• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

May 2025: "Ottawa looks to off-load costly, seldom-used mobile hospitals bought for the pandemic"

The Bread Guy

The Bread Guy

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
5,870
Points
1,260
Just spotted this:
www.thecanadianpressnews.ca

Ottawa looks to off-load costly, seldom-used mobile hospitals bought for the pandemic

OTTAWA - The federal government expects to spend about $7 million this fiscal year to store and maintain four custom-made, portable hospitals that cost taxpayers more than $200 million to
www.thecanadianpressnews.ca www.thecanadianpressnews.ca
Also archived here.

Love to hear from medical folks around these parts if it makes more sense to hang onto these things, or to shuffle them off? How much did they get used in the COVID times?
 
Such is the dilemma attached to preparedness. There always exists the possibility that you never use the resources laid up in case of catastrophe. Personally, I would like to see if a single, smaller unit could be constructed from the current holdings that is much less expensive to maintain, and could still be deployed on an as needed basis.
 
The Bread Guy said:
Also archived here.

Love to hear from medical folks around these parts if it makes more sense to hang onto these things, or to shuffle them off? How much did they get used in the COVID times?
Click to expand...

Not much according to the article. But in my experience (none of it from the time of Covid), that sounds about what I would have expected.

The two units dispatched in Ontario were temporarily deployed at Sunnybrook Health Sciences in Toronto and at Hamilton Health Sciences.

Neither one was actually used to deal with critical hospital overflow, federal documents said, although the one at Sunnybrook took in 32 "low-risk" patients, according to a 2021 media report.

Other provinces weren't interested in requesting them because — according to Duclos' 2024 memo — the “size (capacity) and design of the units made deployment and takedown complex and too long,” and provinces were short of health-care workers who could operate them.
Click to expand...

A major consideration in operating "contingency" medical facilities will always be availability of qualified personnel.
 
daftandbarmy said:
Send them all the the B.C. coast for after the ‘big one’ hits …
Click to expand...
dapaterson said:
Send them all to Edmonton so they're not lost when the big one hits.
Click to expand...

Just so there is a climate controlled BFPL* wherever they are placed.

The four units take up 588 tractor trailers worth of space and need constant access to electricity to refrigerate medicine. Fully deploying one can take about seven weeks. One of the units takes 75 transport trucks to move — almost as many as pop star Taylor Swift’s “Eras” tour.
Click to expand...


* Big F---ing Parking Lot
 
It's cynics like me cantankerous bastards like me who should be the line of defense against such stupid business practices. I hark back to the late 1980s (when I was at NDHQ) and there were a plethora of projects being put on the books in anticipation of the money tap opening up following the defence white paper. Some of those were viewed to Europe - ALMS (ACE Logistics and Medical Support), oft referred to as "alms for the poor" but there were also a number of dreams to modernize in Canada facilities or to acquire contingency capabilities in the event that the Cold War turned hot in the remaining years months before the wall came down. Most of these projects died on the vine, but before that, there were a few (usually relatively low value, but also ill-defined at the time) that landed on my desk when "money suddenly came available" because of delays in projects that had, had higher priority and already approved funding.

One of these was a project to acquire the equipment necessary for expansion of existing Canadian Forces Hospitals in the event of war. My director (who measured the importance of the directorate's workload by the number of capital projects that were still on the books as "current") was adamant that I complete the staffing to get this project to completion. It wasn't a big dollar figure, however upon study, I identified a number of weaknesses that suggested it not go forward. Some had to do with timelines for mobilization (I don't know if that's still classified 40 years later) but like the acquisition of the mobile hospitals in the OP story it raised the question - once you bought the stuff, what do you do with it if not using it on a day to day basis. It didn't take long to find out that there wasn't storage space in existing DND warehousing to hold this equipment, or that like most equipment, it deteriorates if not actively maintained and eventually becomes outmoded/obsolete before being needed. My rough calculation was that the cost to warehouse/maintain/replace would exceed the original acquisition cost in 4.5 years (doubling the project stated value). After I liaised with industry and ascertained that should "mobilization" become necessary, that the equipment could be acquired within months then I recommended that the project be scrapped. When I applied similar calculations to a couple of the other projects on the directorate's books, the Colonel wasn't happy.
 
When Arnold Schwarzenegger was Governor of California one project he invested in were two portable hospitals for use in case of a disaster.
Not long after he left office they were sold off as surplus.
And with a fair bit of fanfare of the current administration saving Tax payers money . Not long after COVID hit and then there were the Wild fires etc . And suddenly they found themselves with a shortage of hospital facilities.
My take on this capabilities like this are insurance policies and as expensive as they might be it's far more expensive to not have them.
Oh , and I've never met a government yet that didn't suffer from collective short and long term memory issues.
 
GK .Dundas said:
. . . a shortage of hospital facilities.
Click to expand...

I refer to my previously made comment.

A major consideration in operating "contingency" medical facilities will always be availability of qualified personnel.
Click to expand...

A building full of beds and the myriad other items necessary to care for patients does not necessarily make a functioning hospital.
 
Blackadder1916 said:
I refer to my previously made comment.



A building full of beds and the myriad other items necessary to care for patients does not necessarily make a functioning hospital.
Click to expand...
You'd be amazed at how people you'd get to volunteer in case of an emergency. You'd have to have it done way in advance but I suspect that if handled properly you could manage it.
 
Sell off/donate 2 of them? As for the other two, keep one in the east and one in the west. Superbugs and other nasty viruses (H5N9 most notably) are becoming more an more common, better safe than caught with our pants down again.
 
Since reference was made to "Arnold" and the California mobile hospitals that were surplused off.

www.latimes.com

California once had mobile hospitals and a ventilator stockpile. But it dismantled them

The state's supply of mobile hospitals, ventilators and N95 respirators would have helped in the coronavirus outbreak, but the state got rid of them years ago.
www.latimes.com www.latimes.com
They were ready to roll whenever disaster struck California: three 200-bed mobile hospitals that could be deployed to the scene of a crisis on flatbed trucks and provide advanced medical care to the injured and sick within 72 hours.

Each hospital would be the size of a football field, with a surgery ward, intensive care unit and X-ray equipment. . . .
Click to expand...

While this equipment (I am loathe to call a kit a hospital until it has at least a skeleton staff to go with it) was disposed off when money was tight, the State of California did at least give thought to requirements for expanding capacity in an emergency.

California Department of Public Health Standards and Guidelines for Healthcare Surge During Emergencies
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/sites/default/files/php/258/258_hospitals.pdf (vol1 Hospitals)
https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/sites/default/files/php/258/258_hospitalinstructorguide.pdf (hospital training guide)
https://calhospital.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/258_referencemanual.pdf (Reference manual)

and a design guide for hospital planning
 
HavokFour said:
Sell off/donate 2 of them? As for the other two, keep one in the east and one in the west. Superbugs and other nasty viruses are becoming more an more common, better safe than caught with our pants down again.
Click to expand...

But still the questions remains. Which government/non-government department/agency will maintain it (Public Services and Procurement Canada still "owns" them, but they're not in the business of providing disaster or health services), and who pays for the upkeep (i.e., additional budget and person years)? And then who will operate them if they are ever needed (training and exercising)?
 
I would think Public Safety / Public Health with a little crossover from DND ?
Come to think of it, who is responsible for civil defence these days anyway ?
 
GK .Dundas said:
I would think Public Safety / Public Health with a little crossover from DND ?
Come to think of it, who is responsible for civil defence these days anyway ?
Click to expand...

So two locations - two permanent, full-time maintenance teams of approx 25 pers each; 6 medical, 6 supply, 13 RCEME/BMERT (or civilian equiv); for each kit a surge group of thirty additional pers for two weeks in advance of any set-up for training or exercise and operational staffing between 150 and 350.

Edited to add
Those numbers don't include pers required for transport of the kit, security at site or accommodation/feeding of pers (does include requirements for accom/feeding of patients)
 
Last edited:
It seems the terms "mobile" or 'portable' had a broad interpretation by the government and SNC at the time; these two kits strike me as particularly neither.

I'm all for having emergency or contingency kit, facilities and supplies 'in a drawer', but it seems absolutely nobody else wants them. Maybe break them up into smaller, more useful pieces.

No doubt we will unload them for pennies on the dollar than scramble when the next crisis hits.
 
  • Sad
Reactions: ueo
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kirkhill
    • Insightful
Optimism
Replies
2
Views
9K
Kirkhill
Kirkhill
Back
Top