May 25, 2011
Council votes to stay
the course on fire review
by Vance Gutzman
Probably the safest place to be in the event of a fire last week was
the Deep River town hall, as upwards of 50 firefighters representing 12
firefighting associations from as far away as Ottawa, Smiths Falls and
Kingston marched into the council chambers with their Deep River
brethren.
The out-of-town firefighters were there, according to Deep River
firefighter Rob Mclaren, "to show that professional firefighters are
standing up for the overall safety of the public and firefighters
themselves."
The show of support came as council was set to debate a motion put
forth by Councillor Daniel Banks.
Banks' motion called on the town to "seek expert third party and legal
advice" on the implementation of a composite firefighting service
(comprised of a full-time fire chief and 40 or more volunteers) "among
other possible models."
It was standing room only in the council chambers for the firefighters,
including every member of Deep River's service, save the fire chief, as
Councillor Banks explained the rationale behind his motion.
"In my intention of bringing this forward, it's a proposal, not a fait
accompli," Banks said as the firefighters, several of whom brought
their spouses, looked on.
"I am open for suggestions to improve the resolution."
That being said, Banks went on to say that, whatever path council were
to take with the resolution, "we need to establish a path forward."
Banks was referring to the Ontario Fire Marshal's report, issued in
February, which was initiated by the OFM as a result of concerns
stemming from a fatal fire last fall.
The OFM's lengthy review contained 11 recommendations, one of which
deal with staffing levels.
The OFM said the town's fire department “currently does not have the
internal resources to effectively, efficiently and safely conduct fire
suppression operations at single family dwellings or at any higher risk
occupancy."
"We need to take steps to address that situation," Banks said of the
OFM's staffing recommendations.
Banks took pains to stress that his resolution should not be seen as a
reflection on professionalism of the town's firefighters.
"I don't see this as being a comment on their competence," he said.
"But what we need are more people who can be trained and available to
respond to fires. We will need to incorporate the use of volunteers
into that model."
Banks also argued his case in a budgetary context, noting that the town
currently has a budget of roughly $1.2 million for its full-time
service.
"This is a case where savings can be achieved by not cutting the
service, but by changing the way it's delivered," he said.
Banks went on to state his belief that changing the composition of the
town's firefighting service could be done without completely abrogating
the term of the current contract the municipality has with its
firefighters association.
"It can be done if the details are properly negotiated," he said.
"If all I had in front of me was this contract, that would suggest it's
a possibility as long as we have other things in place. These are all
things council needs some advice on."
Banks also acknowledged the volatility of the present situation,
as exemplified by the large contingent of firefighters who were
on hand to witness the proceedings.
"We've been elected to take on some difficult issues," Banks said.
"I don't see a way forward that's going to make everyone happy."
Not in favour
Indeed, some of Banks' own council colleagues were not happy, at least
with the resolution he had brought forward.
Councillor Chris Carroll, who chairs the ad hoc fire services review
committee the town established in the wake of the OFM's report, said
Bank's resolution undermines the mandate of that committee.
"The committee has been charged with the responsibility for addressing
these issues," Carroll said, adding that the committee has made great
strides in dealing with several of the OFM's recommendations, not all
of which dealt with staffing levels.
"This motion is presumptuous of what may or may not happen as we work
through this."
Deputy Mayor Mary MacCafferty went one step further, saying Banks'
resolution undermines the very confidence of the town's firefighters,
and their families, too.
"It's no doubt provoked extreme stress," MacCafferty said.
"This inflammatory motion compromises every one of us. It's the view of
one councillor."
Councillor Ruth Syme, who sits on the ad hoc fire services review
committee with Carroll, was also opposed to the resolution brought
forward by Banks.
"This is seriously premature," Syme said of the that resolution.
"There's a great deal of information we don't have."
Councillor Terry Myers, who seconded Banks' resolution for the purpose
of opening it up for discussion, also poured cold water on it.
"It was my understanding the process would engage the firefighters,"
Myers said.
"These issues will come up in time, when it's time to negotiate. I want
to see us move ahead in a way that respects our firefighters."
Banks' resolution also came under fire from Councillor Ron Desrochers.
"This is way ahead of schedule," Desrochers said.
"We have an unusual situation we've inherited from AECL. We have an
abnormal situation. We're going to try and make it normal. I don't
think we mean harm to anyone."
Sensing that the tide was against him, Banks suggested his motion could
instead be deferred to the fire service review committee for further
discussion.
"It was not my intention that we would necessarily vote on this this
evening," he said.
But no other member of council would second Bank's motion of deferment,
so they had to vote on the original motion he had brought forth to the
table, and in a recorded vote all members of council, including Banks,
voted against it, soliciting a hardy round of applause from the large
contingent of firefighters who were on hand.
"Council is in a tough spot," Mayor David Thompson told the
firefighters, just prior to the vote being held.
"The Ontario Fire Marshal has made it perfectly clear that the status
quo is not sustainable."
|
