Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Sept. 16th, 2024

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

At this point, you don't have what you would call a definition of what a protection zone would be.

[John Paul]

No.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Okay.

I will go back to Vice-Chief Pratt.

Do you have a definition or an idea of what protection zones would be for you?

[Vice-Chief David Pratt]

I would have to agree with Mr. Paul on that. I think that it leaves too much ambiguity in terms of not having a clear definition on that.

I get that every piece of federal legislation has that issue. Every piece of federal legislation is not a perfect piece of legislation, but I think that when it comes to clean drinking water, the class action and all the issues that we've had with that, we have to ensure that we're not just allowing the status quo to continue. We have to ensure that there actually is a change when it comes to this.

Part of our mandate here at the federation is to pass our own pieces of regional water legislation, to govern ourselves in terms of how those processes will work.

To answer the question, I believe that it leaves that process too ambiguous, too open and with not enough clarity.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Shields.

Next up in the six-minute round, we'll be turning the floor over to Mrs. Atwin, who is with us virtually.

You have six minutes.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to my fellow committee members and our witnesses for joining us today.

It's back to school in the House of Commons, which means back to work. First nations have been waiting far too long for this legislation and for action around clean drinking water, so I've been very eagerly awaiting today's meeting. I'm very grateful to our witnesses for putting forward, again, incredible recommendations that we've certainly taken note of.

I'd like to specifically shout out Chief Whetung-MacInnes. Thank you for situating women's voices and children in all of this. I think those are the stories that really break through and really present the reality of what people have been experiencing.

I certainly want to underline, as well, your caution to not politicize this. This is a non-partisan issue that all of us should deeply care about. I know that my fellow members of the committee are all here for the right reasons, so I look forward to getting through this work, getting through clause-by-clause, and getting to royal assent in a form that works for everyone and works for communities.

I'd like to actually start with the first nations advisory committee.

What's the role specifically? What did that consultation or engagement process look like with regard to this legislation?

[Emily Whetung-MacInnes]

John, do you want to answer that from a technical perspective?

[John Brown, Executive Director, First Nations Advisory Committee on Safe Drinking Water]

Certainly. Then you can speak to it as the chair.

The First Nations Advisory Committee on Safe Drinking Water was created by the class action settlement. Its mandate, among other things, is to canvass and represent the views of first nations across the country. Its membership is made up of indigenous persons from across the country, and the mandate is to help provide advice to the federal government on what priorities it should look to in terms of asset allocation, funding and the types of water infrastructure that should be provided to first nations. That's mandate number one.

Mandate number two is to oversee and help monitor this very process, i.e., the repeal of the former water act and the replacement of it with this water act. In simple terms, this means ensuring that this water act meets the needs of the first nations and also meets the terms and conditions that Canada has already agreed to in the class action settlement itself, both by way of written agreement and by way of court orders enforcing that agreement.

I'm the executive director of the First Nations Advisory Committee on Safe Drinking Water. Chief Whetung-MacInnes is the chair of the committee itself, and I'll turn it over to her now to answer the question from her perspective.

[Emily Whetung-MacInnes]

I don't know that I have a whole lot more to add, John. That was very succinct.

However, with regard to Vice-Chief Pratt's point, we also provide support on the governance of first nations internally and support for that work as well.

Thank you.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

That's great, and it really picks up on what Vice-Chief Pratt was mentioning.

Several previous witnesses have also raised concerns around provincial jurisdiction when it comes to source-water protection, so I'm very interested in perhaps strengthening this piece of the bill. Do you think the formal recognition of first nations' inherent rights over water will strengthen this position when dealing with provinces?

This is for Chief Whetung-MacInnes and Vice-Chief Pratt.

[Emily Whetung-MacInnes]

Absolutely. I think recognizing the inherent rights of indigenous people always helps strengthen that process and is absolutely necessary.

[Vice-Chief David Pratt]

I concur with the chief, and I want to thank the chief, too, for the comments that she brought earlier. I also want to thank the honourable member who started off with a recognition of Grand Chief Cathy Merrick.

Thank you very much.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Thank you very much. Our hearts go out to her family.

In general, as well, for the First Nations Advisory Committee on Safe Drinking Water, your members deal with provincial governments of all political stripes. Have you seen any interest from provinces to work with you on water protections, or are these conversations already ongoing?

[John Brown]

[Technical difficulty—Editor] From the perspective of the executive director, no, we've not seen any provincial governments reach out to our committee to deal with these issues.

Perhaps Chief Whetung-MacInnes has a different perspective as the chair.

[Emily Whetung-MacInnes]

No, I have no different perspective.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Okay.

Do you think if, perhaps, there was an arrangement in the bill that required the federal government to convene a round table or something of that sort to discuss protection zones at the request of a specific first nation as a way to make sure that all future governments could fulfill these responsibilities, something that ensures this is ongoing regardless of the political stripes...?

[John Brown]

Chief Whetung-MacInnes.

[Emily Whetung-MacInnes]

Thank you.

I think, in terms of convening power, it's always helpful to get together and have those conversations, but the risk is always delay in making those things happen.

In terms of source-water protection, no, I think that's all I have to say on that.

Thank you.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Okay.

Now, quickly, as my time is running out.... I know there were two drafts circulated prior to introduction, and I know that the First Nations Advisory Committee on Safe Drinking Water was able to see these drafts. Did you put forward any suggestions that were either in full or in part seen in the second iteration of the bill?

[John Brown]

I can say that the bill we're looking at today is fundamentally different from the first iteration of the bill that we saw, so we were able to look at the two previous iterations and make many suggestions to help improve the bill. As a result of that, as you'll see from our written submissions, we think this version of the bill, with the amendments we've suggested, does a good job.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mrs. Atwin.

I now give the floor to Mr. Lemire for six minutes.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all the witnesses. Meegwetch.

My first question is for the first nations advisory committee on safe drinking water, particularly Chief Whetung‑MacInnes.

It's a pleasure to see you again and to have this discussion in a formal setting such as this one. Here is where these issues must be addressed and these debates must be held.

I would be curious to hear your views on Bill C‑61, which was tabled long before the special rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation visited and tabled his report in April 2024. In the report, he urges the Government of Canada to do more to guarantee the right to safe drinking water for indigenous communities.

Using the term “best efforts” when it comes to providing funding appears to be a loophole, not a guarantee that the money will be sufficient or a commitment that the funding will be both stable and predictable.

Do you think we should amend Bill C‑61 to ensure that the government, rather than simply doing its best, will guarantee that the money will be sufficient, stable and predictable?

[Emily Whetung-MacInnes]

Chair, I'm so sorry. The translation went out halfway through, and I have no idea what the question is. I apologize.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

We're going to quickly pause to make sure that we can address the translation problem.

Mr. Lemire, I'm going to give you more time.

In the meantime, I will continue to speak in French. Can you hear me in English? It looks that way, so great.

Mr. Lemire, I'll go back to you.

[Sébastien Lemire, Bloc, Abitibi—Témiscamingue, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I was speaking to Chief Emerita Whetung‑MacInnes, whom I am happy to see again. I'm also happy to have this discussion in an official setting where her story can be heard.

My question is about Bill C‑61, which was tabled long before the visit of the special rapporteur on human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation and the tabling of his report in April 2024. In the report, he urges the Government of Canada to do more to guarantee the right to safe drinking water for indigenous communities.

Using the term “best efforts” when it comes to funding seems to me to be a potential loophole, rather than a guarantee that the money will be sufficient or a commitment that there will be stable and predictable funding for first nations.

Are you proposing an amendment to the bill to ensure that the government, rather than just making its best efforts, actually provides sufficient, stable and predictable funding to ensure safe drinking water for first nations, as the situation in Curve Lake demands?