First Nations Clean Water Act

Bill C-37, First Nations Clean Water Act · Second reading · now at committee in the House Where it stands

What Bill C-37 would do

The bill would affirm that the right to self-government includes First Nations jurisdiction over drinking water, wastewater, source water, and related infrastructure on their lands. It would set minimum standards for water quality, water quantity, and wastewater effluent. The bill would also establish guiding principles like substantive equality and create pathways to help protect source water.

Official text (opens in a new tab)

32 statements

Billy Morin, Edmonton Northwest

Conservative
“The government has broken its promises on clean drinking water for First Nations for 10 years. This bill is too weak. It only sets up a framework, and it will take years before anything is actually built.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 30 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I thank my hon. colleague for his great work when I sat with him at INAN. It has been frustrating to watch the last year, but it has been 10 times even more frustrating watching the last 10 years of the Liberal government. It is promise after promise broken, and at this point, I do not blame any first nation for being cynical, sad or disappointed when it comes to its record on water. This legislation talks again about a framework, and it says in there that the government is going to take another year, and it is probably going to be two more years or three more years given its record on implementing actual frameworks and actual details to change the system and get things built. At this point, the bare minimum, a watered-down version of Bill C-61, does not inspire a lot of hope going forward for first nations families or kids at all.

Leah Gazan, Winnipeg Centre

NDP
“This bill limits First Nations control over water only to reserve lands. It leaves out lands where First Nations have title rights, so it does not protect our source water. The government is also ignoring court rulings. I want to know where the Conservatives stand on this.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, it has always a pleasure to work with my hon. colleague. In the legislation, it defines first nations lands as not including “ lands over which Aboriginal title is claimed by a First Nation or has been confirmed by a court.” We know industry is set up by first nations. We also know the legislation would not give first nations jurisdiction over source water and aquifers, therefore limiting our jurisdiction to Indian Act reserve boundaries only. I am wondering if my colleague can share the Conservative position on the failure of the government to even uphold court rulings in relation to this bill.

Billy Morin, Edmonton Northwest

Conservative
“Conservatives want a government that tells the truth and keeps its promises to First Nations and all Canadians. The Liberals make empty announcements that divide the country. Their broken promises are hurting reconciliation.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 12 of 100

    None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 18 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, the Conservative position is that we want to give first nations and all Canadians a government that is truthful and delivers on what it says. Regarding major projects, there was an announcement yesterday by a first nation that it had asked for a review on the latest announcement regarding a pipeline. I do not blame that first nation, but what this really says to me is that the Liberals’ record on rhetoric, on promises they cannot keep and on photo op announcements that have no substance beyond them is really catching up to them, and it is dividing this country. Conservatives do not believe in that. We believe in an honest, straightforward conversation. We believe we should disagree when we have to and show respect. The Liberal government is really setting reconciliation back now many years.

Jeff Kibble, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford

Conservative
“I support sending this clean water bill to committee, but it needs big changes. Right now, it is too weak. It only asks the government to make its best efforts instead of legally forcing it to act. In my riding, an illegal dump on federal land is leaking toxic waste toward the Cowichan River, and the government has done nothing for years. This bill must include real power to stop polluters, guaranteed long-term funding to run water systems, and clear deadlines to clean up toxic sites.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I rise today on behalf of the great people of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford on beautiful Vancouver Island: seniors, families, fishers, workers, youth, business owners and Cowichan Tribes, the largest first nation in British Columbia. Before I turn to Bill C-37, I would like to take a moment to pay my respects to Mr. Bob Saunders, who, sadly, passed away just a few days ago at the age of 91. Across Vancouver Island and beyond, Bob gave without counting, to health care, veterans, mental health education, youth, and community services. As a runner for the Wounded Warrior Run BC team, I personally saw his generosity as he supported our fundraising efforts for those who carried the weight of service. He gave not just in dollars but also with hope, dignity and leadership. Bob inspired me and so many others across British Columbia. Through his generosity, his kindness and his philanthropy, he showed the very best of what it means to be Canadian. Not long ago, I had the honour of joining Bob and his beloved wife, Norma, at the Victoria Shamrocks’ season opener as Bob and Norma celebrated 70 years of marriage. His son Dave has closely followed in his father’s footsteps with the same kindness, generosity and commitment to our communities. What Dave gives to Vancouver Island is not a copy of his father’s work; it is a continuation of it. My and Angel’s thoughts and prayers are with Dave and the entire Saunders family today, and to the late Bob Saunders I wish fair winds and following seas. I now turn to the business at hand of Bill C-37, the first nations clean water act. Clean water is a necessity of life, not a privilege and not a favour. Let me start with this: Conservatives have always supported clean, safe, reliable water for first nations, and we support sending the bill to committee for key amendments to make it stronger. Support is not a blank cheque but a promise to do the work of making the bill better. Let me begin with what the bill would do. It would affirm first nation jurisdiction over water on first nation lands. It would set minimum standards for water quality, quantity and waste water, and it would create a first nation-led water commission. However, let us look closely at what this commission could actually do. It could advise. It could support capacity building. It could help first nations develop their own water laws. What it could not do is order a cleanup. It could not compel a polluter. It could not force a federal department to act, even when contamination is already creeping towards first nations’ water that families rely on. A commission with no enforcement power is a resource, not a remedy. Bill C-37 would also rely again and again on two words: best efforts. With a binding obligation, says the government, it must take action, but with best efforts, says the government, it only has to try. Families cannot drink best efforts. Let me show the House what the difference looks like on Vancouver Island. The Cowichan River begins at Cowichan Lake, winds lazily through the town of Lake Cowichan, through the forests over Skutz Falls and into the fertile farmland of the Cowichan Valley, then through Duncan and the Cowichan Tribes reserve lands, past the Cowichan River hatchery before it empties into the ocean at Cowichan Bay. It is not one community’s river. It is the backbone of a whole valley. It is drinking water. It is fisheries. It is farms. It is identity. For Cowichan Tribes, the river and its salmon are also central to food, culture and ceremony. Since 1978, Cowichan Tribes and Fisheries and Oceans Canada have successfully partnered on a hatchery to rebuild the river’s salmon. In a statement, Cowichan Tribes called pollution and contamination of reserve land and water a “national problem.” They said the tools to address it are “primarily under federal jurisdiction” and that “the Government of Canada [has been] reluctant to prosecute polluters.” Let us explore that statement. On reserve land, along that same river, on Indian Road, sits what looks like, at first glance, a pile of waste. It is not the only illegal dump site in the Cowichan Valley, and it will not be the only one I raise in the House, but this site is unambiguously on federal land and is federal responsibility, and that is why I am turning my efforts to it first. However, it is not a pile. A 2023 consultant’s report put its volume at more than 290,000 cubic metres accumulated over two decades. It is not a dump; it is a mountain. Government and consultant reports list what is in it: heavy metals, including arsenic, cadmium, lead and zinc; hydrocarbons; volatile organic compounds; small amounts of asbestos; and lead-based paint. The list goes on. The reports found that the site is producing leachate that is moving through the groundwater, creeping toward the river. Testing continues. Separately it has been reported that contamination may now also be present in the Cowichan River itself. Though this has only been reported, a river this important should not have to wait for proof of harm before the government takes action. Cowichan Tribes says it has asked for action since 2010. The site sits on reserve land but, importantly, outside the nation’s land code. Under law, that makes this a clear federal responsibility. It is not a grey area, not a shared file and not a matter for another order of government to resolve. It is Ottawa’s duty and Ottawa’s duty alone. In April, I wrote to the Minister of Indigenous Services, but despite years of warning, meaningful federal enforcement and remediation of this water travesty have not materialized. Many people bear responsibility for how this site came to be: those who illegally dumped, those who profited and those who turned a blind eye. I am not here to point fingers today. I am here to have the illegal garbage dump and the contaminants that are impacting the river and the groundwater remediated and cleaned up, and to compel the Minister of Crown-Indigenous Relations to take action. I will always fight for the people of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford. A consultant’s 2023 estimate was $5.3 million to move the waste or $2 million to cap it, and those costs have only risen since. Turning back to Bill C-37, let us consider the money behind this bill. The 2021 settlement agreement promised a one-time, $6-billion amount to achieve safe drinking water access by March 2030. That is construction money with a deadline. However, the bill would not replenish that. It would not guarantee what comes after. There is no statutory commitment to the ongoing operating funding that keeps a treatment plant running or cleanup of an illegal garbage dump moving once the announcements are made and the cameras leave. Best efforts, as is repeatedly said, will not clean up this site. The people of Cowichan Tribes and the Cowichan Valley deserve better. Let me now look at what the bill would offer for a case like this. It mentions cleanup of source water in one place, as some regulations may address. Protection zones beside the reserve would not be defined until those regulations are made, and they would require the province and Canada to agree. The minister’s duty on environmental protection is to consult, to co-operate and to achieve results. The bill would not come into force until one year after royal assent, and the minister would only have to make best efforts to begin consulting on the regulations six months after that. The Assembly of First Nations has raised weak source-water protection, lack of sustainable funding and other challenges with the bill. It is my duty, as a member of the House, to hold the government to account, but that duty is not an end in itself. It means to make a bill better, one worthy of the people of Cowichan—Malahat—Langford and every community the bill is meant to serve. With that duty in mind, I offer the following. First, replace best efforts with binding, measurable duties. Second, have a public federal plan with timelines to remediate issues such as the illegal garbage dump and its pollution into the groundwater and other similar sites. Third, provide not only stable operating funding that is set up but construction funding as well. Fourth, there should be regulations that come back to the House so Parliament can see the details and not just the promises. I offer these in the spirit of working with government, with Cowichan Tribes and with every community on Vancouver Island that depends on clean water. This matters on the island, it matters across B.C. and it matters across Canada. The Cowichan River, Cowichan Valley, Cowichan hatchery rebuilding the salmon stocks, and Cowichan Tribes all deserve a federal government that acts. I support sending the bill to committee. Let us collaborate and work to make it worthy of the people it serves.

Kevin Lamoureux, Parliamentary Secretary to the Leader of the Government in the House of Commons

Liberal

Linked statement

“We are finally taking action on drinking water for First Nations. This bill moves us in the right direction. I want us to send it to committee as soon as possible.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Signal 41 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I am glad to hear that the member supports the legislation and wants it to go to committee. That is a very positive gesture. The government, I believe, has great intent of looking at an issue that has been an issue for generations now. I can recall, even when I was an MLA, the water advisories in the province of Manitoba. I believe there is a lot of good public will for more action. Our Prime Minister, newly elected less than a year and a half ago, has brought forward substantive legislation. I believe we are moving in the right direction. Could the member provide his thoughts in regard to having the bill go to committee sooner as opposed to later?

Jeff Kibble, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford

Conservative
“Good intentions do not get results. The government's clean water bill has not worked, so I want the committee to work together on this next bill to get real results.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, the member said “great intent”. Unfortunately, great intent does not bring results. We have seen with Bill C-61 that there has been a lack of results, so I look forward to the committee’s working with Bill C-37 to this time collaborate and finally get some results.

Sébastien Lemire, Abitibi—Témiscamingue

Bloc Québécois
“The government took decades to act on clean drinking water for First Nations. There are still 35 communities under boil water advisories, down from 60 in 2021. This long delay harmed people's health and lives. I want the member to tell us if that delay was justified.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for sincerely standing up for his constituents, particularly those in indigenous communities. The Liberal Party, which forms the government, has waited decades before taking action, despite successive reports from the Auditor General. It has allowed disputes with first nations, who have been calling for this right, to drag on for decades. I would remind members that the Auditor General said that, in 2021, there were still 60 boil water advisories in effect in first nations communities. Today, we are happy to hear that, in 2025, that number has gone down to 35. There has been some progress. However, some people have been affected by this for decades. Now the government is saying that this is great and that it will be able to fix the problem. However, it is mainly the Liberal government’s lack of action that led to this situation, particularly when it comes to health, and which is affecting the quality of life of generations of first nations members who live in these communities. Can my colleague tell us whether this delay is justified?

Jeff Kibble, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford

Conservative
“The Liberals have made announcements about clean water for decades, but nothing has changed. I want them to work with Conservatives to make this bill stronger and get results.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I agree that there has been a lack of action. The Liberals have waited for decades. We have had announcements without results, with respect not only to this bill but so many others also. Therefore, I am calling on the Liberals to collaborate with and take input from the Conservatives so we can get results. They need to work with the Conservatives so we can strengthen the bill and finally have results.

Ellis Ross, Skeena—Bulkley Valley

Conservative
“The Liberals talk about helping First Nations get clean drinking water, but they fight First Nations in court over it. I want my colleague to comment on this contradiction.”
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, first nations Canadians should know that this is the track record of the Liberal government. It promised to put in a framework to do something in the future, and the first nations leaders, including me, have heard this so many times before. First nations leaders and Canadians should understand that it is a great speech from the Liberal government, and a great bill, so it says, but in the meantime, it is opposing first nations in court that want to have clean drinking water in their communities. It is appealing decisions that it lost in court. Does my colleague have an opinion on the doublespeak the Liberal government is employing against clean drinking water?

Jeff Kibble, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford

Conservative
“The government has a bad record on First Nations issues. Instead of passing more bills, I want the minister to take real action and clean up the illegal dump that is polluting the Cowichan River.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Signal 42 of 100

    Much of this statement went to praise, blame, greetings, routine procedure or general stories rather than reasons, requests or specific points.

    See full analysis
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 100 of 100

    Of this reply, 100% addressed the question or point raised.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, I thank my colleague for his sound advice on so many first nations-related issues. He speaks of a track record that not only applies to this bill but also seems to have been common throughout so many Liberal bills over 11 years. Therefore, I am calling on the minister to clean up the illegal garbage dump that is contaminating the water in the Cowichan River, and help the Cowichan people. Let us finally have some action.

Leah Gazan, Winnipeg Centre

NDP
“Conservatives spread false information that Indigenous land rights threaten private property owners. This bill does not recognize those land rights, and companies operating near reserves will harm clean water for the Cowichan tribes. I want the member to answer for this.”
  • Question or comment in debate

    Clarity 32 of 100

    Much of this statement used imprecise wording, lacked details on timing or responsibility, or made broad claims without support.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, the reality is that the Conservatives did a mass disinformation campaign around aboriginal title in the Cowichan case, saying that it threatened property owners. We know that the bill would not recognize aboriginal title and that industry has set up outside reserves, which will totally erode the protection of clean drinking water for the Cowichan tribes. Can the hon. member answer to that?

Jeff Kibble, Cowichan—Malahat—Langford

Conservative
“The courts have not finished deciding on Indigenous land rights yet. I agree this water bill should look at how nearby businesses outside reserve lands affect water, and the committee should add that.”
  • Reply to a debate question

    Relevance 48 of 100

    None of this reply addressed the specific point raised or the topic under debate.

    See full analysis
Official Hansard

Madam Speaker, to be frank, aboriginal title still has to go to the B.C. Supreme Court. With respect to industry setting up outside reserve lands, absolutely that needs to be incorporated at committee to consider that factor.

Discussion

No comments yet

See the full discussion

Comment rules

More from sitting 149

  1. Government Orders First Nations Clean Water Act 32 statements
  2. Oral Questions Employment 12 statements
  3. Oral Questions The Environment 6 statements
  4. Oral Questions Employment 4 statements
  5. Oral Questions Finance 10 statements
  6. Oral Questions Intergovernmental Relations 4 statements
  7. Oral Questions The Economy 8 statements
  8. Oral Questions Taxation 2 statements
  9. Oral Questions Infrastructure 2 statements
  10. Oral Questions Veterans Affairs 4 statements
  11. Oral Questions Indigenous Affairs 8 statements
  12. Oral Questions Artificial Intelligence 2 statements
  13. Oral Questions The Economy 2 statements
  14. Oral Questions Public Safety 4 statements
  15. Oral Questions International Trade 2 statements
  16. Oral Questions Rail Transportation 2 statements
  17. Oral Questions Transportation 2 statements
  18. Oral Questions The Economy 6 statements
  19. Government Orders First Nations Clean Water Act 13 statements
  20. Government Orders First Nations Clean Water Act 20 statements
  21. Oral Questions Steel and Aluminum Industry 2 statements
  22. Private Members' Business National Strategy on Flood and Drought Forecasting Act 13 statements
  23. Government Orders Privilege 2 statements