SoVote

Jun/5/24 6:08:10 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I do not remember, to be honest, but I will retract anything that could be heard as offensive.

20 words

Jun/5/24 6:08:16 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am referring to the use of possessive language such “our” or “my”. In this case, it was the use of “our first nations”.

32 words

Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia

Jun/5/24 6:08:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I understand and I apologize. I am aware of that. I slipped a bit.

16 words

Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia

Jun/5/24 6:08:32 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-61

It is an emblematic issue because if we cannot solve this problem in conjunction with first nations, how can we have confidence that we can manage our water resources more generally in this country? It is an important issue because it involves the health of first nations, and it is an emblematic issue because it says a lot about how we can manage water in general in this country. It is one of the most stubborn and complex issues to face any government in Canada, and it not only requires money, but also requires major investments. For example, what I have read recently is that, as we know, one of the issues in terms of bringing clean drinking water to first nations is sustainable financing for maintenance of first nations water systems. I have read somewhere that the funding requirement over a 10-year period, from 2016 to 2026, is about $430 million, yet there is only about $291 million available. Therefore, there is a need to increase funding for maintenance of first nations water systems. Now, what I have heard, on the positive side, is that since 2021, Indigenous Services Canada pays 100% of maintenance costs; whereas before, it only paid about 80%. What has been required all along in dealing with this issue is not only the financing, but also the will to make it a priority. This is not to cast aspersions on any previous government. I do believe that there has been a serious commitment to resolving the issue by this government. I did not see this for myself, but I am told that at one point, the minister in charge at the time basically put up a map in her office and pinpointed where all the problem drinking water systems were. She would be able to see this map every day and would be reminded that this is a major government priority. Therefore, the will to do something about this problem is fundamental to solving the problem. As I said, I intend to be a part of a committee study, and one of the issues that I hope to learn more about as we study the bill at committee is how we can better protect source water. Clean drinking water not only is dependent on the kind of system that is in place or built in a first nations community, but also is a function of the source water. As a matter of fact, the kind of system they build is a function of the source water as well. How do we protect source water? I first became aware of the issue of source water about 10 years ago when I sat on the environment committee. It was a minority Conservative government at the time, and we undertook a study of the impact of the oil sands on the Athabasca Watershed. There were concerns downstream from the oil sands operations, basically in Fort Chipewyan, that the drinking water was being contaminated by the oil sands industry. That, in itself, is a source water problem and a source water issue. How do we protect source water so that first nations can have confidence in their drinking water? How do we protect source water when a lot of the source water is in provincial jurisdiction and a province is managing economic development in its jurisdiction? How do we get the province to co-operate with the federal government and first nations to protect the source water? As a matter of fact, the whole issue of source water and the oil sands came up again at the environment committee when we were studying the leaks and spills at the Kearl tailings pond. Again, the first nation in Fort Chipewyan is very concerned about how the oil sands and how this particular spill could be impacting the first nation's source water downstream. How do we protect source water? How do we manage the interface between jurisdictions to make sure that we can protect source water in the best interests of those who are downstream and are consuming that water? I hope to learn more about this when I attend the committee study of Bill C-61. I am pleased to say that there has been progress since our government took power in 2016. There were 144 long-term drinking water advisories in place in November 2015. There are now 29 left in 27 communities. Sometimes an advisory will be lifted, but then it will recur or one will recur elsewhere in the same community. There has been progress. I do not think we should say that there has been no progress because that does not do any good. It just discourages Canadians and governments from doing what they can to solve the problem once and for all. The bill is very important for three particular reasons. One, it affirms the inherent right of first nations to self-government in relation to water, source water, drinking water, waste water and related infrastructure. Two, it creates a legal framework for protecting source water adjacent to first nation lands, which is what I was referring to.

855 words

Mr. Maxime Blanchette-Joncas (Rimouski-Neigette—Témiscouata—Les Basques, BQ)

Jun/5/24 6:15:28 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, my colleague's speech was very interesting. I think he is suffering from extreme optimism. Canada, which has the largest supply of drinking water in the world, is unable to provide its citizens with safe drinking water. My colleague said that progress has been made and we should be happy with that. The Liberal Party's promise in 2015 was to provide clean drinking water to indigenous communities. It has not been able to keep that promise. It is all well and good to say that progress has been made, but why is it that, after nine years in power, the government introduced a bill saying that more action is needed? There is a lack of seriousness, much like there was with the electoral reform promise the Liberal Party made in 2015. I would like my colleague to explain, as optimistically as he likes, what legislation needs to provide, nine years down the line, in order to give people access to a resource as basic as clean drinking water.

171 words

Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia

Jun/5/24 6:16:38 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I do not believe that I was being overly optimistic. I was very clear and I said that the challenges were enormous. The fact remains that there are far fewer boil water advisories than there were in 2015. The situation is far from perfect. Additional funding is required to solve all these issues. There are systems that are on the verge of being operational. In 1% of cases, a feasibility study is under way. We have made quite a bit of progress, but the purpose of the bill is to consolidate the progress that has been made so far. The bill is not going to correct the situation entirely. Funding will. We are getting on with the job. As for this bill, it will create a framework for the future while consolidating the progress that has been done so far.

142 words

Mr. Blake Desjarlais (Edmonton Griesbach, NDP)

Jun/5/24 6:18:00 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his commitment to see this through to committee stage and to hopefully see some meaningful amendments. I also want to thank the member not only for retracting his statement in my point of order earlier, but also for dividing his time. It really means a lot to me to be able to speak to this important issue. In regard to the definition of first nations lands in the legislation, I am told by treaty organizations that the definition is too narrow and that it does not fully acknowledge treaty rights and interests that extend those colonial boundaries, also known as reserve lands. Would the member be amicable to seeing amendments to the definition portion of this legislation, particularly when it comes to the definition of first nations lands beyond just the narrow description provided by the Indian Act, which is reserve lands?

150 words

Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia

Jun/5/24 6:18:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, the answer is yes, from my point of view. I think this is a major problem. We have oil sands operations on Treaty No. 8 land, yet somehow we cannot control the damage that is being done to those treaty lands. There is a problem somewhere. The member knows much more about this than I do. If the problem is in the definitions, and if there is a way to expand those definitions, then I would be in favour of that.

83 words

Mr. Kevin Lamoureux (Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons, Lib.)

Jun/5/24 6:19:33 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I wonder if the member could provide his thoughts about the relationship that has been established and the general commitment the government has made, with regard to boil water advisories. At one point, when we first took office, there were 105 boil water advisories. We have actually gotten rid of over 140. What are the member's thoughts about the general movement, in terms of the government recognizing the issue, and about actually putting financial resources and things like today's legislation in place to protect the water?

90 words

Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia

Jun/5/24 6:20:16 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, we have invested more over a long period of time. The other point I would like to make is that the government actually created a department to deal specifically with indigenous services. It reorganized government so that it could better attack this problem, and I think that is important.

51 words

Mr. Blake Desjarlais (Edmonton Griesbach, NDP)

Jun/5/24 6:20:38 p.m.
Watch
Re: Bill C-61

Madam Speaker, it is an honour to have the opportunity to rise in this place as a member of Parliament. The fact is that, in this country's history, the opinions of indigenous people and their leaders have been largely neglected. It is no secret that indigenous people have, for generations, attempted to build a bridge between those who occupy and those who seek peace and betterment for all people. That is the true nature, spirit and intent of the historic treaties that were signed. Pipes were lifted so that nations could build together. The treaties that we often speak about are fundamental to Canada's establishment. As a matter of fact, they are more fundamental than even the mace that we honour in this place. There would be no mace, no Parliament and no members of Parliament without the consent and treaties of indigenous people. We make promises to one another, particularly to share this place, its resources and our country's mighty prosperity, but we continue to fail to meet them. First nations have been consistent and stalwart in their message that the treaties are a path forward, not just for peace today but for peace tomorrow for the young children who are still growing up without clean water. I have many relatives, friends and family members who continue to suffer without clean water today. I myself grew up in a small rural northern community adjacent to a reserve known as the Métis settlement, where we shared some similar realities, including the lack of clean water. I know what it is to turn on a tap and not have clean water come out. People grow up in that circumstance for so long that they do not even know the miracle of what clean water is when it comes out of a household tap. I am ashamed of that. I finally moved away from the small community where I had so much love but suffered so much poverty. When I turned on a tap at a friend's house, put a cup underneath that tap and took a drink directly from it, I was amazed. I am still amazed that one of the wealthiest countries around the globe, Canada, a G7 country, could bear witness to such atrocities for our children. Our own children still do not have the dignity of being able to quench their thirst with clean water in the convenience of their own home. Mould, inadequate housing, a lack of infrastructure, no operations and maintenance and a lack of technical ability have all come together in what has become the worst outcome. The reserve system is largely an apartheid system, and it has driven indigenous people into a desperate reality. They are proud people whom I have had the great benefit of learning from. I owe so much of who I am to the better good nature of those who continue to suffer. That is why I am so honoured to be in this place, so I can speak to their truths and hope I can encourage all my colleagues to rectify this immensely difficult circumstance. We often talk about the need to pass good legislation in this place, but it is more important to listen, learn and write good legislation. These are the important pieces in making a country stronger, and this is one pathway toward a better future. When Treaty No. 6, Treaty No. 7 and Treaty No. 8 tell me that the government has not fully listened to their concerns, that pains me. When I hear that the bill does not fundamentally recognize their treaty rights to water, that hurts me. There is a Cree word, nîpîy, meaning “water”. This word is not just the noun of the thing we drink, the thing we swim in or the thing our relatives with fins live in. It is a spirit that is so deeply fundamental to who we are as humans that we could not possibly abuse it. Worse yet, to deny access to it would mean to deny access to the very fundamentals of life, of spirituality and of a nation. It is imperative that we take the opportunity presented to us in Bill C-61 to do what is right. As a matter of fact, the history of the legislation is so mired in colonial attitudes that it is now time. Since the inception of similar legislation presented by the Conservatives in 2013, it has been litigated by first nations and taken down by the courts. The current government entered a settlement agreement to rectify some of the pains caused by that legislation. The courts have now ordered that the government table a piece of legislation in its stead. Bill C-61 stands now in its place. Let us not repeat the mistakes of the past. Let us not force first nations people back to the courts to plead an injustice that we can rectify here in this place today. The consequential months that the legislation will be in committee will be important for first nations as they see their relative nîpîy, water, debated as if it were something that had not been known to us all as humans for so long. There is a fundamental right to water for all persons. We must recognize this in the legislation. We must go further to even recognize that the treaty to which this country stands has an obligation to ensure that these rights, the treaty and inherent rights of first nations to their lands, include water. We desperately need to establish a treaty table with the treaty organizations that represent Treaty No. 6, Treaty No. 7 and Treaty No. 8 in order for them to exercise not only their constitutional rights but also their rights as a nation to define for themselves the future for their children, because there is no future without water. That is how fundamental this question is, and I cannot beg my colleagues more than to see that for what it means. If we say “water”, we might as well say “life”, because that is the truth. Denying water will deny life. We can rectify this. That is why I decided to come into this place: to ensure that these fundamental truths and fundamental rights are truly adhered to. The treaty groups need to see legitimate co-development. They need to see a legitimate relationship that honours the treaty people for who they are: stalwarts of water, of land and of a better future. This is not only for first nations but also for all of us. If we protect water, particularly source water, we will do it justice for the next generation and for generations to come. That is what first nations are calling for. First nations must see a guarantee of the protection of water off reserve. I mentioned the issue of the apartheid system, which is the reserve system; it continues to say first nations land is the small postage stamp we see on a map. All land in Turtle Island is first nations land, all of it. We must recognize that and ensure that we protect the land with protection zones, which could be large enough to ensure that the quantity of water needed to quench that thirst is truly met for generations to come. We must abandon any attempt at dump-and-run legislation that would allow corporations to continue to harm water and leave untreated, poisonous chemicals in our waters. I will end with this: First nations see Bill C-61 as being of historical significance and national import; we must get this right. First nations are calling to our attention the opportunity, and we do not often get this. I must beg the chamber to take this piece of legislation as seriously as it takes the very existence of this country; without it, this country will fail, not just today but for generations to come.

1339 words

Mr. Francis Scarpaleggia (Lac-Saint-Louis, Lib.)

Jun/5/24 6:30:30 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I will go back to the issue of source water and what I was saying before in my speech about the community of Fort Chipewyan. The community is concerned in terms of the quality of its water and the impact that water might be having on the health of members of the community. Alberta Health Services has the data to be able to do a longitudinal study of cancer rates in Fort Chipewyan. It was recommended by the environment committee many years ago that it be done, yet it has not been done. How should we go about getting the Alberta government to do that? If it will not do it, is there a way for the federal government to do it?

124 words

Mr. Blake Desjarlais

Jun/5/24 6:31:19 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I very much appreciate the question from my hon. colleague. When it comes to the direct impacts of the lack of good-quality water on first nations communities, they are huge. Indigenous people in Canada are far more likely to suffer chronic illness, disease and even things as terrible as cancer because of the lack of very basic necessities, such as water. It is imperative, and I would recommend, that the federal government use its immense power under section 91(24) of our Constitution, which grants this place an immense amount of power to come into force on laws and agreements with first nations and that could see to it that provinces can no longer ignore their legitimate rights. I will add one more piece, because this question is so important. Section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982, recognizes and affirms the inherent treaty rights of first nations people. Those rights are rights to water, health, justice, self-government and so many more. We must honour it. We must use our powers in this place for good and to make sure that first nations, Métis and Inuit are protected and their rights affirmed.

197 words

Mrs. Caroline Desbiens (Beauport—Côte-de-Beaupré—Île d'Orléans—Charlevoix, BQ)

Jun/5/24 6:32:38 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I am feeling a bit intimidated given my new status as a water warrior. I figure I really need to ask a question that lives up to my title. I would like to thank my colleague from the neighbouring party here. He is raising awareness about the fundamental issues surrounding access to water. We share the exact same position. I would like him to discuss the urgent and unacceptable nature of the fact that we are still discussing the need to provide first nations with access to water. Countless people still do not have access to drinking water in first nations communities. I would like him to comment on the fact that this is taking so long. We should not be talking about this anymore. Everyone should have access to water in this extraordinary land that is home to 20% of the world's drinking water reserves. This is a disgrace. I would like my colleague to comment on the fact that this has taken so long and we are still—

174 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Jun/5/24 6:33:55 p.m.
Watch

I have to give a member time to ask another question. The hon. member for Edmonton Griesbach.

17 words

Mr. Blake Desjarlais

Jun/5/24 6:33:59 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, kinana'skomitina'wa'w to the hon. member. I am thankful for that question, and I want to recognize the member's status as a water warrior. It is really important that we lift up those who protect water; women, particularly in many indigenous cultures across Turtle Island, are revered as water protectors. They have the power to bring life into this place and are from the very same source as water, and they protect it. It is important not only that we protect water but also that we protect people's access to it. The member has allowed me the very good opportunity to speak to the urgency of this issue. When we do not do this, it directly harms those in the next generation. They will grow up knowing that their governments and others do not care for them. They will be dehumanized by that truth.

150 words

Ms. Leah Gazan (Winnipeg Centre, NDP)

Jun/5/24 6:34:55 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I would like to thank the member for Edmonton Griesbach for his absolutely brilliant speech and deep wisdom on the bill before us. You have raised a couple of concerns about the bill, and one is proper consultation. It seems that, with indigenous people, we are always given candies and are supposed to be glad and joyous about it. I sense that you have a different perspective on the lack of consultation. Could you expand on what needs to happen for support?

84 words

The Assistant Deputy Speaker (Mrs. Alexandra Mendès)

Jun/5/24 6:35:31 p.m.
Watch

I would remind the hon. member that I cannot expand on it, but the hon. member for Edmonton Griesbach will.

20 words

Mr. Blake Desjarlais

Jun/5/24 6:35:38 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, I want to lift up the member for Winnipeg Centre's advocacy and work in relation to this important piece of legislation. It is critical that we get not only the consent but also the input and consultation of indigenous groups. They have been so helpful. They have offered a place for us to discuss this issue by way of establishing a bilateral treaty table. If we could establish that today, before the bill goes to committee, we can imagine the power that would have. We could even summon and bring in some of those chiefs, and even better than that, meet them where they are and truly reignite the flames of co-operation and participation that the treaties speak of. Let us recognize this place, Parliament, the Government of Canada, the Crown, and our deep need to become true treaty partners in the relationship we attempted to forge all those years ago. It is never too late to do the right thing.

165 words

Mr. Martin Shields (Bow River, CPC)

Jun/5/24 6:36:58 p.m.
Watch

Madam Speaker, it is always a privilege to stand in our House of Commons to debate topics, and tonight we have an incredible topic to discuss. Before I start, I have to recognize the Brooks Bandits in my community for winning the cup this season. When we talk about water, it is life. We have heard that said tonight. Rain is the critical piece because, without it, we do not have fresh water where we need it. Rain is the critical start to it. Since humans evolved a couple of hundred thousand years ago, the use of fresh, clean water has been vital. Human migration has led to sources of fresh water. People always move to where they can get fresh water, such as rivers, lakes and freshwater sources, because it is so critical. As migration began to settle into specific areas, water was also conserved. Where people did not have running water and lakes, they looked for springs. Then they learned how to drill or dig wells. Part of the culture was to always look for fresh water to survive. The Romans understood that they needed to build aqueducts to catch rain, which carried water through towns and cities. The longest aqueduct in the ancient world was over 400 kilometres long. Modern advances in sanitation, industrialization and sanitation-based practices have led to an explosion of the use of water, and with it, a growth in populations. As populations grew, people moved into rural and remote areas, where they always experienced difficulty finding water. However, indigenous people in this part of the world knew where fresh water was. It was essential not only to their survival as human beings, but also to their spiritual needs. In the world I live in, in recent times as a municipal leader, regional water was an issue because we had communities on boil water advisories. The consultations we held in a small area of communities did not happen overnight. It took months. It took years for people to understand that, to get rid of a boil water order, we needed to have hours of consultation. I will mention that I will be splitting my time today with the member Fort McMurray—Cold Lake. Consultation is so critical. At one point in time in our regionalization, we had a water treatment plant in the city I was the mayor of, but we needed to give that resource up to become part of a regional water system. I remember that the editor of the local newspaper never forgave me for giving up what he said was a resource for one community to be used regionally. It took a long time for that consultation process to happen. It took three years before those communities would no longer have any boil water advisories. That takes consultation, something that has been missing in this situation and something we need more of. The recent government's history is that, in 2001, the then Department of Indian Affairs and Northern Development began surveying water and waste water systems in indigenous communities across Canada to establish a baseline of information on existing drinking water infrastructure. That was just over 20 years ago. However, we knew the situation had existed for a long time, not just for over 20 years. In 2003, the Government of Canada announced the first nations water management strategy and allocated $1.6 billion between 2003 to 2008 to it. It launched a plan of action for first nations drinking water, which was built on the first nations water management strategy, and it allocated an additional $60 million between 2006 and 2008 to address the findings of the 2005 report of the commissioner of the environment. That was only 20 years ago. In 2008, the government introduced the first nations water and waste water action plan. According to a summary of the investments, “An additional $330 million was allocated to support the FNWWAP, which reinforced the PAFNDW while adding new objectives, including a commitment to consult with First Nations on new legislation as well as the commissioning of a national engineering assessment of the status of First Nations water systems across the country.” In 2013, the Safe Drinking Water for First Nations Act was created by the government to support the development of federal regulations to improve first nations' access to clean, reliable drinking water and the effective treatment of waste water. I did not see anything, in all those dates that I read, about consultation. What I referred to in our communities and our municipalities took years, but I am not hearing about consultation. From 2015 to the present, the federal government spent $5.7 billion. Over $11 billion was spent between successive governments, and we are still facing the same problem: the boil water orders, unsafe drinking water in a developed G7 country. It took the Liberal government nine years to introduce the legislation to protect clean water for first nations. In the press conference when the minister announced the proposed bill, she referenced a first nation that she says would benefit from the bill, without having met with it enough for consultation. I say that, because I have met with the Blackfoot Confederacy chiefs who say they did not get consulted at any significant level on the proposed piece of legislation. What little they had suggested, they believed the minister had ignored. Those are not my words. They came from the chiefs of the Blackfoot Confederacy, which is a huge part of southern Alberta. Canada is blessed with clean, fresh and safe drinking water. It is home to 20% of the world's fresh water. We have rain. We have 7% of the world's renewable water supply, yet safe clean drinking water has been unavailable for many of our indigenous communities. This is not acceptable. An effort to provide fresh clean water for indigenous communities across the country— Mr. Blake Desjarlais: I have a point of order.

997 words

SoVote

House Hansard - 325