operational policy to one that does not tolerate the unfulfillment of contracts and pays for the difference. Russell Anthony proposes going one step further and suggests requiring contracted engineers to manage a plant for several years after its completion (ibid).
The second inefficiency of INAC is the lack of communication with Indigenous communities. Hans Peterson, who has developed water systems for twenty years with the Safe Drinking Water Foundation (SDWF), comments on INAC’s unwillingness to discuss water infrastructure with Indigenous communities. “if INAC wants a community to have a specific process, the community has to put up a fight to get a different process, even if capital and operational costs are much lower for the process the band favours” (ibid)). This reluctance to communicate with communities could result in weaker managerial decisions of INAC and the building of less efficient infrastructure. In addition to weaker managerial decisions, this unwillingness to communicate also demonstrates INAC’s very top-down approach which …show more content…
A more efficient approach may be shifting efforts to correct the unfunctional nature of INAC. However, the problem does not stop there. The Consolidation Indian Act (IA) of 1985 -an amended version of the Indian Act of 1857- may have created a political structure of dependency where Indigenous communities are incapable to develop water infrastructure on there own. Instead, communities could be forced to wait and develop water infrastructure through the inefficient INAC. How the IA may incapacitate indigenous communities from building water infrastructure, making them dependant on INAC, will be discussed by the pseudo municipality of Indian band self governance and lack of land
The second inefficiency of INAC is the lack of communication with Indigenous communities. Hans Peterson, who has developed water systems for twenty years with the Safe Drinking Water Foundation (SDWF), comments on INAC’s unwillingness to discuss water infrastructure with Indigenous communities. “if INAC wants a community to have a specific process, the community has to put up a fight to get a different process, even if capital and operational costs are much lower for the process the band favours” (ibid)). This reluctance to communicate with communities could result in weaker managerial decisions of INAC and the building of less efficient infrastructure. In addition to weaker managerial decisions, this unwillingness to communicate also demonstrates INAC’s very top-down approach which …show more content…
A more efficient approach may be shifting efforts to correct the unfunctional nature of INAC. However, the problem does not stop there. The Consolidation Indian Act (IA) of 1985 -an amended version of the Indian Act of 1857- may have created a political structure of dependency where Indigenous communities are incapable to develop water infrastructure on there own. Instead, communities could be forced to wait and develop water infrastructure through the inefficient INAC. How the IA may incapacitate indigenous communities from building water infrastructure, making them dependant on INAC, will be discussed by the pseudo municipality of Indian band self governance and lack of land