The services provided in a city are largely dependent on the city’s culture. For that reason, policing services change from one city to another. Overall, however, it can be said that in large cities, residents have very few interactions with the police. Despite the lack of interaction (or perhaps, because of it), residents generally feel they are protected and have trust in the police’s discretion. Consequently, the relationship between officers and citizens are seldom strained which greatly impacts how police officers do their job. Thus, there is a cycle in which the culture affects policing, and policing affects the culture.
This cycle does not only apply to urban centers, but also to rural areas and isolated communities. However, the positive perception of police often held in large cities is not necessarily the case in isolated First Nations communities. This is in part due to the differences in culture, but also to the difference in policing. In 1991, the federal government established the First Nations Policing Program (FNPP). This program provides funding from both the federal (52%) and provincial governments (48%) towards the community’s policing services. Under the FNPP, the federal and provincial government make an agreement with the First Nations community. These agreements can take one of two forms: the Self-Administered Agreements which allows the First Nations community to manage its own police service; or the community can be policed by an existing police body through the Community Tripartite Agreements (Aboriginal Policing, 2015). Although this program is meant to support communities, it is important to note that this policing program was created by the federal government with relatively small input from First Nations communities themselves. This could mean that while many residents may feel safer with the presence of police officers, many may see it as yet another form of colonialism and Eurocentric ideas imposed on their communities. This can have a significant effect on how the population reacts to the police which further affects how the police reacts to the community. To better understand this relationship and the benefits of the FNPP, we must investigate the impacts it has had since it was first established.
A study by Rudell, Lithopoulos, and Jones (2014) analyzes some of the important impacts of the FNPP. The study includes 236 communities which are policed by seventy-seven police detachments (Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones, 2014). This analysis is based on four factors associated with the costs of policing, as well as police strength. These included the Crime Severity Index (CSI), which accounts for crimes reported to the police; the community well-being (CWB) index; and two indicators of police strength, per capita policing costs and the ratio of officers to residents (Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones, 2014). The study found that crime, as measured by the CSI, in the communities studied was three to four times the national average (Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones, 2014). The high crime rate normally indicates that more police officers are needed in these communities to lower the crime instances; but at 5.83 officers per 1000 residents, this ratio is almost three times higher than the nation’s average (Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones, 2014). Although the latter finding indicates that increasing the police force is not the solution, we must note that officers deployed to First Nations communities work in sparsely populated areas and are often responsible for policing very large areas. Consequently, response times are slower as the travel time between communities is longer. This problem is also shown in the CWB index, with First Nations communities scoring 17% less than the national average on well-being (Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones, 2014). Additionally, the study shows a correlation between isolated communities, overall well-being and police costs, with the well-being decreasing and the costs increasing the more isolated a community is (Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones, 2014). While the FNPP is funded directly by the federal and provincial governments, the funding is allocated to multiple sectors of policing. For instance, the funding provided must cover the costs of relocating and housing officers, and because deployments are usually short, the costs increase (Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones, 2014). Overall, the study indicates that the costs of policing an isolated community are too high for the lack of positive effects the program has had on these communities.
Similar results had been found in a survey conducted in 2013 by Auditor General Michael Ferguson. CBC released a story of this survey’s findings and likely gave many Canadians the impression that the FNPP is not working. According to this story, since its establishment in 1991 until 2013, the federal government alone has funded the FNPP a total of 1.7 billion dollars (The Canadian Press, 2014). While 442 First Nations communities have benefited from this funding, Auditor General Michael Ferguson believes that this amount is not enough. Doug Palson, chief of the Dakota Ojibway Police Service in Manitoba, reiterated this problem in his statement that short-term funding makes it difficult to run his department (The Canadian Press, 2014). Ferguson’s survey of 10 Chiefs with Self-Administered Agreements also showed a significant lack of documentation, from how the funding is spent to how police officers are being selected (The Canadian Press, 2014). Most notably, Ferguson found that there is very little input from the First Nations communities themselves (The Canadian Press, 2014); this shows a failure to incorporate all principles of the FNPP agreements. Overall, the survey comprehensively showed that the First Nations Policing Program is not adequately policing communities due to a lack of funding and oversight.
It is clear from both studies that while the FNPP has good intentions, it is not working for First Nations communities. Needless to say, the main issue with the FNPP is funding; simply, the program needs more of it. However, there are other issues which need to be addressed in order for the communities to benefit from the programs. First of all, the study by Rudell, Lithopoulos, & Jones (2014) showed that the program’s funding is mostly spent on police costs, such as the relocation and housing of police officers due to short-term deployments. One possible solution to lower the costs would be to establish permanent and long-term positions within the communities. The benefit of this would be two-fold; it would give officers the opportunity to be involved and increase their understanding of the community’s culture, and it would also strengthen the relationship between officers and residents. Furthermore, the FNPP would become more than a policing program imposed by the federal government, and would increase residents’ satisfaction with the police. Additionally, communities would benefit from non-sworn officials, such as band constables. These officers are knowledgeable in the community and help create stronger relationships between the police and residents. Another issue is the high crime rate which consequently increases the need for policing. By creating community based programs designated to reduce crime, police officers would become more involved with the community while also preventing crime; while this strategy may produce more costs, it would have long-term impacts on the communities and could potentially reduce the amount of officers needed. Most importantly, to improve the effects of the FNPP, the federal government needs to seek input from First Nations persons as they are the ones directly impacted by the policing program, regardless of costs. This would allow residents to be involved in their community and to have control over their community’s general well-being. Furthermore, residents’ involvement would also help to create a relationship with officers and could change the negative perception of police officers within the culture. In conclusion, as it stands now, Canada’s policing program for First Nations communities has high costs, but does not a positive impact on communities. In order to have a policing program which adequately addresses the community’s concerns, there needs to be changes in both the culture and policing programs; thus, improving the cycle of policing and culture.
References
Aboriginal Policing: First Nations Policing Program [Website]. (2015, February 11). Retrieved from https://www.publicsafety.gc.ca.
Ruddell, R., Lithopoulos, S., & Jones, N.A. (2014). Crime, costs, and well being: policing Canadian Aboriginal communities. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management, 37 (4), 779-796. Retrieved from https://www.emeraldinsight.com
The Canadian Press (2014, May 06). First Nations policing program slammed by auditor genera. CBC News. Retrieved from https://www.cbc.ca
Nadia's Paper Town 