Thanks for the question.
With respect, I am not super familiar with the commission being the comparator.
What the legislation proposes with respect to the first nations water commission is, I think, threefold.
One is the aforementioned drinking water settlement agreement, committed to create an institution to support first nations in the administration of many affairs, including those itemized in this bill. I won't read through them, but they include regulatory and capacity supports.
The commission, in and of itself, needs to be co-developed and supported through consultation with first nations, so the legislation creates the space for that organization, and it alludes to what it can do. However, in essence what needs to be created is essentially that consultation process to create the commission itself.
Subsection 39(1) speaks about that process, and then the remaining paragraphs in subsection 39(1) speak to the potential parameters by which the commission could perform its functions, ranging from operations to maintenance, capacity supports, regulatory development et cetera.
In potentially passing this legislation, what would be created is essentially the venue for that dialogue.