Embers

Firefighters are treasured members of our community. Forces such as ours in Prince Edward County operate mostly with volunteers, often pulled from their homes in the darkest of night in some of the worst conditions imaginable. They are called upon to assist folks in terrible circumstances, at their most vulnerable. This is especially true in communities like Wellington, where our firefighters are often first on the scene of a car accident or a medical emergency. They come equipped with the training and tools to provide lifesaving action.

We all sleep a bit easier knowing these valiant folks are ready and able when we need them.

I want this point made crystal clear at the front end of this column, because I want to talk about the affordability of our fire department in Prince Edward County—as distinct from the firefighters who provide this service.

The County has spent many millions of dollars on building new firehalls and buying new equipment since it embarked on an extensive Fire Master Plan in 2009. The result has been a spending spree—two brand new firehalls, a million-dollar aerial ladder truck, a boat and dozens of new trucks, big and small. Mostly big.

So shiny and slick is Picton’s new firehall that the former mayor chose it to host the Minister of Health’s visit in 2016.

But has the threat of fire increased in these intervening years? The data says no. The opposite in fact. It shows structure fires are declining rapidly across Canada and Ontario. So, what are we bulking up for?

Sadly, council over the past term served mostly as a rubber stamp to this massive expansion to the County’s firefighting complex. Rarely did they pause to ask whether enough is enough? Even more rarely did they direct the fire department to do more with less.

Until last week.

The fire chief came to the committee of the whole last week looking for approval to buy a new tanker truck for Wellington. It will cost $360,000. Next month he will ask for $670,000 for new air packs and breathing apparatus. One million dollars is big money in Prince Edward County. It is about 10 per cent of the amount we spend fixing our roads each year. The fire department is planning about $3 million in new capital (buildings, equipment and vehicles) over the next five years.

The two-page report was thin on detail. The money was budgeted and sitting in reserve. They had received six bids. The retiring unit would be sold for $10,000. That was it. No rationale for the purchase. No information about the age of the retiring tanker. Its condition. Nothing.

Normally this lack of detail wouldn’t fuss council. But not last week. The new council wanted a better explanation. A better sense of the pros and cons. They wanted, at least, an outline of a cost-benefit analysis.

It’s a start. We need more rigorous questioning of this kind.

Here is why.

Structure fires have been declining sharply over the past few decades. According to data from the National Fire Information Database (NFID), fires of all kinds declined 25 per cent between 2005 and 2014. Structure fires (buildings) declined by 26 per cent over the same period.

The NFID doesn’t comment on its findings to suggest why the trend is so clearly in retreat, just that fires are generally on the decline the country. These data don’t diminish the devastating losses that fire wreaks, particularly in context of the terrible toll taken on the historic Notre Dame cathedral this week. But relentless unsupported spending must surely give us pause. It is fair and reasonable to question the scale and pace of the build-up of firefighting assets, when we know the threat is diminishing.

We need more than, “We budgeted the money, so we’re spending it.” Or the tired suggestion that “homeowner insurance rates will rise, if you don’t give us the money for X.” If fire risks are decreasing, why are rates rising? That seems to be a matter between the homeowner and her insurer. It is not a solid basis to relentlessly expand our firefighting capacity.

Remember, too, this department pleaded for, and received, funding for a second fire prevention officer (FPO) in January. Judging from the data alone, fire prevention seems to be going in the right direction. How do we measure the cost-benefit of a second FPO when structure fires are down by a quarter in a decade?

Ultimately this is what governance is about: ensuring our operational folks have the tools and support they need, in the most cost-effective way possible. For too long councils have been sending the wrong signals to its managers. For too long, councils have been rubber stamps to aggressive and poorly supported expansion of capacity.

Our new council took its first tentative steps last week to challenging big spending. We all have a stake in what happens next.

That doesn’t mean a freeze. What it does signify is that every major expenditure requires solid, comprehensible and justifiable reasons why it should proceed—whether it has an approved budget or not. Too many dubious expenditures get jammed into four days of budget deliberations. And then promptly forgotten.

The reason that big expenses are required to come back to council, is to provide that sober second consideration. For too long there has been automatic approval. Perhaps no more.

rick@wellingtontimes.ca