To effectively regulate,
provinces must get out of the business of funding or
operating water systems, thus avoiding
dangerous conflicts of
interest
Paul Lachine
|
The headline of Ian
Urquhart's front-page article told readers of Toronto's Saturday
Star all he wanted them to believe about the
Walkerton water tragedy: Disaster Flowed from Ideology.
Mr. Urquhart called Justice Dennis O'Connor's report on the
causes of the tragedy a "stinging indictment of the Harris
government and its neo-conservative agenda," explaining that
"the Tories' determination to cut spending and red tape laid the
groundwork for what happened in May, 2000."
Other reports echoed such
sentiments. The National Post's Robert Benzie speculated, "If
the Walkerton report is not
the epitaph for the Common Sense Revolution of Mike Harris, it
may well be the swan song for the Conservative's politically
expedient, but controversial program of streamlining government
in order to cut taxes."
How nice it would be if
the tragedy's causes were so simple. Once such problems
were identified, obvious solutions would present themselves:
Boot out the Tories, restore the budgets and our water would be
safe.
Unfortunately, things are
not so simple. Our water was unsafe long before the Tories came
into power and cut budgets and it will continue to be unsafe as
long as the real causes of the problems remain unaddressed.
Although Judge O'Connor's
report is harshly -- and justifiably -- critical of the Tory
budget cuts, it makes it abundantly clear the problems plaguing
both the Walkerton Public
Utility Commission and its main provincial regulator, the
Ministry of Environment, have existed for decades.
Inadequate infrastructure:
Walkerton's Well 5, where the contamination entered the town's
system, lacked the one piece of equipment that could have
prevented the May 2000 E. coli outbreak: an $8,000 continuous
chlorine residual monitor. When contaminants overwhelmed the
chlorine dose, such a monitor would have sounded an alarm and
automatically shut down the well.
Although the shallow well
had been vulnerable to surface contamination ever since it was
built in 1978, and although a number of warnings had been
sounded to that effect, the utility commission never installed
the equipment to protect the well. Nor did regulators under
successive governments ever attach to the well's Certificate of
Approval conditions requiring the PUC to do so.
Shoddy operations: A host
of operating problems at the PUC likewise dated back several
decades. Employees regularly misstated the locations of water
samples and made false entries on daily operating sheets. Many
of the improper practices had been going on for years before
Stan Koebel became general manager in 1988 and did not change to
reflect changes in provincial governments, policies, or budgets.
Infrequent and ineffective
inspections: In his report, Judge O'Connor recommends annual
inspections of water facilities. He notes that inspections have
always been infrequent. Indeed, between 1980 and 1991, no formal
inspections of the Walkerton
facilities occurred. Even the Provincial Auditor's 1988
recommendation that all water treatment plants be inspected
annually fell on deaf ears.
When inspections did occur
-- in 1991, 1995, and 1998 -- inspectors failed to catch two
critical deficiencies in Walkerton's operations. None of the
inspectors -- before or after the budget cuts decreased their
numbers, increased their workloads or dampened their morale --
identified Well 5's vulnerability to surface contamination. Nor
did any of the inspectors detect the PUC's improper chlorination
and monitoring practices, despite readily apparent evidence.
Insufficient oversight by
PUC: When MOE inspections did reveal problems with water safety
and utility operations, Judge O'Connor notes, the public utility
commissioners did nothing. Although the justice says that they
should have done more -- the commissioners were ultimately
responsible for the safety of Walkerton's water -- he does not
attribute their lax attitude to changes in the regulatory
regime. Indeed, he concludes, the commissioners in charge in
2000 "performed their duties in much the same way as their
predecessors had. That approach seems to have been inherent in
the culture at the Walkerton
PUC."
Poor communication of test
results: A primary problem identified by Judge O'Connor was the
failure of the government to regulate the private labs that test
municipal water. The lab that discovered contaminants in
Walkerton's water reported its results to the PUC manager but
not to the ministries of health and environment. The judge does
not criticize the lab: He notes it acted within the law. Nor
does he criticize the government's decision -- initiated under
the NDP -- to stop providing lab services. Instead, he
criticizes the way in which the Tories implemented the
privatization decision -- in particular, their failure to enact
a legally binding regulation requiring labs to notify
environment and public health officials of adverse test results.
Once again, the problem
was an old one: Judge O'Connor reports that, prior to the
privatization of testing, a survey of medical officers of health
revealed only 13 of the 21 respondents were receiving test
results from public labs, municipalities or the MOE. The failure
to report was thus a
failure not of ownership but of
regulation
-- one that existed both
before and after privatization.
Absence of enforcement:
Judge O'Connor quite rightly criticizes the government for not
cracking down when lab tests or ministry inspections revealed
problems. Throughout the 1990s, labs periodically discovered
contaminants in Walkerton's water samples. And MOE inspectors,
while not catching all of the operating problems at the PUC, did
catch some of them: In each of the three inspections in the
1990s, inspectors noted insufficient sampling and insufficient
chlorine residuals. In no case, however, did the ministry
initiate legal action to force the PUC to comply with provincial
guidelines or regulations.
Rather than requiring
the PUC to follow the rules,
the ministry relied on a
voluntary approach to compliance.
Judge O'Connor refers to the "deeply rooted culture across the
MOE that favoured a voluntary abatement approach whenever
possible." That culture had prevailed for decades. Indeed, some
trace it back to the 19th century. The "distaste for
regulation," attributed to the Tories by Judge O'Connor, has in
fact always characterized provincial regulation of municipal
water providers.
Not until 1997 did the MOE
begin to lean towards tougher enforcement of laws governing
public health and the environment, and not until March 2000 --
two months before the outbreak -- did it direct its staff to
follow a mandatory compliance approach. The new policy came too
late to prevent the Walkerton
tragedy. Sadly, it may
be too weak to prevent future tragedies. Despite the
promise of change, water utilities across the province continue
to flout the law with impunity. The latest round of inspections
revealed that, of the 218 water facilities visited, 107 failed
to comply with provincial standards. Many of the problems had
been identified in earlier inspections and some had even been
the subject of orders requiring the operators to comply.
That
so many facilities remain out of compliance calls into question
the ministry's commitment to effective law enforcement.
Why have water problems
become so deeply entrenched? Why have successive governments
been so reluctant to pass good laws and enforce them strictly?
Although Judge O'Connor does not address these issues in his
report, the answers lie largely in the province's close
relationship with municipal water providers. Its long-standing
practice of funding capital expenditures has doubtless
contributed to its reluctance to demand expensive infrastructure
improvements. Its operation, through the Ontario Clean Water
Agency, of 161 water plants -- one third of which are out of
compliance -- has likewise stayed its regulatory hand.
Any crackdown would have
put it in the uncomfortable position of prosecuting itself.
Reversing budget cuts on
their own will do little.
To
effectively regulate, the province must get out of the business
of funding or operating our water systems. Only then can the
government reduce the conflicts of interest that have
compromised the public health,
and only then can we be confident that the
Walkerton tragedy will never be repeated.