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

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

I'm going to call this meeting to order.

Good morning, colleagues. Welcome to meeting number 134 of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs.

As always, I want to recognize that we are gathered on the ancestral and unceded territory of the Algonquin Anishinabe people, and to express gratitude that we're able to do the important work of this committee on lands they have stewarded since time immemorial.

Pursuant to the order of reference of Wednesday, June 5, 2024, the committee resumes consideration of Bill C-61, an act respecting water, source water, drinking water, waste water and related infrastructure on first nations lands.

To help us with clause-by-clause consideration of Bill C-61, I would like to rewelcome our witnesses today.

From the Department of Indigenous Services, we have Nelson Barbosa, director general, community infrastructure branch; and Rebecca Blake, acting director, legislation, engagement and regulations. From the Department of Justice, we have Douglas Fairbairn, senior counsel.

I want to remind members that amendments are confidential and that subamendments are to be shared electronically or on paper in both official languages and sent to the clerk for distribution.

I know we'll have a very long day today, but there will be food to keep people going throughout the day, plus coffee and anything else. We should be set for a very good day today.

(On clause 27)

With that, let's resume where we left off yesterday, which was at clause 27. NDP-55 is the next amendment up for consideration.

I want to welcome Ms. May to the committee here today.

I'll hand the floor over to Ms. Idlout for NDP-55.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Ulaakut.

Welcome, Elizabeth, for joining our committee today.

NDP-55 is an amendment submitted to us by the File Hills Qu'Appelle Tribal Council. They would improve Bill C-61 in clause 27 by replacing line 4 on page 15 with the following:

First Nation governing bodies, based on their own consultation policies, in respect of a framework

Qujannamiik, Iksivautaq.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Ms. Idlout.

NDP-55 has been moved. We'll open it to debate.

First, I see that Mr. Melillo has his hand up, so I'll turn the floor over to him.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair. It's good to see you again.

It's good to see everyone at the committee. I hope you all feel the same about me, but we'll find out.

I appreciate this being brought forward by Ms. Idlout. I think it's clear that, throughout the process here, I've been a fan of consultation and co-development wherever possible.

I have a question for the officials here.

The words “based on their own consultation policies”, to me, make things a bit unclear on what exactly the obligation of the federal government would be.

Could you describe how you view that?

[Nelson Barbosa, Director General, Community Infrastructure Branch, Department of Indigenous Services]

Thanks for the question, and for having us back.

I don't think all first nations have consultation policies that they have enshrined as part of their governance makeup. While that could apply to File Hills Qu'Appelle and other first nations, I think it's fair to say that not all first nations have enshrined consultation policies and engagement with the Crown or other parties, including in the private sector.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Given that, would this perhaps create a bit of uncertainty on what the expectation is of first nations governments and the federal government?

[Nelson Barbosa]

I think it would create inconsistencies, yes.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Melillo.

Next, we'll go to Ms. Idlout.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

I would be willing to consider a subamendment to reword it so that it says it's for those that do have them.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Ms. Idlout.

If a member wants to move a subamendment, this is the opportunity to do that. Of course, we would need that subamendment to be submitted in writing and shared with the committee.

Ms. Idlout.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Given that it is a first nation that is requesting this amendment, I do hope that another party sees fit to send us a subamendment, so that we all as MPs are listening to the first nations who are requesting improvements to this bill.

As I said, this amendment was submitted to us by File Hills Qu'Appelle Tribal Council, who, because they possibly have their own consultation policies, would like to have it incorporated, so I encourage an MP to submit that subamendment.

Qujannamiik.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Ms. Idlout.

We'll give the opportunity here if there is a member who would like to do so. Of course, the mover of an amendment cannot subamend their own amendment.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Can I have the floor?

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Yes, Mr. Melillo.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I just wanted to make it clear that you knew what I was raising my hand for.

Again, I appreciate what I believe the intent of this is, but, given the comments we heard about inconsistencies, I still think that inconsistencies would be created even with that hypothetical subamendment, so we won't be moving that subamendment.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you very much, Mr. Melillo.

I'm not seeing any hands up. I guess at this point we can move to a vote.

(Amendment negatived: nays 10; yeas 1)

This takes us to CPC-9.

I'll open the floor to Mr. Melillo.

[Eric Melillo, Conservative, Kenora, ON]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I am happy to move CPC-9, which I think falls in line with many of the amendments we have been bringing forward from our side.

As it would read, it would include “co-develop the framework with those bodies.”

Let me just come back here. Subclause 27(1) currently reads:

The Minister must consult and cooperate with First Nation governing bodies in respect of a framework for assessing needs—and the making and implementing of funding allocation decisions—respecting water services on First Nation lands.

This would add, after “water services on First Nation lands”:

and must co-develop the framework with those bodies.

That ensures that first nation governing bodies, once again, have a direct say and input to be able to guide this process.

I'm not going to belabour the point, because we've heard a lot of quotes already from witnesses. We've heard from chiefs and community leaders who came and told us that they did not feel adequately consulted on this legislation and had some concerns with the authority afforded to the minister. Although there is that “consult and cooperate” language, this hopes to take it a step further and ensure that there is co-development and that the minister is unable to make any decisions that the first nation may not approve of without that direct involvement.

Again, I said I did not want to belabour it, but I think I went on a bit of a ramble there, so I'll cede the floor now and open it to any comments from my colleagues.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you Mr. Melillo.

CPC-9 is moved. I want to inform members that if CPC-9 is adopted, NDP-56 and PV-6 cannot be moved, due to a line conflict.

With that, I will open it up to debate if there are any members who would like to make an intervention at this time.

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

On division.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Okay.

Go ahead, Ms. Idlout.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

Could you explain where that conflict happens? If we pass CPC-9, where CPC-9 seems to be about co-development of the framework with those bodies, this seems to be quite a different intent from what NDP-56 means. NDP-56 talks about meeting, as a minimum, obligations set out in clauses 31, 33 and 34.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thank you, Ms. Idlout.

Just to be clear, this isn't a matter of the substance of each of the different amendments put forward. Rather, the actual line in the legislation conflicts. This is line 7 on page 15. They all make an amendment to the same line of the bill. Unfortunately, if one is adopted, the other ones can't be moved.

Ms. Idlout.

[Lori Idlout, NDP, Nunavut, NU]

If I understand clearly, before debating NDP-56, what we need to consider is the intent of co-development, as opposed to ensuring minimum obligations are met, as included in section 31, section 33 and section 34.

[The Chair, Liberal, Patrick Weiler]

Thanks, Ms. Idlout.

I think that's fair to say, because, if this amendment is adopted, the other two cannot be moved. It is a good time to consider the other two amendments as well.

Ms. Idlout, you have the floor.