open

Ontario Pool Regulations Consultation Webinar

I'm good morning and thank you for

joining us today on the Ontario

modernization of safe food and water

regulation under the health and

promotion Act webinar your feedback is

really important to us and like jennifer

has indicated if you have questions

please enter them into the chat and

we'll work on answering those as we go

through the process this is the first

opportunity of three of a minimum of

three that you'll have to input into the

changes that are going on as we walk

through this we're going to walk through

each section and after each section

there's an opportunity to ask questions

and then we'll be an opportunity to

participate in the pole where the

responses will be yes no or no vote and

a section for you to answer any question

or any comments name okay so we're going

to get started so thank you very much

and lat yesterday I forgot an occasion

to click the slides on my apologies we

won't try that again so the introduction

the Ministry of Health and long-term

care is undertaking a comprehensive

review to inform the modernization of

regulations made under the health

protection and promotion Act that

governed food and water safety and

Ontario so that's from the Ministry of

Health so the next few slides are going

to take you through or what the ministry

has of Health has defined and is working

on this review and consultation is phase

one prior to releasing the new

regulations for public consultation so

the Ministry of Health and long-term

care has identified their overarching

goal is to modernize Ontario's safe food

and water regulations by undertaking a

comprehensive review focused on

strengthening the overall effectiveness

and efficiency of environmental health

practices so that was directly from the

Ministry of Health documentation that

they provided to us they've identified

some guiding principles and there on

your screen now flexible and responsive

evidence-based and supporting innovation

ensuring ensure public health benefit is

the overarching consideration

streamlined concise and user-friendly

comprehensive regulations with clear

expectations and optimal use of obtunded

of approaches in addition the Ministry

of Health and long-term care has

identified some key questions that are

dividing their review and now they're on

your screen as well Arthur redundant

requirements that serve no additional

benefit is one of the pieces that they

want to identify and fix our current

science and technological advancements

reflected in the regulatory requirements

and if not should they be considered and

then where are the gaps and what

regulatory provisions and policy tools

are needed to address that identified

gaps and again the second the next piece

of this and their guiding questions is

what clarification is necessary to avoid

and address inconsistencies in the

application across the province are

there alternative approaches that may be

better suited and what are the expected

financial or economic impacts of any

proposed changes so if there's any

questions regarding those you can type

them into the chat but that information

was provided to us by the Ministry of

Health and long-term care the next piece

is the process that the that they are

going through this is not art Parks and

Recreation Ontario's process this is the

ministry's process they've identified

three working groups the working groups

are internal working groups to the

Ministry of Health and long-term care

they consist of members from public

health units and the ministry team

itself these are not open to owner

operators and to stakeholders such as

yourself this point in time in addition

there are four stakeholder groups that

the ministry has put together food pool

camps and camps and unorganized

territories and for those of you who are

wondering what camps and unorganized

territories are there logging camps

mining camps etc so probably not

relevant to your day-to-day pool

operations

the working group consoles so Parks and

Recreation Ontario has has been engaged

in the stakeholder working groups on

your behalf but we believe also that

it's important that you are engaged

directly in the process and we're

working to make sure that that happens

the Ministry of Health and long-term

care process is a really short tight

timelines process so when I've got that

on the screen right now the working

group consultation and engagement is

from January to June that's the internal

groups the stakeholder group

consultation so the four groups that

have been identified is from january to

march first so that's why we're running

the webinars this week and we'll be

asking for your surveys back to

SurveyMonkey starting next week is we

need to have all of that feedback

consolidated and back to the ministry by

march first there then going to work on

the inclusion of the feedback and input

from march through may and they've

identified that their timeline to get

information back out to the stakeholder

groups is in May of 2016 then after

they've received a text round of

feedback they'll be posting the proposed

regulations on the regulatory review

board this is where all new regulations

get posted and it's for a period of 45

days typically that those get posted for

input from the field or input regarding

the proposed regulations so there's want

to walk through where you're going to

have feedback opportunities now the

SurveyMonkey that will be coming out

again in May will attempt to as soon as

we have information back from them will

attempt to get that back out and look

for feedback and then again when it's

posted on the regulatory review board

the targeted implementation for the

regulatory changes is 2017 so again a

very tight process

Parks and Recreation is represented by

the following individuals on in this

process and advisory group danbury's law

from Ottawa Darrell mcwilliam who's on

the Parks and Recreation Ontario board

of directors and from the town of

Oakville myself Juanita Bush up I'm on

the pro Board of Directors and from the

City of Brampton and Diane English pro

director of research and policy policy

and communication the to note the other

stakeholder groups were allowed one

player at the table we had three at the

at the meetings at the table that were

invited and we worked hard to make sure

that that was was the case to ensure

that owner-operator participation was in

the forefront of the review but

recognizing again that that isn't enough

and again as the consultation processes

that were going through excuse me so

again just walk through three webinars

for stakeholders that's what's happening

this week we had one yesterday one today

and went on Friday we're gathering

feedback from the worship and

stakeholders through an electronic

survey that will follow these webinars

and then we'll create a submission for

the Ministry of Health and long-term

care based on the survey results for

consideration in the review and will

continue with communication with the

membership and stakeholders throughout

the process today's outcome we're

looking at pool spas wading pools splash

pads and spray pads specifically so

that's the area that we're focusing on

today housework the Ministry of Health

and long-term care provided five areas

and questions within that in those five

areas so the first screen as we walk

through this will be the Ministry of

Health area focus and their question

that they posed to us or the area that

they

did for us and then the second one

proposed pro position and then the

rationale for proposals position after

you get to those three slides and will

be being a poll asking your input and

also an opportunity if you type any

questions too okay we go the first area

with all the direction and no

requirements you're looking the

streamlining and consult or the

creational water regulations and add

notes for the current non-regulated

recreational water so they're looking at

Bulls weighted equals that should say

wading pools at water sprays inside and

water slide receiving game and in the

discussion was looking to regulation 21

regulation probe draft position on this

is joining vision however the

modernization exercise improve the

clarity and consistency of relations

standing apply to any one second and

coordination see beyond the ministry of

health of modern Galatians stand as an

act should be done shuriken sensitive

applicator

catch basins will ask question a mystery

thank you for asking that question I

rationale currently multiple their

location and owner producer must look to

run an aquatic facility and these can be

inconsistent or in conflict within each

other and clarity and consistency will

improve the aquatic operation right now

and where we'd like to focus on things

like inside the building code there's a

requirement for an indoor pool lighting

to be at 200 lux however that's only a

requirement at the time of opening under

the building code and once the building

inspector has left the building then

there's a lot of methodology to check

that and ensure that that's being

maintained so we're asked the ministry

and there was some agreement there's

agreement from them that yes they would

build in how to wrap looking at the

critical items in the building code into

the inspection process but that's the

type of thing that we're talking about

also inconsistencies around first aid

kits exception we'll talk about those a

little bit later okay the posts that if

there's any questions if you could type

in any of your questions and as the

questions are coming in I'd also asked

Jennifer to post the poll there's again

three options on the pole yes no or no

vote you just click on your option it

will automatically show on our results

we're not displaying the results as you

go through but we're tracking that

information and again I'd invite you to

type in any questions so Chris thank you

for your question what did the statement

clarity and consistency be on the

regulations mean so the Ministry of

Health and long-term care only looks at

a certain portion of the regulations

we're talking about consistency and

lining with building code requirements

with fire requirements etc where they're

inconsistent another good example would

be change room doors and in the pub in

the public pool regulations that says

the pool area must be secured when not

supervised in a class a facility however

in the fire regulations you need to

provide to egress a--'s from a change

room and often that second egress is on

to the pool deck and people have been

fined for under the fire code for not

having the second egress open so there

needs to be consistency on how those

pieces are managed hope that answers the

question if it hasn't please let me know

ok I'll give you a dozen longer yes it's

Connie oh honey hi this would not also

look at ASHRAE those types of mm-hmm

lets me ask them to look at everything

that touched the aquatic environment

yeah perfect thank you okay thank you

for the question Connie yeah so in the

in the input for consideration there was

question around phasing in and that the

costing yes they would have to be a

faizon and there's probably going to be

grandfather components inside of it as

well but we don't know the exact answer

from the Ministry on that but yes it did

come up in conversation

okay thank you very much and with your

permission I'll move on to the next one

public disclosure Merrick waterfront

environments is not covered in this one

there's a separate piece that's covered

for waterfront environments under the

camp regulations and that was a big

conversation and Diane and I are having

another conversation regarding that and

how to engage the membership in the camp

regulation component okay issue 2 is

public disclosure public disclosure of

public health inspection results of the

area focus from the Ministry our

position is that Pro supports the public

dissemination of inspection reports as

long as there is consistency in the

application of the standards and our

rationale is open data and public

disclosure will strengthen the industry

however there's a need to ensure that

variations in interpretation of the

standards will be reduced through

consistent language okay so this would

be exploitive the side effects however

you should consider such things as the

green yellow and red disclosures for

food premises ok I'm going to post any

questions if you have any questions

regarding this item please type them

into the chat and it asked Jennifer to

post the pole at this time

for those of you who are posting that

you're interested in the waterfront and

public beaches we're actually the whole

chat is recorded so we will make sure

that any additional information that may

come in gets to you in this and Shelley

I have given that health inspectors are

only human how do we propose an

increasing consistency most of it is an

increase in the consistency in the

language of the regulations is what we

be pushing for in addition we heard from

the Ministry that they're undergoing

some training and changes for the health

and public health inspectors that's a

great step 18 it would that also take a

look at if they're posting green yellow

red let's say it's a band-aid that's

missing is that you know Ryan you could

actually correct that will it take a

look at some of those things that are

really not critical and then not include

the lecture yeah so we that conversation

occurred as well around a third assuring

that there was don't don't close

somebody for a band-aid yeah okay and

then there would we agree that right and

we agree that there's consistency issues

with health inspectors from unit to unit

and from inspector to inspector and that

was brought up in the conversations in

the stakeholder group and the necessity

to have clear communication etc okay

okay so with your permission we'll move

on to the next slide thank you again for

for those of you who are participating

in the polling we really appreciate your

feedback if you're choosing not to

participate in the poll that's fine as

well you will be provided an opportunity

through the SurveyMonkey survey that's

going out after a clarification of

operational processes the ministry

identified that stakeholders have

identified several gaps or requirements

that may conflict with industry best

practices

again our position is coordination and

consistency beyond the Ministry of

Health and long-term care regulation

standards and actions we ensure

consistency of application across

building code TSSA Ministry of Labour

WSIB etc and then our next

recommendation is that a stakeholder

group of experts in the area of pool

physical plant and chemistry should be

convened to gather industry best

practices for inclusion and that there's

a need to ensure flexibility in the

regulations to support advancements in

the field the regulations were written

longer than a lot of you have been alive

and have not changed the the technology

that's in place now was not in place

when the regulations were written and

when asked simple questions like the

value of the of the makeup water volume

there's lack of clarity on where that

came from or the value of that in our

current in our current environment there

is also inconsistency between the

various regulations that leads to

conflict and lack of clarity turnover

rates are different inside of the

building code then they are inside of

the public health regulation and

regulations have failed to keep pace

with industry advancements around

technology and environmental

considerations I'm just reading some of

the questions how do you propose that we

have flexibility and yet consistency and

enforcement I think it goes back to how

is or how is a regulation written that

provides options or the minimum standard

but allows for the advancement of

Technology I hope that answers the

question Shelley and unfortunately we

don't have a really there was a healthy

discussion around it without a clear

answer yet from the Ministry but if

there you have recommendations that

would be valued as well and with your

permission we will you have any

questions regarding this area and i'll

ask jennifer to post the pole

thank you i will add AODA to the reason

as a resource it was a conversation

piece but we'll make sure that that's

tracked as well we are continuing to

who's ensuring that these encouraged

stakeholders are actually be invited to

the table for discussion we've been

think the Ministry of Health and

long-term care might be sick of hearing

from you through email but we're

continuing to follow up with them on our

recommendations

okay and with your permission I'll move

on to the next slide I know a couple of

people are typing so I'll try and follow

up with those ones as well the issue for

that was identified is around operator

training stakeholders have raised the

issue of mandatory training and

recreation water operations for public

pools and spa owner operators well

regulation 428 which is the small

regulation currently includes some

training requirements for spa operators

there's no provincially standardized

training resources for the operation of

public spas and pools our position in

this area would pro supports the

implementation of a safe pool water

operational training standards and that

this needs to be responsibilities driven

the not all people who are in

supervisory capacity or running aquatic

facilities are doing the same functions

there needs to be greater clarification

or definition on the roles and

responsibilities within the pool and spa

operation so when the Ministry talks

about an operator that this who operates

the entire facility in most municipal

operations at least an operator refers

to those who take care of physical plant

and chemistry then the supervisors

management owners etc so our request is

that the ministry look at defining the

rules so that there's clarity around the

role and then look at what are the

required training standards that need to

be implemented based on each of those

roles so responsibility to them

Brian friend in the last question as to

who would the industry leaders be in

physical plant there were some players

at the table around pool pool and spa

Canada etc that we're at the table Oh

RFA is at the table and those people we

assume would be invited and also looking

at other industry experts but they have

not been identified yet Laura would this

remove lifeguards from doing some

operational duties in small operations I

think that's impossible to do but again

that clarification of roles and

responsibilities under the regulation

and then what training needs to be

provided at each of those levels to

ensure safe operation our rationale is

is lack of clarity around the rules

again and there's no consistently

defined standard that be can be applied

to support the delivery of aquatic

programming in physical plant chemistry

requirements aiding yes that we're

really referring to training and

certification it's a combination of both

that if you can't track it it's really

hard to say that it's been done okay I

would invite you to type any questions

at this time and then Jennifer to post

the poll

and again I think those who are

participating in the polling it is

really helpful for us

I know that some people are typing

Jennifer ddc Shelley's question Shelley

if if we can't do it in this section

definitely in the survey monkey that's

going out those will be separated so

that you can make statements on both if

that's okay

yes for all of the questions will do

that okay I'm going to move on to the

next slide and thank you again for

participating in the pool the next area

there is issued labeled as 55 is broken

into several categories so we'll start

with 5a which is emergency telephones

and the Ministry of Health and long-term

care is looking at emergency telephones

in aquatic environments our position is

there's need for clarification and

consistency between the regulations

regarding the application of emergency

telephones and there's a need to include

provision of cell phones and other

related technology as backup within the

regulations an example of what we're

talking about here is that you need in

the spa regulation you need a phone

within a certain distance pocket or

puppets time and needs to be placed in

the middle of your main tank based on a

strict interpretation of the regulations

that doesn't make sense so we're asking

that the ministry look at this and say

that there's clarity around that and

also because the regulations were

written so long ago the lack of clarity

regarding the cell phone use technology

is there's nothing written into there so

we're looking at using it for backups

where applicable and ensuring there's

consistency across the regulation and

what to do when you hold a facility that

has multiple components and we believe

that part of that will be covered off

when they roll the regulation into one

if there's any questions we can invite

you to type your questions now and for

Jennifer to post the pool

Lisa asks a question in consideration

for having a phone directly connected to

EMS or nodding as that was part of the

conversation around the testing of that

item as well obviously that provides it

provides an opportunity to go directly

to the MS system which is good however

we know that in some areas the testing

has been problematic and there needs to

be the clarification wait for people to

answer this question in the pool

and we'll move on to the next one thank

you very much again for inputting the 5b

is aligning of certifications and it's

the definition of a current first aid

certificate differs between on

regulation 565 which is the pool

regulation and 560 requirement pro

supports consistency across the

regulations but we need to ensure that

the public safety the needs of Public

Safety not just worker safety are

identified into addressed and our

rationale is not all standard first aid

certifications our base are the same

based on the wsib module delivery system

and standard first aid in aquatic

environments must ensure that situations

and incidents that commonly occur are

addressed in the training and

certification under the wsib model a

module model a certain number month

birthday ball as a standard first aid

then there's a whole bunch of modules

that are optional models because WSI be

is focused on workplace safety and not

overall community safety that means that

some standard first days do not include

such items is child and infant

resuscitation standards in our aquatic

environment where we recognize that a

large number of users are in that age

category there's a need to ensure that

they're included also so they're not all

created equal we need to ensure that the

needs of our community are identified in

any standard first aid certifications

that are accepted under the regulation

pool regulations

I'd invite any questions at this time on

this topic and for you to join the pool

you

okay and with your permission I'll move

on to the next slide which is first aid

box requirements just wait for the pole

to go down and thank you thank you for

your comments and input on to that last

one first day box requirements

prescriptive approach and no

standardized list of minimum first aid

box requirements across three regulation

so there's great inconsistency across

the regulations about what is included

in a standard first aid box our the pro

draft position is that relevant first

aid equipment should be identified

related to the training standards for

first aid and lifeguarding so I you know

is the need for 12 safety pins required

in the pool regulation and specific

quantities should be replaced with

quantities with the term the wording

such as quantities that support the

specific environment and volume of

participation again the regulations were

written a long time ago and therefore

sometimes don't reflect the changes that

have been made in advancements in in

training and certification things the

rush that inconsistent prosecution and

the content lists are not reflective of

the needs of the acquired environment

and changes to first aid standards and

we were pretty open with them about the

fact that multiple facilities have have

have first aid kits that are taped up

and only opened when the health

inspector shows up in addition there was

a positive conversation around the use

of inclusion of PPE masks and gloves in

first aid kits that currently doesn't

sit inside the regulation

and I would invite you to ask any

questions type any of your questions at

this time and for Jennifer to open the

pole

AED unit Michael asked the question

regarding AED units and aquatic

environments in the new regulation and

yes that was a conversation inside of

the add the stakeholder meetings

America will we didn't address oxygen

but we can bring that up as well okay

and we're on to the next question again

thank you for participating in the

polling and adding your comments it's

very important consistency of

certifications 5d the titles of

certificates listed in the regulation

may have changed and or are there may

only be a parent partial list of current

providers prosupport Sarver draw

position is pro supports a single

lifeguard supervision standard and that

that single lifeguard supervision

standard be the life-saving society

national Lifeguard program a rationale

this issue has been addressed the

question has been asked multiple times

by the Ministry of Health and long-term

care and adjust by stakeholders in

Ontario in 1996 2010 in 2012

consistently stakeholders have supported

a single lifeguard standard and that

that standard be the national lifeguard

license ID national lifeguard standard

pro supported the CPR a position

regarding a single lifeguard standard

for Canada and that that standard be the

National Life Saving Society National

Lifeguard program in a unanimous

decision I just wanted to give a bit of

background because I know that there's a

lot of questions that will come up

around this the standard is not owned by

the life-saving society it is fostered

or supported by the life-saving society

on behalf of a group of organizations

that came together national lifeguard

was formed by a conglomerate or an

advisory group that came together to

build the standard 50 years ago national

lifeguard was not the standard each

municipality owned their own standard at

the request of employers at that time

the they asked that a single standard

being brought together that advisory

group included CPR

ray the Life Saving Society Red Cross

YMCA Canada the Armed Forces etc that

standing advisory group is still in

existence and every time a changes on

advised for the National Lifeguard

program that group comes together and

that group comes together also

approximately every two years to look at

the standard and ensure the standards in

place this standard is not the Life

Saving Society delivers no national

lifeguard programs directly it's open to

all to deliver across Canada it is the

standard is maintained by the Life

Saving Society using using resources

from the life-saving society an

inclusion of all affiliates that run the

program the standard is the standard set

as well as the delivery standard for

content and instructor training and for

tracking and quality assurance but again

the standard is not delivered no courses

are run by the life-saving society they

own the standard and they maintain the

standard so the question yesterday was

around it's a monopoly it's not a

monopoly because individual providers as

a national Lifeguard program actually

set the price timing etc for the program

and all are welcome to excuse me all are

welcome to offer the standard ok I would

invite any questions to be typed in at

this time and at the same time for the

pole to open

my guess there was a discussion

regarding the newer Red Cross

lifeguarding program that came up at the

at the stakeholder groups and why we

believe this is also why we believe it's

important that we pose the question to

our membership ensure that what we've

spoken about in the three previous times

end on the CPR a standard is what our

membership wants in particular what our

owner operators want Shelley the

national lifeguard is is a single

standard you can there's two ways to

manage this question manage this if the

ministry was willing to take over the

management of the standard and the

training standards and delivery

standards that would be one thing we did

not get a sense in the meeting that they

were willing to do that though and to or

have the resources to do that the other

pieces around the when we look at the

model around first aid and could that

model be applied the ministry manages

that model and sets the standard but as

we spoke about in the last time the all

standard first aids are not created

equal and therefore owner-operators need

to make a decision regarding which

standard first aid they are delivering

to ensure the needs of their clientele

are being mad I hope that answers the

question there will be more opportunity

to participate in providing input as we

move into the SurveyMonkey survey as

well okay and we're going to move on to

the next one okay the next area is

around admission standards so the

ministry the Ontario chief coroner has

recommended that regulation 565 our pool

regulation be omitted amended to include

pool Bay their admission standards pro

supports the recommendation of the

Ontario Chief Coroner regarding the

application of a bather admission

standard and it through the conversation

we recognized that the recommended

admission standard is being implemented

in the majority of locations already and

that when the ministry also rug did an

education piece through their public

health offices and going out through the

public inspections and disseminating

that information there was a really

positive pick up on that and we also

believe that the supervision of children

is important and the responsibility of

all that a single standard with

assistant in providing that I would

invite any questions at this time and

for the poll to be posted

marek ask the question whether the

responsible Guardian of 12 years of age

be increased to an older age it's all

open for consideration so I'm not sure

at this time Eric sorry and thank you

again that for the people that are

participating in the pool we appreciate

your input

you

like the implementation of the admission

standard may it probably won't be part

of the standard will be the standard and

leaving it open for four options on how

that's implemented on the admission

standard okay so thank you and I'm we

are reading the chat as it comes in and

keeping track of it and remember that

the chat all of your chat comments will

be recorded and and tracked so we're not

losing those if I haven't gotten to them

so now we open it up so those the end of

the the question areas that the ministry

posed to us I recognize that they're

very high level as this is the first

round of their input gathering as we get

more information and as we sustain the

regulation shape there'll be other

opportunities we hope to allow you to

provide input into it I would invite you

at this time to do if there's any other

questions or considerations on any other

topic to type them type them into the

chat box question let me just colony yep

chemical minimums or maximum would not

come under the first area of focus under

minimum requirements that would be apart

oh that's where we actually stated

Connie that there was a need for a fifth

this stakeholder group to come together

to look at those specific requirements

that the table that was put together by

the ministry did not allow for enough

time or expertise at that table to dive

into that level of review a lot of time

was needed okay more time was needed on

it you've asked in the ministry for that

to happen the whole table the

stakeholder group asked for that to

happen and we have not heard back from

the ministry as to whether or not

they've they're going to do that yet we

hope they are you have definitely okay

mm-hmm

thank you for the comments yes Chris the

has anyone considered looking into the

experience and other provinces were

there's more than one lifeguard program

provider yes the ministry has been

looking at that as well and we're

monitoring that I'm just looking

you

okay again we're tracking the questions

that are coming in in your input that's

coming in okay if fair number of people

typing which is helpful thank you very

much the drank prevention research

center of canada was also in the

stakeholder groups providing input into

drownings in supervised settings and non

supervised settings okay okay so just to

go on to the next steps you'll be

receiving a survey from us outlining the

same questions will be presented in the

survey as we're presented today and with

an opportunity to spend more time

providing comment which would be

extremely helpful we request that one

survey / organization be completed if at

all possible we recognize that times

that coordination may be challenging but

we would prefer that if possible there

is no anonymous survey participation all

users all surveys will need to identify

themselves an email address on the

organization that they're participating

in we believe this is really important

as we provide feedback to the ministry

so that we can acknowledge and provide

information regarding the number of

people that participated that

organizations the size of those

organizations and the population is that

they serve so anonymous feedback will

not be allowed in the survey it is a

very tight timeline for you to complete

the surveys you'll be coming out after

the 12th so recognizing that monday is

family day you'll have from the 16th to

the 9th taste to complete the survey so

we need your feedback this is the first

of the opportunities to participate but

we believe this is the most important

point to purchase

paid and then once the draft regulations

are released we'll be providing sec

another consultation period and

providing you an opportunity participate

Shelley will people who aren't able to

participate in the calls be given an

additional opportunity to provide

feedback yes the survey will be posted

and available are there any other

questions we've got lots of people

typing we'll just wait a few minutes

will people type in their questions

Kristen uniform identification yet will

show up and there wasn't a specific

question from the Ministry again we'll

be looking for what do they write into

the regulation as it comes out into the

draft regulation and then provide the

opportunity in Diane's identified that

all the cert the survey will be

circulated to all pro members and people

who have attended the pro aquatics

conference and the webinar is also being

recorded so anyone who missed it can

listen in okay if you have specific

questions technical questions or

comments please feel free to contact me

at my email address and it's up on the

screen now so we need a dot blush lip at

brampton CA or if you have general

questions regarding the webinar or the

process that we're undertaking you can

also contact died in English and we'll

leave the screen up for a little while

recognizing that my name is not the

easiest spell

and again we'll leave the dopest if you

want to type some additional questions

that would be fabulous the presentation

the whole webinar will be posted start

then that will include the slide deck

okay and not seeing any more questions

coming up and like to thank you for

participating today your input is really

really important if you know colleagues

or people from other organizations that

have not participated in a webinar we

have our last webinar on Friday and it

is from it starts at two o'clock on

Friday afternoon and we would hope that

you encourage them to participate in the

webinar and get this information and

again please watch for the survey as it

comes out and make sure that you're

filling it in providing your input again

we believe this is one of the most

critical points and inputting so that we

can provide meaningful feedback to the

Ministry of Health and long-term care so

thank you very much and we will talk to

you in May again thank you very much

Juanita welcome

you