Summary#
Bill 9, the Waters Act, would create a Nunavut law based on Part 1 of the federal Nunavut Waters and Nunavut Surface Rights Tribunal Act. It would also make a related change to the Public Service Act. Its stated goal is to conserve and use waters for the greatest benefit of Nunavut residents and Canadians; that is a goal, not a guaranteed result.
- The existing Nunavut Water Board would continue under the new law. It would decide water-use and waste-deposit licence applications and could set licence conditions, require security (money or another guarantee against future costs), and recover some application-related costs.
- In general, people could use water or deposit waste only under a licence or an exception. Exceptions include household use, fire or flood emergencies, national parks, and activities later authorized by regulation. The bill also requires prompt reporting of certain illegal waste deposits.
- The bill sets rules for public hearings, compensation for affected water users, and protections for Inuit rights and water on Inuit Owned Lands.
- Inspectors could enter specified non-residential places, examine records and take samples. They could order steps to prevent or address danger to people, property or the environment.
- The bill allows administrative penalties and criminal charges for specified violations. It also allows a permit holder to seek permission to expropriate land for an undertaking, but only if legal conditions are met.
- The Act would start on April 1, 2027. It includes rules to carry over existing licences, Board decisions and pending applications.
What it means for you#
- Residents and water users: Household water use and emergency use are exceptions to the licensing rule. Other use may need a licence, unless regulations create another exception. If a licensed or regulation-authorized activity harms you, the bill provides a right to compensation, subject to limits on double payment.
- Businesses and project operators: Applicants may have to provide studies, pay fees and costs, compensate affected users, and provide security. A licence may include monitoring, waste-treatment, closure and restoration conditions. The Board may require permission before a licence is transferred with an undertaking.
- Inuit and named Indigenous groups: The designated Inuit organization has rights under the Nunavut Agreement, including exclusive water-use rights on or through Inuit Owned Lands and a right to water flow that is substantially unchanged. Existing Inuit water use on those lands has priority over certain mineral-related uses. The bill also gives named Inuit organizations and First Nations councils standing to make representations in licence matters; the Board must consider their representations.
- General public: The Board must publish reasons for its licence decisions and keep a public register. A person may appeal a Board decision on a question of law or jurisdiction, with the Court’s permission.
- Board and governments: The Board may hire staff and experts and must submit an annual budget to the federal minister. The federal minister has exclusive authority over specified functions in federal areas. The bill does not create a new front-line water service.
Money#
The bill requires Board staffing and operations, but the available material gives no cost estimate.
- Applicants and licence holders may have to pay fees and prescribed costs; the amounts and services covered depend on regulations.
- Operators may have to pay compensation and provide security. Some costs of inspections or remedial work can be recovered from them.
- The Board pays its members’ remuneration and expenses and may pay staff and expert costs. No funding source or total public cost is specified.
What is unclear#
- The federal Act that this bill says it mirrors was not supplied, so the exact changes from current law and how the two laws would interact could not be verified.
- Regulations would set key details, including licence types, water and effluent standards, fees, security amounts, exemptions and administrative penalty amounts.
- The bill does not define some important thresholds, such as when an effect is “significant” or water is “substantially” affected.
- How the named groups and Inuit communities would take part beyond the stated rights and representation rules is not fully set out.
- The bill gives a nine-month decision period for certain applications, but other steps can pause that period, and governments can extend it. The practical timeline is therefore unclear.
Case for#
- The bill appears intended to put water licensing, protection and enforcement in a Nunavut statute while continuing the existing Water Board.
- A licence system can set conditions for water use, waste deposits, monitoring and site restoration.
- Compensation rules could give affected water users and the designated Inuit organization a way to seek payment for harm.
- Public hearings, published reasons and public records could make licensing decisions more open to scrutiny.
Case against#
- Important limits and costs depend on future regulations, so the bill alone does not show what many operators would have to do or pay.
- Broad powers to set licence conditions, order remedial steps and authorize penalties could have significant effects; the detail and oversight will matter.
- The bill permits expropriation for a licensed undertaking if the applicant cannot acquire the land despite reasonable efforts and the Minister finds it is in the public interest. That power may concern landholders even though it is conditional.
- Federal-area authority and coordination with other project-review bodies could make responsibility and timelines harder to understand.