Examination of Witnesses (Questions 460-479)
20 DECEMBER 2003
RT HON
NICK RAYNSFORD
MP, MR CLIVE
NORRIS AND
SIR GRAHAM
MELDRUM
Q460 Chairman: Are you going to do
the training manuals in the future?
Sir Graham Meldrum: Again, we
are working with the Fire Service College in relation to that,
because we think the Fire Service College has a major role to
play in the production of training manuals for the future, and
we want to bring those two areas together. Coming back to the
point of underpinning the old institutions, it is true to say
on the thematic review work the Fire Service Inspectorate was
driving things forward, but the part you referred to was the gathering
of statistics and data which we were required to do. It goes right
back to 1984 when the Government brought in the change, the effectiveness
and efficiency role which had to be carried out, and that work
was given to the Inspectorate and continued right to the time
of Sir George Bain. So people, and rightly so, would have said,
"They are gathering this out-dated evidence, it is a lot
of work for us to provide the data", but that was the requirement
on the Inspectorate; that was the job.
Q461 Mr Betts: So everybody is in
favour of modernisation and we are all signed up—unions,
management and politicians—the LGA come along to us and
say, "We actually had some quite challenging targets for
fire safety and arson in the 2002 FSA but suddenly they were reduced."
They said that nobody consulted them, it happened out of the blue,
suddenly the Government gave them less challenging targets than
before. Why?
Mr Raynsford: I have discussed
this with this Committee a few months ago and I explained that
the collapse in the scrap metal price occurred after the original
target for the reduction of deliberate fires, and we were confronted
with a huge increase in the number of abandoned vehicles, which
were a target for arson attacks, and the previous target which
had been probably a reasonable target in the circumstances of
the world which existed before the scrap metal market collapsed
was no longer in any way—
Q462 Chairman: Wait a minute, that
is only one of the targets!
Mr Raynsford: I will go on and
talk about the other one as well. My view is that targets have
got to be meaningful. We inherited this, we looked at this one,
we came to the rapid conclusion that it was simply unrealistic,
because of the combination of the changes in the scrap metal market
and the impact of the End of Life Directive. We have therefore
set new targets which require a very challenging reduction in
the number of deliberately set fires in the light of the much
higher level there now is—there has been a huge increase
since the target was originally set—but with a realistic
prospect of achieving it as and when the new End of Life Directive
arrangements come into force from 2007. So it is a realistic target.
Similarly, with the reduction in the number of accidental fires
in the home, we are setting an extremely challenging target which
will require something in the region of a thousand fewer deaths
in accidental fires than would otherwise have been the case. So
it is not in any way an attempt to soften the rigour of the target,
but it is a realistic target in the light of current circumstances
rather than sticking to a target which simply could not be achieved
and would ultimately demoralise people that they were failing
to meet a target rather than pushing very hard to try and reduce
the number of accidental fires and deaths[1]
Between 1998-99 and 2001-02 deliberate fires increased
by 42%. A significant part of the increase relates to deliberate
car fires. To meet the original target there should be no more
than 55,000 deliberate fires by 2008-09, including non-vehicle
fires. Based on the current long-term trend, the number of deliberate
fires would need to be reduced by at least 82,500 from 137,500,
in the three years to 2008-09. This translates into reductions
of 26% per year for three years. If the levers available slow
down the rate of increase to 125,000 deliberate fires by 2006-07,
it would still require a decrease of 70,000 fires in the 3 years
to 2009-10 in order to meet the original target.
Until 2007, the most realistic scenario is to slow
down the rate of increase in deliberate fires and aim for actual
decreases thereafter. Nevertheless the revised target remains
challenging. Evaluation of current available levers gives some
confidence that after 2007 real reductions are achievable. There
are legitimate reasons for changing the baseline: the collapse
in scrap metal prices can be traced to the beginning of 1998,
about the time deliberate car fires began to increase rapidly.
The low price of scrap metal, coupled with greater environmental
costs will, at least until 2007, be a constant source of pressure
on the number of deliberate car fires which is the key component
in the rise in deliberate fires as a whole.
Q463 Mr Betts: Is it not surprising
that that message has not got through to the LGA? Normally people
say that targets are too difficult to achieve, here they are saying
they are too easy.
Mr Raynsford: I think if they
reflected on it—and we have reflected on it and I must say
I thought we had discussed this with the LGA—I think they
would realise the impact of the change in the scrap metal market
and the End of Life Directive makes it quite impossible to achieve
the previous target.
Q464 Chairman: As far as accidental
deaths in the home are concerned, you are saying it will take
an extra seven years to achieve what was the original target.
Why?
Mr Raynsford: The original target
was based on a five year time frame, and we are saying we think
there should be a longer time frame, quite simply because of a
number of factors including demographic change which were not
properly factored in.
Q465 Chairman: Explain to me the
demographic change.
Mr Raynsford: The considerable
growth in the number of the elderly population, who are those
most at risk, and that was not properly taken into account in
the original estimate.
Q466 Chairman: Wait a minute, we
are going to achieve it in 12 years instead of in seven years?
Mr Raynsford: That is right.
Q467 Chairman: Surely we are going
to lose some more lives of elderly people. If it is possible to
do it in the future, surely it should be something we could accelerate
and do quicker?
Mr Raynsford: We are committed
under the new target to reduce the number of fatalities in the
case of accidental fires in the home by a thousand below the level
which would otherwise apply, so this is a very, very challenging
target. We want it to be a realistic target, we do not want targets
to become, frankly, derisory because there is no prospect of meeting
them. We are absolutely committed—it is the whole thrust
of our policy—to reduce the number of lives lost and the
number of injuries, as a result of fire, and that is driving the
whole of our policy not just the setting of targets.
Q468 Mr Betts: Can I ask about the
role of the voluntary sector in the Fire Service? It does seem
they have been rather missed out of the reports and the proposals
for the future. If you go to virtually any other service, whether
it is hospitals, schools, museums, they nearly all have an element
of volunteers, some integrated into the provision of the service
in support of the mainstream service. Is this something which
has been missed out deliberately or just not thought about?
Mr Raynsford: There are two ways
you can look at this. One is to say there are a lot of good initiatives,
particularly schemes like the Young Firefighter Initiative, which
is designed to engage young people in the work of the Fire and
Rescue Service. Those are supported by voluntary organisations
working with the Fire and Rescue Service, and I think they are
successful. They probably can do more and as part of our investment
in community fire safety we want to be exploring ways to engage
with the sections of the community we need to reach if we are
to reduce the risk of fire. So this is an area where there is
scope to do more but I would not take a wholly negative view that
there has not been any provision at all.
Q469 Mr Betts: It is sometimes seen
that the Fire Service is distinct and separate from everything
else, that with initiatives such as community safety it seems
the Fire Service is omitted from these. There have been comments
about the increase in fireworks and the problems there and it
did not seem that the Fire Service was being brought into the
general discussion on community safety, whereas they would probably
see this very much as an integrated problem as far as they are
concerned.
Mr Raynsford: We are very keen
the Fire Service should be fully integrated, working with local
authorities, working with their partners, throughout the community
on initiatives such as the one I have described and others. We
certainly want to see a great deal more engagement of the community.
That is one of the reasons we are saying the Fire Service has
to change to be more representative of the community it serves.
This has been a well-known problem for sometime. The Service has
been disproportionately white and male and has not reflected the
ethnic dimensions of the communities it served in general, and
has been disproportionately short of women, so measures to try
and engage the Service more and ensure the Service is more representative
of the communities it serves are very important indeed.
Q470 Mr Betts: In the Crime and Disorder
Bill the Fire Service is not even mentioned.
Mr Raynsford: I constantly talk
about engaging the Fire and Rescue Service with other initiatives
at a local level, whether those be local strategic partnerships
where we encourage—[2]
The Police Reform Act 2002 contains a number of clauses
amending the Crime and Disorder Act 1998. Clause 97 and 98 deal
with partnership issues and add police authorities and fire and
rescue authorities not presently part of a local authority to
the list of responsible authorities.
Q471 Mr Betts: Does it not help if
the Government, when they are passing legislation, actually show
they are seeking integration rather than doing it as an after-thought?
Mr Raynsford: We are doing it
and it is something which is very much part of the philosophy
of the White Paper that the Fire and Rescue Service must be more
engaged in the wider community and more representative of that
community. The expansion of community fire safety programmes is
very considerable. You will know we are spending £43 million
over the next three years. The budget we inherited in 1997 was
just £800,000 a year for that aspect of the work. There has
been a huge increase in the focus on community fire safety and
we are accelerating that. There is scope for doing a lot more
and we will do more.
Q472 Chairman: We have things like
cave rescue and mountain rescue, do you see any scope for them
coming into the urban landscape, not just those organisations
but organisations which are set up by individuals to do some of
these tasks?
Mr Raynsford: I have to say it
is not something I have given thought to. I defer to my colleagues.
Sir Graham Meldrum: Locally there
exist very good working relationships between people undertaking
mountain rescue and cave rescue work, and the Fire and Rescue
Service acts mainly in support of such organisations. Where in
some of the urban areas such organisations do not exist, the Fire
Service itself has set up high level and rope rescue units which
are specialised units in the Brigade. What we have not done, where
such units exist, is try to compete with them, but try to integrate
them, very successfully, into the overall rescue capability of
that particular area, and it has been very successful.
Q473 Christine Russell: Can we move
on to the retained firefighters. We have been given quite a bit
of evidence which seems to indicate that the retained service
has been run on the cheap for far too long and, as a result, rewards
for the retained firefighters are fairly poor, and there is probably
growing evidence that many employers are increasingly reluctant
to give their employees time off especially for training. As a
result, we were told by the Retained Firefighters' Union that
there is a shortfall of about 20% in the workforce.
Mr Raynsford: Yes.
Q474 Christine Russell: What are
you doing about that because surely that huge shortfall is going
to undermine the modernisation process?
Mr Raynsford: We recognise the
problems, we have had very constructive discussions with representatives
of the retained firefighters. We have said we want to see a move
towards pay parity, so the rate of pay for retained firefighters
when they are called out should be comparable to that of full-time
firefighters, the employers have already moved on that, I am pleased
to say.
Q475 Christine Russell: Can I ask
you about that? You have just explained why you got rid of that
performance indicator, because of the perverse nature of encouraging
people, but that is precisely how they are paid, is it not? They
get paid for each time they turn out. Are you looking for a different
type of pay scale?
Mr Raynsford: I agree entirely,
I was just saying that is one move which has been put immediately
in place, but you are quite right there are wider issues we are
also looking at to ensure the recruitment and retention of a sufficient
group of motivated and skilled retained firefighters can deliver
the service in many parts of the country where the Service is
predominantly a retained service. That includes clearly a much
bigger package, including for example promotion possibilities.
Previously there have been some pretty arbitrary restrictions
which have prevented retained firefighters progressing in their
career and moving to senior ranks. That we are committed to change.
We want to work with employers to make it easier for people to
be released to do retained firefighting, and that is again something
we are working on.
Q476 Christine Russell: Employers
have to release staff for serving as magistrates, as school governors,
as councillors. Have you thought about discussing with your colleagues
in the DTI the possibility of including retained firefighters
in that?
Mr Raynsford: We are conducting
a very detailed review of the whole retained service at the moment,
and that is certainly one of the issues which will be considered,
how we recruit more effectively.
Q477 Chairman: When will that be
completed?
Mr Raynsford: I do not know when
officials expect to be in a position to submit—
Mr Norris: Hopefully we will get
something out to you, Minister, by next summer.
Q478 Chairman: Can I push you a little
more on the question of the training of the retained service?
It was put to us that employers are not very happy to have firemen
off for a lot of time if there is a fire but they understand that,
but the training is much harder for them to accept, particularly
if the Health and Safety Executive are demanding that anyone attending
a fire has certain levels of training. It is going to be quite
difficult to retain the retained firemen, is it not?
Mr Raynsford: This is an important
issue. It is right there should be a more integrated approach
to training retained personnel with full-time firefighters because
that will allow the flexibility for mixed crewing and for joint
operation and for retained firefighters to develop their careers
through promotion which otherwise would be debarred. There is
a need for it and clearly you are right in saying this is a factor
which employers will bear in mind, the time requirements, and
it is one of the issues which is being considered as part of the
review.
Q479 Chairman: What about some of
these good employers getting perhaps a plaque on the fire engine
or some more recognition for the service that they provide to
the community?
Mr Raynsford: I think that is
a perfectly fair proposition. I would not want to endorse the
idea of plaques or anything of that nature, but certainly the
concept of recognition of those employers who are constructive
in releasing their employees to serve as retained firefighters
is something we can certainly discuss further.
1 The "over 60s" are the most at risk group
from accidental dwelling fire deaths, and this section of the
population is projected to grow most rapidly over the next decade.
If the existing fatality rates are maintained, population changes
alone could account for over 200 extra deaths during the period
covered by the target. In effect, the average fatality rate would
need to be reduced by much more than 20% to achieve a reduction
in numbers. Discounting population the number of deaths during
the period to 2009-10 would need to be reduced by over 800. In
effect in order to meet the orginal target the total number of
deaths would need to be reduced by over 1,000 during the period
to 2009-10. Back
2
The 1998 Act provides for the responsible authorities-police and
local authorities-to formulate and implement a strategy for reducing
crime and disorder in their areas. The Act does not provide for
CDRPs as a statutory entity but instead requires that "responsible
authorities" within the meaning of the Act work in co-operation
with local groups and agencies. Back
| 
