1. MOTION – financial implications paragraph
motion – section sur les rÉpercussions financiÈres
That the “Financial Implications” paragraph in future reports to
Committees identify the costs of the study and analysis, as well as any
internal work done in support of the material in the report alongside any
financial consequences of adopting the report recommendations.
Qu’à l’avenir, la section intitulée « Répercussions
financières » des rapports aux Comités précise les coûts de l’étude et de
l’analyse ainsi que le travail effectué à l’interne à l’appui du contenu des
rapports, en plus des conséquences financières de l’adoption des
recommandations formulées dans les rapports.
DOCUMENTATION
Emergency and Protective Services Committee Chair report dated 13 November 2003 (ACS2003-CCS-EPS-0007).
Extract of Draft Minute, Emergency and Protective Services Committee 27 October 2003.
Report to/Rapport au:
Council / Conseil
10 November 2003 / le 10 novembre 2003
Submitted by/Soumis par: Emergency and
Protective Services Committee
Comité des services de protection et d’urgence
Contact/personne-ressource : Diane Blais, Coordinator / Coordonnatrice
580-2424, ext. 28091, diane.blais@ottawa.ca
|
|
|
Ref N°:ACS2003-CCS-EPS-0007 |
|
SUBJECT: |
MOTION
– financial implications paragraph |
|
OBJET: |
motion – section sur les rÉpercussions financiÈres |
REPORT RECOMMENDATION
That the “Financial Implications” paragraph in future reports to Committees identify the costs of the study and analysis, as well as any internal work done in support of the material in the report alongside any financial consequences of adopting the report recommendations.
Qu’à l’avenir, la section intitulée « Répercussions
financières » des rapports aux Comités précise les coûts de l’étude et de
l’analyse ainsi que le travail effectué à l’interne à l’appui du contenu des
rapports, en plus des conséquences financières de l’adoption des
recommandations formulées dans les rapports.
At its 27 October 2003 meeting, the Emergency and Protective Services Committee considered and approved the above-noted motion while discussing an information report on the status of the Comprehensive Vulnerability Analysis. A draft Extract of Minute is attached to this report for information.
N/A
N/A
Attachment – Draft Extract of Minutes, Emergency and Protective Services Committee meeting of 27 October 2003.
Secretariat Services staff to communicate Council’s resolution to all City departments.
STATUS REPORT ON COMPREHENSIVE VULNERABILITY ANALYSIS
RAPPORT
D’ÉTAPE SUR L’ANALYSE GÉNÉRALE DE LA VULNÉRABILITÉ
ACS2003-EPS-EMU-0029
Mr. Murphy, Manager, Emergency Measures Unit, introduced Mr. M. Doré, President, Strategies multirisques, a company that specializes in emergency management and business continuity planning. He explained that Mr. Doré’s firm had been engaged to assist staff in the developing a comprehensive emergency plan for the City of Ottawa. He invited Mr. Doré to make a presentation to Committee on the status report.
Mr. Doré provided a detailed presentation in which he touched on the emergency management five year action plan, he explained the methodology, results and next steps of the vulnerability analysis and he discussed the impact on major 2003/2004 projects. A copy of his presentation is on file with the Committee Coordinator.
Councillor Bloess referenced the strategic actions, which speak to informing and including “relevant stakeholders, including the public” and he noted that a lot of the information on this issue was exempt from disclosure. Therefore, he wondered how the working group would reconcile these two points. Mr. Doré indicated the working group can initiate public information on any of the hazards to which the City is exposed. He explained that sensitive information pertains to scenarios and specific trigger mechanisms that could initiate these events and/or consequences.
Responding to a further question from Councillor Bloess, Mr. Doré advised that the public information project included in the 5-year action plan does not target any specific audience or territory. He explained the objective was to ensure the population was aware of the various hazards and their consequences, what they could do to increase their own security, and what the City would be doing to reduce their vulnerability.
Councillor Harder wondered where an airplane crash would factor into the top 10 hazards. Mr. Doré confirmed that air accident or air collision scenarios have been studied and that they are a risk for the City of Ottawa but that they did not rank in the top 10 hazards. However, he submitted that the operational objectives associated with such incidents (providing medical assistance and de-contamination, confining and preventing explosion, etc.) are covered. Therefore, it’s not that they are not addressed within the emergency management program, it’s just that they are not listed as an agent specific, among the top 10 priorities.
Councillor Harder referenced a letter received from Mr. P. Benoit, President/Chief Executive Officer, Ottawa Macdonald-Cartier International Airport, expressing concerns about the number of seagulls over the Trail Road landfill site. She explained that 75% of the planes fly directly over the site and there is a concern that seagulls could get involved in the engine. She wondered who would have responded to Mr. Benoit’s letter. Mr. Murphy indicated he was not aware of the referenced letter but suggested that staff would prepare a collective response to correspondence of this nature.
Though Councillor Harder could not recall which Committee had received the correspondence, she requested staff find a copy of it because she believed Mr. Murphy’s group should be looking into addressing the concerns identified therein.
Councillor Harder referenced the issue of duplication with other government agencies and in response, Mr. Murphy advised that the project did not include any initiatives that were being duplicated. He maintained the objective of the project was to get as much money as possible from other levels of government. Therefore, all the projects are defined in such a way that, if the City can get funding from other sources (provincial, federal, or other agencies), it does so.
Responding to further questions from Councillor Harder, Mr. Murphy explained that in engaging and informing the public, the working group would want to raise the level of awareness and disseminate some basic information such as how to recognize an incident, how to report it. He confirmed that emergency information was available on the City of Ottawa’s website and that more would be added as it was developed.
Councillor Legendre referenced the first paragraph on page 6 of the report; the probability and consequences of a hazardous material spill. He noted that, according to the report, the consequences varied “according to the nature of the released substance.” The paragraph went on to speak to contamination of the storm overflow system, bodies of water and soil. The councillor believed the working group was missing one of the major problems in the nation’s capital with respect to this issue. He suggested the fact that a major transportation corridor goes through the downtown core and over bridges to Québec results in consequences to the population, to workers, and to businesses in that adjacent jurisdiction. He wondered whether that had been considered. Mr. Doré advised that the working group had discussed the issue of hazardous material routes during the vulnerability analysis process as well as in the process of identifying potential mitigation activities. He acknowledged the fact that hazardous materials were transported throughout the area and confirmed that it was a concern. However, he maintained there was very little the working group could do. He explained that if hazardous routes were designed in order to isolate the problem, these would only apply to through traffic and not to any local delivery traffic. Mr. Doré briefly discussed some of the complications and implications of designing designated routes and re-iterated that this was a concern, but that very little could be done within the municipality’s scope.
Councillor Legendre appreciated that little could be done with the existing infrastructure. However he indicated he had hoped that this analysis would have resulted in some recognition with respect to infrastructure deficiencies. He believed the area needed a corridor so that hazardous material traffic could avoid the heart of the nation’s capital; parliament hill, major business areas, etc. Mr. Doré acknowledged the vulnerability and suggested some things could be done to mitigate the risks. He submitted that identifying cargo routes would address less than 75% of the traffic, leaving a significant volume of hazardous material traffic within the City.
Councillor Legendre indicated the responses left him dissatisfied. He wondered if there was a list of the most important things the municipality could do, in necessary in partnership with senior levels of government, to mitigate risks. Mr. Doré advised the working group had discussed a series of actions that would form part of the mitigation plan, to be developed early in 2004 as part of the 2004 implementation plan of the 5 year action plan.
Again, Councillor Legendre expressed dissatisfaction and frustration. He referenced the Universal Program Review (UPR) currently underway at the City. He noted that Council was expecting a report, in early December, on the consequences of cutting back expenditures in every area of City programs. He believed that not having the mitigation plan developed and incorporated in the UPR would result in a major element being missed and would pose a problem.
Councillor Legendre referenced the “Financial Implications” paragraph of the report and the fact that similar paragraphs appear on every report presented to committees and Council from the departments. He noted that in this instance, the report indicated there were no financial implications. He understood that there were no direct financial consequences in the preparation of the current report, however he introduced a motion requesting that future reports to this Committee identify the cost of the study and analysis, as well as any internal work done in support of the material in the report alongside any financial consequences. He maintained that there was a cost to producing the report; the consultant did not volunteer his services.
Chair Deans agreed and suggested that all committees need more fulsome financial information in their reports. Councillor Legendre concurred.
Councillor Chiarelli agreed, however he maintained there should not be different formats for different committees. He indicated he would move deferral of the issue to the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee (CSEDC), which has the purview to deal with format.
Councillor Legendre agreed that all committees should follow the same format, however he did not agree with his suggesting of referring the matter to the CSEDC. He indicated his intent was for this to become generic across the corporation. He believed it would help to have a solid message from this Committee with respect to the importance of this matter, and that it rise to Council to encourage the process.
Councillor Chiarelli maintained that the CSEDC had the responsibility for dealing with format for Committee meetings.
Councillor Harder argued that Council, as a whole, made decisions on issues coming out of CSEDC. Therefore, she saw no need for the extra step of referring the matter to that Committee.
That the “Financial Implications” paragraph in future reports to
Committee identify the costs of the study and analysis, as well as any internal
work done in support of the material in the report alongside any financial
consequences of adopting the report recommendations.
CARRIED
Moved by Councillor R. Chiarelli
That Councillor Legendre’s
motion be referred to the Corporate Services and Economic Development Committee
for consideration.
LOST
YEAS: R. Chiarelli, D. Deans, H. Kreling
NAYS: R. Bloess, J. Harder, J. Legendre
That the Emergency and Protective Services Committee receive this
report for information.
RECEIVED