Certifiable: Can a Class Action Address Canada’s On-Reserve Drinking Water Crisis?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: For decades, Canada has struggled to provide safe and equitable drinking water services and wastewater services to on-reserve residents. The funding regime currently in place has not delivered sustainable outcomes, and while the underlying issues are multi-faceted, the regime itself is a significant factor — and despite repeated criticism and public displays of failure, the regime has not changed. At a time when Canadians are attempting to work together to move beyond our colonial legacy and towards reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples in Canada, we must also address current-day inequities and the policies, such as those operating in this context, that sustain them. There have been scholarly discussions addressing the crisis and this paper intends to add to that discussion. The dominant theme of legal discourse to date has focused on constitutional law. I add to that discussion by proposing a cause of action in tort. I also propose that class actions have the potential to offer an effective procedural tool for advancing the potential claims, and I use the standard Canadian class action certification requirements as a framework for assessing the form and preferability of such a proceeding.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".