Thanks.
It's very clear to me that what we require is legislation around FPIC. That would be very helpful in this circumstance. Then we could of course refer to it. It's very clear that we're missing a component we could address, I hope, at some point. However, right now, we're working on an act respecting water, source water, drinking water, waste water and related infrastructure on first nation lands, which is very specific.
We also enshrine the human right to water, which I think is very important. It lends itself to this conversation. What does that look like in actuality? We've yet to see that. It's a very nice piece that has been added to the bill. I wish we had that guiding principle or another piece of legislation with that definition, but we don't. That's my fear.
The task at hand is what we're looking at now. I want to go back to the consultation for the bill. I know you've gone over this many times, but it's a preoccupation for a lot of us. We have heard from individual voices across the country and in specific communities. At the top level, what does that look like? I also think it demonstrates some of the difficulties in what that definition should be. If we're posting something online, everyone can look at it. Is that consultation? Are we holding seminars or gatherings in communities? Is it sanctioned by all members of that community? Say you have 725 registered members and maybe some live in Hawaii, and some are....
I'm wondering about the mechanics. Without a separate piece of legislation that sets all of that out, what we're doing right now puts this bill—the one we are tasked to get through in this committee—at risk.
Could you talk about the consultation piece for me? Thanks.