Amidst reassurances that the Didsbury Fire Department is rebuilding in its personnel and methodology, a review of the published report that was commissioned to guide the correction of deficiencies raises a number of questions about its content and its potentials of application.
Having been widely described as a safety audit, the report states that it is based on a total of 4.5 hours of physical inspection at the fire hall and interviews with three Town of Didsbury personnel, the chief administrative officer, the manager of protective service, and the former fire chief.
No input from any firefighters is mentioned. The formal complaints that resulted in mass resignations are not mentioned. There appears to be no reference to any existing practice of safety procedure or incident reporting.
This report does not seem to be the safety audit it was suggested to be, but a review of select management practices. For appropriate accountability and best practice, a full reconciliation is required to align the requisitioned protocol of this audit and its content with what has been presented to the community.
This apparent shortfall suggests that the town currently is exposed to a significant amount of unmitigated risk and liability. Industry standards of policy, procedures and reporting must be implemented, along with training that satisfies Occupational Health and Safety regulations. The safety of the volunteers and the public depend on it.
Protective services regulators recommend that public and professional input typically be incorporated into the board that oversees municipal fire departments.
Didsbury and Mountain View residents require the candor, transparency and accountability that we deserve from our town administrators in their delivery of our protective services.
Fred Van Vliet,
Didsbury
