Health Committee on Dec. 13th, 2022

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Dr. Powlowski.

Mr. Garon, you now have the floor for six minutes.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Mr. Pitchers, Mr. McMillan and Mr. Amnotte, I thank you for being here.

Mr. Chair, I would like to take two seconds to salute the Mirabel airport firefighters, who have been through some very difficult times recently. I want them to know that we are with them, that I support them and that we love them very much.

The work of a firefighter involves many professional risks. Some of them are foreseeable. However, sometimes the irreparable can happen. The Memorial Grant Program for First Responders already in place provides, among other things, compensation to the families of deceased firefighters.

I will get straight to the heart of the bill. The Bloc Québécois has tabled an amendment to the bill that would give the federal government the opportunity to review its allocation criteria so that it could have a harmonized list of recognized cancers. It could then pay out compensation without having to wait for decisions to be made in the various provinces. This could facilitate and accelerate the payment of these compensations. Families would go through fewer administrative procedures and paperwork, and there would be greater respect for provincial and Quebec jurisdictions. Can you tell me off the top of your head what you think of such an amendment?

[Richard Amnotte]

The list of recognized cancers is currently a provincial responsibility. If we had a harmonized list, similar to what is proposed in Bill C‑224, it could facilitate access to this compensation once the death of a firefighter in the line of duty is recognized.

Would the parliamentary process allow this to happen? That is up to you. However, we hope that this recognition program for firefighters who die in the line of duty can be applied universally to any firefighter, regardless of his or her province or territory.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

I find this part of the bill very important. It would enable Ottawa to pay compensation based on its own criteria, without having to wait for the provinces, if a firefighter dies in the line of duty. That could be part of the solution.

[Richard Amnotte]

Yes, it is. Now, we have to ask ourselves whether this should be part of Bill C‑224, which we consider to be immediately applicable as is, or of the program itself. We could add to the latter the list of cancers that the Canadian government wishes to recognize as being directly related to the firefighting profession, so that the beneficiaries of firefighters whose death was attributed to one of these cancers would be eligible for the program.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

That point is not currently in the bill, but I would like to inform you that it is the subject of amendment BQ‑5 proposed by the Bloc Québécois, which will be discussed during the second hour today. That is why I wanted to know your opinion, as we are in the process of deliberating and reflecting on this. That is essentially why you are here.

It's also about the provinces and the regulatory authorities sharing information on prevention, recognition, and so on. I've talked to the Commission des normes, de l'équité, de la santé et de la sécurité au travail. In addition, there appears to be a coordinated, structured and frequent exchange of information at the Association of Workers' Compensation Boards of Canada.

Do you have any information about the conversations that take place in this association? Is the firefighters' issue dealt with on a routine basis? Have you heard anything about that?

[Richard Amnotte]

I don't have any information on these exchanges involving the Association of Workers' Compensation Boards of Canada.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Okay.

On October 6, 2021, the Act to modernize the occupational health and safety regime came into force in Quebec, and schedule 1 of the act was repealed and replaced by the Regulation respecting occupational diseases. The latter gives the Commission des normes, de l'équité, de la santé et de la sécurité au travail the new power to amend the regulation in accordance with the evolution of science and scientific advice.

Montreal firefighters have recognized this as a step forward in the process leading to the recognition of work-related injuries. What is your view on this legislative change in Quebec?

[Richard Amnotte]

I will refrain from commenting too much on what is being done at the provincial and Quebec levels. However, according to the information we have, we note that Quebec is still doing poorly compared to the other Canadian provinces in terms of the number of cancers that it recognizes as being related to firefighting.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

I understand.

From what I understand—I may be wrong, but I'm doing my best—there are prevention measures that can be put in place. It may be showers or rooms with a separate ventilation system in the barracks, for example. There are important infrastructure issues in the municipalities. Funding is difficult to obtain.

Do you think that better funding for infrastructure, particularly municipal infrastructure, which would come through Quebec but from the federal government, would make it possible to improve prevention and decontamination, among other things?

[Richard Amnotte]

This is one of the four requests the Canadian Association of Fire Chiefs has made to the Canadian government. Last week, which was the association's government relations week, we discussed the possibility of reinstating the joint emergency preparedness program, which was abolished several years ago. This would bring new money to the fire services to provide them with modern infrastructure, both for the effective protection of the Canadian public and for the health and safety of our firefighters.

[Jean-Denis Garon, Bloc, Mirabel, QC]

Thank you.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Amnotte and Mr. Garon.

Next is Mr. Davies for six minutes, please.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

I would like to thank all the witnesses for their powerful testimony.

Mr. McMillan, the figures you quoted are sobering and frankly riveting. Thank you for putting names, people and a human element to this issue. I think that's very important. I'd like to address some questions to you.

First of all, I'm curious about the most common causes of occupational carcinogens. Do we know what chemicals or what causes are responsible for the cancers being experienced by firefighters disproportionately?

[Neil McMillan]

As I mentioned earlier, products of combustion include a number of things. There are aerosols; particulates, a lot of which gather chemicals that attach to them; and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, many of which are recognized by IARC to be known human carcinogens. There are endocrine-disrupting chemicals, such as the phthalates and bisphenols that interrupt the systems regulated through hormones in the body. I mentioned PFAS chemicals. Those are perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances. They are found both in home constituents and in the equipment that firefighters have: in AFFF and our PPE. It's a whole host of chemicals. It's a toxic soup. As building constituents advance and new products become available, it changes the types of exposure firefighters have.

I mentioned the urinary PAH metabolites, and what is important to note is that before they get in the urine, they have to be filtered out of your blood. These chemicals that are being absorbed in the skin or inhaled are circulating systemically. That's why a lot of these cancers can be found in different areas of the body: the brain, the colon, the prostate, the ovaries and the lungs.

As I mentioned—and I don't mean to repeat myself—the deck is stacked against us. We need those preventative and awareness measures to be in place.

To some of the comments earlier with respect to cost, we have to be cognizant of fire departments that have.... In our association, locals have five members or 5,000. In Ontario alone, I know that if every fatal firefighter cancer had been survivable because of early detection or prevention, it would have saved this province $349 million. That's money that employers pay and that municipalities and townships pay. Beyond the human cost, we can't afford not to have this bill move fast and hopefully pass shortly.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Thanks for raising that. We sometimes forget to include the cost of disease when we're making economic assumptions about the cost of prevention.

I know that the IAFF has been raising the dangers of chemical flame retardants at the federal level in Canada for many years. While certain chemical flame retardants are known to pose numerous health risks to Canadians, we know that firefighters are obviously at an increased risk of harm because they encounter them in a combusted state in the course of their duties.

In August 2021, the federal government announced an action plan to “protect firefighters from harmful chemicals released during household fires”. Can you outline the elements of this action plan and how they will impact firefighters' safety across Canada? If you know, can you maybe give us an update on where we are with that plan?

[Neil McMillan]

I will defer the update to those within the IAFF who were specifically involved with that process.

I do know that flame retardants—organophosphates, brominated flame retardants—have posed a hazard to firefighters for quite some time. In terms of jurisdictions in the U.S., Proposition 65 in California, for example, has been successful in reducing the use of those types of chemicals in consumer products.

As I mentioned earlier, we are the harvesters and depositors of contaminants. Studies in fire stations for these specific chemicals have shown that the levels of flame retardants in many fire stations in the U.S. and Canada exceed what you would find in an e-waste facility in Thailand or in other jurisdictions that you know would have high levels of these contaminations and, more importantly, are treated as contaminated areas.

These are our workplaces as firefighters, and they contribute to the body burden of chemicals that ultimately lead to the diagnoses that our members unfortunately get too early and too young in their lives.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

Since we know the flame retardants that cover our furniture in this country create these chemicals when burned, why can't we just ban them? What's the problem?

[Neil McMillan]

I'm uncertain as to what the challenges and barriers are for a complete ban. As a representative of the International Association of Fire Fighters, and specific to my role in health, safety and medicine, I would like to see the precautionary principle put into effect. I would like all of the unnecessary exposures to be removed, and flame retardants are one of them.

As I mentioned, we can't avoid certain types of exposures given the nature of our job, a job we're happy to do as firefighters, so if chemicals are placed in the environments we work in and they're not required to be there, my recommendation is to remove them.

[Don Davies, NDP, Vancouver Kingsway, BC]

It seems to me that the ultimate prevention would be to eliminate materials that are carcinogenic when combusted as much as we can, if we can do that.

My other question is, how large is the gap between provinces and territories in listing cancers as presumptively caused by work?

[Neil McMillan]

There's a wide gap. There are five provinces that presently cover 19 cancers. Ontario covers 17, I believe, and there are potentially nine in Quebec. I believe there are 10 in New Brunswick. Newfoundland and Labrador just acquired eight additional cancers to be added to their presumptive cancer list.

This is significant. It's important. Again, I believe it's really necessary that when science supports it in one jurisdiction, it supports it in the other. I believe that Bill C-224 will help provide the initiative and critical mass to hopefully harmonize presumptive cancer coverage across the provinces.

[The Chair, Liberal, Sean Casey]

Thank you, Mr. Davies and Mr. McMillan.

Next is Mrs. Goodridge, please, for five minutes.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Thank you to all of our witnesses for being here today, and I'll give a special thank you to Ryan for joining us all the way from Fort McMurray. It's amazing to have a local witness join us at this committee.

As you touched on a bit, during the Fort McMurray wildfire, you guys saw 2,400 structures destroyed and were able to save 90% of the structures in the community. I think that is absolutely spectacular. There are full communities in Fort McMurray that owe their existence today to the hard work of firefighters.

Do you think a major incident like this should be captured in a database and that data should be collected as part of this framework?

[Ryan Pitchers]

I believe that a major emergency such as the one that took place in Fort McMurray so many years ago needs to be put into the framework of provincial legislation across the provinces, as my brother said at the table as a witness.

Once the data is there, each province should accept it through the framework of Bill C-224. Hopefully these major emergencies don't happen as frequently as in Slave Lake, Fort McMurray and other places in Ontario years ago, but this stuff should be included in presumptive legislation, and I encourage provinces to pass it.

[Laila Goodridge, Conservative, Fort McMurray—Cold Lake, AB]

There is another piece to this. Most people, when they hear of wildfires, think of trees burning. In the case of Fort McMurray, many of you guys weren't out there; we had wildland firefighters fighting the trees that were burning. The firefighters like you were on the front lines protecting homes.

I remember that when you came to my office, you told me that basically a lifetime number of homes were burning down in a one-month span. Perhaps you could expand a bit on that.