Idlout hopes First Nations will be heard on federal water legislation
Bill C-61 with Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs
Nunavut MP Lori Idlout says First Nations were not adequately consulted on a federal bill that aims to improve access to clean drinking water. (File photo)
Nunavut’s federal representative acted as an advocate for First Nations earlier this month, criticizing a lack of consultation over a bill aimed at improving access to clean water.
Bill C-61, a First Nations Clean Water Act, is intended to strengthen protections for drinking water. It includes changes that would allow for a water commission to be run by First Nations.
The bill is currently before the Standing Committee on Indigenous and Northern Affairs.
NDP MP Lori Idlout sits on the Indigenous and Northern Affairs committee. She criticized Liberal and Conservative MPs for voting against proposed amendments based on recommendations from First Nations leaders.
“I’m finding it frustrating to see that they’re not willing to truly make a real effort to have reconciliation with First Nations,” Idlout said in an interview with Nunatsiaq News.
“If C-61 is a way to try and give jurisdiction back, they’re only giving it in a piecemeal way without the real authority that First Nations need to exercise their treaty and inherent rights to manage water the way that they used to before.”
On Nov. 8 during question period in the House of Commons, Idlout spoke in Inuktitut through an interpreter, saying “profound changes” are needed in Canada in regards to Indigenous access to safe drinking water.
She relayed observations made by Pedro Arrojo-Agudo, UN Special Rapporteur on the human rights to safe drinking water and sanitation, after his two-week tour of Canada in April that included Nunavut.
Arrojo-Agudo visited Indigenous communities in British Columbia, Ontario and Alberta as well.
While he praised Nunavut’s drinking water as “pristine,” Arrojo-Agudo noted First Nations concerns regarding proper funding, safeguarding of water sources, and that government consultation be in accordance with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Idlout said she asked witnesses from government how many of the approximately 580 First Nations that will be impacted by the legislation were consulted.
“Only about 30 per cent of the First Nations that will be impacted were engaged in the consultation process, and to me that is not sufficient and we heard from committee from First Nations that they didn’t feel they were properly consulted,” said Idlout.
She said the committee is going through a large number of amendments to the legislation submitted by First Nations, which is a great indicator they were not consulted enough by the federal government.
I don’t think ‘reconciliation’ or ‘consultation’ imply obligation to “do exactly what you say” on the part of government. Of course it’s not hard to see the allure of these terms as a blunt political tool.
Can anyone tell me what Lori means when she says “First Nations need to exercise their treaty and inherent rights to manage water the way that they used to before.” ?
I believe she’s referring to using water responsibly, the conception of water is inseparable from the land. Water is sacred, not to be abused or polluted. It is essential for consumption, hunting, fishing, and transportation. It is important for the current needs and needs for the future generations. It should be governed by natural law, Indigenous people view themselves as caretakers to preserve water and life.
Does that make sense to you?
Does it make sense?
Well, you said absolutely nothing about water management. Waxing poetic about “conceptions of water” doesn’t tell us anything insightful or even interesting to be honest with you.
In that sense, I will grant your moniker is fitting.
*shrugs*
Lol absolutely nothing about water management? These aren’t “poetic conceptions”, they are concepts on how to manage water for future generations. Just because you dont care to understand what treaty rights are or what inherent rights are, doesn’t make them un-insightful or un-interesting.
Maybe if you took some real time to try and open up your ignorant mind, you might see what I am trying to say. Try google, I heard it’s helpful.
Nothing about water being “sacred… not to be abused or polluted.” Or telling us the obvious, that it is “essential for consumption, hunting, fishing, and transportation…” says anything about water management.
I am interested, or I would not have asked. I was even hoping for a good answer, instead I got this.
So now you want me to ask google? lol
What were the “proposed amendments based on recommendations from First Nations leaders” that MPs voted against? Don’t make your readers do your work for you. Ask questions, do research and write good content.
I would also love to learn more about what period Ms. Idlout is referring to when she said First Nations need to exercise their rights to manage water the way they used to before. Is this just a statement about how there were no “outsiders” suggesting how to do things?
What is actually known about how First Nations managed water before European contact? I am genuinely curious.
Its unimaginable to take anything seriously from the NDPs.
That’s neither fair nor accurate. You’re referencing a political party and not the people beneath its banner. If you’d said it’s unimaginable to take anything seriously from this particular member, I think there are many people who would agree.
Nunavut has some of the cleanest drinking water of earth
For once nothing derogatory about Inuit.
4 More years Lori, 4 More years
Are you serious, right now?😂HOLA!!!