Dear Editor,
Recent events have caused me to rethink a decision that I made: not to comment publicly on matters pertaining to the Guyana Fire Service (GFS).
I came to this position after a careful survey of both the external and internal dynamics affecting the Department. Coming out of this survey, I thought it was the wise thing to keep my comments private, since it would be construed by the public that I was defending the GFS; and, on the other hand, the members of the department would construe that I was being too critical.
Clearly, from the above, it is my belief that the Department had its ups and downs in the recent past, which I dare say is not a surprise. Any trained, experienced, and honest firefighter would admit to this, since it’s not unusual; it’s the nature of the job.
No two fire scenes are the same. The fluidity prevailing under these conditions demands optimum levels of conduct and performance from firefighters, machinery, and equipment. Anything less would result in the ire of the public being unleashed, and rightly so.
This has now brought me to my change of mind and the reasons for commenting on issues pertaining to the Guyana Fire Service. On the matter of Fire Tenders’ arrival at fires without water in the tank, it has been brought to my attention that there exists a letter threatening dismissal if this happens.
The Standard Operational Procedures (SOP) of the GFS instructs that water tanks on Fire Tenders (including those not working) must at all times be filled. All drivers and crews, whenever taking over or handing over such a vehicle, must ensure the tank is filled with water. Failure to do so has always been met with strong disciplinary actions, inclusive of dismissal.
However, there is always an unguarded or unexpected situation. The GFS, in its humanitarian role, supplies water to various entities during periods of water shortage. If after doing so, and before the tank is refilled with water, there is the need to respond to a fire, the crew would be forced to seek open water supply from nearby trenches on arrival at the scene of the fire.
Further, whenever arriving at a large fire, even if the tank is filled with water, it would be downright incompetent to go into action using the tank supply, knowing it is inadequate. Seeking open water sources is the SOP in such a situation. This has been explained repeatedly by the GFS, but sections of the public refuse to accept it.
In regard to the letter threatening dismissal, I hope these factors are taken into consideration.
Now for some remarks in response to recent fires which attracted adverse comments from both members of the public and the media. My aim is not to debunk or challenge any of those comments, because, in all honesty, some may have merit. My purpose here is to bring more clarity to some of the issues and challenges faced by the GFS.
Having served 38 years as a firefighter, let me say that firefighting is a highly unique skill: danger, stress, tension, and both mental and physical fatigue all combine with other occupational hazards to confront a firefighter when on a fire ground. Please note that I have ignored the public and the pressure they bring with their presence.
To adequately cope under these conditions, a firefighter requires a large degree of CONFIDENCE. This is a fundamental tool for him/her at a fire scene. Unfortunately, it doesn’t come easy. Confidence in a firefighter comes through optimum training, the possession of adequate equipment, and competent leadership on the fire ground. As a former head of this noble organization, I have maintained contact at all levels, and the feedback has caused me to believe that these are not at the required levels.
Kudos to the GFS for its expansion with new stations around the country. However, what about the capacity to deal with this challenge? It’s embarrassing to hear that there were no pickaxes and sledgehammers on a first-out fire truck. The quartermaster’s stores ought to be adequately stocked. These items can be acquired locally.
Further, fire trucks and equipment should be standardized, making it easier for personnel effectiveness upon transfer to other locations.
I recall that while coming through the ranks, the GFS’s competence level was second to none in the Caribbean. There was a structured training programme catering to all levels. It included both local and overseas training. The UK, Canada, the US, and later Japan, were where these training institutions existed (1st World).
The then upper management of the Department was exposed to the highest levels of technical and leadership skills, resulting in a qualitative Incident Command System at local fire scenes. From recent reports, this seems to no longer be the norm. My sources have indicated that in many cases there is no central command at major fires.
Instructions/orders come from different quarters, including those with no firefighting experience, which only complicates and worsens the situation.
I would recommend that GFS revisit the training of young officers overseas, especially in the UK, because of the historical connections. Fire Engineering is a fluid science. The Department needs to keep abreast for it to maintain its professionalism in this field.
Budget for at least two officers being trained each year. This will help tremendously in closing the existing gap.
Finally, activate the structural training assets at Leonora. Conduct live (fire) training employing the use of breathing apparatus sets and other firefighting equipment regularly. Involve all, especially those firefighters in remote locations. Exposure to this training would improve their confidence level, which is clearly lacking, and consequently also benefit the organization.
Thank you.
Lawrence O David,
DSM.
Chief Fire Officer
(retired)
