Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 25th, 2024

[Nelson Barbosa]

Thanks for the question.

The best-case scenario is the objectives that you're all speaking to, which are regulatory standards and a policy regime that is led and shepherded by first nations, with Canada as a partner at the table, and where there's an acknowledgement and affirmation of rights and law-making in that space, where first nation laws are put at the forefront on protecting their waters and where there's a provincial and territorial space where they can protect waters together.

I think the opposite side of that coin is what some others are highlighting, which is ambiguity of the term, a highly unclear definition of what co-development means, a stagnation in progress, a lack of alignment between provinces and territories, and a pushing of people away from co-operation and into a more adversarial or legal context.

This is, I guess, the thread of the legislation and the needle that it tries to weave with.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Unpacking that further, again, we've addressed a similar thing with similar amendments.

I do wish that the co-development piece was there for first nation governing bodies, but entering into the conversation with the provinces and territories again is further complicating this. That would be a concern, as you mentioned—that it's not clear.

The other piece is that we're under clause 22, so it's all about “If requested to do so by a First Nation governing body”, yada yada yada. It's already implied that they're going to be the ones requesting that. They're the ones at the table who are stewarding this process, so I do see it as an additional layer.

Again, we did work with many partners to put this together. I'm wondering specifically where that amendment from our Conservative colleagues came from. I am just curious, because I think it's important to the conversation.

Those are my thoughts for now. Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mrs. Atwin.

We'll go to Mr. Shields.

[Martin Shields, Conservative, Bow River, AB]

I think you made my case when you said that it's “implied”. If it's implied.... I want to make sure it's there, not implied.

I don't want any ambiguity—no ambiguity and not just implied but actually very clear. That's what we've been asked for from first nations: Make it clear—no ambiguity. They've stated that.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Shields.

I'll now give the floor to Mr. Lemire.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just want to say that we'll be supporting the principle of collaboration and consultation.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you, Mr. Lemire.

We can now proceed to the vote.

(Amendment agreed to on division)

CPC-6 is carried on division, which will take us to CPC-7.

I'll open up the floor.

Mr. Vidal, the floor is yours.

[Gary Vidal, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Again, on behalf of Mr. Melillo, I have the privilege of moving amendment CPC-7. The language of that amendment is that Bill C-61, in clause 22, be amended by adding, after line 24 on page 13, the following:

(3) A regulation made under subsection (1) must not come into force unless the First Nation governing body of the First Nation consents to it.

My comments on this are probably pretty simple, Mr. Chair.

I understand that there's been a fair amount of conversation around consent at this table over the last few meetings. I think we've heard the arguments many times, and I think this is just another step on that journey of ensuring the nations actually consent to the regulations being made that impact their nations or the water that impacts their nations.

I think I'll just leave it at that. I believe this just adds some assurance that the consent happens.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you so much, Mr. Vidal.

CPC-7 has been moved. I'll open it up to debate. Is there anybody who would like to intervene at this time?

Mrs. Atwin.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Again, we've had this conversation multiple times around the same pieces, so I don't want to reiterate in the interest of time. I think that we're going to probably land at the same place.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mrs. Atwin. Not seeing any further hands....

I'm sorry, Ms. Idlout. Did you have your hand up? I'll turn the floor over to you.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

I'm wondering what effect adding a subamendment would have if we added “provides free, prior and informed consent” after “governing body”, and whether the Conservatives would be amenable to that subamendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Ms. Idlout. I know that this hasn't been officially moved as a subamendment, but I'll just remind all members that any subamendments do need to be submitted in writing as well.

Before that, I'd be happy to open it up if there are any other comments on Ms. Idlout's suggestion.

Mr. Vidal.

[Gary Vidal, Conservative, Desnethé—Missinippi—Churchill River, SK]

I would just comment that on our side we'd be happy to look at it in writing and potentially support it.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Vidal.

In that case, I will just mention to Ms. Idlout, should you wish to move that subamendment, please say so, and then could you prepare something in writing to circulate to the committee? Maybe we'll briefly suspend for that subamendment to be circulated.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

We'll send an email right now.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Great. Thank you so much. With that, we are going to briefly suspend.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Colleagues, I call the meeting back to order.

We left off on the subamendment to CPC-7 that the NDP is moving. That amendment has been submitted in writing and translated and has been circulated. All members should have that at their disposal at this point.

I'll turn the floor back over to Ms. Idlout, should she wish to speak any further on this topic.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik.

Just to make sure that it's clearly reflected in the blues, the subamendment I've provided to CPC-7 is to remove the words “of the” after “governing body” and replace them with “provides free, prior and informed consent to it”.

I think it's pretty clear what the intent of this subamendment is.

Qujannamiik for the time to get it admissible.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Ms. Idlout.

We're going to move to debate on the subamendment.

First, I see Mr. Battiste.

I'll turn the floor over to you.

[Jaime Battiste, Liberal, Sydney—Victoria, NS]

I'm wondering how something comes into free, prior and informed consent. How do we demonstrate that?

If I'm a first nations community or the Atlantic First Nations Water Authority, can you tell me the steps that a first nation community would now have to go through to ensure that this, in practicality, works? How do they do that?

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thanks, Mr. Battiste.

Go ahead, Ms. Idlout.

[Leah Gazan, NDP, Winnipeg Centre, MB]

It's already in the Constitution. They have to.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

When we're debating bills such as these, I think it's important to remember the intent of our debate and the intent of this bill. As we've discussed, in this bill we've been trying to ensure that, as introduced, Bill C-61 hands over jurisdiction over decision-making regarding water. Then, having had Bill C-15 become law in Canada, this would help strengthen the ability of first nations to ensure they are exercising their inherent rights, as well as what we've passed in Parliament under Bill C-15 for UNDRIP: “free, prior and informed consent”.

The way that I could see it implemented is that there would be consultation. There is a right to participate, especially because it includes the right to their lands, territories and resources. Ensuring this declaration for free, prior and informed consent would make sure that first nations are engaged fully, as has been discussed. Up to this time, we've heard, for example, that only 31% of first nations were consulted in this so-called co-developed bill.

I mentioned earlier that I met a chief of a first nation this afternoon who has never even heard of Bill C-61, so these concepts of ensuring consent—concepts of ensuring free, prior and informed consent—will help to make sure that first nations can be engaged in the way that they need to be, especially with Canada's colonial and genocidal policies continuing to impact the work that first nations try to do. This would be a real recognition and a real form of reconciliation: ensuring that first nations can give the free, prior and informed consent even at regulation stage.

Qujannamiik.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Ms. Idlout.

I'll turn the floor over to Mr. Battiste.