch of our Algonquin Canoe Company outfitting business. Here, in 2013, without the federal government acting as it should have on a major project's interprovincial project designation provisions within the legislation, and the Minister of Environment at the time refusing our request for project designation, the Public Works real property branch refused to engage in a framework for consultation and accommodation to guide decision-making regarding this development. Subsequently, all access to the lower river was impeded for portage for Algonquins and non-Algonquins alike, for over a year.
Furthermore, the Public Works-led environmental effects evaluation under CEAA 2012 completely scoped both our first nations communities and threatened lake sturgeon species completely out of the process, as Transport Canada, NEB, and DFO issued authorizations without consulting us. Once again, the watershed and our rights were impacted by this development.
The great watershed of the Kitchissippi River is an ancient trade and travel route throughout the Algonquin nation, as are the shores, islands, and portages along the route. We ask this government, why was our navigation impeded under the Navigation Protection Act on a scheduled waterway? What navigation protection assurances do we really have in the scheduling of waterways?
Furthermore, it is unclear to us whether the working group of ministers will ensure the crown is meeting its constitutional obligations with respect to aboriginal and treaty rights within this new legislation and ongoing regulation, to provide innovative, effective, enforceable, and specific indigenous and environmental protections to the Ottawa River.
For example, Akikodjiwan is a key sacred site to our peoples. Here in Ottawa, it is also known as Chaudière Falls. Akikodjiwan was, and continues to be, a site of prayer, offerings, ritual, and peace. These activities are important work for us as custodians of our waterways and communities, as we redefine and reconcile the interrelationship between our people and the river.
We have closely examined the threats to Akikodjiwan and the Ottawa River watershed and have made recommendations to both the National Capital Commission and the Canadian Heritage minister,Mélanie Joly, that a much higher priority must be given to recognize and preserve Akikodjiwan as a key healing point for Algonquin peoples and all cultures here in the national capital region.
Therefore, as Algonquin leaders, we are together exploring all possible options that can address the legislative shortcomings impacting the protection of our sacred waterways and jurisdiction, including but not limited to the pursuit of separate legal rights for the waterways.
Wolf Lake and Kebaowek introduced a resolution at the AFN national assembly to give legal recognition for the Kitchissippi River, the Ottawa River, that explores the concept of legal identity for the watershed as a means of protection. It's attached for your reference later.
In terms of our recommendations, Bill C-69 remains overly politicized, with the minister making final decisions on the scheduling of waterways or designation of projects, and the cabinet making final project decisions after a full impact assessment process. Based on our experience, this would leave little incentive for us to participate. Similar to what we are discovering within this process to date, why put all this work into it if the government already has its mind made up?
Prime Minister Trudeau specifically promised to return lost protections to waterways in this country. That is not necessarily going to happen and is entirely at the discretion of the minister in scheduling new waterways for protection. We are requesting that the act guarantee in writing that it will schedule any waterway that first nations request to be scheduled. Without this amendment, we have little choice but to pursue legal identity for the Ottawa River watershed, because as far as we are concerned, in our view all protections have effectively been lost.
We support the opportunity that the impact assessment act is to “take into account” indigenous knowledge, along with scientific information and community knowledge. However, only “traditional” knowledge is a required factor to be considered in the environmental assessment, and the act does not go far enough to require that assessments and decisions be based on the broader scope of indigenous social, ecological, and cultural knowledge.