"I am moved and overwhelmed by this catastrophe, which is making me relive the tragedy of Lac-Megantic. These are extremely painful times and I want to underline my sympathy for all the victims and their families. All of Quebec is in mourning."
"It's a complex problem. [Which] facilities should be covered? How can regulations be implemented? How do we finance that and support the facilities financially?"
Quebec Health Minister Rejean Hebert, L'Isle-Verte, Quebec

"We have been talking about sprinklers for years. We are quite exasperated by the situation... We have been asking (for sprinkler laws) for years, but our thinkers, our deciders, they go and find things that delay us. Even if you can use a fork and feed yourself, doesn't mean you can jump out of your bed if there's a fire at night."
Daniel Perron, president, Quebec Fire Chiefs Association

Canadian firefighters douse the burnt remains of a retirement home in L'Isle-Verte on January 23, 2014 (AFP/File, Remi Senechal)

 

Quebec classifies the elderly in the province as "autonomous" and "semi-autonomous"; 37 elderly, infirm residents of La Residence du Havre where the catastrophic fire occurred last week taking the lives of an estimated 32 people out of 52 living there, were over the age of 85. Some had Alzheimer's, some were blind, many used wheelchairs, walkers and canes, yet the home was cleared for the dual designation of "autonomous and "semi-autonomous" old people.

A designation that meant no fire sprinklers were required by law. The mourning residents of the town have given a huge vote of confidence and appreciation both to the visiting premier and to the owner of the residence, who arrived to share the grief of those who have lost their loved elderly. Evidently the residence owner has never been questioned about his good intentions, despite never having decided on his own initiative to protect his responsibilities with installed fire sprinklers.

Those 'responsibilities' woke up in the wee hours of the morning, just after midnight to the horrifying reality of a blaze engulfing the three-story wood structure that housed them. It housed them, because there was no law to the contrary, without a sprinkler system installed. Though it was entirely feasible there should be one.

There was, however, a sprinkler system installed in a later addition to the residence, where 20 elderly residents were rescued from, or found their own way out with the help of the more robust among them. The residence owner obviously saw no merit in retrofitting the larger, original structure with equal protective measures in view of the fact that the law did not require him to. Such business owners are always happy enough to escape unneeded expenses.

As for Minister Hebert, who is a doctor, last February he was quoted of the opinion that the lack of sprinklers represented an urgent problem. "Do we have to wait for a tragedy to hit before we establish clear rules?" he questioned the National Assembly. A year later, the tragedy occurred, and he was toeing the party line, paraphrasing Premier Pauline Marois, commiserating with the mourners: "If only we were able to stop this from ever happening again, this type of thing."

Fire sprinklers have been in use well over a century. In fact, those that were in use a century ago were so efficient not much has been changed since then in their design. The U.S. National Fire Protection Association has no record of any fire killing more than two people where any public assembly, educational, institutional or residential building has sprinklers installed. They work.

Fire chiefs in Canada have been calling for laws to have sprinklers installed in all such buildings for decades. On a list of deadliest fires in "foreign facilities for older adults" dating to 2004, the NFPA ranks Canada among the worst since 1950 for lethal fires.