The Winnipegization of North America. I challenge the House to clearly define the jurisdiction of water in the country. When the country was negotiated under treaty with the aboriginal peoples the term and rights to water were not defined. Referring to the oral history of treaty negotiations, I will read a passage from a report called “Aski Puko” which means the land alone in which Daniel MacKenzie asked:
When the land was sold what exactly was sold? When the treaty obligations were made, was that just dry land or did that include the lakes and rivers of this country?
In the treaty there is no mention of water being transferred, negotiated or sold. The people mostly make their living from the water and also from the land. However in the treaty there is no mention of water.
The water was assumed as the lifeblood for all nations and all people. Ownership of water was assumed. It was assumed that everybody had access to it. When we discuss interbasin transfers, bulk export, the whole concept of the ecosystem and the impact, obligations under the treaty are in breach.
Let us look at our opportunities under sustainable development. Our challenge is to look after our environment and social and economic needs in an even manner. Water will play a major role in our future.
If we start transferring water to deserted areas such as the desertification of the southwest, climate disruptions are forecast by science. We have seen evidence of that. If we transfer water prematurely it may not address the needs of urban and growing populations to the south or the urban populations of countries that need our exports.
We have to look at how we can sustain our lives in this country. As more people move to Canada and find a home here they must have a place in which to live. We cannot recklessly abandon our water resources.
China will be the first country in the world to literally restructure its economy to respond to its water scarcity. Countries are making such changes. We see examples of cities collapsing in some countries because water is no longer usable. We also have a UN commission on sustainable development that found water usage growing at twice the rate of the population increase.
If we have an abundance of water in Canada we may be abusing the gift of water as we have it now. Jurisdiction is of vital importance. There are communities in northern Canada, most of which are aboriginal communities, that do not have running water or sewage treatment plants because the economic and commercial interests of those regions cannot afford it.
We have an opportunity to create clean, fresh water in the country. In terms of federal jurisdiction there was a major change in the early 1990s when Environment Canada started cutting budgets to deal with the science and research of water. We must revisit our federal obligations to the rightful use of fresh water, to our jurisdiction over water in dealing with our provincial, federal and aboriginal obligations. The Manitoba Natural Resources Transfer Act indicated in 1930 that traditional lands and waters for social and economic benefits must be considered.
All this debate about water is by no means complete today. It is an opportunity for us to review the federal jurisdiction over water and to put a moratorium on the export and interbasin transfer of water.