Proceedings of the Standing Senate Committee on
National Security and Defence
Issue 7 - Evidence, January 27, 2003 (Afternoon session)
REGINA, Monday, January 27, 2003
The Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence met this day at 3 p.m. to examine and report on the need for a national security policy for Canada.
Senator Colin Kenny (Chairman) in the Chair.
[English]
The Chairman: It is my pleasure to welcome you to the Standing Senate Committee on National Security and Defence. My name is Colin Kenny, I am a senator from Ontario and I chair the committee.
On my immediate left is the deputy chair of the committee, the distinguished senator from Nova Scotia, Senator Michael Forrestall. Senator Forrestall has served the constituents of Dartmouth as their member of the House of Commons for 25 years and for the past 12 years as their senator. Throughout his parliamentary career, he has followed defence matters, serving on various parliamentary committees, including the 1993 Special Joint Committee on the future of the Canadian Forces, as well as representing Canada at the NATO Parliamentary Assembly.
On my right is Senator Jack Wiebe from Saskatchewan, one of Saskatchewan's leading citizens, who was instrumental in persuading us to come here today. He has been a highly successful farmer, a member of the Saskatchewan Legislative Assembly and Lieutenant Governor of Saskatchewan. In the Senate, he is the deputy chair of the Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry. Currently, that committee is looking at the impact of climate change on farming and forestry practices across the country.
At the far end of the table is Senator David Smith from Ontario. A lawyer by training, he is a distinguished practitioner in municipal, administrative and regulatory law. In the 1970s, he was elected as councillor and deputy mayor of Toronto, and was a Member of the House of Commons from 1980 to 1984. Senator Smith also serves on the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee and on the Committee on Rules, Procedures and the Rights of Parliament.
Beside him is Senator Norman Atkins, who has a strong background in the field of communications. He served as an adviser to former Premier Davis of Ontario. During his time as a senator, he has championed the cause of Canadian merchant navy veterans and is a member of the Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs. Currently, he serves as chair of the Senate Conservative caucus. He is also deputy chair of the Senate Committee on Internal Economy, Budgets and Administration.
On my far left, at the end of the table, is Senator Joe Day from New Brunswick. Senator Day holds a Bachelor of Electrical Engineering from the Royal Military College, Kingston, an L.L.B. from Queen's University, and a Master of Laws from Osgoode Hall. Prior to his appointment to the Senate in 2001, he had a successful career as a private practice attorney. Senator Day is deputy chair of the Senate Committee on National Finance and a member of the Senate Committee on Transport and Communications. In addition, he serves as deputy chair of our own Subcommittee on Veterans Affairs.
Beside him is Senator Tommy Banks from Alberta. Senator Banks is well known to Canadians as one of our most accomplished and versatile entertainers and an international standard-bearer for Canadian culture. A Juno award winner, he was the host of The Tommy Banks Show from 1968 to 1973. He is the chair of the Senate Committee on Energy, the Environment and Natural Resources. Currently, that committee is studying Bill C-5, the proposed Species at Risk Act.
This committee has worked on a number of reports, notably the following: ``Defence of North America: A Canadian Responsibility,'' which was published in September 2002; a report entitled ``For an extra 130 bucks...Update on Canada's Military Crisis: A View from the Bottom Up,'' published in November 2002; and the most recent, ``The Myth of Security at Canada's Airports,'' published in January 2003.
Today, we continue our study on national security by focussing on the work of first responders. In times of national emergencies or disasters, we look to you to respond quickly and effectively.
We look forward to hearing from the Chief of the Regina Police Service about the city's plans for dealing with emergencies and the relationship with officials at other levels of government, especially the Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency Preparedness in Ottawa.
Chief Johnston, the last time we met, I believe, was when the Illegal Drugs Committee was in Regina. We had the fortune of your testimony at that time. It is a pleasure to see you again. I would ask you to introduce the officials who are here with you, and then it is my understanding that you have an opening statement.
The floor is yours, sir.
Mr. Cal Johnston, Chief of Police, City of Regina: The Regina Police Service has asked certain people to join us here today to better answer any questions that you might have. We have a brief prepared statement, following which I think it might best serve everyone if we could respond to any concerns or questions that you may carry with you or that arise from these comments.
I am joined today by the Chief of the Regina Fire Department, Mr. Jack Lichtenwald, the Director of Emergency Medical Services for Regina, Mr. Ken Luciak, the Deputy Chief, Mr. Clive Weighill, who was your host this afternoon as you looked at some of the emergency equipment behind police headquarters and in the garage, and by Mr. Dave Quick, the coordinator for the City of Regina for emergency planning.
As a group, we represent in this community the people who would be in charge of the first response. Our capability to respond to a chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear, or CBRN, incident rests with these local agencies. Their expertise and first-hand knowledge should assist in providing your committee with an accurate assessment of our current state of readiness and future requirements.
Our first responders are well trained and equipped to deal with major disasters, for example, a severe storm, train derailment, air crash, et cetera. We have a cohesive working relationship with each other. Our agencies regularly hold joint training exercises to ensure a coordinated emergency response. Although we have a good capability to react to natural disasters and hazardous materials incidents, we have a limited capability to handle chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear terrorism. If a major biological, chemical or radiological disaster were to happen in Regina, the combined City of Regina emergency capability could only handle the bare essentials of first response. Our responders would contain the scene, monitor the threat and evacuate a safe radius around the site. We would then have to call for help through the province to the federal government to neutralize the threat, decontaminate victims and environmentally cleanse the site.
We wish to acknowledge the receipt of $204,000 from the Joint Emergency Preparedness Program, JEPP. That funding, $18,000 to the police and $186,000 to the fire department, went toward the purchase of first responders' personal protective suits, chemical and radiation monitoring units, and decontamination equipment. We await training sponsored by the Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency Preparedness in the use of this equipment. Emergency Medical Services also received an additional $80,000, primarily for decontamination.
Prior to the receipt of this equipment, we had limited capability to decontaminate first responders and could only decontaminate a few victims. When we become trained with the new equipment, we should have the capability for decontamination of first responders and approximately 500 victims. We recommend the continuation of funding and training from JEPP.
As evidenced during your tour of our emergency response equipment and vehicles, our municipality and corporate donors have already spent large amounts of money for emergency preparedness. Municipalities do not have the financial capacity to fund the amount of money required to detect, respond to or mass-decontaminate victims should a CBRN incident occur. The cost related to the environmental cleanup is well beyond the capacity of a municipality.
In the area of training, we recommend that a train-the-trainer program be further developed through the Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency Preparedness. If a portion of our personnel could receive initial CBRN training, we have the systems and capability to continue the training to all of our personnel. The train-the- trainer approach strengthens the understanding and expertise of our personnel and enhances the overall effectiveness of our services. As seen in the September 11, 2001, incident in New York, it will be local agencies that are first on the scene. Those early minutes and hours of response are critical, as they hold the greatest opportunity for mitigating the negative effects of an incident.
In relation to emergency medical services, we require a greater capability for decontamination of victims. Our ability to perform this function on a large scale is still very limited. A terrorist incident, as opposed to an industrial-site event, is more likely to involve a large number of affected people. Mass decontamination is one of the most expensive endeavours, as it requires the addition and/or construction of new facilities to our hospitals, not to mention the equipment and training.
In connection with a coordinated response to a CBRN occurrence, we propose a regional concept. Consideration should be given to funding two centres within the province, one in the north and one in the south. As well, well- equipped and trained first-response teams should be created. This concept would allow resources to be concentrated, while balancing the recognition that local first responders would be the first to encounter a major incident.
In our circumstances, a regional approach would create a higher response capacity as opposed to a lesser capability resulting from a thin dispersal of scarce resources to a number of smaller communities. This approach would necessitate the creation of umbrella agreements, charting response, liability and fiscal obligations.
As has been stated, there is a need for balance and forethought in building our capacity to respond effectively, and this may differ across Canada, depending upon the circumstances and characteristics of local environments.
One critical area that requires consideration is the need for direct communication to and from federal government agencies such as National Defence and the Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency Preparedness by municipalities. We are currently constrained because communication must come through the province. The province does not have responsibility for, nor does it maintain, a first-response capacity. A new structure and process should be considered to expedite communications in both directions.
The municipalities are the first level of government to respond to an occurrence and yet we are not able to connect directly with federal-funding and information-providing agencies. We need information related to any actual terrorist threat to the province and the city. The Regina Police Service has an integrated criminal intelligence unit with the Royal Canadian Mounted Police and excellent working relationships with the Canadian Security Intelligence Service, CSIS, and Criminal Intelligence Service Canada, CISC. They forward information to us on a regular basis. As best we know, they have not received a Saskatchewan threat assessment. Has any agency performed a terrorist threat assessment on the province or on the city? The intelligence agencies we have regular contact with do not have such an assessment.
Most large-scale critical incidents, either threatened or actual, occur at the community level, for example, a severe storm, a train disaster, et cetera. We can prepare for them as a municipality.
Threats to national defence are monitored through the higher levels of government. However, a terrorist incident, if one were to occur, would likely happen within a local jurisdiction. At the community level, we need information regarding vulnerability and potential targets so that we can adequately prepare.
There is a significant volume of information related to terrorism in the United States. To date, our local municipality has received very little information from the Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency Preparedness. The last official documentation we received on the topic of terrorism through this entity was the National Counter Terrorism Plan authored in the early 1990s.
We acknowledge that in many cases it is perhaps not feasible for us to receive protected information or lengthy, in- depth assessments. A possible solution might be the regular distribution of short bulletins from National Defence, OCIPEP and/or CSIS, briefly outlining specific threats and global trends. These pieces of information would allow us to harden targets and better plan responses for any potential incidents. We are responsible for reacting should a CBRN occurrence happen in Regina, yet we are probably the least prepared, information wise.
In conclusion, we have an excellent capability to handle natural and hazardous-material incidents. Our city has received funding from the Joint Emergency Preparedness Program, which has improved safety for our first responders and given us some capability for decontamination of victims.
Our recommendations to the committee are the following: (1) continuation of the Joint Emergency Preparedness Program to supply equipment and training to municipalities; (2) use of the train-the-trainer approach to build and sustain local expertise; (3) creation of additional decontamination facilities for victims of CBRN incidents; (4) utilization of a suitably balanced regional approach for the allocation of resources and expertise through first-response teams; (5) creation of a new structure and process that facilitates direct communication between federal and municipal agencies; and (6) distribution of intelligence bulletins and threat assessments for the province and local areas, for example, the City of Regina.
On behalf of the Regina Fire Department, Emergency Medical Services, Emergency Planning and the Regina Police Service, I should like to thank your committee for coming to Regina to hear our concerns and our recommendations.
Senator Wiebe: Let me first thank Chief Johnston and the rest of you for the informative, though short, tour we had today. What my colleagues and I saw certainly was very impressive, and we congratulate you on the work that you have done.
When this committee first started, we met with the officials from the newly formed OCIPEP. On first listening to them, we had the feeling that everything was under control in this country, in terms of terrorist attacks and emergencies and first responders; however, after a considerable amount of questioning, that was certainly not our feeling.
That was reinforced today by your comments, in which you say:
To date, our local municipality has received very little information from the Office of Critical Infrastructure Protection and Emergency Preparedness. The last official documentation we received on the topic of terrorism through this entity was the National Counter Terrorism Plan authored in the early 1990s.
Part of the reason for this committee is that that is certainly our feeling, and we feel that something must be done to turn that around.
You mentioned that communication is necessary between the federal and provincial authorities, as well as infrastructure funding, funding for training and national guidelines. You gave us a breakdown of some of the things that you would like to see this committee recommend.
What is your idea of a perfect world? We may not be able to achieve that in Canada, but nevertheless that is my question is.
Mr. Johnston: I will make a few remarks, after which I will turn to Mr. Quick for some comments on his relationship. As well, my colleagues from the fire department or EMS may wish to talk about that perfect world.
In a perfect world, a first-response capacity, which resides at a municipal level and is generally funded through a municipal tax base and those structures, would know what to do in the case of most emergencies. The first responders would have very real connections to deeper resources should the need arise, both provincially and federally, especially through the military. They would know that those would be there and available quickly. Hence, in a perfect world, one would want to build that capacity, in terms of training and equipment, although there would be reasonable limits to that.
What is more important, however, is the recognition that, although there would be a federal level of responsibility for gathering intelligence and making plans and ensuring preparedness, short of, perhaps, war or an extreme national security emergency, the actual service will be delivered by the people in front of you today, together with the people you met today at the police station and those from the fire department and EMS. Those are the people who deal with these issues, and they are the people in need of being informed.
Do we have a problem? What is the extent of that problem? Is there something to be concerned about? It will help us to better prepare both in an anticipatory sense and also mentally, in what we should do. I think we need to work carefully on those barriers.
I will turn it over to Mr. Dave Quick, just briefly.
Mr. Dave Quick, Emergency Planning Coordinator, City of Regina: First of all, I should like to indicate that we do have a good working relationship with OCIPEP. Obviously, the events of September 11 have created a completely new issue and a completely new threat to all of us, including OCIPEP. Since that time, we have been hoping that we would receive more information than we have. For us to do our planning at a community level, we need to know what we are planning for and therefore do risk assessment.
In the City of Regina, we plan for events such as major summer and winter storms and events related to hazardous materials. There is a refinery complex in the north end of our city. As well, major pipelines out of Alberta, including those that run down to the United States, run immediately through our city. The main railway line of the CPR runs right through the centre of town.
We know about all those issues, we work with all those organizations. The problem we are having related to CBRN or terrorism issues is the intelligence.
There should be intelligence at the federal level, because this is mainly an international issue. When we sit down and decide what it is we will do about a chemical or a biological threat, say, I would like to know what the threat is that I am dealing with. Hence, we are asking for information such as that. Is there a threat to the city of Regina; if so, what is it? If there is not a threat to the city of Regina, that would be nice to know also.
I do not think that OCIPEP is really the target that we should be looking at. OCIPEP is a conduit to us, no question about that, but the intelligence is obviously being created or obtained elsewhere. Sharing of that with us at a federal level would probably be a big help for them.
Mr. Jack Lichtenwald, Fire Chief, City of Regina: Certainly, I think it is important from the fire department's perspective in a perfect world that we continue to build on the programs that we operate and function within on a day- to-day basis.
We see CBRN as an extension of our emergency daily response. From that perspective, the perfect world is continuing to work in a very coordinated way with Regina Police Service and Regina EMS to build our response and our capacities for a special environment that we traditionally have not prepared for.
We have prepared, from a fire department's perspective, for the industrial hazard response, for limited numbers of people. CBRN presents a whole other issue and that is the issue of exposure of hundreds of people. The intention of terrorists is not to affect an individual but to affect groups of individuals. Therefore, it is about expanding our services to meet the needs of those kinds of programs.
In a perfect world, anything that we commence we need to sustain. Sustainability, from a fire service's perspective, means things like maintenance of training, maintenance of equipment. We need to continue to support the individuals that have the greater capacity or the specialized needs.
One of the important areas in this coordinated approach and how we do that in our province is that there are various levels of capacity within our community.
Certainly from an awareness perspective, I think it is important that we educate the population as to how to deal with an immediate incident. That is at the awareness level. The community needs to be educated and familiar with these new kinds of threats of terrorism.
In the smaller communities, from an operational perspective it is the RCMP officer or the local volunteer fire department that has to have at least immediate first-response capacity, until somebody with greater levels of equipment, training and resources can come in and mitigate the incident.
From the technical level perspective, Chief Johnston has indicated that he believes in a north-south concept within the province, and we support that belief at the technical level. Also, there should be additional resources from areas beyond ourselves, be it DND, OCIPEP or other areas within our country, from where we could bring in specialist capabilities to support the technical capabilities that are developed within the municipality.
Those are some comments as far as a perfect world from the fire service's perspective.
Senator Wiebe: In your remarks, Chief Johnston, you mentioned that you have good working relationships with CSIS, with the RCMP and with the Department of National Defence.
If, for example, there is a certain threat to the city of Regina or to the province of Saskatchewan, do these organizations need authority from the federal government to pass information on to you so that you may be prepared in case there is a threat? Or is the concern more about what kind of attack or emergency could befall the city of Regina from some terrorist group that may not be planning anything today for Regina but something that could happen in the future?
Mr. Johnston: I cannot speak directly for the legislative or policy restrictions on those organizations and how much they can share; I can relate what we have received.
With respect to actual warnings or higher levels of alert, there was a situation about a year ago where we received information, in a general sense, that there may be a higher level of threat present in North America; we received that alert.
We also have received an alert with respect to computer systems and something that might happen, in a general sense. In a very general sense, we received that.
I would characterize those pieces of information as somewhat tactical. They are about the thing that is going to happen the next day or the next week, or something along those lines. They are non-specific in terms of identifying to us, as an agency that might deal with that. Fair enough, if that is all that is known, that is all that we would know.
Further to that, though, I believe that there is a need for an analysis and, if you will, a digest of what is occurring or what appears to be occurring in the balance of the world, not only in terms of actual actions on the ground — what are they doing? — but also in terms of an assessment or analysis of whether that is likely to or could happen here, looking at the characteristics of the different places in our country. If that has not been done, or if it is beyond our capacity, and I do not know the answer to that, then, of course, it is not available to us, but we think it would be wise to do that proactively — that is, to look at what is the degree of applicability to Saskatchewan and, if so, where the vulnerabilities are. We do not have that information. If we did, it would be very valuable to us, because we could incorporate that into our planning, making us that much more effective should anything happen.
Senator Forrestall: Today has been an eye-opener. As well, what you have said to us this afternoon, Chief Johnston, is a further eye-opener, given our concern about first responders and whether the federal, the provincial and other levels of authority in our land, in fact, are reacting adequately to that.
Let me read a portion of a letter from Chief Fantino of the Toronto Police Service. Chief Fantino expressed some disappointment about some aspects of the Canadian reaction to September 11. He said, in part, that the following aspects were a disappointment: First, an apparent lack of integration and cooperation between all levels of government; second, the failure of the federal budget to respond to the ``pleadings'' — his word, not mine — of the Toronto Police Service for badly needed financial assistance to first responders; and third, the general failure of the senior levels of government to acknowledge that the first responders must receive support from all levels of government.
In support of that, Dr. Sheela Basrur, Toronto's senior medical officer of health, in a letter dated January 29, 2002, noted that ``first responders tend to be on the margins of federal emergency planning'' and that ``local emergency plans are developed and tested without the regular inclusion of federal officials, resources or expertise.''
I share Senator Wiebe's concern about this area of information. I share his concern that adequate response to the needs of first responders is, in fact, not in place.
Am I very far off track?
Mr. Johnston: No sir, you are not. I would not characterize our response as pleadings, but with respect to integration and cooperation on a local level it has been one of the, if you will, bywords. That is the approach taken in Saskatchewan, in Regina, but also throughout the province, including the RCMP.
Within the higher levels of government, whether it is federal-to-provincial, interdepartmental, federal-to-municipal, there are issues in terms of how much information is really there. We do not know so I could not tell how much is there to be shared. I can tell you that we get little.
In terms of first responders in those capacities, there is no doubt of the need. It is a case of where and when you want to look at that.
We are all aware of what we came through, through the decade of the 1990s, in terms of fiscal restraints that were translated into cuts to service and cuts to capacity. That eventually flows through to the front line. We are recovering from that somewhat these days. I think all of us in emergency services perhaps feel a little better about where we are today, in terms of strengthening our capacity. However, we are coming out of a slump, if you want the frank response.
Senator Forrestall: I cannot speak for my colleagues, but I was singularly impressed with what has been done with, if I may say, so little.
I put the word ``pleadings'' in its proper context.
I gathered from your remarks this afternoon that you were proud to show us where you have come to so far. Indeed, I think you should be very proud of that. It is a singular major step forward.
I gathered from conversations, not with you directly, but with others around you during that hour or so we were with you earlier, that you do have concern for the first responders and their training — the community, the family, right up through the chain — and that you are aware of the need for training, that training is being done and education is taking place. We have to walk before we can run. We commend you for that. The City of Regina is an example to some of the other major, smaller cities in our national community, in that regard.
You have a disaster plan in place. When was it last tested? I will put all my questions to you, and then give you an opportunity to answer. Does that disaster plan include capacity to get fresh water? Have the sources of fresh water been made known to you, the methods of getting that to you? Finally, do you have a major disaster plan; has it been tested; and who administered the test? Perhaps you might tell us, generally, who is in charge and whether that would depend upon whether it was a biological or a chemical problem, or a natural disaster. Would different authorities under different circumstances take the lead, or would the senior service person on the spot assume the lead?
Mr. Johnston: Mr. Quick is in charge of the planning here in the city. Although we all participate, he can best answer your questions about the update of the plan. I will also let him respond to who is in charge. It is dependent to a degree, at a certain level, on the nature of the incident.
Mr. Quick: Before I respond directly to your questions, I want to explain how our system works in Regina.
In the City of Regina, there are three levels of emergency response. The first level is the day-to-day operations of these three departments and other departments of the City of Regina. They respond to house fires and heart attack victims and car accidents. Those procedures are set in standard operating procedures within the agencies and jointly.
The second level of emergency response is what we call a major emergency. This would be a scenario such as a plane crash at the airport, a major hotel fire, a chemical incident where we have to evacuate 250 to 300 people. Those types of incidents are handled by an emergency site management system. A team will be formed at that site, usually under the command of a police officer or a firefighter. The site manager takes his respective hat off and begins to coordinate the response of everybody that is going to that scene, to respond accordingly.
Related to that, every year we run an emergency site management course developed by the City of Regina, utilizing the same general principles as OCIPEP. It is designed for our city. Emergency site management is a system of communication. People come back to that course on a regular basis.
We run up to six emergency exercises during the week of that course. It is there that the exercise and the training and development of our emergency plan at that level is conducted every year.
In addition, we run many other exercises, mainly related around industry. This year, we have planned a pipeline exercise, an exercise with the Co-op Refinery and an exercise with the Canadian Pacific Railway in a downtown incident. Each one of them will be done at tabletop, and in some cases we will do a full response-type exercise.
Now let us take you to the last level of emergency response, which is a disaster. Disaster is a scenario that is so large it is beyond the city's capability of responding to it. Disaster goes beyond our capability. What occurs then, and what you hear about mainly, is that the mayor or elected official will declare a state of local emergency. We will activate the emergency operations centre at City Hall and the backup at the police station.
We will bring into the emergency operations centre all the agencies and departments of the City of Regina, the Regina Qu'Appelle Health Region, the provincial government, federal government agencies, industry, volunteer groups, all of which are included in our emergency planning in Regina.
The last time we ran an exercise of that scale was March 2001. That exercise related to an evacuation around an anhydrous ammonia train derailment in which we had to evacuate in excess of 10,000 people. We worked them hard that day. That was the last time we exercised that particular level of our planning.
In addition, we have ongoing training throughout the year. Coming up in March we have the emergency public information officer training. Many members of the police, fire, health district, public works will conduct and do exercises during that particular training.
In addition, we will again run this year, in the fall, an emergency site management course.
We have not scheduled an EOC course, mainly because of changes in some staffing positions where there is a learning procedure that has to take place. I am leaving this year and my replacement will be running the new EOC and operations. We have to get that person into that position, which is why there is a span there of in excess of a year. Normally, we run these exercises every year.
Senator Forrestall: Could I ask you to comment on access to clean water, clean food?
Mr. Quick: The City of Regina, in conjunction with the City of Moose Jaw and many other smaller communities and individual farms, has the Buffalo Pound Water Treatment Plant, which is situated at Buffalo Pound Lake just north of Moose Jaw.
There is a 78-kilometre pipeline that runs to the city of Regina. The water is treated to a certain level at the water treatment plant and transported into the city of Regina where we have five water-storage facilities. It is put into the water-storage facility, at which time we conduct additional treatment, such as chlorination, and thereafter it is distributed through the water-distribution system. In addition, we have 14 — but it could be as high as 21 — underground wells in the Regina aquifer area that also feed into the water system.
In the event of an emergency somewhere between our storage facilities and the water treatment plant north of Moose Jaw, we are able, with water rationing, to maintain clean water for firefighting, consumption and normal cleansing within the city of Regina.
Probably — I am going to guess at this — we would be able to maintain that fairly well for at least one week. I would hope that that would give us enough time to bring the other one back on force.
Senator Day: My questions relate to coordination, which is what I was thinking about as we went through the emergency mobile vehicles that we looked at today and the discussion we have had thus far.
Mr. Lichtenwald, you mentioned the importance of communicating the information to the public generally, the importance of educating the public so that they will have confidence, will know they are in good hands, and not be in a panic situation. I am pleased to hear that that is happening, at least at the municipal level.
I also appreciate, Chief Johnston, you giving us the five recommendations. I tried to make notes of them here; however, I know you are going to make them available to us in due course. We do not have to have them now, but I think it is important that we get your recommendations.
From a coordination point of view, in some of the comments you made earlier I think you said that a lot of the planning you were doing was around year-2000 activities. Someone mentioned that, I believe. I am wondering if what we are doing now is applying a post-September-11 mentality to something that was already in the works, only moving it along a little faster. Is that what I am seeing?
Mr. Lichtenwald: I certainly would support that. We have been for a long time planning for emergencies and our responses to them.
Post-September 11 certainly brings a requirement for a higher level of preparedness. Prior to that, North America, by and large, was free of terrorist attacks. Now it has come into our community and we are now certainly at the stage of taking it to the next levels of preparedness.
The fire department's levels of preparedness are about greater levels of detection. It is about the greater numbers of people that can be affected by the event. It is about having a greater and larger response capability to effect that change. That all brings with it other levels of training requirements, resources, equipment and internal capacity.
Senator Day: I suppose to a degree, Chief Johnston, we are looking at a greater likelihood that something might occur now. Previously, we were focussing on natural occurrences; we now have potentially terrorist-induced occurrences, as well.
In terms of insurance and certification for hospitals and nursing homes, there are commercially induced requirements for some level of emergency preparedness. Volunteer fire departments in rural areas have been doing a little bit of this work.
Where is the coordination, and how do we know that the equipment that you are buying here is not being duplicated by another area close by? Who is bringing this all together, and what role has the federal government to play in that coordination, or is this primarily a provincial government role for the coordination part?
Mr. Lichtenwald: That is a great question. Mr. Quick is the coordinator for our municipality, for the area of Regina. He has done an excellent job in making sure that there is no duplication. Because a lot of that money has to be transferred from the federal government to the province and through to us, Mr. Quick acts as a very good gatekeeper to ensure that the best use is being made of those dollars.
I want to answer a question that excited me when you asked about Y2K. The reason I found it exciting was we are just now doing some work on pandemic planning, which is a big health issue. I am going back to my Y2K contingency plans, which were very, very extensive. A lot of what was addressed in those Y2K contingency plans is very applicable, not only to pandemic planning but also to CBRN incidents as well.
It addresses everything from water supplies, fuel supplies, all those different things that you take for granted day to day, but would not be available if a large part of our population is not available to provide those services.
That is essentially what we were planning for with Y2K. Even though Y2K may have seemed like a big white elephant, it was in fact a very good step forward for us, not only in the upcoming pandemic planning but also for CBRN issues.
Senator Day: I appreciate your answer. If we could return to resources and knowing what resources are available.
In your planning, if the drinking water is contaminated in Regina is there a plan that is coordinated as to from where the drinking water will come for this populace in that event? Is that plan in place and who is doing that?
Mr. Quick: No, we do not have such a plan. We would be dependent on the province and the federal government to initiate that type of response.
Senator Day: You would sit here and say, ``Our water is no good; somebody help''?
Mr. Quick: I have asked that question of our provincial government but have not received any response.
Senator Day: In terms of critical infrastructure planning, to know what infrastructure in this region is critical and could be vulnerable, which presumably would come from a national program —
Mr. Quick: You used the right word, ``presumably.'' We do our own threat assessments within our community and around the community.
I have not received any information since the Vital Points program done by the RCMP up to the mid-1980s, I believe. Since that time, we have not received any additional information on infrastructure.
We talk to our different industries. I deal on a regular basis with the pipeline industries and the railways and get as much as we can out of them. Risk assessments, risk evaluation on those facilities, none of that has been brought forward, to my knowledge.
I wonder if I could return to a question asked by Senator Forrestall. When you spoke of the water issue, I forgot to mention that we do have a first draft of an emergency plan. We are preparing an exercise to test that plan this year.
Senator Day: Is that water emergency plan purely a municipal plan, or does it involve the region?
Mr. Quick: Purely the City of Regina. The City of Moose Jaw will piggyback onto our plan because they are part of the same system. Basically, other than with representatives of the Department of the Environment and Provincial Health, it is being done by the City of Regina.
Senator Day: If it is part of the same watershed, if the water is contaminated naturally or otherwise for the City of Regina, then Moose Jaw is contaminated as well?
Mr. Quick: If the lake is contaminated, yes. That comes under the authority of SaskWater, who are part and parcel of our water planning process.
Senator Day: You have had no discussions federally or provincially for the broader region, in terms of sharing resources in an instance like that?
Mr. Quick: As far as risk assessment?
Senator Day: Yes.
Mr. Quick: I am sure that within SaskWater there are risk assessments. I do not deal directly with that; it is being dealt with by our water engineers.
Senator Day: If somebody determines that the water system is contaminated — you have a lot of people living here and your entire agricultural infrastructure is based on this — what is your response?
Mr. Quick: Our response is based on the water supply to our citizens; beyond that, it is a provincial responsibility.
Senator Day: Are you not dealing with the province in terms of a response from the regional point of view?
Mr. Quick: Certain departments that are involved in the water quality issue in the City of Regina are part and parcel of our plan. As far as water underneath the ground, no, to my knowledge.
Senator Forrestall: In other testimony given to this committee, we have run across situations where difficulties arise because the city police cannot talk on their car radios to the RCMP, the RCMP cannot talk to hell and only Bostonians can talk to God. How far along are you advanced with this major little stumbling block that must be terribly frustrating from a communications point of view?
Mr. Clive Weighill, Deputy Chief of Police, City of Regina: We are probably about three to four years away before we are fully integrated with the RCMP and other municipal departments.
Saskatoon, Moose Jaw and Regina have all gone to the same digital communications system, so with a few tweaks and a little help we will be fully integrated within a few years.
I believe the RCMP is still undertaking some research on the system they are going to choose, but we believe that their system will be integrated with ours as well.
I think we are only three to four years away from a mass-communication system for the province.
Senator Forrestall: Does this include ground-to-air communications capability? Can you talk to a plane or helicopter?
Mr. Weighill: We would have the capability of doing that within a limited distance. Most of our telecommunications is digital and goes through a repeater system, so you would need repeaters to boost the signal.
Senator Banks: In Saskatchewan, is there a means of pushing a button and talking to everybody in the province through all the radio stations? The reason I am asking is that that exists in Alberta.
Mr. Quick: Are you referring to the emergency broadcast that the Province of Alberta has?
Senator Banks: Yes.
Mr. Quick: No, we do not have anything like that.
Senator Banks: I am sure you would like to have one.
Chief Johnston, I will address my question to you, and you can refer it to whomever you like.
I will ask you to cogitate a little bit and remove ourselves from the realm of the known and talk about the unknown. The reason I am going to ask you to do that is because conventional wisdom in the face of innovation, evil or otherwise, is always wrong.
If you had taken a poll in New York City on September 10 as to the chance of someone flying two airplanes into two buildings, 99 per cent of the people would have said that there was no chance of that happening. If you were to take a poll in New York City today as to the chance of someone doing that or doing something similar to that in Philadelphia, the people in New York would say, ``No. Why Philadelphia?''
I do not think it is any less likely that anything would happen here than in Toronto, or any less likely that anything would happen in Swift Current than here.
I should like to return to something you said in your recommendations, that is, the establishment of two centres, one in the north of the province and one in the south of the province. The first part of my question is this: When you need the help you said you would need when it is a wider issue, how fast do you think you could get it? Is it better now than it was, and what do you think is the prospect for it getting better in the very near future? I am asking you to assume a lot, but assuming that money is a factor in these questions.
Mr. Johnston: It never has been before, senator.
Senator Day: My second question is this: Given the rapidity with which that kind of thing we are told in some circumstances can be delivered, what would your reaction be if somebody said the most logical thing that we can do here is to put these facilities and the people who know how to run them in Kelowna, Swift Current and Brandon, with an effective means of delivering them very quickly — because if we put one in Regina and one in Saskatoon, the people in Prince Albert, say, will be upset, and on it goes?
Just cogitate on those things for a moment, if you would, please.
Mr. Johnston: What would be best to know is that the capacity existed and that we knew how, in a time of great and emergent need, to get it, to know that it would be on its way and know that it would be coming in a serviceable fashion and in a way that we could integrate with it and work around it.
I am not sure that where it came from would be too terribly important.
When we talked about regionality for resources, we were talking in terms of, as first responders, applying ourselves to the event. There is a certain level of training and some equipment that is needed, expertise that needs to be resident.
It makes sense to us to tier that response, so that you will not necessarily be able to, in a smaller agency, create the ability, for example, to extract victims from a collapsed building, because of the amount of gear and training that is involved; however, perhaps you will be able to establish that capacity on a regional level of some kind. It is perhaps for others than ourselves to determine on what basis the regions will be determined. I like your thinking in that regard.
In terms of conventional planning and what happened in New York City, I do not know that it would be appropriate at this point in time to get into a discussion or debate about those events.
One of the things I think you would use to measure or demark your capacity is the level of proficiency of your people, as well as, as we have been asked, the amount of training and exercise that occurs. You do not want to kid yourself that you can put out a forest fire with a bucket of water.
On the other hand, if a group of people are prepared on a very real level to work together, share. Make the little sacrifices that come along with that kind of behaviour, incorporating people who work at their area of expertise diligently, and you will be well prepared.
In terms of exercises, if you are exercising and people are responding with forethought and discipline, then I think you can have some confidence that you can rise to the occasion and meet the demands of a given situation.
As well, I think we have to consider what you have talked about, which is resources.
We know we will need to decontaminate; can we decontaminate? We know we will need water; do we have water and where is that water? I do not know that I have strong opinions on that.
I think a tiered approach is what we are advocating, with some good forethought and consultation involved in how that is achieved.
Senator Day: I am not being critical, but we need you to answer these questions candidly, because we need to know this.
We have heard misgivings amongst first responders across the country about the degree of integration and interoperability and communication and access to what is needed in a very short period of time. I should like you to talk briefly about the fact that, as you said, the last time you conducted a large-scale exercise was March 2001. Is that enough? Was that recent enough? Was that big enough?
Do you think that the communication shortfalls in respect of a large event, as you and your colleagues have enumerated them, are on the way to being solved by the necessary coordination that you have all spoken of all the levels of government?
Mr. Quick: In the last 10 years, in our emergency planning every time we do an exercise, every time we do training, every time we have a real emergency response, the one thing we have learned time and time and time again is the importance of and the need for good, clear communication. It is important, not only amongst ourselves but with all other agencies, all other levels of government and, most important, our citizens, that they understand what is going on. In our emergency planning, our number one initiative is to communicate properly during any major incident.
There is no question that our emergency response agencies are trained to a high level. They have tremendous initiative, great leadership and are very capable and will do the very best job that they possibly can. We need to give them the tools to be able to do that very well.
Emergency preparedness is communication; emergency response is the training and the equipment and all those types of things. We have to have systems in place so that we know how to communicate at all levels. It is wonderful that we can communicate within our own community. It took seven or eight years of growth and learning to actually get to that point. We are saying we need that at all levels.
Senator Day: It sounds to me, based on what you have shown us today, and this is only my personal opinion, that Regina is way ahead of everybody else in that respect, and I congratulate you and thank you for your time today.
The Chairman: I have a follow-up question about radio communication, the radio system that is province-wide that evidently exists in Alberta.
What is the reason that that does not exist in Saskatchewan? Is it not a good idea?
Mr. Johnston: I think Alberta is fortunate in that it has the oldest publicly owned radio system in the country, in fact, older than the CBC. I think Senator Banks would know this well. It has the coverage, and it is a single entity, so with respect to the single button and the capacity, the infrastructure is in place. It has been a long time growing.
For those of us who live in different parts of the country, we have the CBC. It has national coverage, but I am not aware of how one would push a button and make the CBC do the same thing; however, I know it can be done.
In Saskatchewan, we have disparate or separate radio entities. As part of our plan, we have a communications plan through the media for emergencies; hence, in effect, we can use local media to reach out and communicate with the public. However, we do not have the very direct straightforward approach as in Alberta.
Senator Banks: Let me correct one thing, just so that we know what we are talking about. Chief Johnston is right: Alberta has a 17-station publicly owned, publicly supported radio network, which is the oldest one in the country. However, while that network operates the emergency communication system, when they push a button the emergency message goes onto every radio station in Alberta, including the commercial radio stations, the big guys, the little guys in all the little towns.
The Chairman: Chief Johnston, is a system like that a good idea? Second, if it is a good idea, is it something that you would advocate working towards in this province?
Mr. Johnston: The answer to both questions is yes. However, Mr. Quick has some clarification around current capacity.
Mr. Quick: With respect to the system in Alberta, what brought that to the forefront was the 1987 tornado that hit Edmonton. In addition, federal and provincial money was also instrumental in the development of that.
The Pelmorex Group of Companies, which owns The Weather Network, has for the last three years, at least, been interested in providing emergency warning systems across the country, utilizing The Weather Network and with the help of cable systems; however, the CRTC regulations has held this up on a number of occasions. I have been to a couple of their meetings and have submitted reports to them. In my opinion, what Pelmorex is attempting to do is at a national level and is, I believe, superior to doing it for local people only or for a local system only.
What Pelmorex was proposing was to provide emergency response right across the country — or focussed on a particular region, if necessary. I really liked what I saw, but it is still up in the air.
Senator Forrestall: In a very general way, would that be a useful tool?
Mr. Johnston: Absolutely.
Senator Atkins: While none of us wants to have the whole discussion of September 11, I am curious as to what you did as a result of hearing about the events of that day and any adjustments you made in relation to your own department. Could you take us through that, please?
Mr. Johnston: I would say that our main adjustments were in terms of establishing lines of communication that allowed us to update ourselves about what was happening with CSIS, what was happening with the RCMP — working on the ground, supplying information to investigations initiated by other agencies with potential threats. As well, there was advanced CBRN training through the Canadian Police College, with respect to nuclear, biological, radiological incidents or the potential for incidents like that. We also saw ourselves responding at different times to calls involving unidentified white powder, those kinds of things. We worked with the lab, the Regina Health District, et cetera.
In terms of our actual operations and transforming or changing our police operations, no, not in any large measure. The capacity to do that requires, again, knowledge, money for resources to understand things, and time to train.
The specific training events that took place did focus on hostages and what we might do in those kinds of circumstances. However, you would not have seen a large-scale change in the way we would do operations.
In looking at the events of September 11 and what happened there, one of the things that I believe it affirmed for all of us was the need for procedures and discipline in terms of emergency response. I think that is something that we already pride ourselves on. It is something that we test ourselves on in terms of our training and also in our day-to-day work.
Who can say in a catastrophic event what would really occur, but our goal would be, as leaders of first responders, to have us respond in a measured, controlled, disciplined fashion. If we are going to get into trouble, we are going to get into trouble because we are not approaching it that way. I think all of our experience would tell us that that has to be the way we pursue this.
Senator Atkins: Would you have expected more from different levels of government in terms of directions that followed September 11?
Mr. Johnston: Realistically, no, sir. Would I have liked more? Yes, sir. I would have liked more, but realistically I did not expect it.
I think everybody worked hard in Canada and did what they could do. We do not have the depth of infrastructure or the depth of financial resources, et cetera, that perhaps the U.S. does or other people. Working with what we had and working across agency lines even outside of government, I think the Canadian response was appropriate and well done.
Senator Atkins: Mr. Quick, you talked about the three levels. I understand the first, however, I was a little surprised about the second and third, that there was not more involvement at those levels of government.
Mr. Quick: We do have planning, but that is more within our department. We have am environment department — they are the people that sit at our table; however, they deal with the provincial environment department.
I will give you a personal opinion, whether or not I should.
The level of emergency preparedness priority in the Province of Saskatchewan is not as high as we believe it should be; as a result, a lot of the communication issues occur.
Senator Atkins: Are you the policing agency out at the airport?
Mr. Johnston: Yes. While we do not have a detachment at the airport, it is definitely within our jurisdiction.
Senator Atkins: I do not suppose you have seen our most recent report, but do you feel the airport is secure?
Mr. Johnston: That is a very big question. I would have to ask for more clarification — for example, secure against what kind of threat?
Senator Atkins: The perimeter, for instance, the access.
Mr. Johnston: The perimeter of the airport, no.
Senator Atkins: I have something to present to you, then, which I think you will find most interesting. You will find that this committee has made it very clear that we are not very satisfied with the security of our airports in this country.
While I appreciate that Regina is not a large airport, it probably has some of the same difficulties that we have found in some of the large, major airports in the country.
Mr. Johnston: Whether Regina is a large or small airport, whether Regina has international flights or not, those are issues to be discussed around how much resources do you have, or capability.
In Canada, whether an individual person boards a plane in Regina or Saskatoon or Toronto, once he or she is through security and on the far side of that, that individual is air-side. That is the way it is currently structured.
If you want to assure a level of security on the far side of that wall, all points of entry, it does not matter where — be it Medicine Hat, Alberta, or wherever — all points of entry have to be screened and secured to the same level. We are kidding ourselves, otherwise, if we think that somebody with a certain level of determination cannot get beyond that wall.
The Chairman: I think he has read the report, Senator Atkins.
Senator Atkins: How have you felt the process of gun control and registration has gone in your department?
Mr. Johnston: I did not expect we would be discussing that today.
The Chairman: Neither did we.
Mr. Johnston: Saskatchewan, as a province, has the lowest support overall for the registration of firearms, gun control registration. It is still about 50 per cent.
Now, whether that is true since the announcement that it has cost us $1 billion to get where we are, probably not. However, before that, even then Saskatchewan as a province had a better than a majority support for the process.
Do I believe in gun control? The answer is absolutely yes. Do I think it should cost $1 billion? No.
I am not accountable for that part of it, but should we now abandon something that strategically will enhance the safety of people in this country 10, 20 or 30 years from now? Not at all.
Firearms registration, licensing of firearm owners is a very good move. I do not think we have done it very well, that is all.
Senator Wiebe: Just a brief comment and then a question. Mr. Quick, in your comments about the concern for pure and clean drinking water in this country, I think what we have to do, provincially, federally and municipally, is start looking at and designating water as a food and not a natural resource. Once we do that, we are going to move ahead quite quickly in the development of pure and safe water for people in Canada.
Mr. Quick: I agree with you 100 per cent. I might mention that I have seen some preliminary work on the critical infrastructure program and the municipal water systems are not even mentioned.
Senator Wiebe: I would like to throw a ``what-if'' at all of you. If we want to assess problems and how we address them, I am a strong believe in what-ifs.
Let me use my province as an example. Say, for example, a tornado hit Rosetown or Davidson or Swift Current and there was a considerable amount of damage. We have a good first-responders team here in Regina. I understand, according to the fire chief, there is one that is not too bad in Saskatoon, and a few others. We have the resources in this province to address those areas. What kind of resources do we have if that tornado wipes out a third of Regina or a third of Saskatoon?
We can have reciprocal agreements with the other areas, but they are rather small. Saskatchewan is one of only two provinces in Canada that does not have a regular Armed Forces presence. We do not have a regular army, as such, in this province.
In that event, from where would you expect to receive that upper level of help in terms of a major disaster like that and how long will it take to mobilize?
Mr. Lichtenwald: We would quickly become overwhelmed within our city, our community. We are working on reciprocal agreements with seven other cities within the province. Our first step in a request for greater assistance would certainly be to the cities of Saskatoon, Moose Jaw, North Battleford, Swift Current. Beyond that, we do have the capability of requesting provincial assistance and assistance from the Department of National Defence. They take a certain reflex time and certainly would take time to respond.
We would be in a position of overwhelmed capacity for a period of time until the greater infrastructures could be put into place. We are vulnerable.
Senator Wiebe: So we are very vulnerable in that area? That was my same feeling.
Mr. Ken Luciak, Director, Emergency Medical Services: From the Emergency Medical Services side, we have mutual aid agreements with 19 other services, plus we have at our disposal well over 200 first responders who are trained and could be activated through our communications centre immediately, through a computerized call system. Therefore, we can mobilize well over 200 people immediately.
Mr. Chairman: That concludes our list of questions.
I have to say to you, Mr. Quick, to Chief Lichtenwald, to Director Luciak, to Deputy Chief Weighill and to Chief Johnston, we have appreciated your efforts today to inform us. We are grateful to you for taking the time. Without the sort of demonstration and briefing and discussion that we got from you today, it is very difficult for us to get a picture of what is going on in Canada.
The committee adjourned.