44th Parl. 1st Sess.
February 5, 2024 11:00AM
Madam Speaker, personally, I see two strong aspects of Bill C-61.
First and foremost, I appreciate and value all the work and contributions from the minister and indigenous leaders throughout the country. They brought this legislation forward through consultation and hard work.
Second, we talked about the UN declaration, in terms of how we bring forward legislation. Again, we see that the legislation is being driven not just by the minister but also by indigenous leadership.
It is so important that we continue to work hand in hand with indigenous people in order to protect mother earth, as it is often referred to, particularly when dealing with water. Could my colleague provide his thoughts on that?
117 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:20:19 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to thank my colleague from Winnipeg North for his commitment to first nations and for his question.
I will answer it by pointing out that the Minister of Indigenous Services was asked to release a list of the first nations and organizations that were consulted about the bill. That request went nowhere, and instead the minister stated that all first nations had received the bill, as well as a second one based on consultations with communities.
We obviously need to ensure that consultations have indeed taken place, in a spirit of consultation, not simply sharing information.
Take the Assembly of First Nations Quebec-Labrador, as an example. Its members must be able to take part in the process and have their say, particularly when it comes to first nations located in Quebec. That is what nation-to-nation dialogue is all about. It is an interesting principle, but the government needs to walk the talk.
159 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:21:25 p.m.
- Watch
Uqaqtittiji, a lot of the thoughts the member shared are quite similar to what I have analyzed as well.
I would like to hear from the member what his thoughts are on the current Liberal government's attitude toward indigenous peoples, and what it means that it introduced this bill that would not meet international human rights laws.
58 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:21:52 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Nunavut for her comments and question.
She was already one of the members of the House I most respected. When I had the chance to get to know her better on the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs, I grew to admire her and her genuine commitment to the first peoples even more.
Obviously, in this context, the government must do something toward reconciliation as part of a nation-to-nation dialogue that is as inclusive as possible. When one informs people of something, that is not a dialogue. If I sent someone an email, I obviously cannot say that we had a dialogue. That is key. We have seen the government taking the first nations for granted in too many bills. They have been taken for granted since the Indian Act. That has done a lot of harm.
Now, we need to take action. I think that we can demonstrate a new openness in 2024. That means being proactive, reaching out, and accepting that there may be different ways of seeing things. We are talking here about a fundamental right, access to water. We have to get this right.
198 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:23:05 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to congratulate my colleague on his recent appointment as our party's critic for this very important file.
Earlier, I was trying to tell the Minister of Indigenous Services that, in 2017, water testing was done back home, in the community of Listuguj. The tests found that there was a certain level of lead in the water that did not meet the acceptable or recommended limit set by Health Canada. When the community reported this to Indigenous Services Canada, the department told those people that the problem would be solved if they let the water run for a while prior to consuming it, instead of simply helping the community invest in replacing the plumbing, for example. These tests were carried out in a day care centre. The children were drinking this water. We know that consuming lead or a certain concentration of lead in water has an ill effect on health. It affects children's brain development.
I hope the bill will ensure that, when communities ask for help, the government and Indigenous Services Canada will respond and that the necessary funding will be available.
Does my colleague think this will be the case, or does he still have concerns, especially with regard to funding?
209 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:24:24 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I want to say a special thank you to my colleague for her leadership with the community of Listuguj. She clearly knows every detail of that community's needs.
It is unacceptable that a day care does not have drinking water. What happens as a result of a situation like that? The same entity, be it the municipal or local administration or the day care itself, will have to make choices: repair the pipe, or invest the money in education, in preserving the language? In many cases, the health emergency must take priority and the pipe must be fixed. That is a problem because the federal government should be taking on this responsibility. As we have seen over the years, the amounts are simply insufficient.
127 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:25:17 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague from Abitibi—Témiscamingue for his speech and also for his response to the question from our colleague from Nunavut. I was amazed by the question she asked. It is so clear to me that this bill must be garbage if our colleague from Nunavut thinks it does not respect human rights.
Could my colleague from Abitibi—Témiscamingue say a few words about that?
75 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:25:53 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Saanich—Gulf Islands for her question and her remarks, as well as for her genuine commitment to first nations.
I will give an example concerning water quality. She accompanied the Kebaowek First Nation here so that its members could speak at a House of Commons news conference on a fundamental issue, namely the quality of water in the Ottawa River, which borders their territory. A nuclear waste treatment and storage facility is going to be built in Chalk River. This project is vehemently opposed by my colleague from Saanich—Gulf Islands and many others, including myself.
The possibility of a leak poses a risk to water quality in the region. We are experiencing numerous climate change-related disasters, and it is possible that a tipping point could be reached. In addition, the facility is located on top of a hill from which water runs off into the Ottawa River, six kilometres away. The consequences will be felt not so much in Abitibi—Témiscamingue as farther south, where the water flows down to Ottawa-Gatineau, as well as Montreal and Quebec City. The consequences could be devastating for both indigenous and non-indigenous residents. We need to be extremely vigilant when it comes to protecting our water. I am making a personal commitment to address this issue.
231 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:25:55 p.m.
- Watch
The hon. member for Longueuil—Saint-Hubert has time for a brief question.
14 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:27:27 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I am not sure if I can be brief.
What an absurd situation. I have been listening to the debate since this morning, and I cannot get over it. First nations account for 5% of Canada's population. We are debating a bill that seeks to give 5% of the population of this country access to drinking water. It is mind-boggling to contemplate.
I would like to raise another issue with my colleague. I visited his region to talk about housing. Lac‑Simon alone is short 300 housing units. The statistics on housing for first nations are devastating. They are overrepresented when it comes to unsanitary and overcrowded housing.
What does my colleague think should be done to get this issue dealt with here? What can we do not only about drinking water, but also about housing, so that first nations truly have access—
149 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:28:17 p.m.
- Watch
I asked the hon. member to be brief and he took more than a minute to ask his brief question.
The hon. member for Abitibi—Témiscamingue has 30 seconds to answer.
35 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:28:27 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, it was an excellent brief question because it leads me to point out the importance of first nations self-governance. Funding is key, but it must be significant, recurring and predictable.
Let us talk about Quebec's water policy. Quebec made that policy a fundamental law. Based on my discussions with first nations back home, I would say that if the federal government wants to take meaningful action, it should allow first nations to be subject to the provincial legislation, which is already very progressive. If the government stopped encroaching on provincial jurisdictions, that might help Quebec protect water.
102 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:29:02 p.m.
- Watch
The member did a great job. That was just one second over, which is not bad.
Questions and comments. The hon. member for Nunavut.
24 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Uqaqtittiji, I am privileged to represent Nunavut in the House. I am sorry I missed the Minister of Indigenous Services's speech as I was in committee. Our committee was concluding the study of the Métis self-government bill. I am glad I am able to at least find out what her statements were and to respond to them later.
I appreciate that before July 1, 1867, Inuit, first nations and, later, the Métis, governed these lands. Before Canada, they had laws regarding wildlife, marine and terrestrial environments, ecosystems and relationships with each other. Bill C-61, an act respecting water, source water, drinking water, waste water and related infrastructure on first nation lands is a particularly important one to remind us of the existence of indigenous peoples before colonialism. Before colonialism, indigenous peoples protected water and the land, and they used the environment for sustenance, acknowledging the limits. Therefore, protecting and preventing future damage was at the core of being sustained by the environment, especially water.
I take this opportunity to remind Canadians that Canada’s colonial efforts to “remove the Indian from the child” remain active. There are more indigenous children in foster care than there were in residential schools. There are more indigenous people who are homeless, in overcrowded housing situations or living in substandard housing. First nations, Métis and Inuit have the largest infrastructure gap. Indeed, the NDP found that the first nations infrastructure gap is at $350 billion. The Liberal government made cuts to MMIWG funding.
Therefore, when this bill was introduced, I put on my oppressed lens and sought where it could be familiar to me. I found familiarity in asking these questions: Why, in this legislation, are human rights and treaty rights not on par with what other Canadians have as rights? Why does the bill not align with international human rights laws regarding water? Why does the bill provide only a guide regarding the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples?
Before I go deeper into this analysis, I want to share what is included in Bill C-61 according to the Government of Canada website. The key elements of the bill include the recognition and affirmation of the inherent right of first nations to self-government, including jurisdiction over water, source water, drinking water, waste water and related infrastructure on, in and under first nation lands; rights-based regulatory pathways to protect water and source water adjacent to first nation lands, in consultation and co-operation with first nations, other federal ministers, and provinces and territories, to help protect drinking water sources flowing onto first nation lands; and minimum national standards for the delivery of drinking water and waste water services on first nation lands, based on first nations choice.
Other key elements include a federal commitment to make best efforts to provide adequate and sustainable funding for water services on first nation lands comparable to services received in non-first nations communities; a requirement to provide funding that, as a minimum, meets the commitment expenditures set out in section 9.02(2) of the settlement agreement; a requirement for all decisions made under the proposed act to be guided by the principle of free, prior and informed consent; and a commitment for Canada to support the creation of a first nations water commission that would support first nations in exercising greater control over drinking water and waste water services on first nation lands.
To go back to my analysis of the continued lack of commitments toward first nations, as well as the impacts this continues to have on indigenous peoples, unfortunately, Bill C-61 falls short on respecting human and indigenous rights. According to an analysis by JFK Law:
Overall, Bill C-61 provides First Nations with a strong foundation to assert control over their water resources and jurisdiction over water occurring on First Nations land. However, the legislation fails to expressly recognize a human right to drinking water or a guarantee for substantive equality for access to water services on and off First Nations lands. Critically, the legislation fails to include provisions for effective source water protection, which is necessary to ensure First Nations have enough clean water flowing onto their lands and territories to meet their needs.
The Federation of Sovereign Indigenous Nations stated, “the first public draft released by Canada in February was developed in secret by Indigenous Services Canada without any direct input from First Nations, a fact that has been raised by the Assembly of First Nations and several regional First Nations organizations over the course of 2023”. Other first nations, such as those represented by treaties 6, 7 and 8 and Neskantaga said early on that they had been kept in the dark about the legislation and did not see it before it was tabled.
I note that, in addition to another bill tabled by the Liberal government, Bill C-38, an act to amend the Indian Act on new registration requirements, Bill C-61 has been introduced on the basis of a court case. In November 2019, legal action was initiated against Canada on behalf of all members of first nations and members resident on reserves that had a drinking water advisory for at least one year since 1995. Terms of the settlement agreement were previously announced on July 30, 2021. While they have been mentioned by others in this House, I repeat that they include the following: $1.5 billion in compensation for individuals deprived of clean drinking water; the creation of a $400 million first nations economic and cultural restoration fund; a renewed commitment to Canada's action plan for the lifting of all long-term drinking water advisories; the creation of a first nations advisory committee on safe drinking water; support for first nations to develop their own safe drinking water bylaws and initiatives; a commitment of at least $6 billion to support reliable access to safe drinking water on reserves; and the planned modernization of Canada's first nations drinking water legislation.
We have heard that Bill C-61 was co-developed with first nations. While I appreciate the effort by the Minister of Indigenous Services, I know that more could have been done. The Assembly of First Nations is an important national first nations organization. However, it does not represent all first nations. There are indigenous nations in Canada that are not represented by AFN. During committee, we will need to ensure that as many first nations as wish to be heard, are heard. As parliamentarians, we must incorporate indigenous ways of working together. We must ensure that first nations people who feel ignored are afforded the opportunity to speak to this bill. In this way, we can make sure that Bill C-61 is improved and truly co-developed.
In 2018, the Assembly of First Nations held an engagement regarding safe drinking water. The concerns shared at the time included a lack of adequate, predictable and sustainable funding; a lack of recognition of indigenous rights; potential infringement of indigenous and treaty rights; a lack of protection of source water; and insufficient engagement on water issues that directly affect first nations. When Bill C-61 goes to committee, it must seek to answer all these concerns.
Bill C-61 requires scrutiny to make sure that inherent treaty rights and human rights obligations are met. As a G7 country, Canada must show that it treats the original inhabitants with the utmost respect.
We have generations of first nations that have grown up without access to tap water. They probably think it is normal to drink bottled water. We have first nations who probably think that it is normal to boil water before it is safe to drink. It is 2024, and we must ensure that first nations do not continue to think it is okay to have to do this in order to drink water.
Bill C-61 requires a lot of work. I hope that we, as parliamentarians, do this work with the lens that first nations have inherent treaty rights and human rights and that we must all do what we can to ensure that their rights are respected.
1375 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:41:01 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, Ontario Regional Chief Glen Hare from the Chiefs of Ontario stated, “The process of this bill is more than consultation. It reflects co-operation and true co-development, a two-way collaborative process.” Could the member comment on what he said?
45 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:41:33 p.m.
- Watch
Uqaqtittiji, as I shared earlier, I know that the Minister of Indigenous Services has worked really hard with organizations such as the Assembly of First Nations. However, they do not represent all first nations. There are way too many first nations that were not included during this consultation process. In terms of those who were consulted, I appreciate the sentiment, but that does not extend to all first nations.
69 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:42:07 p.m.
- Watch
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Nunavut for her commitment and her speech.
I would like to ask the member a question in light of where she is from. What is the drinking water situation in her community? As I understand it, the territorial governments provide safe, clean water in communities, including first nations and Inuit communities. It is my understanding that this is basically the territory's responsibility.
Have the territories been consulted? Do they approve of the elements included in this bill? What are the needs in first nations communities?
I am wondering wether the issue of drinking water was a factor in her decision to get into politics in 2021 and her commitment to improve conditions in first nations communities.
127 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:42:56 p.m.
- Watch
Uqaqtittiji, the member's question is an important one.
As an Inuk, as I said earlier, I had to really scrutinize the bill based on my experience as an indigenous person who has experienced oppressive and genocidal policies most of my life. This is why so much in the bill is familiar in terms of those kinds of oppressive policies. The reason I felt compelled to run to sit in Parliament is that this is the place where we can help make those changes. As parliamentarians, we can make sure that we are always fighting to uphold indigenous people's inherent rights. We are fighting to uphold human rights for all Canadians, including first nations, Métis and Inuit.
120 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
Madam Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from Nunavut for the outstanding work she does on this file every day and every week.
Arguably, fresh water is our most precious resource. In Canada, we are lucky to have one of the largest reserves of fresh water anywhere in the world. Many Canadians, including me, take it for granted that, when we turn on the tap, fresh, clean drinking water comes out. However, for so many first peoples, this reality does not exist. That is a shame in a country as wealthy as Canada.
The gist of my question comes from the fact that I have sat in this House of Commons now for just over eight years, and this has, supposedly, been a very important priority for the Liberal government. However, my colleague talked about the infrastructure gap that exists and the fact that there are still boil water advisories, and it is only now that we are seeing this legislative framework come into play in debate, in the form of Bill C-61.
What would the situation be like if the Liberal government had been a little more proactive on the legislative front? If we had seen legislation like Bill C-61 introduced not in the previous Parliament, but the one before that, where might we be now and what difference might that have made for people?
230 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- Feb/5/24 1:45:19 p.m.
- Watch
Uqaqtittiji, I very much enjoy working with my colleague.
The reality for first nations, Métis and Inuit, as I was asked about earlier as well, has been unfair. There have been inequities, such as a lack of investments, resulting in many social issues that are beyond what we see for Canadian standards.
The indication that the Liberal government is not showing a true commitment to reconciliation can be seen in this bill. If this bill sought to have true reconciliation with indigenous peoples, it would have shown a willingness to uphold indigenous human rights, international human rights and access to water. It would have included provisions to uphold first nations treaty rights, for example, by making sure that first nations have authority for source water protection and providing an absolute guarantee that funding is sustainable and consistent, so first nations have ongoing access to safe drinking water.
149 words
- Hear!
- Rabble!
- add
- star_border
- share
- menumenu
- notificationsnotifications
- home
- mailmail
- searchsearch
