HOME PAGE |
SUBSCRIBE TO BIG MED AT THE BIG MED SITE ON GOOGLE GROUPS. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Chapter 7--Emergency Management--Public
Safety Canada
Fall 2009 Report of the Auditor General
20091103 Ottawa ON Public Safety Canada needs to ensure that Canada is
ready with a coordinated response to large-scale emergencies, whether
pandemics, floods, or forest fires, says the Auditor General of Canada,
Sheila Fraser, in her Report tabled today in the House of Commons. “The government must be ready to respond quickly and effectively when
emergencies arise,” said Ms. Fraser. “Canada needs to have a
planned and coordinated approach in place so that federal, provincial, and
municipal agencies know what part they will play in managing a crisis.” Public Safety Canada has developed an interim Federal Emergency Response
Plan to coordinate activities in an emergency, but it needs to be assured
that other departments are ready to play their part. The audit found that
the Plan has not received formal approval by the government or other federal
departments. The Report says that until the government fully endorses the
plan, elements of the federal response will continue to be managed by
individual departments, and it will be difficult for Public Safety Canada to
fulfill the role assigned to it by Parliament in 2003. The audit found that in establishing its Government Operations Centre,
Public Safety Canada has made considerable progress toward coordinating
response activities. The Centre keeps other departments informed of events
in a crisis as they unfold. But there are still obstacles to a coordinated
response that may be beyond the control of Public Safety Canada. For
example, it is often difficult for firefighters, police officers, and
paramedics to communicate with each other in an emergency because their
voice communication equipment may not be compatible. “Until it is clearly established how Public Safety Canada will work
with other departments, it will be difficult for it to truly coordinate the
federal response to emergency situations,” said Ms. Fraser.
___ Emergency management refers to a wide range of measures to protect
communities and the environment from risks and to recover from emergency
events stemming from either natural or human-induced causes. While some
emergencies in Canada can be handled locally by municipalities or provinces,
the federal government will assist when requested, when the emergency
transcends jurisdictional boundaries, or when its assistance is in the
national interest. As emergency events today can escalate quickly, this
federal capability has become increasingly necessary. Through legislation and government policy, Public Safety Canada, which
was created in December 2003, is responsible for leading by coordinating the
management of emergencies among federal departments and agencies. This
includes establishing policies and programs for the preparation, testing and
exercising, and implementing emergency management plans; it also includes
monitoring and coordinating a common federal approach to emergency response
along with the provinces—an “all-hazards” approach incorporating prevention
and mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. The Department’s
responsibility for emergency management includes coordinating the protection
of critical infrastructure—from planning for emergencies to recovering from
them. Critical infrastructure includes physical and information technology
facilities, networks, services, and assets essential to the health and
safety or economic well-being of Canadians. We examined how Public Safety Canada carries out these responsibilities.
In addition, we looked at its efforts to enhance emergency response and
recovery in coordination with six other departments that have specific roles
in emergency management. Our audit included assessing the government’s
progress on some of the commitments it made to Parliament. Our audit covers
performance of federal departments and agencies and events taking place
since our last audit, reported in April 2005, and 15 June 2009. We did not examine the performance of emergency management efforts by
provinces, territories, or local communities. The H1N1 pandemic, the 2003 eastern seaboard power blackout, Severe Acute
Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), massive flooding, and terrorist conspiracies
and attacks have demonstrated that global trade, international travel, and
cyberspace have increased the speed at which emergencies escalate in scope
and severity. Today, many emergencies can be difficult to contain by a
single government department or jurisdiction. A federal response is needed
for emergencies that are beyond the capacities of other players—emergencies
that may have a low probability of occurrence but a high potential impact. Public Safety Canada is faced with the challenging task of providing the
coordination necessary for an overall federal approach to emergency
management, in an environment where departments have operated as needed and
through their ministers to provide federal assistance on a case-by-case
basis. The Department and the Privy Council Office have responded.
The Department and the Privy Council Office agree with all of the
recommendations that are addressed to them. Their detailed responses follow
the recommendations throughout the chapter. 7.1 Emergencies today can have a broader impact than those of the past.
Examples of emergencies that have recently affected Canadians include the
outbreaks of H1N1 and avian influenza, severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS),
listeriosis, and mad cow disease; the 1998 ice storm in Eastern Canada; and
the 2003 power blackout across the eastern seaboard. Urban density,
international travel, and global trade have increased the speed at which
emergencies can escalate and spread. Today, many emergencies can be
difficult to contain, and the impact is likely to be greater. A federal
response is needed for those emergencies that are beyond the capacity of
municipalities or individual provinces or territories—emergencies that may
have a low probability of occurrence but can have a high potential impact.
To be able to respond effectively to large-scale emergencies and reduce the
potential loss of life and property damage, there needs to be extensive
planning and coordination. 7.2 Under Canada’s Constitution Act, 1867, provinces and
territories have primary responsibility for emergency management within
their boundaries. Emergencies such as fires and floods may remain local in
nature and, if so, may be effectively managed within the local resources of
the municipality and province or territory. If an incident escalates, so do
the response activities of various levels of government. At the request of a
province or territory or where the type of emergency falls within federal
jurisdiction or occurs on federal lands, the federal government provides
help to manage and coordinate the response to an emergency. The
Emergency Management Act (2007) established that the Department of
Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness (Public Safety Canada) is
responsible for responding to requests for assistance made by provinces and
territories and for coordinating the assistance provided by other federal
departments and agencies to the provinces and territories. 7.3 Following the events of September 11, 2001, the Canadian government
changed its approach to emergency preparedness and response. At that time,
there was a highly decentralized division of responsibilities among federal
departments, provinces, and territories. In December 2003, the government
created the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, bringing
together emergency preparedness, national security, and policing
responsibilities within one federal department. This restructuring was
intended to better integrate public safety efforts and link various federal
programs more closely. 7.4 Building the capability to manage a coordinated federal response to
an emergency of national significance is a huge undertaking and cannot be
achieved overnight. In the past, federal departments had organized their
emergency response actions as situations arose. However, given the changing
nature of national emergencies, this is no longer sufficient. Recognizing
this, the federal government issued the National Security Policy
in April 2004, which called for the federal government to be prepared to
play an enhanced role in modern emergency management and to improve
collaboration among governments and other entities. The 2004 policy outlined
a number of initiatives to enhance the safety and security of Canadians. It
identified the need for an “all-hazards” approach, meaning that whether or
not the cause of an emergency is malicious, accidental, or natural, the
federal government would be prepared to respond. To facilitate this, the
policy called for an updated emergency response system in which federal
entities would work together in a coordinated manner. As well, it identified
the need for federal departments and agencies to be more strongly linked
with emergency operations at the provincial, territorial, and local levels. 7.5 The 2004 National Security Policy, our 2005
audit of national security and emergency preparedness, the House
of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts, and the Senate Standing
Committee on National Security and Defence all called for updated federal
legislation to clearly define and ensure adequate emergency management
powers and responsibilities for the Minister of Public Safety. 7.6 In 2005, the Department of Public Safety and Emergency
Preparedness Act was passed. It stipulates that the Minister of Public
Safety is to exercise “leadership at the national level relating to public
safety and emergency preparedness.” When she appeared before the Standing
Committee on Justice, Human Rights, Public Safety and Emergency
Preparedness, the Minister explained that she would be responsible for
coordinating the federal response to emergencies, while respecting the Prime
Minister’s prerogative in matters relating to national security and to the
statutory authorities of other ministers. 7.7 In January 2007, federal, provincial, and territorial ministers
agreed that emergency management would adopt a comprehensive all-hazards
approach. This approach would incorporate the four functions of emergency
management: prevention and mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery. 7.8 In August 2007, the Emergency Management Act came into
force. It assigns to the Minister of Public Safety the responsibility to
“exercise leadership relating to emergency management by coordinating
federal emergency management activities” (Exhibit 7.1). The Minister’s
responsibilities include As well, other federal ministers are to identify
the risks that are within their area of responsibility, including
those related to critical infrastructure, and to prepare, maintain,
test, implement, and exercise emergency management plans in respect
of those risks in compliance with the policies, programs, and other
measures established by the Minister of Public Safety. 7.9 Public Safety Canada is the coordinating agency for federal
departments, which have various roles to play in an emergency. Public Safety
Canada is to ensure that the federal government is ready to respond to any
future emergencies through the development of policies, standards, and plans
that define roles and responsibilities. The aim is to eliminate the
potential for confusion when responding in a crisis and provide a federal
point for coordination. 7.10 If a department or agency has a clear mandate to respond to an
emergency and is responsible to act, it is the subject matter expert.
However, if emergencies escalate and spread, other federal departments may
be required to play a role to manage the impact within their area of
expertise. For example, for an incident involving a terrorist or criminal
act, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) would be the primary federal
response agency in its law enforcement role. For a natural disaster
involving an earthquake or a power outage, Natural Resources Canada would be
the primary subject matter expert. The Public Health Agency of Canada would
be the subject matter expert for public health, including infectious
diseases, in concert with Health Canada. Other departments or agencies, such
as the Canada Border Services Agency, would play a supporting role. In each
of these examples, Public Safety Canada plays a coordinating role in helping
to receive information and communicate the current situation to other
departments and agencies, and to senior officials in the federal government
and other jurisdictions. 7.11 For emergency management, Public Safety Canada had a budget of
$58.5 million and 400 employees for the 2008–09 fiscal year. Many of Public
Safety Canada’s emergency management programs are delivered through
11 regional offices. It also manages the federal Government Operations
Centre that monitors emerging threats and provides round-the-clock
coordination and support to government entities in the event of a national
emergency. As well, it oversees the conduct of exercises on emergency
management at the national level and an inter-jurisdictional training
program for local frontline emergency workers at its Canadian Emergency
Management College. 7.12 Public Safety Canada’s role as the lead department for coordinating
federal emergency management includes critical infrastructure protection.
Critical infrastructure consists of physical and information technology
facilities, networks, services, and assets essential to the health and
safety or economic well-being of Canadians, and the effective functioning of
government. Examples of critical infrastructure include food, water, and
energy supplies; health services; financial systems; and communication
networks, including the Internet. Events such as the 1998 ice storm in
Eastern Canada and the 2003 power blackout across the eastern seaboard
highlight the impact of the failure of the electrical grid. The vast
majority of Canada’s critical infrastructure is owned by the private sector
or managed through another level of government. This creates a challenge for
the federal government to establish its role with owners and operators and
thereby ensure the protection and resiliency of the nation’s critical
infrastructure. 7.13 In this audit, we focused on four main responsibilities of Public
Safety Canada: 7.14 Specifically, we examined Public Safety Canada’s responsibility to
lead by coordinating the efforts of other federal entities and by
coordinating federal efforts with those of the provinces and territories. We
focused mainly on the Department’s preparedness efforts, including its
coordination of the provision of critical infrastructure protection. As
well, we examined progress by Public Safety Canada in enhancing emergency
response and recovery in coordination with government departments and
agencies. 7.15 We did not examine the performance of provinces, territories, or
local communities in their delivery of emergency management services or
activities, nor did we examine provincial and territorial or private sector
critical infrastructure protection efforts. We also did not examine the
security activities carried out in preparation for the 2010 Olympic and
Paralympic Games, as responsibility for these activities was assigned to the
Office of the Coordinator for 2010 Olympics and G8 Security, which reports
to the National Security Advisor. 7.16 More details on the audit objectives, scope, approach, and criteria
are in
About the Audit at the end of this
chapter. 7.17 Public Safety Canada is responsible under legislation to exercise
leadership through planning, establishing policies and programs for
emergency preparedness, cooperating with provinces and territories, and
promoting a common approach to emergency management. It is responsible for
coordinating the emergency management activities of various federal
departments and agencies and fostering a cooperative approach to responding
to emergencies. 7.18 Because the subject matter expertise and experience for dealing with
emergencies resides in several different departments, Public Safety Canada
has an important role to ensure that all potential hazards are addressed,
that plans exist and have been shared and tested, and that, during a crisis,
the kind of response needed is quickly established without confusion.
However, Public Safety Canada does not assume control over other departments
or tell them how to do their jobs. Each department remains responsible to
its own minister and for acting as required under its own legislation.
Public Safety Canada, under the Emergency Management Act, is
responsible for establishing policies and programs that other ministers must
follow in carrying out their emergency management responsibilities and
determining how they will be coordinated. Given different mandates and
accountabilities, it is important that Public Safety Canada know who it
should communicate with and ensure that the various departments know how
coordination will proceed and what the expected operating procedures will
be. Nevertheless, each department determines whether it will assist during
an emergency, what its role will be, and how it will operate with other
federal, provincial, or territorial partners. 7.19 We found that while Public Safety Canada played a coordination role
in some emergencies, including participating in the development of response
plans for avian and pandemic influenza, it has yet to establish the policies
and programs that would help define its leadership and coordination role for
emergency management in an all-hazards environment. Defining a leadership
role when each department responds to its own ministerial direction, and
coordinating that direction with other departments can be a challenge.
Nevertheless, Public Safety Canada was established to address these concerns
and determine how to coordinate and harmonize the activities of the
different departments needed to deal with today’s complicated and
broad-reaching situations. 7.20 In order to move forward in its mandate to exercise leadership,
Public Safety Canada needs to have experienced and knowledgeable staff in
place. Another challenge we noted was that the Department has had difficulty
attracting and retaining senior managers to provide the direction needed in
its emergency management. This area of Public Safety Canada had an employee
vacancy rate of 39 percent in the 2008–09 fiscal year and a vacancy rate of
50 percent the previous year. In April 2009, only 56 percent of senior
managers had been in their jobs for more than 18 months. Turnover and change
of staff has been particularly problematic, and in the 2008–09 fiscal year,
the rate of employee movement (including appointments, promotions,
deployments, acting assignments, and departures) was 71 percent in emergency
management. 7.21 In 2006, Public Safety Canada was allocated approximately
$115 million over five years to enhance its core capacity for emergency
management; and, in 2008, it was allocated a further $28 million over
five years. In the 2008–09 fiscal year, Public Safety Canada had an annual
budget of $58.5 million for emergency management. However, it had not spent
one third of its budget for emergency management in each of the past
two years. In this context, it is evident that Public Safety Canada has been
unable to develop its capacity for emergency management. 7.22 In the face of these challenges, Public Safety Canada has taken the
first steps toward establishing its leadership role by developing the
interim Federal Emergency Response Plan, a framework for coordinating
emergency response activities across government. Work has been under way on
developing this plan, in various forms, since 2004. In June 2005, the House
of Commons Standing Committee on Public Accounts recommended that Public
Safety Canada obtain formal support for its plan from other departments. At
the time of our audit, the Plan was still an outline of the requirements
of an emergency response plan. The Plan has been presented to an
interdepartmental committee of assistant deputy ministers. Although it has
not been formally approved by Public Safety Canada or endorsed by other
departments, officials told us that it is, nevertheless, being considered
final. 7.23 While the framework may be considered complete, the roles and
responsibilities and the capabilities (contained in its annexes) needed for
an integrated, coordinated approach to emergencies have not been updated or
completed. Department officials told us that details on how the federal plan
supports provincial and territorial plans and capabilities are being
drafted. At the time of our audit, Public Safety Canada expected to share
the draft document with provincial and territorial representatives
in September 2009. While we recognize that the Federal Emergency Response
Plan will always need to be updated to reflect changes in policies and
practices, it is a significant policy document that, with formal government
approval, would provide proper authority and clear support to Public Safety
Canada. 7.24 The Federal Emergency Response Plan outlines a decision-making
process to help coordinate a federal response to emergencies. Since 2006, an
interdepartmental assistant deputy ministers’ committee for emergency
management (now, ADM-EMC) has met regularly to discuss emergency management
priorities and to make decisions to guide federal government actions during
emergencies. Depending on the severity of a situation, this committee may
make decisions, or may refer the issue to the Federal Coordinating Officer
(usually the Deputy Minister of Public Safety), who may refer the issue to a
committee of deputy ministers. Similarly, the issue may be referred to
Cabinet or, ultimately, to the Prime Minister. The federal emergency
response structure is summarized in
Exhibit 7.2. The ADM-EMC is co-chaired by
Public Safety Canada and the Privy Council Office to facilitate the sharing
of information should decisions need to be taken to a higher level. The
ADM-EMC has served as the coordinating body for events such as the 2007
floods in British Columbia and the H1N1 virus pandemic in 2009.
7.25 As part of our audit, we reviewed federal responses to
six emergencies that occurred between August 2006 and May 2009, where
multiple federal departments were involved and for which after-action
reports were available. We tried to determine whether the Federal Emergency
Response Plan was used as the framework for a coordinated response. In each
of these cases, the Government Operations Centre was used to varying degrees
to share information and analysis among entities. However, the ADM-EMC, the
body responsible for coordinating the federal response to an emergency,
did not meet to discuss possible responses during three of these
six emergencies. According to after-action reports prepared by participating
departments for these emergencies, there were problems in coordinating the
federal response among departments and agencies in all cases. Roles and
responsibilities needed to achieve a coordinated approach were not well
understood and some established practices were not followed. At the time of
our audit, the ADM-EMC intended to clarify roles and responsibilities in its
decision-making process. 7.26 Recommendation. The Privy Council Office and Public
Safety Canada should ensure that all components of the Federal Emergency
Response Plan are completed and should obtain government approval for the
plan. The Privy Council Office and the Department’s response.
Agreed. The Privy Council Office and Public Safety Canada will seek approval
for the completed Federal Emergency Response Plan (FERP) at the earliest
possible date and the supporting Emergency Support Functions (ESFs) prior to
the end of the 2009–10 fiscal year. Public Safety Canada will seek approval
of the National Emergency Response System (NERS), an annex to the FERP,
which articulates how the FERP supports provincial and territorial emergency
response plans, by the end of August 2010. Public Safety Canada will
organize information sessions with departmental executive committees to
brief departments on the FERP and their associated roles and
responsibilities. The FERP and its components will be maintained as an
evergreen document. 7.27 In order to be ready to respond,
emergency management plans need to address the most important risks.
In 2007, the Deputy Ministers’ Committee directed Public Safety Canada to
assess the federal government’s state of readiness for a national emergency.
Through this review process, a number of
capability gaps were identified;
however, Public Safety Canada did not have a framework upon which to
prioritize or rank the severity of the gaps and, as a result, has not moved
forward with an action plan to address these gaps. As well, the review found
that Public Safety Canada lacked an all-hazards risk assessment that
identified potential hazards to public safety or security—whether malicious,
natural, or accidental. It also lacked a framework to determine required
capabilities to respond to these risks. 7.28 The 2004 National Security Policy and the 2007 Emergency
Management Act recognized that the federal government needed to better
understand Canada’s vulnerability to emerging risks and use this information
to develop comprehensive emergency plans and programs. Under the
Emergency Management Act, federal departments are to identify risks
that are within their area of responsibility, and prepare emergency plans in
respect of those risks according to the policies established by Public
Safety Canada. Under its leadership role for emergency management
activities, Public Safety Canada is to coordinate risk assessments in
collaboration with other federal departments and to ensure that they have
proper emergency management plans and preparedness measures in place. 7.29 We found that Public Safety Canada has made limited progress in
developing the guidance that departments need to achieve a consistent
approach when identifying their risks and their emergency management plans
and programs. A comprehensive risk and vulnerability assessment to guide the
development of plans and response capabilities under an all-hazards approach
has not been conducted in Canada. A Public Safety Canada study conducted
in 2008 of 36 federal departments found wide variation in the risk
assessment processes used by departments to guide the development of plans
and capabilities. Some departments had no process in place. In the
six federal departments we examined, we found that none had received any
guidance from Public Safety Canada on conducting risk assessments for
emergency planning, yet all of these departments were working to update
their plans. Public Safety Canada initiated a project in April 2009 to
streamline and validate these risk assessment processes for emergency
planning and capabilities development. This project is in the preliminary
planning stage. 7.30 The Emergency Management Act stipulates that Public Safety
Canada is responsible for reviewing departmental emergency management plans,
which includes departmental business continuity plans. These plans are
needed so that federal organizations can continue operating during an
emergency. Under the Emergency Management Act, Public Safety Canada
is responsible for ensuring that business continuity plans are complementary
and meet the overall needs of the federal government. It had provided a
self-assessment tool for departments to review their own business continuity
plans. However, at the time of our audit, Public Safety Canada had not
formally analyzed or evaluated departmental business continuity plans, nor
did it have plans to do so. It had not determined whether there were gaps
between departments. 7.31 Recommendation. As stipulated in the Emergency
Management Act, Public Safety Canada should establish policies and
programs and provide advice for departments to follow when identifying risks
and developing their emergency management plans. The Department’s response. Agreed. In keeping with the
all-hazards approach to emergency management, Public Safety Canada is
leading the development of an Emergency Management Planning Framework that
will provide departments and agencies with guidance, tools, and best
practices for developing emergency management plans. It is also working with
federal departments to develop an all-hazards risk assessment framework.
Under the Emergency Management Act, it is the responsibility of
each minister accountable to Parliament for a government institution to
identify the risks that are within or related to his or her area of
responsibility. 7.32 Recommendation. As stipulated in the Emergency
Management Act, Public Safety Canada should analyze and evaluate the
emergency management plans prepared by departments to ensure that they are
prepared according to the policies, programs, and advice provided, and it
should identify potential gaps or risks to a coordinated emergency
management response. The Department’s response. Agreed. Public Safety Canada
is developing the Emergency Management Planning Framework, which will
include performance measurements that will allow Public Safety Canada
to analyze and evaluate emergency management plans produced by departments
and agencies. The Framework will also include self-assessment tools for
departments and agencies. Public Safety Canada is currently developing an
approach to implement this initiative. 7.33 In 2004, Public Safety Canada established the Government Operations
Centre as the core of its federal coordination efforts for events of
national significance. The role of the Government Operations Centre is not
to act as a decision-making body in an emergency response, but to assemble
and communicate information to decision makers. It is connected with the
operations centres of 20 federal departments and agencies, as well as with
those of the provinces and territories, and other countries, including the
United States. 7.34 The Government Operations Centre has coordinated information and
analysis among federal departments and provinces for numerous events since
its inception. The scope of the emergency determines the scale and extent of
its functions. However, it has not clearly defined when or why its level of
activation changes in response to the severity of events and what this means
for participating departments. A government-wide exercise, conducted
in February 2009 by Public Safety Canada, found that information analysis
and sharing at the operations centre was poor. Furthermore, officials at
Public Safety Canada told us that the Government Operations Centre did not
have the physical facilities to support the number of staff needed to keep
the operations centre fully functional for a major emergency lasting an
extended period of time. Public Safety Canada was in the process of
determining what corrective actions were needed as we completed our audit
work. 7.35 Public Safety Canada has made considerable progress in federal
emergency coordination through its Government Operations Centre, as the
centre operates on a continual basis and can track many potential or
evolving events. It keeps other departments informed of the status of events
on a real-time basis and alerts them if the events escalate into a more
serious situation. The centre produced regular situation awareness reports
for such issues as the H1N1 virus pandemic and Manitoba’s spring flooding
in 2009, which allowed decisions to be based on a common set of facts. We
noted that the Government Operations Centre reviewed how well it performed
after events, but this was a verbal process. Results from these reviews are
not normally tracked or monitored to ensure that corrective action is
implemented. 7.36 In order for response plans to be reliable during an emergency, they
must be regularly exercised, especially the plans for coordination between
departments and agencies and between different levels of government. The
National Security Policy and the Emergency Management Act call for
regular exercises to assess the adequacy of emergency response plans in
various scenarios. In 2004, the National Exercise Division was established
within Public Safety Canada, with resources dedicated to staging regular
national exercises at the federal, provincial, and municipal levels and
consolidating lessons learned to improve future performance. 7.37 Over the past three years, Public Safety Canada budgeted a total of
$17.1 million to plan and conduct exercises related to emergency management
across the federal government and with the provinces and municipalities, as
well as to share lessons learned and best practices with exercise
participants. However, over half of the budget allocated to national
exercises was not spent in each of the last three fiscal years. Public
Safety Canada maintains a calendar that lists exercises planned among
federal departments and has developed a framework for federal departments
and agencies to coordinate their national exercise efforts.
Since April 2005, Public Safety Canada has coordinated five federal
exercises, shared in the coordination of eight multi-jurisdictional
exercises, and participated in an additional two exercises. However, we
found that exercises were designed to meet the training objectives of
individual departments, rather than to test the government’s overall
coordination or readiness for a national emergency against identified risks.
Public Safety Canada recognizes the need to increase the number of federal
and multi-jurisdictional exercises. 7.38 In response to our April 2005
audit, Public Safety Canada committed to consolidating, on an
ongoing basis, the results of lessons learned; however, at the time of our
audit, it had not done so. The Department provided us with after-action
reports for 14 of the exercises it coordinated or participated in
since April 2005, but observations and recommendations from these reports
were not systematically collected and used to improve emergency plans and
operations. 7.39 Following the events of September 11, 2001, Canada focused its
attention on the significant threats posed by terrorist attacks and on
the need to enhance readiness against emergencies caused by people, whether
deliberate or accidental. In Budget 2001, the federal government allocated
$513 million over six years to federal departments and agencies to improve
their ability to respond to chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear (CBRN)
events, as these types of emergencies are beyond the response capacity of
provinces, territories, and municipalities. Public Safety Canada receives
$2.7 million annually for CBRN training. The initiative is currently being
expanded to include the possibility of a threat due to explosives (CBRNE).
7.40 We examined the status of efforts made to
improve CBRNE response capability, where a coordinated and integrated
approach among federal departments, as well as provincial and local
jurisdictions, is essential to success. To enhance the capacity of local
emergency workers to respond to a CBRNE event, Public Safety Canada leads a
training program for
first responders from municipal,
provincial, and territorial governments, with a combined annual federal
budget of $12 million. From April 2003 to April 2009, it had trained
1,854 local first responders to assist during an event, and a
further 10,400 had received awareness training. While Public Safety Canada
has administered participant questionnaires and consulted experts and other
government departments, it has not conducted a formal needs analysis for its
first responder training. 7.41 In 2002, a federal team was established to prepare for and respond
to potential CBRNE events, combining the efforts of the RCMP and National
Defence; at the time, Health Canada; and, since 2004, the Public Health
Agency of Canada. We expected that Public Safety Canada would lead the
efforts of these departments, and we looked for evidence of joint planning
and execution to develop the capabilities needed for a coordinated response
and recovery. 7.42 Public Safety Canada is responsible for setting the overall federal
policy on CBRNE issues. In 2005, it issued a federal strategy, identifying
the roles and responsibilities of federal departments and agencies for an
effective response to these types of emergencies. However, it did not
address how federal departments and agencies would coordinate their
resources with those of the provinces, territories, and municipalities to
assist them in a national emergency, nor has it expanded the strategy to
include explosives. At the time of our audit, Public Safety Canada was
consulting with the provinces and territories to develop a national CBRNE
strategy that included their responsibilities. 7.43 While the current strategy states that the government is to take all
possible measures to pre-empt, prevent, mitigate, and respond effectively to
a potential CBRNE incident, it has not identified the desired capability,
mandate, roles, or priorities for crisis or consequence management for the
responsible federal organizations. The role of the federal CBRNE team is to
manage the crisis phase of an emergency; however, the team does not have the
resources to manage the after effects of a CBRNE incident, including
assisting in mass casualty evacuation, medical aid, or decontamination.
In August 2008, the three departments involved in the federal CBRNE response
team informed Public Safety Canada of their concerns with the team’s
mandate, capacity, training, and the compatibility of communications
equipment. While the responsibilities of each team member were clear, there
were no defined operational protocols or agreements on how the team would
work together in a coordinated manner. Team members felt that it was the
responsibility of Public Safety Canada to define protocols and formalize
agreements among members. At the time of our audit, these issues had not
been resolved. Public Safety Canada officials told us that the role it could
play in this type of emergency is unclear, as the three departments on the
federal CBRNE team have the expertise, resources, and responsibility, while
Public Safety Canada has none of these. 7.44 Recommendation. As stipulated in the Emergency
Management Act, Public Safety Canada should ensure that its
coordination role for the federal response to an emergency is well-defined
and that the operational policies and plans that departments will follow are
updated and consistent. The Department’s response. Agreed. Public Safety Canada
will maintain the Federal Emergency Response Plan and its components as an
evergreen document. This includes ensuring the development of policies and
event-specific plans that outline operational protocols and departmental
roles and responsibilities, and reviewing these plans to ensure a
coordinated approach as necessary. 7.45 The 2004 National Security Policy called for equipment and
communications to be interoperable or compatible so that first responders
could work together better. In response to our 2005 audit
chapter, Public Safety Canada agreed to collaborate with a
research group to develop standards for equipment for use in chemical,
biological, radiological, or nuclear emergencies. The equipment is used in a
variety of emergency response situations, and it includes fire and heavy
urban search and rescue vehicles, personal suits, gear worn by first
responders to protect against hazardous materials, and communications
systems. 7.46 First responders have identified voice communications as the main
constraint to their interoperability. Capability gaps remain in
communications interoperability that limit the ability of fire, police, and
ambulance services to talk to one another and to communicate across
jurisdictions during an emergency. Public Safety Canada officials told us
that its role is not to establish standards but to assist first responder
groups that purchase and use the equipment to develop their own standards.
Public Safety Canada completed a draft document on a national approach for
communications interoperability but has yet to present the draft to
provincial officials for approval. For other types of equipment, Public
Safety Canada is currently assisting groups to establish standards for
personal protective equipment. 7.47 As noted in our 2005 audit,
while the federal government could use directed funding to promote
standardized equipment, officials told us that it has not done more due to a
lack of resources. About $5 million in federal funding is available through
an existing cost-shared program. Under this program, choices of equipment
purchases are left to the provinces. 7.48 Public Safety Canada is the lead federal department for coordinating
the protection of Canada’s critical infrastructure. Critical infrastructure
consists of those physical and information technology facilities, networks,
services, and assets that, if disrupted or destroyed, would have a serious
impact on the health, safety, and security or economic well-being of
Canadians or the effective functioning of governments in Canada. The
Emergency Management Act stipulates that the Minister of Public Safety
is to provide advice and to analyze and evaluate federal departmental
emergency management plans, which include critical infrastructure plans. 7.49 We examined whether Public Safety Canada was providing a leadership
role in developing and implementing a national strategy for critical
infrastructure protection. Namely, we examined its initiatives to provide
advice and promote standards to other federal and provincial or territorial
authorities. 7.50 In February 2001, the federal government identified the need to
provide national leadership to protect Canada’s critical infrastructure from
the risks of failure or disruption. Following the terrorist attacks in the
United States on September 11, 2001, the federal government allocated
$190 million over five years to improve critical infrastructure protection
and emergency management capacity across the federal government. In 2004,
the National Security Policy directed the federal departments to work with
provinces, territories, and the private sector on initiatives to improve
national capabilities to protect critical infrastructure. In its 2004–05
Report on Plans and Priorities, Public Safety Canada committed to the
development and release of a National Strategy for Critical Infrastructure
by spring 2005. 7.51 While not meeting its target date in 2005, Public Safety Canada
started to work with provinces, territories, and the private sector to
develop a plan to implement a proposed National Strategy for Critical
Infrastructure. In the strategy, 10 key sectors involved in critical
infrastructure were identified, and federal departments were designated to
head each sector. We found that Public Safety Canada has consulted with
representatives of government and private sector organizations in order to
draft the National Strategy for Critical Infrastructure. It expects that
implementation will take three years once the strategy is formally approved.
Department officials told us that they are continuing to work on
implementation while they await formal approval. From its monitoring, Public
Safety Canada found that progress was more advanced in some sectors than in
others toward completion of the 37 milestones necessary for their emergency
management to be fully operational (Exhibit 7.3).
7.52 At the time of our audit, Public Safety Canada had started to
develop guidance to promote a consistent approach to critical infrastructure
risk assessments and protection efforts. However, this guidance had not been
finalized or distributed to departments designated to head the sectors. We
found that, in the absence of guidance from Public Safety Canada,
departments have been developing their own approaches, without the assurance
that they will result in plans that are coordinated and consistent across
government. 7.53 With the proposed critical infrastructure strategy, Public Safety
Canada has taken the first step toward getting a complete picture of the
infrastructure considered important at the federal, provincial, and
municipal levels. However, to get this picture requires input from many
different partners in government and the private sector. At the time of our
audit, the critical infrastructure that needs to be protected had not yet
been determined. Public Safety Canada had begun to map the infrastructure of
14 major Canadian cities. However, none of this information had been
validated for its significance at the federal level. While certain assets
may be deemed critical to an industry, municipality, province, or territory,
those assets may not be critical at the federal or national level. This
information is key for industry and all levels of government to allocate
resources and develop their own protection plans. 7.54 There have been challenges to progress, specifically 7.55 While Public Safety Canada can move forward to develop policies and
programs without resolving these issues, the unresolved issues will remain
an impediment to achieving full success if they are not addressed. The
proposed national strategy includes information sharing and protection as a
key strategic objective, and the Access to Information Act has been
amended to protect critical infrastructure information supplied by third
parties. However, department officials at Public Safety Canada told us that,
while they can provide advice and coordination to departments, it is the
responsibility of operational departments to identify Canada’s critical
infrastructure and determine how it should be protected before a national,
coordinated approach can be implemented. 7.56 Public Safety Canada has provided no guidance to departments to
ensure that they determine what critical infrastructure needs to be
protected. Furthermore, there is little guidance to departments responsible
for sectors to determine what assets or facilities are critical to the
federal government. This information is essential for a coordinated approach
to critical infrastructure protection. 7.57 We examined the energy and utilities sector in more detail as it was
seen to have made considerable progress in efforts to identify and protect
critical infrastructure. Led by Natural Resources Canada, the sector is
organized and has regular meetings and classified briefings to industry and
government officials. 7.58 Natural Resources Canada is in the process of adding infrastructure
information to maps, including not only pipelines and transmission lines,
but also railways, telecommunications, and strategic buildings and
structures. While these efforts are expected to complement the proposed
national strategy, we note that this project was developed separately from
Public Safety Canada, which has since initiated its own separate mapping of
critical infrastructure. 7.59 Threats to computer-based critical infrastructure, including federal
information systems, are evolving and growing. In April 2009, the Minister
of Public Safety stated that there have been repeated attacks against this
country’s computer systems. These cyber attacks may be initiated by
individuals or groups and may be unintentional, amateur, or foreign
state-sponsored espionage and information warfare, and present an
ever-changing and evolving threat. Cyber attacks could have very damaging
consequences. For example, computer and communications networks are used to
control such things as our electrical grid, with varying vulnerabilities.
Recently, the United States and the United Kingdom have significantly
increased their efforts to fight cyber threats. 7.60 Public Safety Canada is in the process of developing a cyber
security strategy—a commitment first made in the 2004 National Security
Policy. While it has been working on a draft strategy, at the time of our
audit, it had no date scheduled for its formal approval. Although the
commitment was made in 2004, progress has been slow until this past year.
Public Safety Canada has identified the key elements of a cyber strategy and
has initiated action on a list of current cyber security initiatives along
with other federal government departments. 7.61 Recommendation. Based on the responsibilities
outlined in the Emergency Management Act, Public Safety Canada
should provide policies and guidance for departmental sector heads to
determine their infrastructure and assess its criticality, based on risk and
its significance to the safety and security of Canadians; it should
establish policies and programs to prepare plans to protect the
infrastructure. The Department’s response. Agreed. Based on the
responsibilities outlined in the Emergency Management Act, Public
Safety Canada will provide tools and guidance for sectors to determine their
processes, systems, facilities, technologies, networks, assets, and
services. Public Safety Canada will also provide tools and guidance for
departmental sector heads to assess the infrastructure’s criticality based
on risks and its significance to the safety and security of Canadians, and
will establish policies and programs to prepare plans for their protection. 7.62 We found that Public Safety Canada has not exercised the leadership
necessary to coordinate emergency management activities, including
protection of critical infrastructure in Canada. While it has a challenging
role, Public Safety Canada still needs to develop the policies and programs
that would help clarify its leadership and coordination role for the
emergency management activities of operational departments. Public Safety
Canada has taken the first step by developing the interim Federal Emergency
Response Plan. In our opinion, to make further progress, the plan would
benefit from formal government approval and a better definition of roles and
responsibilities of all players, as well as the capabilities needed for
an integrated, coordinated approach to emergency response. 7.63 Public Safety Canada has drafted a strategy to protect Canada’s
critical infrastructure, but it has not been formally approved. However, at
the time of our audit, the critical infrastructure that needs to be
protected had not yet been determined. It has categorized critical
infrastructure into 10 sectors, each headed by a federal department. 7.64 We found that Public Safety Canada had made slow progress until this
past year on its 2004 commitment to develop a cyber security strategy,
although threats to computer-based critical infrastructure, including
federal information systems, are evolving and growing. While it has been
working on a draft strategy, at the time of our audit, it had no date
scheduled for its formal approval. Public Safety Canada has identified the
key elements of a cyber security strategy and has initiated action on a list
of current cyber security initiatives along with other federal departments
and agencies. 7.65 Over the period of our audit, Public Safety Canada, along with other
federal departments and agencies, had made limited progress in enhancing the
response to and recovery from emergencies in a coordinated manner. However,
their rate of progress has improved, especially in the past year. Public
Safety Canada has established a Government Operations Centre, which is
connected to other federal departments and agencies. The centre has enabled
Public Safety Canada to make considerable progress in coordinating response
activities in times of crisis, as it keeps other departments informed of the
status of events on a real-time basis. It also produces regular situation
awareness reports for such issues as the H1N1 virus, which allow decisions
to be based on a common set of facts. However, improvements can be made in
identifying and implementing lessons learned from real emergencies and
exercises. In its responsibility as the lead federal department for
emergency management policies and plans, including chemical, biological,
radiological, nuclear, and explosives, Public Safety Canada has not
clarified the decision-making processes and operational protocols for
emergency response activities. 7.66 Public Safety Canada is making progress in promoting standards for
personal protective equipment used in responding to emergencies. However,
key interoperability gaps remain for voice communications, limiting the
ability of various fire, police, and ambulance services to work together in
an emergency. The Department has directed little or no funding toward
standardizing equipment. All of the audit work in this chapter was conducted in accordance with
the standards for assurance engagements set by The Canadian Institute of
Chartered Accountants. While the Office adopts these standards as the
minimum requirement for our audits, we also draw upon the standards and
practices of other disciplines. The objectives of this audit were to This audit examined federal efforts to improve the nation’s readiness and
resiliency to respond to incidents or attacks, through improved coordination
of emergency management activities at the federal level, and through work
with provinces and territories to achieve unified and integrated response
and recovery operations. While the focus of the audit was Public Safety
Canada, audit work was also conducted at the Privy Council Office, National
Defence, the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the Public Health Agency of
Canada, Health Canada, Natural Resources Canada, the Canadian Food
Inspection Agency, and the Canada Border Services Agency. We followed up on selected recommendations made in our April 2005
chapter, National Security in Canada, regarding emergency
preparedness, including response capabilities for a chemical, biological,
radiological, or nuclear event. Public Safety Canada has the lead
responsibility for addressing the majority of these recommendations. We also
followed up on selected recommendations from the June 2005 House of Commons
Standing Committee on Public Accounts report that supported our audit
chapter with several recommendations to federal departments. The audit did not examine emergency management activities of the
provinces and territories; it focused on Public Safety Canada’s coordination
of emergency management among federal departments along with the provinces
and territories. The audit did not examine the security activities carried
out in preparation for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Games as
responsibility for these activities was assigned to the Office of the
Coordinator for 2010 Olympics and G8 Security reporting to the National
Security Advisor. Listed below are the criteria that were used to conduct this audit and
their sources. Criteria Sources Management reviewed and accepted the suitability of the criteria used in
the audit. This audit covers the performance of federal departments and agencies and
events taking place since our last audit of this subject reported in
April 2005. Audit work for this chapter was substantially completed on 15 June 2009. Assistant Auditors General: Wendy Loschiuk and Hugh McRoberts Principal: Gordon Stock Jenna Lindley For information, please contact Communications at 613-995-3708
or 1-888-761-5953 (toll-free). The following is a list of recommendations found in Chapter 7. The number
in front of the recommendation indicates the paragraph where it appears in
the chapter. The numbers in parentheses indicate the paragraphs where the
topic is discussed. Recommendation Response Capability gap—The gap
between available resources and the desired result, which in this case is a
timely and effective response to an emergency. First responders—The police
officers, firefighters, and emergency medical service workers who are the
first to respond to an emergency.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The contents of this site, unless otherwise specified, are copyrighted by © Big Medicine 2001-2009. The news provided is for personal use only. Reproduction or redistribution of the this site, in whole, part or in any form, requires the express permission of Big Medicine or the original source. For questions or comments pertaining to this site, contact the web administrator. Big Medicine is not responsible for the content of external sites linked and does not endorse their content. Advertisers are not responsible for Big Medicine contents, the content of external sites linked and do not endorse their content.
|