Indigenous and Northern Affairs Committee on Nov. 26th, 2024

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik, Iksivautaq.

NDP-70 was an amendment submitted to us by the British Columbia Assembly of First Nations. I thank them for their great work to try to make improvements to Bill C-61, as I'm sure this will have a direct impact on the first nations people they represent.

The amendment reads that Bill C-61, in clause 31, be amended by replacing line 24 on page 16 with the following:

The Government of Canada must

It also would amend Bill C-61, in clause 31, by replacing line 27 on page 16 with the following:

water services on First Nation lands and in protection zones adjacent to First Nation lands so that First Nation

Qujannamiik.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you, Ms. Idlout.

Unfortunately, I do need to make a similar ruling in this case, because the amendment attempts to create an obligation for financing that does not currently exist in the bill. Again, House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states on page 772:

Since an amendment may not infringe upon the financial initiative of the Crown, it is inadmissible if it imposes a charge on the public treasury, or if it extends the objects or purposes or relaxes the conditions and qualifications specified in the royal recommendation.

Here again, in the opinion of the chair, the amendment proposes a new scheme that imposes a charge on the public treasury. Therefore, I rule the amendment inadmissible.

That takes us to NDP-71. Again, I will have something to say about this amendment, should it be moved.

I'll open the floor up to Ms. Idlout, should she wish to move it.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik, Iksivautaq.

NDP-71 was an amendment submitted to us by Ermineskin Cree Nation. I thank them for their hard work in ensuring that Bill C-61 could, hopefully, meet their voice, their demands and their rights.

The amendment they submitted reads that Bill C-61, in clause 31, be amended by replacing line 24 on page 16 with the following:

The Government of Canada must

It also amends Bill C-61, in clause 31, by replacing lines 28 to 30 on page 16 with the following:

persons are able to receive clean and safe water that meets the guidelines set out in the Guidelines for Canadian Drinking Water Quality.

Qujannamiik.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Ms. Idlout. Unfortunately, again, I need to make a ruling, because the amendment attempts to create an obligation for financing that does not currently exist in the bill. As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states on page 772:

Since an amendment may not infringe upon the financial initiative of the Crown, it is inadmissible if it imposes a charge on the public treasury, or if it extends the objects or purposes or relaxes the conditions and qualifications specified in the royal recommendation.

Here, again, in the opinion of the chair, the amendment proposes a new scheme that imposes a charge on the public treasury. Therefore, I rule the amendment inadmissible.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

In that case, I want to challenge the chair.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Okay. That will take us to a vote on whether the ruling of the chair will be sustained.

(Ruling of the chair sustained: yeas 10; nays 1)

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

That brings us to BQ‑29.

I recognize Mr. Lemire.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Amendment BQ‑29 proposes that Bill C‑61, in clause 31, be amended by replacing line 25 on page 16 with the following:

provide funding that meaningfully reflects consultations and cooperation between the Minister and First Nation governing bodies under subsection 27(1), that is adequate, predictable, stable, sus-

Based on that logic, we're obviously talking about all expenses incurred and how the funds are distributed to meet needs. We propose to specify that funding must also properly reflect the principle of consultation and cooperation. Essentially, we're proposing that the minister take this into account when applying his needs assessment framework.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Lemire.

I open debate on the amendment.

Mrs. Atwin, you have the floor.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

Thank you very much, Mr. Chair. I feel that, again, we understand the spirit of the amendment, and it has many merits, but I believe the existing clause 31 is actually a significant commitment for the Government of Canada and is aligned with that substantive equality concept.

To reiterate, clause 5(2) reads as follows:

The making of decisions under this Act is to be guided by the principle of substantive equality in relation to water services, as reflected in the following concepts:

(a) the distinct needs of First Nations for reliable access to water services must be addressed in a way that respects First Nations rights and their access must be comparable to that in non-Indigenous communities;

(b) First Nations are, without discrimination, to have control over their water services, including any related information management systems and the data and information they contain, and the design, construction, operation, maintenance and management of their water services; and

(c) First Nations may, without discrimination, exercise their right to deliver water services through service delivery models designed by them to suit their needs, including through the adoption of innovative approaches and technology.

Therefore, because of this strong language, I feel it's already a significant commitment for the government, so I would not be supportive of the amendment.

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Ms. Atwin.

Next, we'll go to Mr. Melillo.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

If nothing else, now that we have already supported a previous Bloc amendment to add this wording in the previous clause, I think, for consistency's sake, at this point it would make sense to include it here as well, so we'll be voting in favour.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Melillo.

Is there any further debate on BQ-29? Not seeing any further debate, shall BQ-29 carry?

(Amendment agreed to on division)

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

That brings us to BQ‑30.

I'm going to go back to Mr. Lemire.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Amendment BQ‑30 talks about the principle of substantive equality.

The amendment is that Bill C‑61, in clause 31, be amended by replacing line 27 on page 16 with the following:

water services on First Nation lands so that, in accordance with the principle of substantive equality, First Nation

We're talking about first nations individuals who receive water services. The rest of clause 31 remains the same.

The idea is to explicitly name the principle of substantive equality in the context of the bill.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Lemire.

I will now open the floor to debate on this amendment.

Not seeing any interventions, let's go to a vote.

Shall BQ-30 carry?

(Amendment agreed to)

This takes us to clause 31 as amended. Is it agreed to on division?

Oh, I'm sorry, Ms. Idlout.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

I just want to reflect my vote as “no”, because I don't support “best efforts”.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Ms. Idlout, would you like a recorded vote on that?

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Yes, please.

(Clause 31 as amended agreed to: yeas 10; nay 1 [See Minutes of Proceedings]).

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

This takes us to new clause 31.1 and PV-9.

I will have something to say about it. It is deemed moved, and I will give the floor back to Mr. Morrice to speak to it.

[Mike Morrice, Green, Kitchener Centre, ON]

Thank you, Chair.

Recognizing your rulings over the last few amendments I brought forward from Six Nations, I'm aware of and have a sense of what you'll be ruling on this one as well. It is the third attempt, along with many attempts from MP Idlout, to increase the responsibility of the Government of Canada to ensure that funding is provided.

In this case, Six Nations of the Grand River proposed adding to the bill the possibility of first nations' availing themselves of the dispute resolution process set out in the settlement agreement, should actual costs be more than the costs that were provided previously in the bill. This amendment would provide that option for them.

Once again, this comes from Six Nations of the Grand River and would increase the funds required, so I expect a ruling to follow.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Morrice. Unfortunately, as you alluded to, I do need to make a ruling on this. The rules are what they are.

The amendment attempts to alter the conditions of an existing charge in order to extend them. As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states on page 772:

Since an amendment may not infringe upon the financial initiative of the Crown, it is inadmissible if it imposes a charge on the public treasury, or if it extends the objects or purposes or relaxes the conditions and qualifications specified in the royal recommendation.

Therefore, unfortunately, in the opinion of the chair, the amendment would impose a new charge on the public treasury, and I rule the amendment inadmissible.

(On clause 32)

That takes us to clause 32 and NDP-74.

Again I mention that I'll have something to say about this one, but I'll hand the floor over to Ms. Idlout to speak to NDP-74.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik, Iksivautaq.

I'm introducing NDP-74, which is based on the multitude of responses we got from first nations all over Canada, asking that the minister not just be reduced to making “best efforts” but that the obligation for the minister be at its highest. Therefore, NDP-74 replaces “The Government of Canada must make best efforts to” with:

The Government of Canada must

I think that this amendment is very much a request from first nations to have reconciliation with Canada, first nations having for too long been reduced to “best efforts” of previous Liberal and Conservative governments, which, because of their “best efforts” at the time, always resulted in not enough investments for first nations to have clean drinking water. This has resulted in the many hundreds of boil water advisories that first nations have to endure. This is really hoping to change the colonial pattern of underinvesting in first nations.

Qujannamiik.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you, Ms. Idlout.

NDP-74 has been moved. Unfortunately, again, I need to make a ruling on this amendment, because it creates an obligation for financing that does not currently exist in the bill. As House of Commons Procedure and Practice, third edition, states on page 772:

Since an amendment may not infringe upon the financial initiative of the Crown, it is inadmissible if it imposes a charge on the public treasury, or if it extends the objects or purposes or relaxes the conditions and qualifications specified in the royal recommendation.

In the opinion of the chair, the amendment proposes a new scheme that imposes a charge on the public treasury. Therefore, I rule the amendment inadmissible.

(Clauses 32 to 36 inclusive agreed to on division)

(On clause 37)

That takes us to clause 37, and the next amendment we have is G-9. I will open the floor to Ms. Atwin to speak to G-9.

Just for members' information, this is the new G-9 that has been circulated. The reference number is 13434555.

[Jenica Atwin, Liberal, Fredericton, NB]

I believe I'm reading the updated version. If I'm not, please stop me. This is around liability, just to be clear. I move that Bill C-61, in clause 37, be amended by replacing line 19 on page 17 to line 2 on page 18 with the following:

(2) A First Nation governing body is not liable for loss or damage in relation to acts or omissions of any of its employees or any persons hired by it who are acting within the scope of their duties in the provision of water services on the First Nation lands of the First Nation if the acts or omissions were committed in good faith and the Government of Canada did not make best efforts to provide adequate funding for water services on those First Nation lands.

(3) His Majesty in the right of Canada is not liable for loss or damage in relation to acts or omissions of servants of the Crown for anything done or omitted to be done by them in good faith in the performance, or intended performance, of their duties in relation to the provision of water services on the First Nation lands of a First Nation—and no action or other proceedings for damages lies or may be instituted against such servants of the Crown—if the Government of Canada made best efforts to provide adequate funding for water services on those First Nation lands.

The goal here is to clearly outline where that liability falls between the Government of Canada and first nations in a fair and equitable manner.

This proposed administrative adjustment is to support equity and liability protections. I'd like to say that it's also specifically referenced from our September 23 meeting. The Chiefs of Ontario supported this amendment during their committee appearance.

I'd just like to read a few things from Regional Chief Abram Benedict from the Chiefs of Ontario to back that up as well. He said, “We urge the committee to amend Bill C-61 to clearly define and fairly allocate the liability. We must ensure that the liability is fair and reasonable for our communities and shared with the federal government.”

He also went on to say, “I want to clearly highlight that our communities will, reasonably, accept the liability, but will not take on broken and underfunded systems and be expected to be held liable for the federal government's lack of action on their end.”

He also made another important point in his testimony by stating, “First nations should not be held liable for Canada's historic failure to properly fund infrastructure, maintenance, operation and training, nor should first nations be held accountable for future failures or underinvestment by the government.”

This is where, again, that “best efforts” piece also comes into play.

Furthermore, the Government of Canada is required to fund in a manner that upholds first nations' human right to clean drinking water. This strengthens an already high standard. It also reinforces self-determination, which cannot be achieved without capacity, tools and resources. We believe this wording will help us get closer to self-determination, while still preventing first nations from paying the price for the lasting impacts of systemic underfunding from successive governments.

Thank you.