By Amanda Berine
Linda Debassige, Grand Council Chief for the Anishinabek Nation was the final speaker on a clean water panel on the first day of the Assembly of First Nations (AFN) General Assembly meetings July 14, with her remarks following those of NDP critic Leah Gazan, Conservative Opposition Critic Billy Morin and Liberal MP Ginette Lavack, as well as introductory remarks from Newfoundland Regional Chief Brendan Mitchell who spoke on the importance of First Nations water legislation.
Chief Debassige began her comments with a common refrain, underlining the fact that successive governments had passed off responsibility to their predecessors, and failed to pair their words of promise with action. She also followed up these criticisms with lucid analysis of government actions, words of advice to fellow leaders and a call for strategic unity.
“I listen sometimes to our members of parliament and the various perspectives they bring. At one time in my life very early on I thought what party do I belong to? Am I NDP, am I an independent, am I conservative? And I ultimately decided that I am Anishinaabe,” she said to cheers and applause from the Assembly.
With precision, Debassige went on to sharply contextualize the killing of the former Bill C-61, the First Nations Clean Water Act, placing it within broader contexts and what she called the “veil” of federal practices in contrast with words.
She described Bill C-37, just introduced by Indigenous Services Minister Mandy Gull-Masty with the same name as C-61, as a “watered down” version of the former bill. Bill C-61 had passed through three readings and arrived at the Senate, and instead of being definitively defeated in senate, it had been stopped by Canada after parliament was prorogued in January 2025. Debassige was careful to point out however, that parliament could have made the bill a priority in December had they wanted to, as they’d had two weeks to pass it before the prorogation.
Debassige, long a clean water advocate, has worked for years to advance legislation that is built around First Nations inherent rights. But any efforts to make legislation stronger, including Bill C-61, she stated, had been rejected by the governing party. C-61 could also have easily been renewed by the succeeding Liberal government, but the federal government and provinces recognized its potential to stand in the way of extractive projects, and they had indeed resisted its advancement and council amendments to improve it at every reading stage.
Chief Debassige decried the government’s ongoing attitude that clean water is an optional policy decision rather than a legal duty, and was clear that the new policy represents a manifestation of “the continued extinguishment of our rights, a continued erosion and an assault on our people.”
She also dug into government strategy, the deceptive maneuvers of provincial and federal government, describing how C-37 had emerged only two weeks after the federal government filed their appeal against a welcome ruling that came down in December 2025 from Justice Paul Favel in favour of Shamattawa and St. Theresa Point First Nations – that Canada has a legal and fiduciary duty to supply adequate housing and safe water on-reserve.
Debassige declared that the tabling of C-37 was explicitly designed to stop that type of victory from being possible elsewhere, and stated that Assembly leaders needed to pay attention not only to legislation in which Indigenous communities are directly mentioned, but for example in the case of water, advised fellow leaders to look beyond distractions and pay attention to what the government is doing in legislation where Indigenous nations are not invoked: the modernization of the Canada Water Act, the National Water Security Strategy, and a National Freshwater Data Strategy, all pieces of policy that are rapidly being advanced, “to support the thievery of government” and “pave the way” for destructive megaprojects and the violation of Indigenous rights in service to economic interests.
One of her central messages was that more strategizing needs to take place. She argued that AFN membership need get together in other contexts – not while being broadcast and recorded by CPAC and observed and surrounded by government officials – but privately in order to be able to strategize effectively.
She advised against allowing the government to “displace” Indigenous leaders from one another, “to conquer and divide,” and encouraged leaders to look past the “nice language” and “to really look at the text of each piece of legislation that is put forward.”
Reflecting the increasingly intense level of disillusionment among Indigenous communities and leadership with governmental approaches, she also stated that she’d become Chief at age 33 with a lot of optimism, and that now at age 44 she has entirely lost hope in achieving goals with governments. “But I’ve not lost hope in what we can do together.” The Chief encouraged unity above all: “Our great great grandchildren depend on it,” she said.
Here is an excerpt from Chief Debassige’s remarks:
“What’s interesting, is that government tabled C-37 two weeks after filing their appeal to the federal court against Shamattawa and St. Theresa Point. Yet we’re told here today to trust them, and ‘this is what we’re doing for you,’ and they’re talking out of both sides of their mouth.
“These are real actions that are happening. And we can’t look at Bill C-37 in a small box; we have to look how water flows – never in a box – and where else does it touch? I believe in hindsight, that Bill C-37 was introduced purposely after that decision by Justice Favel in that court action. I believe they delayed the introduction, in order to determine, what was going to be the language in that decision.
“And as a result of it, the language in C-37, the wording was changed to allow Canada to continue to fight Shamattawa and St. Theresa Point. It is clear that the wording was changed to support Canada’s argument, and we were the victims of a political game of ‘wait and see what the court says, then we’ll do our next steps’ while we’re waiting, hearing from the Prime Minister last December that legislation would be introduced in the spring.
“The truth is Bill C-61 was ready to be introduced immediately after this government was elected and it wasn’t. So as mentioned last December Justice Favel ruled that First Nations have an ‘unmistakably Indigenous’ interest in safe drinking water on reserve, an interest over which Canada has assumed control, triggering a duty to act with communities’ best interest, meaning their fiduciary obligation.
“However, Canada says that the judge went far beyond any existing legal obligation and paves the way for unlimited government liability. I agree with that. Because when did any of our First Nations, any of our ancestors, cede title to any water across this country?”
Support working-class media!
If you found this article useful, please consider donating to People’s Voice or purchasing a subscription so that you get every issue of Canada’s leading socialist publication delivered to your door or inbox!
For over 100 years, we have been 100% reader-supported, with no corporate or government funding.
