Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  For clarity, on the technical side.... I understand what you're saying. Certainly, we've heard that consistently. I would just say that the parameters of this bill are clear, and they speak only to what are called section 91(24) lands, which are reserve lands for first nations. Those are the parameters to which this law would apply.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  This legislation fits in a fabric of laws that exist in current-day Canada, and fills a gap that we've talked about before in terms of a regulatory gap on reserve and the recognition of rights. It's about the alignment of those things. I think you're right. We all have a duty, as Canadians, to pass water that is both clean and safe on to future generations.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Yes. Thanks to the funding, there has been significant investment in the water space, including in operations. That was recognized by the Parliamentary Budget Officer a few years ago. But as it relates to Bill C-61, the funding framework that we had talked about previously outlines a number of things that must be considered as part of that framework, including the actual costs and the operations and maintenance of systems.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Yes. The funding framework really, in my mind, one, doesn't exist today. The consultation around what is the actual cost for a number of things that you itemize in this bill and creating that funding framework is kind of item one. Two is the minister's use of public reporting of that framework.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Just so I understand the question clearly, if it's about recognition of the important work that operators do, I agree with you. Are you asking how we entrench that recognition in terms of a funding commitment?

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  Yes. That's a great question. I think some of those provisions are enumerated in the funding commitment section. I think they're covered, but they're open to views, absolutely. Thank you.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  In terms of what's embedded in the legislation itself, it does not consider international waters, including tributaries that may flow outside of Canada. It's within the confines of Canada's jurisdiction.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  I'm reading the consultation section that you're referring to, which is subclause 22(2), where it says "The Minister must consult and cooperate with a First Nation", etc. Go ahead, Rebecca.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  May I just go back to the previous question? There are a couple of defining terms on first nations governing bodies and first nations lands in the earlier sections that might provide some further light to your previous point. On the question of where there might be conflicting laws, including those with regard to resource development, those are itemized in the clause called “Limitation”, which talks about if there are conflicting laws.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  That's a good question. I'm going to go back to the funding one because it's the inference I made before. If it said that the minister must do X, Y and Z, that would require a fiduciary requirement for the government and for Parliament to appropriate funds relative to the agreement being provided.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  There are multiple references, as you mentioned. I'd probably point to a couple of them. Certainly, one of the core feedbacks we heard from partners is regarding funding predictability. My colleague from the Department of Justice talked about the role of ministers and, of course, the parliamentarians in this room in the appropriation of funds.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  In essence, yes. What this bill does in the concept of protection zones—

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  —is to align laws that are laws both on and off reserve, which requires, obviously, a dialogue between first nations and provincial, territorial and municipal governments that administer those laws and systems.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  I think that there are certainly many fantastic operators who are operating very complex systems in many, if not all, first nations right now. The void is largely around enforceability of legislation and the regulatory gap in terms of standards and practices on water operations.

Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee  There are 634 first nations from coast to coast to coast. A proportion of those are self-governing first nations, which have paramount laws around jurisdiction. In some cases, they include water. The rough number, just for frame of reference, is around 570 to 580 first nations communities.