Square Peg, Round Hole: First Nations Drinking Water Infrastructure and Federal Policies, Programs, and Processes

Abstract

Despite nearly a decade of targeted federal government efforts to provide potable water to First Nations communities in Canada, drinking water advisories and piped-water infrastructure gaps still persist. An indepth understanding of technical practitioners' perspectives and experiences with federal policies, programs, and processes (PPP) may provide unique insight into the challenges behind the issues. To meet this objective, we interviewed 16 First Nations technical staff within the geopolitical boundary of the province of Ontario. Results emphasize the role played by federal government-centric principles that shape policy, and the inflexible nature of the program execution format. This study provides a foundation for understanding the policy translation process and indicates action areas to create supportive policy for First Nations drinking water service provision.

How does the media portray drinking water security in Indigenous communities in Canada? An analysis of Canadian newspaper coverage from 2000-2015

“…Among articles that focused on drinking water policy challenges, articles discussed the lack of legally enforceable Federal safe drinking water standards on reserves [91], along with the complicated policy framework currently in place [88]. Articles that focused on infrastructure challenges primarily discussed challenges with water treatment infrastructure, the lack of local operator training, and the lack of financial support, consistent with challenges reported in literature [88, 92].…”

“…The lack of government funding available to address Indigenous water security challenges [82, 88, 89], along with the history of water-related government actions [82, 89], have been reported in peer-reviewed literature. While progress was made in improving safe drinking water provision in high risk communities [90], the emphasis on government responses surrounding inadequate funding and action, along with the persistence of drinking water issues [75], suggest a call for further government support and action.…”

“…Among articles that focused on drinking water policy challenges, articles discussed the lack of legally enforceable Federal safe drinking water standards on reserves [91], along with the complicated policy framework currently in place [88]. Articles that focused on infrastructure challenges primarily discussed challenges with water treatment infrastructure, the lack of local operator training, and the lack of financial support, consistent with challenges reported in literature [88, 92]. News coverage on regulatory framework challenges mainly focused on the complicated jurisdictional issues regarding water on First Nations reserves [6, 89, 93], highlighting the difficulties when the responsibility for water quality on reserves is shared between First Nations councils and the Federal government [89] and provincial governments are responsible for regulating and enforcing legislation and policies relating to municipal water systems.…”

Insights and Opportunities: Challenges of Canadian First Nations Drinking Water Operators

“…Providing safe drinking water continues to be a challenge for First Nations communities in Canada despite considerable financial investment from the Canadian federal government over the last decade (McCullough & Farahbakhsh, 2012). In Neegan Burnside Ltd.'s 2011 National Assessment of First Nations Water and Wastewater Systems, a project commissioned by the federal government, 807 water systems serving 560 First Nations communities were assessed.…”

“…Although user fees are collected in these communities, operators still complain of inadequate funds for operation and maintenance, noting that Band Councils ask them to reduce costs or claim that the budget is in deficit, therefore restricting the flow of funds. McCullough and Farahbakhsh (2012) suggested that the 80:20 split in operation and maintenance costs does not reflect economic reality because many communities do not have income-generating activities that can support the collection of user-fees and, as a result, this funding divide sets the stage for two-tier service delivery-communities with higher incomes can afford to pay for more qualified operators and keep up with maintenance needs, in contrast to those whose incomes are lower and must cut salaries and corners in terms of operation and maintenance. Nevertheless, the collection of user fees alone does not seem to preclude two-tier service delivery in the Ontario communities interviewed.…”