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

[Ben Carr, Liberal, Winnipeg South Centre, MB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair.

I want to begin briefly on two personal notes and echo some sentiments that have been shared already.

To Grand Chief Kennedy, it's a pleasure to be with you here this morning. As the sole Manitoba representative around the table, I can certainly share the feelings of many in Parliament and across the province of our grief and shock about the passing of Chief Merrick. I'm very much looking forward to working with you and continuing the legacy, path and vision that she set forward as you undertake these important responsibilities as grand chief of the AMC.

Chief Woodhouse, this is a special moment for me, because you and I have known each other since we were 15 years old. I have seen you work hard and grow into an inspiring and meaningful leader. Much of my understanding of our history as it pertains to first nations people, our public policy development and our path towards truth and reconciliation has been informed by the mentorship, guidance and friendship that you have provided to me over the years. To be with you in this capacity is quite special to me.

I want to take a step back, National Chief, and ask you to more broadly address the evolution in the past number of years of where we have come on this water file, in your view. As regional chief, it was one that you invested a fair amount of time in developing.

I'm wondering if you can provide some commentary about how you have seen the evolution of our public policy around the protection of first nations' rights, particularly as it pertains to water, from your time as regional chief, and then where we're at here today as we're talking about implementing the legislation found in Bill C-61.

[National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak]

Certainly, and thank you for that.

It's nice to see you this morning. I can't help but remember your dad as he walked these chambers. My heart goes out to you and your family, and I send my sincere condolences on his passing.

I'm glad that we're sitting here together today. It's nice to see all of you.

I have to say that this is a very important moment for first nations in Canada. I know that there was an old bill, and we're repealing it. Let's not go back to the way that bill was done in the past. It was very hurtful towards first nations. I also know that co-development isn't easy, and I know we're here and talking about amendments to this bill.

In growing up on a first nation community when I was a little girl, I could easily drink from the water. I grew up there. I know that we've come a long way in first nations communities, but we haven't come far enough. I think, after watching the way the first piece of this was done, that had it been done right back then, I don't think we would have been sitting here today. We would have been on a different track. We're here now, and we're here now together. We're here to try to work towards a bill that we can agree on. We heard the amendments from many speakers before me, and I think that if we can put some of those pieces into this legislation, we'll move this along very quickly.

At the same time, I know that first nations have never ceded their jurisdiction over their traditional waterways or source water. The United Nations General Assembly recognizes the “human right to water and sanitation” and the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment. We don't have that right now, so I know that legislation is a necessary tool to ensure meaningful change to the current water crisis faced by first nations across Canada.

Legislation and how it's developed are critical to the quality of life and self-determination of first nations. The process involves more than consultation, however: It requires co-operation and working together in good faith. This is the core of co-development that speaks to a two-way collaborative process. This is the foundation of the commitment Canada has made through section 5 of the federal UN declaration act, UNDA, which requires the following: the proposed legislation must meet this bar. All eyes will be upon it to assess whether it does that and whether Canada is sincere in the commitments made in UNDA.

This is an important moment for first nations in Canada. I know that on a first nation, we don't have the simple things that many Canadians take for granted. I've lived in two first nation communities. In either place where I've lived, I've never had access to clean drinking water. I'm so used to drinking bottled water that it's sometimes hard, when you come off reserve, to have to drink water like this water that is beside me here today, because we're so used to drinking bottled water. I think that's the reality for many first nations in this country, and I look to a time when we can fix that.

It also disheartens me when I see fishermen in Lake Winnipeg. I have to say that the first nations fishermen in Winnipeg are pulling up nets that are full of stuff. We have to do better in this country. On the waters, it's starting to show. The animals are starting to show us that. Our people are starting to show us that.

I look forward to working with all of you to find that path forward, and I think this is a right step in that direction to move in a good way together.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Carr.

Mr. Lemire, you have the floor for five minutes.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

First of all, I'd also like to extend my condolences to Grand Chief Kennedy and to all the members of Manitoba's first nations.

Grand Chief Woodhouse, we've heard calls from a number of indigenous organizations for changes to strengthen the bill and ensure that their treaty rights, such as the rights to their lands, are not suspended or eroded by the new legislation. A number of arguments were heard at the Assembly of First Nations general assembly in Montreal last July, which I attended. A number of arguments have also been presented to this committee. However, we haven't yet received the brief from the Assembly of First Nations. Can you give us a concrete description of the amendments you are recommending? You've mentioned them, but I'd like us to be able to write them down more accurately.

[Christopher Rapson]

Thank you for the question.

With respect to the treaty rights of first nations, again this comes back to protection zones.

We understand that the bill does not at this time have a definition of “protection zones”, so one of the amendments that the Assembly of First Nations is putting forward is the beginnings of a definition for protection zones that would include both the traditional territory and the treaty territory of first nations when source waters flow from those territories to first nation lands.

Also, of course, there is an inherent and treaty right for first nations to protect the source waters in those territories, and our amendment would reflect that.

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

How do you think this is coordinated with the provinces, which are responsible for water management?

[Christopher Rapson]

This comes back to the mechanism I referred to earlier. That's a mechanism that's already been, as I said, tested and endorsed by the Supreme Court of Canada with respect to the coordination and application of laws in places where there are overlapping jurisdictions. We believe that this mechanism, adapted from what was known as Bill C-92, would provide for dealing with those overlapping jurisdictions and the coordination of laws in a way that respects first nation jurisdiction, both inherent and treaty rights.

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

How do you see negotiations when waterways flow through more than one province? How are protection zones and protected areas defined?

I'm thinking, for example, of the Kitchissippi River, or the Ottawa River: Beyond jurisdiction, how can we guarantee protection and ensure water quality?

[Christopher Rapson]

It is about coordination. We live in a country of co-operative federalism. That requires the provinces, the federal government and first nations be at the table to discuss and negotiate when jurisdictions overlap.

Unfortunately, if one of those parties chooses not to come to the table or refuses to enter into an agreement, that can, obviously, stall the negotiations and leave us in a deadlock or a stalemate.

That can't be allowed. We can't be frustrating first nations jurisdiction in those circumstances. It is inherent. It does come before other jurisdictions and should be given the force of federal law and therefore paramountcy over provincial laws when provincial governments refuse to enter into such coordination agreements.

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

In the spirit of nation-to-nation dialogue, I would kindly invite the Assembly of First Nations to make its documents available in French. It would obviously be easier for francophone communities, the majority of which are in Quebec.

What could we add to the preamble? In the opinion of all members, there's a fundamental element missing from the preamble. An element should be added to recognize the importance of treaty development and reconciliation initiatives, as well as to guide constructive partnerships.

[Chief Kelsey Jacko]

Yes, it is kind of hard when you're talking about talking with the provinces.

Our treaty predates the making of the provinces or whatnot, and it's about trust. A lot of a lot of provinces are not transparent with first nations. We have to be a part of the monitoring to make sure that the water is safe.

As I said, we're last in line, and it shouldn't be like that. We were here before the creation of Canada. It's kind of hard when you have an unwilling partner to work with, so a lot of the times talks go into stalemates or they stand still. It's very frustrating for first nations.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Lemire.

Next we'll be going to Ms. Idlout, who is joining us by video conference.

You have five minutes or less.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik, Iksivautaq.

Thank you to all of the witnesses for appearing before our committee on such an important matter.

I share the sentiments with acting Chief Betsy Kennedy on the sudden loss that we all experienced with the loss of Chief Merrick. She had such an important role, and for you to take on this role at this urgent time is much appreciated. Thank you for sharing your testimony as well.

I'm quite honestly frustrated with this committee, because we've been limited in our time to ask so many witnesses questions. I'm frustrated with this committee that we're trying to rush through as many witnesses as we can, especially knowing that out of the 634 first nations, only about 31% were consulted in the development of this bill.

In my eyes, this is not meeting the standard of the duty to consult. I think it is so important that we hear from as many witnesses as possible.

We had great testimony, for example, from Chief Trevor John, who shared very clearly what the concerns are around source water, jurisdiction and sustainable infrastructure. Those things in the bill are not clear enough, especially in this time when we all know that first nations managed water with their own laws before Canada stole your jurisdiction, and for them to try to hand it back in Bill C-61 is completely unacceptable.

We need to do a better job of ensuring that first nations treaties are being implemented and that first nations' human right to water is being upheld, and we're not seeing that in Bill C-61.

Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak, congratulations on becoming the National Chief for the Assembly of First Nations. I wanted to point to the Federal Court case with Shamattawa First Nation, in which the federal lawyer, Scott Farlinger, at first acknowledged that there's been a historic underinvestment in first nations' water, but also shared his argument that “everything is better now”.

Can you respond to that, please, Chief Woodhouse?

[National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak]

Thank you.

I can, absolutely. We stand with Shamattawa. I grew up the way that.... I feel for the people up there, and I invite this entire committee and Canada to come visit our communities and see the reality of what our first nations face day to day with basic human rights like access to drinking water and source water.

Sometimes you go up to these communities and you come back down and you realize the disparity that many of our first nations are facing. This country has a lot to answer for over what we've been through for the past 150 years. I know that's not what we hear about the relationship between first nations and the rest of this country. I'm glad that we're finally here, having these really difficult discussions with each other. They're not always easy, but they're absolutely necessary, even when it comes to things like safe drinking water and sanitation.

I know there's a lot to work through. I know this is a really tough issue, and my heart goes out to Shamattawa First Nation.

Canada, you have to right that wrong with Shamattawa First Nation. We can't leave them hanging. For the minister, I'm glad about her comments on water and trying to work that way, but for the Department of Justice lawyers to go out and say the statements that they're making.... The right hand needs to know what the left hand is doing when you're going out there and speaking to my people, speaking to first nations. You can't say one thing on one hand and then have your lawyers coming to say something else in a legal way. The political way—yes, okay, there's that will. I'm glad you're all here today. I commend all of you for sitting here with us.

At the same time, when your lawyers are writing all these laws, that's where the mistrust comes from from us. These lawyers are there, and then they go into court and they say stupid things like that to first nations. They make us feel like.... I thought we were making progress.

It's hard as national chief to hear that the day before. I'm glad that we're working on this legislation and trying to co-develop and work through some of these pieces together, but we really have to work stronger together. Obviously, you're seeing the cracks in it, even before this committee happened this morning.

As I said, my heart goes out to the Shamattawa First Nation. Canada, right that wrong with them.

Thank you.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Thank you so much.

My next question is to—

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

I'm sorry, Ms. Idlout; I'm going to have to cut you off there. I apologize for doing this, but we are over time. You will have another opportunity to ask a question.

We are going to move into the second round of questioning. I'm going to cut it in half. I want to make sure that everybody has an opportunity to have another intervention here.

I'll be going to Mr. Shields for two and a half minutes.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to the witnesses for being here.

Thank you for the statement of “despite...ministers publicly acknowledging federal responsibility for water crisis, they continue to support a completely contrary position in court.” That came from the Manitoba federation yesterday. I appreciate that.

When I look at this legislation, I see the Canadian government, the provincial governments, the Canadian water commission and the indigenous water commission. No matter what you say, with this legislation, we're not going to fix the water crisis tomorrow. We're going to be in court for years. You know that.

If this legislation said that we empower the government to build water treatment plants in co-operation with every nation in the country starting tomorrow, we could set up regional training centres with support staff to train water treatment people who are available 24-7. We could set up a system so that supplies for those water treatment plants were available, just like emergency transfers for health, so that you'd have a fly-in plane to bring a part to you immediately. If we had legislation that said that, we could start fixing those problems quickly. This legislation tells me that we're going to be tied up in court for years, and you're not going to get clean drinking water for years.

We need to change the legislation so that we're taking action now. This legislation doesn't do it. It's going to tie us up in court for years across many jurisdictions. I want the water fixed now. Don't you? Yes. This legislation isn't going to do it. This is just going to tie us up in court.

[Christopher Rapson]

I'm not sure if there was a direct question in that.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

I'm frustrated.

[Christopher Rapson]

I understand.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

I've listened to people. I know the issues. I know what water treatment plants are. I've been in that business. We could fix this if this legislation did that. It doesn't do it. It ties us up with water commissions and indigenous and provincial and federal governments. We're all going to be in court. That doesn't give you clean drinking water and doesn't start it.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

I have a point of order.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Go ahead on a point of order, Mr. McLeod.

[Michael McLeod, Liberal, Northwest Territories, NT]

Mr. Chairman, I know Martin is excited and is on a roll, but he's not speaking into the mike. For people like me who have hearing issues, it's hard to follow.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

I'm sorry.

I think I was pretty clear. I'm very frustrated. I'm frustrated with legislation that I believe is just going to end up in court, with jurisdiction and jurisdiction and jurisdiction fighting. There isn't a process in this legislation that allows for it to move forward, to start building water treatment plants, training staff, having equipment ready and parts delivered. That's what needs to be done. This legislation is just going to set up court action, disputes and years of legal wrangling.

I want to see something happen so that she can drink clean water out of a tap and so you can wash your kids in a bathtub in your community and not fear that they're going to die from some cancer-related issue. That's what we need to fix.