Get Real about BC's Next Disaster

Rest your fears, gentle folks, your federal and provincial governments have learned their lessons from Hurricane Katrina. And they will remember them for 48 hours, maximum. And action will take the form of talk, studies and memos.

Last week I interviewed John Les, the provincial minister responsible for public safety. He had all the right words. And it scared the pants off me and many listeners. The plain fact is this. If we had higher than expected water on the Fraser, a high tide and an earthquake in the 7 or above range, Richmond and other areas of the Fraser estuary would be flooded. In order to get your mind around that you must remember that there is a great difference between water going over the top of a dike and a dike bursting. I've helped fight three floods and I can tell you that water going over a secure dike presents problems but they are manageable. Dikes bursting are not. In New Orleans, the dam burst.

To prepare for an emergency, there are two factors. First you do all things humanly possible to prevent a disaster resulting from a major impact, such as a bad quake. Second, you assume that your preparations will not be enough and have in place a plan to deal with the aftermath.

Let's get dredging

Let's deal with the first and ask if our dikes are in the kind of shape where they could withstand a major quake. John Les was not encouraging. In fact, quite the opposite. He tells me that the dredging of the Fraser River, supposed to be a joint project by BC and the Feds, is on hold because Ottawa won't come up with their share of the money. To the extent the dredging is not done, the dike is therefore lowered for the obvious reason that the water is higher to start with. Would dredging, then, mean that the dikes would thereafter be sufficient to withstand a major quake?

If one applies the usual rules, namely (and this is Mair's Axiom I, folks, duly copyrighted) that you make a serious mistake assuming that people in charge know what the hell they're doing, the answer is no. Governments are a reflection of the people and people don't want to spend money on protection from something they don't think is going to happen. If you ask the average voter if he wants lower taxes and more spent on flood protection he will answer yes to both questions.

I asked Mr. Les point blank: If we have a high Fraser River next June, with high tide, and a major earthquake happened, would the dikes hold and he said "yes". I don't believe him. I don't believe him because I don't believe the dredging will happen and, even if it does, I can't believe it will be enough. If the powers that be have ignored the dredging that must accompany the maintenance of strong dikes, why in hell would I believe that the dikes themselves are well maintained? I believe that as long as politicians think the risk is slight, they will do nothing in the hopes that they're OK for the length of their mandate. The trouble is that it's much like having a gun to your head, the chamber of which holds 1000 bullets but all but one are empty. If you pull that trigger, the chance of there being a bullet in the chamber is remote. But if it happens that there is a bullet there, the consequences are catastrophic. So it would be in the scenario I use, for it wouldn't be a matter of rising water with everyone getting their tiggy-toes a bit damp, but a huge rush of water as was the case with Katrina.

Bring back the troops

Now, no two disasters are the same and the one I describe might well not be as devastating as Katrina, but surely that's pretty cold comfort.

OK, then, have we preparations in place if there is a disaster in spite of the comforting platitudes from Mr. Les?

The first thing one needs is a prepared population. Do the citizens at risk all have at least five days supply of food and water in a safe place above the probable water line? Do they all have their medicines there and, of course, a first aid kit? Do they have an ability, in a case of sudden high water, to get themselves ands their kids out of the house? Do they have a plan?

I doubt that one in a hundred has these things and there has been no massive education program. Nor will they be because as the images of New Orleans fades, so will the attention of those set in authority over us. Besides, having plans may upset folks. It's a bit like one of my mothers-in-law who was against life insurance because it was bad luck!

The second thing is that you need is manpower - lots of it. And we haven't got it. You will now remember that a few years ago the federal government removed the armed forces from Chilliwack to Edmonton. Many, many people complained precisely on the basis that these men and women would be critical to any serious rescue operation. A large, well trained, well conditioned group of men and women is essential to any rescue operation. We had that, but thanks to Ottawa we don't have it any more. This fact, I'm told, is well known to the authorities for they have done a test run with army vehicles, without passengers, from Edmonton to Vancouver and it took 17 hours! Add that to the time it would take to prepare the troops to leave Edmonton, transport them billet, equip them and get them to the scene and you're looking two or three days or more. Remember what New Orleans looked like at the end of Day Three?

The plain fact is that we simply do not have the "person" power to deal with a catastrophe quickly. The Provincial Emergency Program has within it excellent and well trained people. But those in the program tell me that they have nowhere near the number of trained people necessary to make a major early intervention.

Are you quake smart?

There are more little worry beads for you to finger. The program to make schools earthquake proof has only scratched the surface. Many older buildings in Vancouver are not quake proof.

Very few of us know, for example, how to turn off the natural gas. You may know but does your neighbour? We know that we're in a major earthquake zone, we talk about it a lot but I would bet that there isn't one in a hundred that knows what to do if a quake happens.

In the meantime, our governments, municipal, provincial and federal, will keep pulling that trigger hoping that we don't get the live one in the brain forgetting that if you run a risk with no time limit, it's no longer a risk but a certainty waiting to happen - the only question being "when"?

The politicians hope that "when" comes after they leave office.

For a checklist of what to do to before and after an earthquake strikes BC, go here.

Rafe Mair was a Socred government cabinet minister. His column for The Tyee runs every Monday and he can be heard every weekday morning from 8:30-10:30 on 600AM. His website is www.rafeonline.com.