What We Heard Report

Transcription

1 What We Heard Reprt Fire Preventin Act - Legislative Review Public Engagement July 2017

2

3 Table f Cntents Backgrund... 1 A. Cmprehensive Review... 1 B. Public and Stakehlder Engagement... 1 C. This Reprt... 2 What We Heard General Cmmunity Needs Scpe f Statutry Rles and Respnsibilities Carrying ut Statutry Rles and Respnsibilities The Plan Review Prcess Prcedural Clarity Inspectins, Building Cdes and Standards Crrective Actin Orders Disputes and Appeals Other Cmments... 17

4

5 Backgrund A. Cmprehensive Review The Fire Preventin Act (FPA) and Fire Preventin Regulatins have nt been fully reviewed since the mid-1950s and have nly gne thrugh a few substantive changes since then. As such, it is in need f mdernizatin. The FPA and Regulatins relate t: Structural fire investigatin and reprting; Fire hazard regulatin; and, The adptin f cdes and standards fr the preventin and extinguishment f structural fires. The Regulatins under the FPA are: the Fire Preventin Regulatins, the Firewrks Regulatins, and the Prpane Cylinder Strage Regulatins. In summer 2013, representatives frm the Department f Municipal and Cmmunity Affairs (MACA) and key stakehlders frmed a technical wrking grup t discuss the FPA and Regulatins. This wrking grup included representatives frm the NWT Assciatin f Cmmunities, the Lcal Gvernment Administratrs f the NWT, the NWT Fire Chief s Assciatin, the NWT Assciatin f Architects, the Wrkers Safety and Cmpensatin Cmmissin, the NWT and Nunavut Assciatin f Prfessinal Engineers and Gescientists, the NWT Chamber f Cmmerce, and the NWT and Nunavut Cnstructin Assciatin. The wrking grup flagged a number f issues with the legislatin and regulatins fr MACA s review and cnsideratin. In 2014, MACA began a cmprehensive legislative review f the FPA. This review includes cnsidering the issues raised by the 2013 wrking grup, as well as identifying and addressing gaps and issues with the FPA that had nt been previusly identified. Thrugh this cmprehensive review f the FPA, MACA has the pprtunity t, amng ther things: Clarify regulatry cntrls and ffences under the Act; Clarify administrative rles and respnsibilities under the Act; and Strengthen enfrcement prvisins and penalties. This legislative review is a significant undertaking is intended t ensure there will be a sund basis fr any amendments r new legislatin that may be prpsed. Ultimately, MACA s gal is t ensure that the NWT has the means t adequately and efficiently prtect the public and prperty frm fire and the threat f fire. B. Public and Stakehlder Engagement One f the first steps in the cmprehensive review was t cmplete a public and stakehlder engagement prcess, cmpleted between December 2016 and March WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 1

6 MACA released a Public Engagement Discussin Guide in December 2016 t slicit feedback frm stakehlders and the public t better understand the issues, challenges, and pprtunities arund the FPA and Regulatins. The Discussin Guide asked fr general feedback n the FPA as well as specific feedback n issues that were identified thrugh previus stakehlder engagement and MACA s cnsideratin f the legislatin. Respnses were accepted until March C. This Reprt The aim f this reprt is t give readers a summary f the feedback, cmments and cncerns received in respnse t the Public Engagement Discussin Guide released in December This dcument is a summary f the areas f cncern identified in the respnses and is nt intended t prvide cnclusins r recmmendatins based n the cncerns raised. The feedback frm this engagement, as included in this reprt, will be taken int accunt as MACA develps ptential legislative slutins t the identified stakehlder issues and areas f cncern. It will als be used as a fundatin upn which t build a secnd engagement prcess that will ask stakehlders and the public t cnsider and cmment n ptential legislative slutins t address identified issues in the FPA and Regulatins. The fllwing What We Heard Sectin includes summaries f the respnses MACA received t each questin. Each sectin includes a shrt summary f the infrmatin prvided in the Discussin Guide befre the questins are presented. Fr mre backgrund infrmatin, please refer t the Public Engagement Discussin Guide. WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 2

7 What We Heard MACA released the Public Engagement Discussin Guide n December 5, Respnses were cllected until March MACA reached ut directly t primary stakehlders t infrm them f the engagement prcess and implemented an infrmatin campaign thrugh a public press release, newspaper and radi ads, and internal cmmunicatin t ther GNWT departments. Respnses were accepted by mail t the MACA mailing address, t FPA@gv.nt.ca, r nline via a survey tl available n the MACA website. MACA received 20 respnses, frm multiple NWT regins and many different rganizatins. See the tables belw fr a breakdwn f affiliatin and gegraphy f respndents. Thirteen f the respndents (68%) answered mre than half f the questins. Several respndents answered nly thse questins that applied t their specific cncerns, and five f respndents submitted their cncerns in a separate frmat frm the survey prvided, which were included in the Other sectin f this reprt, r added t the respnses t specific questins where they clearly applied t the issue at hand. Table 1: Respndents by affiliatin Affiliatin Number f Respndents Percentage Cmmunity gvernments and/r cmmunity fire 6 30% departments Fire-related cmpanies in the NWT 4 20% Office f the Fire Marshal 3 15% Organizatins r assciatins 3 15% Territrial gvernment stakehlders utside MACA 2 10% Member f the public 1 5% Annymus 1 5% Table 2: Respndents by regin Regin Number f Respndents Percentage Nrth Slave 12 60% Suth Slate 5 25% Sahtu 1 5% Inuvik 1 5% Annymus 1 5% WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 3

8 The respnses were analyzed fr majr themes. Of these identified themes, the mst cmmn terms that were brught up in the respnses, and as pictured in the wrd clud, included: Training Inspectins Cmmunity Review Funding Educatin Lcal Assistant The results n what we heard are rganized by the fllwing themes, as they were presented in the Discussin Guide: 1. General 2. Cmmunity Needs 3. Scpe f Statutry Rles and Respnsibilities 4. Carrying ut Statutry Rles and Respnsibilities 5. The Plan Review Prcess 6. Prcedural Clarity 7. Inspectins, Building Cdes and Standards 8. Crrective Actin Orders 9. Disputes and Appeals WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 4

9 1. General The Fire Preventin Act (FPA) has nt been fully reviewed since the mid-1950s. The rles and respnsibilities and the prcesses put in place under the FPA are fundamental t the system f structural fire preventin in the NWT. 1.1 What we asked: Frm yur experience, what d yu think is wrking and what d yu think may nt be wrking with respect t structural fire preventin in the NWT? 1.1 What we heard: Wrking: There were n clear themes in the respnses arund what is wrking, hwever respndents mentined: Prmpt adptin f the Natinal Building Cde and Natinal Fire Cdes; Basic equipment availability; Cmmunity fire prtectin initiatives; and The wrk and expertise f design prfessinals. Nt Wrking The mst cmmn cncerns were: Cmpliance and enfrcement; The amunt f respnsibility placed n cmmunity gvernments; Lack f resurces and infrastructure (especially fire suppressin infrastructure including sprinkler systems and fire alarms); and The range f capacity in nrthern cmmunities. Other cncerns mentined by ne r tw respndents included: Lack f funding; Lack f training; The level f services t First Natins Designated Authrities and remte ldges; Inability t deal with inspectin issues; Insufficient fire suppressin services; and Lack f clarity arund rles. WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 5

10 1.2 What we asked: Hw culd ur system f structural fire preventin be imprved? 1.2 What we heard: The main themes, with abut a quarter f respndents mentining each included: Increased funding and training arund fire preventin; Clarity arund rles and respnsibilities and cmmunicatin with ther nn-maca actrs; Clarity arund inspectins, including increased training and defined expectatins and rles; and Dealing with capacity issues by wrking with nrthern realities, capturing the nrthern built envirnment in cdes, wrking with cmmunity capacity, setting expectatins relative t access t resurces, and GNWT supprt, WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 6

11 2. Cmmunity Needs The FPA utlines respnsibilities related t fire preventin, including the authrity fr enfrcing cdes and standards thrugh plan review, fire investigatin, and fire inspectins. Cmmunity gvernments are respnsible fr prviding versight n cmpnents f fire prtectin related t firefighting equipment and maintenance, strategy and tactics, perating prcedures, and ther safety requirements. It can be difficult fr cmmunity gvernments t develp and sustain quality cmmunity fire prtectin services, equipment, and infrastructure. 2.1 What we asked: What is wrking and what is nt wrking in yur cmmunity with respect t prtecting peple and prperty frm fire and threats f fire? 2.1 What we heard: Wrking: Sme respndents mentined supprt frm MACA and the Assistant Fire Marshals, especially when cllabrating with cmmunity gvernments, and cmmunity gvernment supprt fr fire departments mre generally. Nt Wrking: A third f respndents t this questin brught up lack f funding. A third brught up cmmunity engagement and educatin. Several brught up lack f resurces fr training fr fire departments. Several mentined resurces fr fire suppressin services, infrastructure, and equipment maintenance. Other cmments mentined by ne r tw respndents included: Lack f cnsistency between different cmmunities depending n capacity and cmmunity gvernment supprt, and between the FPA vs. Envirnment and Natural Resurces (ENR) frest fire plicy; Fire chief retentin; The relatinship between individuals acting under the FPA and design prfessinals; Plan review respnse times; and Regulating inspectin and servicing systems. 2.2 What we asked: D yu feel that the Fire Preventin Act r Regulatins culd be changed r imprved in rder t better assist cmmunity fire preventin and prtectin? If s, hw? WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 7

12 2.2 What we heard: Several respndents stated that they did nt think changes t the FPA r Regulatins wuld better assist cmmunity fire preventin and prtectin. Rather, that increased funding, training, cmmunicatin, and supprt fr cmmunity fire departments is needed t effectively carry ut the already existing prcesses, rles and respnsibilities. Several suggestins were made abut ptential amendments r imprvements t the FPA and Regulatins including: Exempting traditinal structures frm regulatins; Inclusin f a requirement r ptin fr cmmunity gvernments t implement fire preventin bylaws; Recgnizing the nrthern built envirnment; Establishing inspectin standards; Establishing fire prtectin systems standards (including sprinklers and fire alarms), Implementing penalties; and Including fire department peratinal requirements in the FPA and Regulatins. WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 8

13 3. Scpe f Statutry Rles and Respnsibilities Fur key rles are created in the FPA: the Fire Marshal, Deputy Fire Marshal, Assistant Fire Marshals, and Lcal Assistants. The three key functins that are shared between these fur actrs are: undertaking inspectins, investigatins, and issuing rders. Althugh the FPA creates and describes these functins, it des nt always clearly describe wh is respnsible fr each functin. 3.1 What we asked: In yur cmmunity, what d yu see as being the mst imprtant jb f the Lcal Assistant (e.g. Fire Chiefs, SAOs)? 3.1 What we heard: Half f the respnses identified maintaining and ensuring preparedness f fire department persnnel and equipment as a pririty. Half included fire preventin activities, especially inspectins. A third prpsed cmmunity utreach and educatin. A third included cmmunicatin with the OFM. Several mentined that mre resurces are necessary fr Lcal Assistants t adequately fulfill their respnsibilities. 3.2 What we asked: D yu have any cmments n the rle and respnsibilities f Lcal Assistants in yur cmmunity? 3.2 What we heard: Mst respndents stated that there is a gap between training and the requirements f a Lcal Assistant. They supprted mre specific qualificatins with supprt fr training and adequate funding. Sme stated that there is a need fr increased clarity arund the rles and respnsibilities f the Lcal Assistant in the FPA, and resurces prvided fr the Lcal Assistant t fulfill these respnsibilities, because capacity t carry ut the duties f the psitin can vary, especially with the psitin assigned autmatically t the SAO r Fire Chief. 3.3 What we asked: D yu feel that the rles and respnsibilities f the psitins under the FPA (the Fire Marshal, Assistant Fire Marshals, Deputy Fire Marshals, and Lcal Assistants) are clearly defined? If nt, what culd be clarified? 3.3 What we heard: The majrity felt the rles and respnsibilities are nt well defined and require mre clarity, particularly arund inspectins and cmpliance. Several specified that the differences between the rles f the Deputy Fire Marshal and Assistant Fire Marshal need t be clarified. WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 9

14 4. Carrying ut Statutry Rles and Respnsibilities Capacity limitatins can affect the ability f thse in psitins described in the FPA t carry ut their rles and respnsibilities. Many f the respnsibilities set ut in the FPA are cmplex and require specific skill sets. Capacity challenges vary by cmmunity and culd present frustratins and a capacity strain t thse wrking n the grund t keep cmmunities safe. 4.1 What we asked: Based n yur experience, are there changes t the FPA that culd be made t help thse in psitins set ut in the FPA (e.g. Assistant Fire Marshals, Lcal Assistants) deal with limitatins t capacity? 4.1 What we heard: The majrity f respnses supprted increased funding and training rather than specific changes t the FPA t deal with capacity limitatins. Several respndents brught up cncerns arund the capacity f Lcal Assistants in different cmmunities depending n the level f resurces available. Sme expressed a desire fr increased assistance frm OFM r allwing utside cntractrs t wrk with Lcal Assistants. Several respndents brught up cncerns with a lack f standardizatin arund the qualificatins f the Lcal Assistant. WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 10

15 5. The Plan Review Prcess Any cnstructin, alteratin r repair f a structure in the NWT must fllw the cdes and standards that relate t fire and the spread f fire as adpted under the Fire Preventin Regulatins. The Fire Marshal is respnsible fr reviewing plans and specificatins t ensure all nn-exempted structures adhere t these cdes. 5.1 What we asked: D yu feel that the rles and respnsibilities f thse invlved in the plan review prcess are sufficiently clear in the FPA? If nt, hw culd they be made clearer? 5.1 What we heard: Mst respndents wh did nt believe these rles are clear stipulated that mre clarity in cmmunicatin frm the OFM and educatin fr thse in fficial psitins, cnstructin players, and cmmunities verall wuld imprve the implementatin f the plan review prcess. A third f the respndents agreed that the rles are sufficiently clear. 5.2 What we asked: Wuld yu like t prvide any ther bservatins r cmments regarding the existing plan review prcess under the Fire Preventin Act? What we heard: One majr theme was efficiency: Mst respndents mentined cncerns abut timelines arund the existing plan review prcess. Several respndents raised cncerns arund the level f detail f the current plan review prcess. Several stated that OFM review f design prfessinals wrk is unnecessary given their level f expertise and training if they have sufficient knwledge f the cdes. Several suggested the OFM be invlved at an earlier stage f design prcess t save time r allw prfessinal cnsultants t supplement the plan review fficer s respnsibilities. The ther majr theme was enfrceability; respndents suggested: Adding penalties Final inspectins Additinally, respndents mentined: Desire fr increased cllabratin between actrs invlved with plan review, Flexibility fr nrthern cntexts, Funding & training, and The need fr building standards as additinal regulatry versight. WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 11

16 6. Prcedural Clarity Under the FPA, the Fire Marshal has the authrity t publicize infrmatin and advice abut fire preventin and fire prtectin in the NWT. This infrmatin is presented as 1) Advisries & Clarificatins and 2) the Plan Review Guidelines. 6.1 What we asked: D yu feel there is sufficient infrmatin available t help yu understand yur bligatins under applicable cdes and standards with respect t building cnstructin, alteratin, r repair in the NWT? Why r why nt? 6.1 What we heard: Half respnded that there is sufficient infrmatin, hwever mst f these respnses indicated that translatin f this infrmatin thrugh increased training and cmmunicatin wuld imprve understanding. Half respnded that there is nt sufficient infrmatin. These respnses identified the need fr increased infrmatin available regarding inspectin requirements, clarity arund interpreting cdes, and respnsibilities f specific rles, bth within the OFM and thse wrking with the OFM. 6.2 What we asked: Are there ther matters relating t structural fire preventin in general in the NWT that yu feel are subjects abut which the Fire Marshal shuld prvide increased public infrmatin? 6.2 What we heard: Respndents brught up the need fr increased awareness arund: Fire-related recalls, Issues specific t the nrthern envirnment (including remte ldges and mine sites), and Occupancy lads. Several respnses brught up the need fr increased cmmunicatin t cmmunities, t related gvernment branches (especially crdinating with the Department f Envirnment and Natural Resurces) and t designers and cntractrs. Several expressed interest in seeing increased cmmunicatin regarding fire safety and practical suggestins n maintaining structural fire safety. One respnse suggested a designated OFM cmmunicatins staff member. WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 12

17 7. Inspectins, Building Cdes and Standards While the FPA requires descriptins, plans, and specificatins t be submitted t the Fire Marshal fr review, and the receipt f a written reprt frm the Fire Marshal prir t cnstructin, the FPA and Regulatins d nt require the plans and specificatins t be apprved by the Fire Marshal. Even when the plan review prcess is prperly cmpleted, there is currently n way t ensure that all territrial cnstructin adheres t cdes and standards in the NWT given that the Fire Marshal des nt cmplete pst-plan review inspectins. 7.1 What we asked: What additinal tls r prcedures, if any, d yu feel fficials in the NWT need in rder t ensure the cnstructin and maintenance f safe buildings (i.e. cmpliance with building cdes and standards)? 7.1 What we heard: Mst respndents supprted additinal tls fr enfrcement, including: Pst-plan review inspectins, Authrity t pen structures t cnfirm cmpliance, Enabling a cmmunity bylaw with enfrcement tls. Tw respndents supprt building standards legislatin. Respndents als brught up the need fr increased fire preventin inspectins, cmmunicatin with design prfessinals, and harmnizatin and cnsultatin with ther GNWT departments and cmmunity gvernments. WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 13

18 8. Crrective Actin Orders Under the FPA, the Fire Marshal, Deputy Fire Marshal, Assistant Fire Marshal r Lcal Assistant can carry ut hazard inspectins. A hazard inspectin can reveal prblems including dilapidated cnditins, dangerus uses r ccupancy, cmbustible materials, and inadequate fire exits. These prblems may prmpt fficials t issue a crrective actin rder under Sectin 12 r Sectin 13 f the FPA, hwever the authrity f the crrective actin is limited arund rdering evacuatin and it is nt always clear wh must remedy the identified dangerus cnditins. 8.1 What We Asked: Have yu encuntered any barriers (e.g. resurces, training, prcedural, gegraphic, etc.) t issuing, receiving, r enfrcing rders under the FPA? If s, what barriers have yu encuntered? 8.1 What We Heard: Mst respndents identified lack f training and infrmatin as barriers; several said that enfrcement wuld be easier if there was mre clarity and educatin arund the prcess f drafting and issuing rders. Several mentined that lack f clarity arund the prcess makes enfrcement f rders difficult. Several identified lack f clarity in jurisdictin, including wrking with First Natins in designated authrities and arund remte ldges. Several brught up lack f resurces as a barrier in enfrcement Varying levels f capacity f different fire departments can create barriers t meeting FPA requirements One respndent expressed a cncern that the nly ptin fr rder enfrcement is thugh curt actin, which they felt wuld be a burden n cmmunity resurces One respndent brught up distance t small cmmunities making cmpliance difficult t mnitr. 8.2 What we asked: What tls r prcesses, if any, d yu feel wuld better enable the prcess f issuing and enfrcing rders? 8.2 What we heard: The majr themes in respnses included: Increased educatin and training; Cmmunicatin t the public; Increased funding and resurces; Clarity n standards and prcess; and A mre frmalized prcess fr nn-cmpliance and discipline. WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 14

19 9. Disputes and Appeals If a recipient f an rder disagrees with the fficial they can dispute the rder r decisin. The FPA enables the plan review prcess but des nt establish plan review reprts as authritative decisins r prvide infrmatin n the enfrceability f plan review written reprts. This means that it is nt clear whether r hw plan review reprts cannt be frmally challenged r disputed by the recipient. Fr thse decisins r rders that can be frmally appealed, thse frm the Deputy Fire Marshal, Assistant Fire Marshal r Lcal Assistant may be appealed t the Fire Marshal. If the respnse is nt satisfactry, the recipient can appeal the Fire Marshal s decisin t the NWT Supreme Curt. Orders directly issued by the Fire Marshal can be appealed directly t the NWT Supreme Curt. 9.1 What we asked: Wuld yu like t prvide any bservatins r cmments regarding the existing appeals prcess under the Fire Preventin Act? 9.1 What we heard: Respnses were varied t this questin; several stated that the appeals prcess is clear while thers that it is unclear. One respndent suggested the appeals prcess shuld g straight t curt while anther supprted additinal levels being added between the Fire Marshal and the Supreme Curt. 9.2 What we asked: D yu feel that this the current prcess f appeals t the NWT Supreme Curt is an apprpriate prcess thrugh which t appeal decisins f the Fire Marshal? 9.2 What we heard: Half f the respnses t this questin believed the current prcess is apprpriate, while the ther half did nt. Several brught frward the idea f an independent third party mediatin, ne respndent felt the Fire Marshal shuld be the final decisin maker. One respndent suggested that the prcess be dependent n the situatin with a different prcess fr minr vs. majr appeals, fr example, majr cmmunity cnstructin ging t the NWT Supreme Curt, but appeals r smaller prjects staying in the cmmunity. 9.3 What we asked: D yu agree with the current tw-level appeal prcess (first t the Fire Marshal and then t the Supreme Curt f the NWT)? Why r why nt? If nt, what prcess wuld yu see as being mre effective r beneficial? 9.3 What we heard: Just ver half f the respndents did nt agree, while just under half d agree with the prcess. WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 15

20 The prpsed alternatives included a third party mediatr r bard; ne respndent felt the Fire Marshal shuld be the final decisin maker; ne said that it shuld bypass the Fire Marshal and g straight t curts; and tw recmmended increased cmmunicatin and meetings with cmmunity gvernments t reslve sme cnflicts. WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 16

21 10. Other Cmments The final sectin f the Public Engagement Discussin Guide encuraged stakehlders and public t prvide any ther cmments r feedback that may nt have been addressed by the questins prvided. Several respndents t the Discussin Guide submitted their cncerns in a separate frmat frm the survey prvided, and these respnses were added t the sectins abve where they specifically applied t a questin in the Discussin Guide and therwise were added t the Other Cmments sectin belw. The fllwing sectin includes cmments that address issues nt specifically included in the Discussin Guide, gruped by majr themes. Training The issue f increased training was brught up cnsistently thrughut the Engagement Questins and as Other feedback. Many respndents brught up the need fr further training fr actrs under the FPA alng with training and educatin utreach fr cmmunity members and thse invlved in the fire preventin system. Funding The issue f increased funding was als brught up cnsistently thrughut the Engagement Questins and as Other feedback. Many respndents felt that even with clarified rles and respnsibilities set ut in the FPA an effective fire preventin system is nt feasible withut increased funding fr training, resurces, and equipment. Crdinatin with ther gvernmental actrs Several respndents brught up lack f cmmunicatin and duplicatin in the system between levels f gvernment, These included crdinating with the Department f Public Wrks and Services (PWS) n cdes, the Department f Envirnment and Natural Resurces (ENR) n addressing fires utside municipal bundaries, harmnizatin with ther legislatin that verlaps with the FPA, federally and territrially, and wrking with cmmunity gvernments t avid dwnlading rles and respnsibilities withut prper funding and training. Enabling cmmunity gvernments t enact fire by-laws was mentined several times. Inspectins & Enfrcement Many respnses included the need fr mre inspectins. These included mre regular peridic inspectins and testing f fire prtectin systems as well as specifically mandated pst-plan review inspectins t cnfirm cmpliance. The inspectin f sprinkler systems was mentined especially ften fr bth regular peridic inspectins and pst-review inspectins Several respndents brught up amendments t the Act t allw warrantless entry fr inspectins r increased scpe fr entry arund fire preventin inspectins. WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 17

22 In additin t mre pst-plan review inspectins, increasing penalties and enfrcement was emphasized alng with ensuring the OFM is prperly resurced t cmplete these inspectins. Withut these inspectins, many respndents expressed cncern that the authrity in the FPA is nt meaningful since there is n methd f enfrcement. Nrthern Cntext Several respndents brught up specific issues that need t be cnsidered in the nrthern cntext, including fire preventin at remte ldges and at mine sites, wrking with First Natins Designated Authrities, dealing with capacity issues in small cmmunity gvernments and vlunteer fire departments, cnsideratin f traditinal structures, and difficulties in develping infrastructure. Sme respndents were cncerned that the Natinal Building Cdes are nt always relevant fr nrthern infrastructure as they are develped fr the prvinces in suthern Canada, and suggested that these cdes be supplemented by a nrthern building cde. WHAT WE HEARD REPORT Fire Preventin Act Legislative Review Public Engagement 18