I understand his insistence certainly towards me. It is bizarre that a first nations person is trying to water down his rights.
In saying that, the justice department has been very clear. I'll read the definition into the record again. We have a definition. I can read the whole definition from the federal justice department:
References to “free, prior and informed consent” (FPIC) are found throughout the Declaration. They emphasize the importance of recognizing and upholding the rights of Indigenous peoples and ensuring that there is effective and meaningful participation of Indigenous peoples in decisions that affect them [and] their communities....
There are three things that you must have for free, prior and informed consent. One is “free from manipulation”. This is certainly not what has occurred in the water legislation. When we meet a chief today who hasn't even heard about the legislation, who is getting second-hand information about what its intent is and where it's at in terms of meeting UNDRIP standards, that is manipulation or coercion. It's “We need to pass this bill really fast or it's not going to happen. We need to push this bill through even if it doesn't meet UNDRIP standards.” It's threatening, and that would be coercion. That would be threats.
Also, it must be “informed by adequate and timely information”. Informed is knowing what you're actually agreeing to. The chief we met today didn't even know about the bill.
There's also “prior”. That has not happened with the bill. That's why it's so important that we have free, prior and informed consent in this bill. It's because first nations people need to have protection from this kind of behaviour.
Even with this water bill, where first nations are being placed in a position to accept a bill that doesn't meet UNDRIP standards or we have to worry about clean drinking water, that very behaviour in itself is why we need free, prior and informed consent. How do you do that? By doing all of those things. That's very clear to me. That's the international definition. I'm not making these things up. It's also consistent with the UN expert mechanism.
We have a path forward. The question is whether this government is going to throw the free, prior and informed consent of indigenous people in the toilet, or it is serious about reconciliation.
That's my answer, through you, Chair. Thank you.