Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Oct. 10th, 2024

[Nelson Barbosa, Director General, Community Infrastructure, Department of Indigenous Services]

If we go back to Bill C-61, I would point to some of the language around “substantive equality” and “comparable services” with regard to the question around the availability of parts. In some cases, it's not just removing one small artifact or one small piece of equipment; it's about large-scale replacement or expansions of systems.

When we're talking about critical failures of important pieces of work, it's not so much about getting a team of engineers in there as about providing long-term solutions to long-term problems. That's what this legislation proposes to—

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I appreciate that, but we have municipalities across the country that are able to quickly deal with this.

You mentioned that this is a framework to develop this process, but the information is here telling anyone who reads it exactly what the issue is. Again, if we know what the problem is, we can address it more quickly by maybe putting this action in place, instead of a framework, to deal with this issue. Wouldn't that be a quicker way of addressing the problem, rather than this long process dealing with all of this other important stuff? Let's get this fixed now, rather than potentially spending more in court.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

I would agree with you that urgency is paramount. That's why every community does have a plan. You can track online what each community's challenges are and where they're at.

Some of the communities are in a place where the chief and council are working to have confidence in the lifting of the advisory. Some of the communities are in a place of fixing deficiencies. I would also point out that in many cases—and this is a big difference between the majority of municipalities and first nations—communities are extremely removed from the ability to, for example, transport people and equipment very quickly. Those challenges get in the way of the work.

I would just say that—

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

I don't disagree with those challenges—

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

—this is the work we must continue, but this bill prevents the—

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

There are options, though. It's kind of like health. When there's a health emergency, there's an ability to get someone out quickly.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

That's why the Atlantic First Nations Water Authority model is fantastic. That's why we work closely with partners like OCWA in Ontario—the Ontario Clean Water Agency—to provide relief and training for operators.

There are communities that have, for example, no trained operator. I've spoken to some of those communities. It's not just a matter of offering training dollars, which the government of Canada has; there has to be someone in the community who wants to be a water operator.

I'm sure you can appreciate that it isn't something you can force on someone. Being a water operator, I will say, having spoken to hundreds of operators across the country, is a high-stress position. Oftentimes, you're working alone. You are responsible for the clean water for your entire community. Many times operators are exhausted, so we also have supports for communities that are operating with maybe only one trained operator to provide relief for those communities.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

We spoke earlier, and best practices were also mentioned. I appreciate why it's in the legislation. Given that we are talking about health care, I also note that when we're talking about Jordan's principle, the ability for an answer to be given by your department continues to decrease. We're down 19% since the year before to meet that 12-hour deadline.

Given the fact that your department isn't meeting its stated goals and that we're again developing more frameworks and that type of thing, should people have confidence that best practices are strong enough?

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Please give a very brief answer.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

It's not best practices. It's best efforts.

[Jamie Schmale, Conservative, Haliburton—Kawartha Lakes—Brock, ON]

It's best efforts—sorry.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

It's in relationship to money and funding, so it's actually completely different. It's not the Government of Canada providing services or administrating Jordan's principle; it's about the commitment of the federal government to ensure that adequacy of funding is there so that communities can actually have what they need to implement their own regulations.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Schmale.

Next we will move over to Mrs. Atwin for five minutes.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you so much, Minister and officials, for being with us again today.

I just want to start with again reminding Canadians and our committee of how we got here, which is chronic underfunding, discrimination, oppression in our system, a bill that was previously inadequate and didn't respond to the needs of indigenous communities across the country, and currently having no enforceable standards right now for clean drinking water and wastewater protections for communities.

I think it's disrespectful to the work of indigenous peoples and voices across this country not to acknowledge the progress we've made. Of course there are still gaps. Of course it's still inadequate. We have to keep working and fighting. However, I think if we don't acknowledge how far we've come, it puts that better future in jeopardy. I just wanted to preface my comments this morning with that.

Minister, really, we've heard from incredible voices. The testimony at this committee is just such an honour to be a part of. We've heard concerns. We have heard amendments that have been brought forward. We've heard perhaps also misunderstandings with how the bill will work in application for communities as they move forward.

I'd like to go through some of those concerns quickly. A big one we're hearing is the idea that Bill C-61 removes any responsibility from the federal government for ensuring this water protection moving forward. Can you speak to that?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Again, I just want to acknowledge that deep distrust of the federal government by first nations is not unexpected. In fact, we should all understand that it's a by-product of colonialism.

What this bill is trying to do is change the way we create legislation and the way we decide, for example, on funding models to be inclusive of first nations voices. This could be a path for the country. I hope it is a path for the country in bringing first nations voices into all of the legislation we debate in this House, because in fact they are an important partner in the work of building this country and protecting our beautiful natural resources.

Thank you for the question. I would just say that what this bill does is remove an arbitrariness of funding from the federal government. Now, that's a strange thing to say as a minister of the Crown. I'm sitting here as a minister of the Crown, representing the federal government, yet I'm advocating a framework that says that Canada can no longer arbitrarily decide, in a silo, alone—regardless of need, regardless of actual facts, regardless of science and figures—what first nations should receive to operate their systems fairly.

Rather, the federal government must work with first nations to co-develop funding models that will help them achieve their own regulations that must meet—or beat, by the way—provincial standards. First nations will have standards of water quality like everyone else in this country and the fiscal firepower to be able to achieve that.

This is revolutionary. We've not done this in this country. To be here saying to you that the Government of Canada commits to do so through this legislation should give you pride as members of Parliament, because it is the first time the Government of Canada has ever proposed something like this.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Another piece we heard is the idea that you, as the minister, would have this veto power or extraordinary opportunity in the end, once this bill potentially is passed, to make decisions without consulting indigenous communities. Can you speak to that concern?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Nowhere in the bill does that power exist. In fact, it distributes power fairly and equitably among first nations partners, the federal government, and provinces and territories, which will be asked to come to the table with first nations and the federal government to do a better job in protecting water for all their citizens. There's an opportunity in this for all of the provinces and territories.

I'm sure you heard—in fact, one of the witnesses who was on just before me talked about it—how, if we don't protect our water, we will not have life. That sounds so dramatic, and yet the more I worked on this bill and listened to elders and first nations, the more I realized that it is fundamentally true. This legislation actually empowers all of us to do a better job in taking care of the most essential, precious resource of life.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Ms. Atwin.

Mr. Lemire, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Madam Minister, nothing prevents you from establishing regulations to regulate the nuclear industry's obligations regarding the use of water and how it releases it into waterways. There are some for mining companies, in particular.

What specific role does Environment and Climate Change Canada, Health Canada, Transport Canada and Natural Resources Canada play in a bill like this?

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

Thank you for the question.

This is very important to me, because there are first nations that suffer the effects of pollution produced by oil companies or from other substances, among other things. I'm thinking of the Mikisew Cree, for example.

They are facing a devastating situation right now.

Their water and land are contaminated, and these people eat meat from the animals that live on their land.

It's very important, and the work I'm doing right now is in sync with the work that Environment Canada is doing on, for example, the first update of the Canada Water Act and the water commission. We have to work better to protect people from the effects of contaminants.

In southern Ontario, Minister Guilbeault, as you know, used his orders as the Minister of Environment to pause the production of pollutants from the petrochemical industry in Sarnia that were polluting the air with an invisible, scentless chemical that nonetheless is a carcinogen. He worked very closely with the first nation. The company, as you may have read, was not too thrilled about having to shut down business while they put on better filters and scrubs.

The chief from that community told me that they live in chemical valley. He said that we know this industry is important to the economy and that many of our members work in this industry, but it still doesn't mean that we're okay living with practices that are poisoning our members.

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

As a follow-up question, because it's directly related to your answer, would you support a ban on building a nuclear waste dump along the Kitchissippi River, or the Ottawa River, in Deep River?

It's a no-brainer for first nations, particularly for the Anishinabe who came here, for Grand Chief Woodhouse and for us.

[Patty Hajdu, Liberal, Thunder Bay—Superior North, ON]

I can't give you an answer right now, because I'm not a scientist and I don't have the necessary data. That's too broad a question for me to be able to give you a yes or no answer.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Lemire.

With that, we go to our final questioner for the panel and of the meeting today.

Ms. Idlout, you have the floor for two and a half minutes.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik, Iksivautaq.

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just wanted to remind the committee, based on the minister's responses regarding removing the arbitrariness of what the federal government can do, that this kind of statement ignores the legal obligations that the federal government has towards first nations and important constitutional principles like the honour of the Crown and the fiduciary duty that the federal government has to act in good faith.

I also remind the committee that there is a Supreme Court decision, a judgment regarding the Haida Nation, that says, “In all its dealings with Aboriginal peoples, from the assertion of sovereignty to the resolution of claims and the implementation of treaties, the Crown must act honourably.”

This does not prevent the federal government from funding or from introducing laws that respect their relationship with first nations. To posture to us that this would eliminate that arbitrariness I think disregards that important relationship with first nations. It disregards the importance of reconciliation that this government must exercise with first nations, rather than refusing to act towards reconciliation.

We need to make sure as a committee that we've heard from those who have been ignored. Only 31%, we were told by bureaucrats, were engaged in this so-called “co-developed legislation”. I take this opportunity to make sure that we understand, based on what we've heard, that there.... I do recall, as well, that there have been numerous submissions from first nations.

The indigenous and northern affairs committee received notice of my motion on October 4. I would like to submit my motion:

That the committee direct the analysts to prepare a summary document of correspondence and briefs submitted, including recommended amendments and a summary of issues, related to Bill C-61, First Nations Clean Water Act.

We were told this morning by the Assembly of First Nations that they had submitted their brief, but I've looked through my inbox, and I haven't seen any of that correspondence or their submissions.

Qujannamiik, Iksivautaq.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Ms. Idlout.

It's my understanding that you had already submitted and circulated this motion, I believe, last week. Just so I understand things correctly, are you moving the motion at this moment?