SOCK it to them in the Media

It’s been twenty or so years since I began using the term SOCKO.  I often worry that it may seem a bit silly or flippant, but I’ve not found a better term to express the impact, newsworthiness and succinctness that audiences of all types need. 

 Speaking and Writing in Sockos

Aces, press lines, Qs & As, key messages, mission, vision and value statements don’t do the trick for me.  If they lack impact or are not newsworthy, reporters won’t use them and audiences won’t remember them. Qs & As can go on forever with inflammatory, confidential or hypothetical questions.  Even articles in The Harvard Business Review question whether shop-floor workers in industry have any idea what to do differently after hearing mission, vision and value statements.

 

So, I’m still stuck with SOCKOs, which imply impact and allow me to discuss the communications theories that the five-letter acronym evokes.  This article made the front page of Winning Campaigns and has been reprinted and archived on the magazine’s web site.     

 

In a recent media training session with a senior member of cabinet, the time came to simulate interviews with one of my trainers.  I played good cop, asking the politician to consider what he wanted to say in the 5 to 8 minutes he’d have.

 

The client and staffers talked a bit about policy and goals.  It was an unfocused discussion.  I took a few notes on what the politician and his staff thought they should say.

 

At the end of the interview, I asked the politician to review his own performance:

 

“Good relationship with the journalist.”

 

“I felt positive about it.”

 

“I’m comfortable with what I said.”

 

“Strong performance” (from staff).

 

I pulled out my notes and observed that in the eight or so minutes he had had to speak, he hadn’t got out one single message that he’d planned to.  Jaws dropped.  I then parsed this observation more finely—either your strategy was wrong and those messages should not have been delivered, or your strategy was right but you missed executing it.

 

I’ve developed an acronym to show how to develop a good media clip.  It’s SOCKO.

 

SOCKO

 

I know this acronym evokes a crash or blow in a comic strip, but it doesn’t at all stand for punching reporters who ask you tough questions.  SOCKO does imply impact, but of the emotional or intellectual kind.  A SOCKO is a true, memorable, clear, short statement that encapsulates your position and makes the recipient say “Ah!” or “Oh!” or “Hum!”

 

SOCKO also stands for Single Overriding Communications and Knowledge Objective.  Each word is worth a few sentences in turn.

 

Strategic

 

A message is strategic because you’ve thought about it, practiced it and rehearsed it.  It is your considered opinion on what to say about a topic.  You’ve pondered what others will say in response and your rebuttal—a semantic chess game.  Rehearsal is done out loud with staff and with audio and video recording equipment.  Does anyone really think Richard Nixon thought about the implications of saying “I am not a crook”?  How about George Romney’s “When I came back from Viet Nam, I had just had the greatest brainwashing that anybody can get when you go over to Viet Nam” (often paraphrased as “I was brainwashed on Viet Nam”).  Or how about John Kerry’s “I actually did vote for the $87 billion before I voted against it”?

 

Overriding

 

Media operate twenty-four hours a day and thus work at three times the speed of normal life.  Reporters need your clip right now.  They do not want to waste much time on context, background, disclaimers and parenthetical statements.  Get on with it.

 

I ask clients to imagine all they know about a topic.  It’s lots.  Reporters and the public can’t absorb it all.  Now I ask clients to imagine all they know about the topic in the shape of an iceberg.  What’s the fifteen percent that’s floating above the surface?  That’s probably the best clip.  You can then move on to the next most important fifteen percent, the next and the next again.  Just like real icebergs with portions chopped off, they right themselves, and another important fifteen per cent pokes above the surface.  Proficient communicators figure out how to combine chunks to sound like new clips when they’re really reiterating previous sound bites put together in slightly different ways.

 

So, a good clip is the overriding message you want to get out and the overriding aspect of what you want to talk about.

 

Communications

 

There’s about a fifty-percent difference between oral and written communication.  In this article, I don’t have intonation, volume, pausing, pacing or any other tools that I have when speaking.  But when I’m speaking, I don’t have fonts, italics, headings, bold, drop initials or any of the graphic tools that a writer uses to hold your attention.

 

Most candidates spend a lot of time with the written word—bills, reports, letters and so on.  They have to be reminded to shift gears when they speak.

 

Good oral communication features stories, imagery and metaphors.  Sentences are shorter.  For TV, a big part of the clip is your positive body language, eye contact, engagement and open gestures.  For radio it’s pausing and variety in volume, pitch and tone.  In print it’s what makes a good headline or picture.  In all cases it’s a polished, condensed version of normal speech.

 

Many lawmakers think that speaking as if they were a paragraph in a complex contract sounds precise and thorough.  It doesn’t.  Even in legal journals, the advice is to avoid being “hyper-correct.”  Studies of judges and juries show that they tend to discount witnesses’ testimony if it is loaded with jargon and unnecessary big words.

 

So pursuant to the above, I exhort you to peruse your verbosity and expunge polysyllabic utterances.  Keep it simple and conversational.

 

Knowledge

 

Knowledgeable people have facts, figures, data and trends at their disposal.  How often does a political speech or clip in the media say something new?  Not often enough.  This takes research and work.  So does deciding how to cite figures.  A number can be expressed as a percentage, a fraction, or a whole number, or one can show the change over time.  Numbers can be expressed graphically with bar charts, graphs, dispersions, scatter diagrams or box plots.  Choose wisely.

 

Whatever the choice with numbers, research shows that anecdotes and images trump them every time.  Numbers are hard to remember and understand, but a story is memorable.

 

Objective

 

So what’s all this work in aid of?  What’s the objective?  In print the objective is a headline, picture, cutline (underneath the picture) or call-out (a quote culled out of the copy and made larger or bold to create a nice graphic look in a magazine or newspaper).  For radio it’s a sentence or two on the news or talk show that people remember.  On TV it’s the same, but it also could be something you’re doing that looks newsworthy.  That’s often called a photo opportunity, but try to avoid clichés, such as cutting a ribbon or “grip and grin” shows of you shaking hands with someone while you’re not looking at her but grinning like a mad fool at the camera.

 

In all cases you want to be remembered by the audience.  You also want to be interesting and helpful enough to keep the reporters coming back for more.

 

Boston’s Wake Up Call

Where I live in Canada, Boston is well known for a few things. First, it’s “Maritimers’ Heaven.” Folks from the Canadian provinces bordering on the Atlantic Ocean, think Boston is pretty special and sophisticated. Boston is also known as a tough town.

Boston’s urban emergency plan and the Mayor’s recent Task Force on Climate Change are a couple of tough documents, befitting a tough town. Boston’s not fooling around or mincing words. Alone among the 100 city emergency plans I’ve studied, Boston notes that it only has food on hand for 3-5 days and many facilities are located in a flood zone. So a severe winter storm or torrential rain could cause widespread hunger.

Everybody talks about the weather, but no one does anything about it.

But it turns out that Boston is actually doing something about the weather, and that makes it a leader in urban emergency planning. The Mayor’s recent Task Force on Climate Change shows the way.   

A combination of sea level rising and soil erosion could spell big trouble for cities on water.

What’s the threat? Boston’s excellent emergency plan notes that the weather in Massachusetts may be more like the Carolinas by the end of this century. Since 1991 most of Boston’s emergencies have been caused by flooding.  There’s been a bad winter storm almost every year in Boston and winter precipitation could rise by 16% according to the Mayor’s climate change report.  One hundred year floods could occur every 2 or 3 years by 2050.  

There are already hundreds of deaths per year in the US because of extreme heat and that could get worse as Boston warms up. When the temperature goes up, crime in the streets goes down, but domestic violence goes up. Heat means more danger for the elderly and those with respiratory problems. Heat means more sedentary lifestyle, diabetes and other diseases.

There is an alarming inventory of vulnerable facilities in Boston, including those which will be needed to respond to emergencies — schools, 1500 units of public housing, 430 miles of roads, half the Centers for Youth & Families, one-third of all emergency shelters and more than 900 critical facilities are susceptible to flooding. Many ambulances are parked on streets and thus immobile in a snowstorm. Even the roof leaks in the Emergency Operations Center.     

Flooding is also a major health hazard since it circulates pollutants. Heat brings in new insects and diseases, such as West Nile.  

Somebody in Boston has done world class research, such as noting that the 1929 Newfoundland tsunami which killed 28 people—a fact many Canadians wouldn’t know.

Someone has actually noted the dangers of the weather in outer space. Solar storms could disable 300 large transformers in the US and cut power to 130 million people.  

Here’s where Boston is doing more than talking. A park on “Parcel 5” has been designed to help with drainage and surging tides. Boston’s plan calls for elevating and relocation boilers, electrical panels and computers. There’s also talk of modifying work schedules, spray mists and water stations at outdoor events. It’s not enough to use water pumps to keep roadways open during floods, Boston is talking about using absorbent paving materials.  New types of asphalt will absorb and even filter water so it can go back into the drinking water supply, not into people’s basements.

There’s always more work to be done. More trees and landscaping is a solution to both heat and flooding. About 35% of Bostonians don’t have a private vehicle, 10% are over 65, and 22% have disabilities. How will Boston evacuate neighbourhoods or move people around during an emergency? Where will the food come from?

Boston’s plan proves that simple, innovative solutions can save money and lives.

First Order of Political Business

Citizens who are hard at work, raising children, going to school and raising social capital might assume that there’s a good division of labour in the community.  They’d be right to assume that the first duty of politicians is to keep citizens safe and thus political leaders have lead the police, fire, EMS, and other first responders to make effective emergency plans.

 

But this isn’t always the case.

 

Many world cities are in danger from their own emergency plans which sometimes feature pages of jargon, acronyms, missing appendices, irrelevant lists of contributors, and wishful thinking.

 

Researchers in the field call them “fantasy plans,” relying on public transit, private cars, and even expertise and help that often doesn’t really exist. Up to 56% of urbanites don’t have cars, and often the remedies listed in crisis plans turn out not to exist. In fact, some evacuation orders have killed more people than the emergency did.

 

Where does Auckland, New Zealand fit in? Auckland’s Emergency Management Group Plan 2010-2015 is a wake up call for the rest of the world. In a study that I conducted of 100 urban emergency plans from the top English-speaking cities in the world, none face up to lack of preparedness the way Auckland does. Auckland’s plan notes that only about 7% of its residents are prepared for an emergency. This means go bags, first aid kits, stiffening up homes for high winds, preparing for floods and so forth. For a city built in a volcanic field, this may seem alarmingly low, but it’s the truth.  Some Ontario response officials claim that 50% of the population is prepared, and I don’t believe it.

 

Knowing the impact of a disaster can be a good first step to preparing for it. So Auckland’s plan also notes the economic consequences of disasters. The estimate is that a severe natural event such as a volcano could have a catastrophic economic impact. Page 8 of the plan notes that there could be a reduction in GDP of 47% in the city of Auckland and 14% nationally. This is double the impact of the Great Depression.

 

Compare this to San Francisco’s plan, for instance, and you’ll see what an improvement Auckland’s plan is. San Francisco’s Hazard Mitigation Plan includes a section on “seismic hazards.” Surprisingly this is mostly about distinguishing among earthquakes, landslides, and tsunamis. A brief history of those events on San Francisco follows. But I could find no procedures describing specifically what to do in the event of those emergencies, nor any assessment of the effect that they might have.

 

Why don’t cities in California note the potential negative impact of an earthquake? How about American cities in Tornado Alley? What about the impact of climate change on cities everywhere?

No plan will ever be able to foresee every form disaster can take. Auckland’s plan rightly notes that “it is not possible to completely remove risk.” It’s important to be flexible and realistic.  Too few cities use pictures to show the risk the way Auckland does, and I don’t recall one that speaks of the “emotional, social, economic and physical well being of individuals and communities.”  There might be one other city that notes the danger from solar winds.  The right kind of storm can knock out power to 131 million Americans, but I don’t see Americans particularly worried about this.

There’s always room for improvement in evacuation, shelter in place, emergency kits, and so on.  But Auckland is on a better track than the vast majority of plans I’ve seen.

For Safety’s Sake…Think Again

We often assume the police, fire, EMS, mayor, and other first responders are fulfilling their duties to keep us safe.

 

But according to my studies of plans from the top 100 English-speaking cities in the world, this isn’t always the case.

 

Many of our cities are in danger from their own emergency plans which sometimes feature pages of jargon, acronyms, missing appendices, irrelevant lists of contributors, and wishful thinking.

 

Researchers in the field call them “fantasy plans,” relying on public transit, private cars, and even expertise and help that often doesn’t really exist.  Up to 56% of urbanites don’t have cars, and often the remedies listed in crisis plans turn out not to exist. In fact, some evacuation orders have killed more people than the emergency did.  Contra-flow for evacuations, with all roads leading out, has been called potentially life-threatening by researchers.  

 

Where does San Francisco fit in?

 

San Francisco has two main emergency plans: the All-Hazards Strategic Plan and the Hazard Mitigation Plan

 

The biggest strength of San Francisco’s All-Hazards Strategic Plan is the emphases on a comprehensive training program for city workers, the use of volunteers, and social media.

 

But the All-Hazards plan was last updated six years before I studied it, and the plan has not followed the maintenance schedule set for it. Moreover, when I studied it, I found myself wondering whether anyone is really safer as a result of reading San Francisco’s statements describing how the plan was developed or what the visions, missions, and guiding principles of it are. It’s hard to see how these help anyone prepare for an emergency, but they take up about a quarter of the plan.

 

The Hazard Mitigation Plan is different. It’s newer that the All-Hazards plan. But it has some of the same problems.

 

The Hazard Mitigation Plan is full of very general statements and is often overly preoccupied with semantics definitions. The section on “seismic hazards,” for example is mostly about distinguishing earthquakes from landslides and tsunamis. A brief history of the effect of those events on San Francisco follows. But I could find no procedures describing specifically what to do in the even of those emergencies.  How does it help  victims to be absolutely sure they are being swept away by a landslide versus a tsunami or earthquake?

 

It looks as though San Francisco’s plans were not intended for the general public. They offer hardly any information on individualized, micro-level measures that citizens can take to prepare themselves to deal with emergencies.

 

No city’s crisis plan is perfect. But a good plan can mean the difference between a well-handled crisis and disaster which can cost lives.

 

Some other cities’ emergency plans do have something serious to say — Boston’s climate change study, Kansas City’s dealing with pets, for whom residents will risk their lives, and Richmond, B.C.’s links to great information on personal preparedness. These are just some of the elements that stand out and which could be duplicated by other cities.

 

If San Francisco or any other city lacks the money or time to write a better plan, the best advice from publicly available plans could be cut and paste it into a better document than is on most websites in North America.

 

Some of the plans, including San Francisco’s may have been updated in the months since I read them. No plan will ever be able to foresee every form disaster can take, so it’s important to be flexible and learn from the experiences of other cities.  But the main focus should be on useful, clear information for the average citizen.  

The City of the Future

 

I’ve always thought of Seattle as a symbol of modernity.  Growing up in Vancouver, I viewed the Space Needle as an example of American prosperity and progress.  It reached toward outer space while the monorail sleeked along the ground toward the future.  I now live in Toronto, but visit Seattle when I can, to keep in touch with the future. 

  

The world almost missed getting these two lasting symbols from the 1962 World’s Fair.  The Fair was originally going to be called The Festival of the West, as hard as it is to mix cowboys and technology—Broncos and Boeing.  More futuristic heads prevailed and the fair became known as the Century 21 Exposition with the motto “Living in the Space Age.”  The Fair turned a profit and left a legacy of civic amenities and revitalization. 

 

Edward E. Carlson, one of the great civic boosters of any time and any city, extracted a victory within a victory.  He famously drew the Space Needle on a napkin, obtained funding for the project, started it a little late, but finished on time.  The Space Needle retired it’s debt in 18 months.  It now has a new pod for more weddings and parties.

 

My book Safer Cities of the Future is a study of better urban experiences through better design.  I began the book with a picture of the Space Needle and the Seattle skyline.  I recounted the story of Mr Carlson and the world’s fair as an example that we get things right occasionally.

 

It’s a lifetime later and Mr. Carlson and Seattle should be remembered for success and foresight.  But now we have new challenges — terrorism, a sluggish economy, severe weather events and little faith in space, the future, or in anything.  This is where Seattle can lead the world again.

 

Seattle’s All Hazards Mitigation plan is one of the best I’ve studied. It offers a very realistic view of the risk of floods, earthquakes, and terrorism. The plan notes, for example, that 32.75% of Seattle’s housing stock was built before 1939, an astonishingly high percentage considering that the seismic building code dates from 1992. If there were a serious earthquake, the damage could be enormous and could come at a very high cost. Seattle’s plan notes that property damage claims against the city have totalled as much as $12 million since 2006. In the event of a serious storm or earthquake the cost would be exponentially higher.

 

Seattle’s plan also includes a detailed summary of activities to mitigate the impact of earthquakes. These include upgrades to buildings to correct structural deficiencies, disaster recovery needs for all IT systems, and replacement of older underground cables. And the plan notes that city departments, the police, and public utilities have all received briefings and training in order to prepare them for seismic events.

 

These are all steps in the right direction. But Seattle’s plan could be improved by including specific instructions for residents on what to do or where to go in the event of earthquakes, floods, or other disasters; what to take with them; and even how to ensure the safety of their pets.

 

Don’t get me wrong: no plan is perfect, and there are some very good plans out there that Seattle could borrow from. Auckland, New Zealand, for instance is the only plan I’ve seen that precisely quantifies the economic cost of a volcanic eruption. Kansas City has a unique plan for rescuing citizens’ pets. And Boston’s plan for dealing with climate change is an excellent example for all other coastal cities.
Most plans leave much to be desired.  But Seattle’s is a template for progress.  

Flight Out of Danger

It’s hard to warn people to stay clear of dangerous situations. Motorists will remove road barriers and drive right into danger. They’ll even use logging roads to get around road closures. Vague direction to “be aware” or “take shelter” may be misunderstood or ignored by many.

 

For the most part, urban emergency plans are dominated by vague jargon and buzzwords. Aspirational statements about emergencies abound, but few plans offer real solutions to crisis situations, or even realistic language.


But thankfully, Jacksonville/Duval County has taken a few steps in the right direction when it comes to public safety. Instead of vague directions to stay safe, Jacksonville provides vivid descriptions of the danger. A hurricane is described as “…a bulldozer clearing everything in its path…” Flying debris in a windstorm is called “…a battering ram destroying objects in its way…”

 

This sort of language is a wake up call for people who have not lived through a serious storm and just think of high winds or a big wave of water as good fun.


I might need similar creativity to help Floridians understand the danger in a Canadian snow storm. I wouldn’t want people thinking of big fluffy flakes of snow, as in a Disney cartoon. I’d want them to think about thousands of pins and needles hitting their faces, flesh freezing in minutes, and air so cold it’s hard to breathe.


There’s another reality check in Jacksonville. The plan notes that “temperature-related deaths in Florida exceed those caused by hurricanes and tornadoes combined.” For all those who go to Florida for the warm weather, this is a useful alert.


Most of the 100 urban emergency plans that I studied don’t have Jacksonville’s creative and effective way of describing a threat.

 

Some use Quantitative Risk Analysis (QRA) with complex formulae 
and decimal points. These are lost on most people, including me, and I’ve been trained in QRA. Others have the useful direction to make sure your drinking water isn’t poison after a flood, but no indication of how to do this. Jacksonville is a leader in plain speaking and simple warnings.


It’s also smart to use the 50th anniversary of Hurricane Dora to remind people of the danger and pictures to tell the story, including vividly showing a storm surge.


No plan is perfect. There’s work to be done on Jacksonville’s plan too. The public doesn’t need or understand the pages of legal authorities, information on appeals to FEMA, 18 pages of civic boosterism, and less than fascinating acts. Is the public any safer reading that “…the PW goes to the FCO for approval. If there is a disagreement on the PW, it is returned to the applicant for resolution of the discrepancy. The second review, conducted by FEMA staff, is done before final approval of the FCO. If the PW is approved, it is forwarded to the ECO for approval.”

 

The language here could be simplified, but I wonder if that information is really necessary at all.


Official responders don’t need their own job descriptions in a plan. Nevertheless, the Jacksonville plan includes these. Jacksonville’s plan also includes something that they call the “Planning P”: an informational graphic designed to explain how to assess and respond to a threat. The “Planning P” may be good graphic art, but it’s unique in the emergency response field and not easily understood. Best to stick with plain English.

 

Windshileld surveys (driving around) and flyovers are out of date now that drones have been invented. If wedding photographers can benefit from drones, so can 
emergency responders.

 

The high points in Jacksonville’s plan are a reminder that those dedicated to saving lives can never stop putting better systems in place.  

What we can learn from the Drummonds Mill Fire

bradford

 

Originally posted on my blog July 14th, 2016

As I sat down to write about Bradford’s emergency preparedness plan, I saw on BBC news that a fire had broken out at Drummonds Mill. High levels of carbon monoxide were released into the air. According to the BBC about 100 houses have been evacuated as a precautionary measure, and 100 firefighters were still tackling the fire as I was writing.

 

So a discussion of Bradford’s emergency preparedness plan couldn’t be more timely.

 

In researching my book Safer Cities of the Future, I discovered that many urban emergency plans are inadequate. Many such plans in America, for instance, rely on people self-evacuating in private cars. But up to 56% of urbanites don’t have cars, and often other remedies listed in crisis plans turn out not to exist. In fact, some evacuation orders have killed more people than the emergency did.

 

But Bradford has one of the better plans that I’ve seen so far. In my study of 100 urban emergency plans from the top English-speaking cities in the world, I discovered that Bradford’s plan is one the clearest and most concise.

 

Bradford’s plan is called Don’t Panic: Prepare! It includes useful checklists so that people can determine exactly what they need in an emergency, such as emergency contacts lists, wind-up radios, agreed meeting points, copies of important documents, and contents and building insurance.

 

But Bradford’s plan isn’t perfect.

 

Its section on flooding, for example, is a bit vague when it recommends keeping a “flood kit” ready. What’s a flood kit and what should it include? The plan doesn’t say.

 

Also the Bradford plan’s point about keeping pets safe is a good one, but needs elaboration. It’s not enough just to say that pets should be moved to a safe place.

 

People in urban emergencies will die trying to look after their pets. Disaster victims return to evacuation zones to save their dogs and cats as they would a loved one. Half of all pet-owners say they would consider defying authorities during a disaster to stay with their pets if they were not allowed to evacuate with them. And in America, owning pets is considered to be the major reason why households without children fail to evacuate in time of emergency.

 

This is why a place like Kansas City, Missouri, has an Emergency Pet Services Plan. This includes estimates of how many pets and stray animals there are in Kansas City, what sort of equipment may be needed to look after them, which local organizations are meant to do what, as well as sample press releases reminding citizens how to take care of their pets in time of emergency. This is definitely a “best practice” which Bradford and other cities could adopt.

 

Other elements of Bradford’s plan could be improved with more specific language on exactly what to do. It’s not enough to say “put flood protection equipment in place,” for example. Exactly what this consists of must be spelled out.

 

Bradford’s plan covers floods, extreme weather, and industrial disasters. But there is no mention of what to do in the event of fire or carbon monoxide pollution. Luckily, authorities reacted quickly, and no one was seriously harmed this time. The Drummonds Mill disaster and its aftermath should be a wake-up call that emergency planning can and should be improved.

Fredericton disaster plan gets failing grade

hi-allan-bonner

Last year I was interviewed by CBC Fredericton on their surprising lack of emergency planning. The province’s three major cities need to make major improvements in their emergency plans. This is crucial stuff

Allan Bonner, a crisis management consultant, says the province’s three major cities need to make major improvements in their emergency plans. (CBC)
An expert in disaster management gives Fredericton a failing grade when it comes to emergency response plans, and he says Moncton and Saint John aren’t much better.
He says Fredericton’s emergency preparedness website has links to federal and provincial sites, but lacks specifics.
“It’s a failing grade,” said Bonner.
He says he expected more guidance, especially about evacuation plans in the event of a disaster.
For example, “In other cities they have the number of buses, the number of bus drivers, the capacity of the public transit system,” said Bonner.
Fredericton city councillor Bruce Grandy said via email that, speaking for himself, the city could do more.
“I know we have some plans at the city and we connect to the plans the province has, but it never hurts for the city to have a more comprehensive look at the gaps and other areas.”
Moncton, Saint John get a passing grade
Bonner says he would give Moncton a C-plus for personal preparedness. He says the city’s emergency preparedness site includes useful information, such as what to pack in a “Go-bag” in case of the need for a swift evacuation.
However, he points out that Moncton’s municipal emergencies measures plan includes only an executive summary. He said the larger plan should be made public.
“I’d like to see more concrete direction to people in Moncton on where to go, what to do,” said Bonner.
Isabelle LeBlanc, a spokesperson for the City of Moncton, says portions of the plan are not made public for security reasons.
Bonner gave the Saint John emergency management website a grade of C, saying it includes no mention of Point Lepreau. the oil refinery, or climate change.

“I used to live in Saint John and I was expecting some reference to the Point Lepreau nuclear plant,” he said, pointing out that other jurisdictions with nuclear power plants have elaborate evacuation plans.
In fact, the province has a comprehensive EMO website that includes information on nuclear safety and in November completed Operation Intrepid, a nuclear emergency preparedness exercise.
Bonner says that kind of information needs to be on the Saint John city website in detail.
CBC News reached out to the City of Saint John for comment, but has not received a response.

 

Originally posted here: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/emergency-planning-moncton-fredericton-1.3388651

Today in History: April 11th

1988: A gas tanker overturns in Walton, England, and spills 6,000 gallons of fuel. Houses are evacuated, and an explosion occurs in a pub cellar, however no lives are lost. The event is an illustration of the complications that can arise from lack of coordination among different sets of responders.

1914: Robert “Honest Bob” Stanfield, Nova Scotian Premier and leader of Canada’s federal Progressive Conservatives, is born.

1713: The Treaty of Utrecht is signed, ending the War of the Spanish Succession. France recognizes British title to Hudson Bay, cedes Acadia and Newfoundland to Britain, but keeps fishing rights. The French settlers relocate to Cape Breton Island, where the fortress of Louisbourg is built to protect the French fisheries and the sea lanes to Québec.

Political Columns – Honest Bob Stanfield

An Ounce of Prevention – Gas Tanker Overturning

Today in History: February 8th

2005: Edmonton police chief Fred Rayner is fired after news of a police sting targeting a journalist and the chair of the city’s police board comes to light.

1993: General Motors sues NBC after “Dateline NBC” allegedly rigs two crashes intended to demonstrate that some GM pickups can easily catch fire if hit in certain places. NBC settles the lawsuit the next day.

1986: A passenger train and a freight train crash near Hinton, Alberta, killing 29 people and injuring 93, making it the deadliest train accident in Canada since 1947. The resulting investigations revealed serious flaws in CN’s employee practices.

An Ounce of Prevention: Appendix 1 – Learning From Past Disasters