by John Wellner, OMA Health Policy Department
In late October, the provincial government introduced the Safe Drinking Water Act for first reading in the legislature. The Act focuses on issues related to the treatment and distribution of drinking water, and addresses Walkerton Inquiry Commissioner Dennis O'Connor's recommendations on these topics.
The issue of drinking water protection is complex, and conflicting reports about the utility of this Act make it difficult to assess whether or not it will ensure the safety of Ontario's water.
While the water will be safer, the OMA feels it will not be as safe as it can be. Ontario has done a significant amount of work to prevent the possibility of another Walkerton tragedy, and although the Act will reduce the risks, more work is required.
Walkerton was not the first instance in which the OMA identified water quality as an issue of concern. In fact, at the Association's inaugural meeting in June 1881, water safety worries - specifically, concern about "the prevalence of unsanitary conditions which were endangering the health of the citizens," as noted in the meeting's minutes - ultimately led to the establishment of Ontario's Public Health Act.
The water problems of the late 19th century have, for the most part, been resolved. But, as we enter the 21st century, there are new challenges in the quest to guarantee safe drinking water for all.
When the position of the medical officer of health was threatened by proposed legislation in 1997, the OMA saw as its first duty the need to support the importance of this role.
When reports of the Walkerton water troubles first broke, the OMA took immediate steps to ensure that drinking water safety policies were in place, and continued to emphasize the need for full-time medical officers of health in each community.
The OMA later raised concern about the quality assurance of laboratory water testing practices, and made recommendations about improving the overall approach of provincial and municipal governments toward water safety.
In its submissions to the Walkerton Inquiry, the OMA's key recommendation to ensure public safety focused on the need for an effective, stable, and sufficiently funded public health system.
The Association emphasized that it is essential for all communities to maintain a consistent level of public health infrastructure to ensure that all Ontario residents are protected. The need to maintain the role of the local medical officer of health as the "community's doctor" became readily apparent in Walkerton.
The OMA was pleased when, in "Part I of the Report on the Walkerton Inquiry," Commissioner O'Connor's very first recommendation, speaking directly to OMA concerns, called on boards of health and the minister of health and long-term care "to expeditiously fill any vacant medical officer of health positions with a full-time medical officer of health."
When this recommendation appeared as part of the Safe Drinking Water Act in October, and government announced its intention to amend the Health Protection and Promotions Act, and ensure that local boards of health work with the minister to quickly fill any vacancies, the OMA received the commitment it needed and must now see that this comes to fruition.
In addition to the role of the local medical officer of health as the last line of defence to protect the public in case of drinking water contamination, Commissioner O'Connor recommended four key pieces of legislation to protect against the possibility of contamination.
One of these, the Nutrient Management Act, is designed to deal with unsafe manure spreading practices. This Act is in the final stages of the legislative process. A Sustainable Water and Sewage Systems Act has also been proposed to develop full-cost recovery plans for water and sewage services.
As noted, the Safe Drinking Water Act was intended by Commissioner O'Connor to ensure that matters related to the treatment and distribution of drinking water were fully protective of the public health. To protect the sources of Ontario drinking water, he recommended amendments to the Provincial Environ- mental Protection Act.
In September, the OMA was consulted by the Ministry of the Environment on the Safe Drinking Water Act. The Association specifically expressed concern about the province's lack of action to protect drinking water from becoming contaminated in the first place. Although drinking water source protection has now been discussed, and an advisory committee has been struck, the OMA is not yet satisfied that water sources will be protected any time soon.
It is the OMA view - and it is believed to be Commissioner O'Connor's intention - that the essential issue of water source protection be addressed at the same time as the treatment and distribution issues that are covered in the proposed Safe Drinking Water Act.
Source protection, which Commissioner O'Connor refers to as "The first barrier to the contamination of drinking water," should be addressed in an open and transparent process that is parallel to, if not preceding, the finalization of other drinking water legislation.
In "Part II of the Report on the Walkerton Inquiry" (item - 1.4.1), Commissioner O'Connor states:
"A strong source protection program offers a wide variety of benefits. It lowers risk cost-effectively: keeping contaminants out of drinking water sources is an efficient way of keeping them out of drinking water. This is particularly so because standard treatments cannot effectively remove certain contaminants. And protecting drinking water sources can in some instances be less expensive than treating contaminated water so that it meets required safety standards."
It is no doubt in the interest of municipalities - who will shoulder a significant portion of the responsibility - to move toward drinking water protection in the most cost-effective way.
This first barrier to contamination is the foundation on which safe drinking water legislation should be built. An open and transparent process for identifying and protecting drinking water sources is essential, even if government's work in this area is not yet complete.
A clear legislative roadmap, outlining government's intentions to protect drinking water sources is required, as well as timelines with firm target dates for delivery.
The OMA is also concerned about problems that might arise if several pieces of related water legislation are proposed in unison.
There is every likelihood that these Acts would overlap or intersect in some way, and that other pre-existing legislation might have significant influence in water matters.
The chance of legislative conflicts is great, so there must be clarification about which Acts are intended to have priority.
There must be a "conflict provision" included in the drinking water legislation, which states that wherever a conflict appears between drinking water provisions and any other Acts or regulations that may have an impact on drinking water, the drinking water provisions shall prevail.
This is especially important with regard to the issue of water source protection, where development initiatives, water-taking permits, and industrial or municipal effluent may pose a risk of contamination.
Jurisdiction over water sources is bound to be hotly contested. There is a need to guarantee that drinking water safety legislation supersedes other Acts and regulations when jurisdictional conflicts arise.
Although progress has been made on the issue of clean water, continued advocacy by the OMA and others is vital to help ensure that Ontario's water is as safe as possible.