Maybe I would start my answer by saying that I raised the point around the difficulty and the sensitivity around water issues, and it's not unique to water. Working with a first nations community, when it comes to house fires or emergency management, fire, flooding, these are extremely challenging situations and we do have people, me included, who go on the ground and try to be that support.
I absolutely appreciate the frustration of the committee with respect to this work. That is what drives our resolve: the impact on people. I would just note to the chair that the department is taking this.... I know actions speak louder than any commitments that can be made, but there is action there.
There is also an understanding of the mental health impacts that this has on communities. Rebuilding that trust and investing into mental health specific to water impacts are other things the department takes very seriously and tries to work with partners.
When it comes to the lift, this is about a partnership. Nobody can decide to lift unless they have certainty that they have government funding, government support. I'm not suggesting that the lift is entirely the choice of a first nations band and council in the context of.... If they wouldn't have the funding, how could they make that choice?
What I'm saying is that at the end of the day, and I think this is important, government can't dictate when someone lifts, because if a community does not feel that the conditions are in place to lift, they should not and will not lift. That is important in the context that we have to ensure they have trust in the partnership, trust in the longevity of the commitment and trust that they have the capacity and operations in place to lift their advisory.