I am in agreement to stand this discussion, but I also want to highlight another bullet point to add with this proposal that maybe everybody is forgetting.
Starting in the third line, there is a very clear limitation that says that this would only be for the first nation, so it would be “under the jurisdiction of that First Nation”. It's not a broad, vague identification. It's saying that this would be for standards on “The quality of water and source water available on the First Nation lands of a First Nation and in a protection zone under the jurisdiction of that First Nation”.
Regardless of that first nation, if it has “Aboriginal and treaty rights”, the following part of this amendment helps to clarify that exercising either of those would be under the jurisdiction only of that first nation.
To help clarify and make sure that members understand, we're not asking for a broad exercise or a broad discussion of what these rights are; it's to make sure that first nations that have jurisdiction are able to “at least meet the First Nation's needs for the purpose of exercising its Aboriginal and treaty rights, among other purposes.”
I just needed to clarify that for you all so that you can see that it's focusing on first nations that have that specific jurisdiction.
Qujannamiik.