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

[Douglas Fairbairn]

I would say it does not lower the duty or the standards, and the fiduciary duty varies on the subject in question as well, so there's not an overarching fiduciary duty to first nations. However, certainly in this context, “best efforts” is intended to convey the fact that the government will take every step possible to achieve a result and to achieve an objective. To your question, this is a very high standard and signifies the government's commitment to ensuring safe drinking water.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Are there other examples of contract law cases being used to set out a minister's obligations to first nations?

[Douglas Fairbairn]

There are a number of federal statutes that use the term “best efforts”, and we can provide those to you, but “best efforts” is not defined in federal law, so it's necessary to go to case law to get an idea about what “best efforts” means. The case that was provided was one example of the definition, and it's a fairly good example. It's a fairly standard example of what “best efforts” means.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Are those other pieces of federal legislation ones that are impacting first nations?

[Douglas Fairbairn]

No, they are not.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

At this point, I'm still not convinced that “best efforts” is the best language that we need to pass in Bill C-61, not when best efforts can still result in first nations children living in conditions with boil water advisories or sores on their skins. If “best efforts” is introduced this way, the way I interpret the honour of the Crown or try to think about how it's supposed to be implemented.... Fiduciary duty should not ever be diminished based on interpretation of contract law, and fiduciary duty should have been used in ensuring that Bill C-61 in the first place should not have fallen below UNDRIP standards, which we have been discussing all this time.

I thank the committee and the MPs for helping ensure that UNDRIP standards are much better reflected in Bill C-61, but I do caution the parties with a red flag about “best efforts” in this legislation and how it's allowing the government to pretend that it doesn't have the resources...that it has obligations to meet because of its fiduciary duty, and downgrading that to “best efforts”.

First nations, as I have repeatedly said, had authority over water. It was stolen from them, and for this Liberal government to respond with “best efforts” because of what contract law states is still a huge disrespect to first nations who will be impacted by this.

Qujannamiik.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Ms. Idlout.

At this point, we're at the short title.

Shall the short title carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

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

On division.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

That is carried on division, which takes us to the preamble. The first one that we get to is PV-10, but before we get to that, Mr. Morrice had withdrawn this one, so we need to make sure there's no.... We need unanimous consent for it to be withdrawn.

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

(Amendment withdrawn)

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

That brings us to BQ‑35.

Right now we're at BQ-35, which is in the preamble.

Mr. Lemire, you have the floor to present amendment BQ‑35.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I have a lot to say. Just kidding.

The purpose of amendment BQ‑35 is essentially to say that water is not like any other commodity.

Specifically, the amendment proposes that Bill C‑61, in the preamble, be amended by adding after line 12 on page 1 the following:

Whereas water is not like any other commodity but a part of our heritage that must be protected, defended and treated as such, particularly in response to pressures from sectors such as agriculture, industry, tourism, transportation and energy;

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you, Mr. Lemire.

Amendment BQ‑35 has been moved.

Is there any debate on BQ-35?

(Amendment negatived: nays 9; yeas 2)

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

BQ-35 is defeated, and that takes us to BQ-36.

I will again give the floor to Mr. Lemire to that he can present amendment BQ‑36.

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

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

In that spirit, the amendment specifies the following:

Whereas Parliament recognizes that broad, concurrent action by all levels of government to protect First Nation waters from pollution, including that caused by certain persistent, toxic and bioaccumulative substances, is urgently required;

The proposed amendment is based on a lot of the testimony we heard.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you, Mr. Lemire.

Amendment BQ‑36 has been moved.

I'll open it to debate. Is there any debate on BQ-36?

Not seeing any debate, shall BQ-36 carry?

(Amendment agreed to on division)

That takes us to NDP-80, and with that I'll turn the floor over to Ms. Idlout.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Qujannamiik.

NDP-80 is an amendment that was submitted by quite a few first nations. It seeks to add UNDRIP articles to include articles 3, 4, 18, 19, 22, 28 and 29, paragraph 2 of article 32 and paragraph 1 of article 37.

Qujannamiik.

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

Agreed.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Ms. Idlout.

NDP-80 is moved.

Is there any debate on NDP-80?

(Amendment agreed to on division [See Minutes of Proceedings])

Shall the preamble as amended carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.

[An hon. member]

On division.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Shall the title carry?

[Some hon. members]

Agreed.