I'm 100% in favour of co-development with first nations. The problem is it's the first nations' water, and they have the motivation to want to come to the table because it's their water. It's talking about their fishing rights and it's talking about their access to clean water. We heard from witnesses who were in tears and who talked about the poisoning of the very waters in which their children were swimming in Alberta.
If we're not just asking for co-development from first nations but also for co-development from a province that could walk away and say it's not coming to the table because of jobs, industry or political reasons, as a first nations person, I'll say that this defeats the purpose of what we're trying to accomplish here in protecting the water sources they're connected to.
If there's an amendment we could come to that says that first nations.... I'm happy to have a strong co-development aspect of it, if that's what it takes, but to give the province the ability to not come to the table and say it's not going to come to the table because it doesn't feel this is necessary would allow first nations' water sources to be poisoned like they've been poisoned for the past 100 years. The entire intent of this legislation is to ensure that the first nations who live on reserve and who have been abandoned many times by the provinces for corporate gain.... I would think that this would be at the heart of what this bill is trying to prevent.
I just need to be clear that first nations across Canada and the first nations I've talked to are agreeing is a standard we need to put above co-operation and consultation. I want the provinces to be involved and I want them to have a say, but I don't want them to have a veto over whether they can poison first nations communities' water or not.