Certainly.
The truth is that very few Canadian cities currently meet the response time and personnel standards for existing two-storey structures, let alone high-density structures made of combustible materials. In our review of previous testimony before this committee on this study, we see grand assumptions made about municipal fire protection that just aren't accurate—for example, that local fire officials are consulted on and could veto a building in their city. This just does not happen.
Even if a community does have adequate fire protection resources to protect a particular structure, there is no guarantee that they will be there during its entire lifespan. What we are actually seeing in many communities across Canada right now is the propensity to reduce fire department resources and capabilities for political and budgetary reasons. We can point to numerous communities in Canada, large and small, that have experienced station closures or firefighter layoffs, and many that are contemplating initiatives that would increase response times and decrease the fire department personnel and equipment available to respond.
This common scenario would leave the occupants of any given structure with even less protection than builders and authorities anticipated when it was built. Commonly, when these kinds of cuts are made, fire prevention and inspection are among the first to be targeted. These are the fire safety individuals the occupants of these structures would rely on most to ensure that the structure is always in compliance with codes and regulations—for example, when modifications are made.
As the population ages, a greater percentage of citizens have mobility problems, which is another factor to consider, especially if these structures are to be used for such things as hospitals, which we understand from previous testimony is a target use for wood-frame buildings in additions to schools, malls, parking garages, and bridges.
Firefighter safety is another concern. In our view, the move to permit higher and taller wood-frame buildings in the national building code is set against the backdrop of an objective-based code that does not include firefighter safety as an objective. As a result, firefighter safety cannot be used as the basis for a code change request.
We would also note that the national building code, despite being a model code, establishes the absolute minimum performance that builders are required to achieve. It is not the Cadillac level; it's the minimum. Six-storey wood-frame structures were first permitted under the British Columbia building code. The first such structure was consumed in a massive blaze in Richmond in May 2011, confirming that they are particularly vulnerable when they are under construction.
In December 2013, a four-storey wood-frame student residence under construction in downtown Kingston, Ontario caught fire, sparking a massive inferno that spread to two adjacent buildings while taxing the city's emergency response infrastructure to its limit for 48 hours. The builders were charged by the Ontario Ministry of Labour with 22 offences, 11 of which were related to fire safety precautions that were not followed.
Having fire safety regulations and having an existing level of fire protection in a community are not guarantees that any particular structure is safe. The truth is that every working fire represents a danger not only to the public, but to the firefighters who respond. Large blazes, such as the Richmond and Kingston wood-frame blazes, also reduce the resources that fire departments have available to handle simultaneous incidents.
In closing, firefighters are not opposed to a vibrant forestry sector or innovation in building codes, but if such changes occur quickly, we urge more thorough discussion of firefighter and public safety considerations against the backdrop we have described of inadequate fire protection in many communities and the prospect that any given municipality may reduce its fire protection capabilities in the future.
We appreciate this opportunity to present our views to the committee on behalf of Canada's professional firefighters, and we look forward to answering any questions the members may have.