| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
John McDonnell: What will happen if they do not work? The Minister has said that we no longer have minimum standards and that we have risk management plans, but he has neither the political will nor the powers to intervene.
Jim Fitzpatrick: My hon. Friend has articulated that concern a couple of times, but the Secretary of State has reserve powers, and the Department offers professional assistance for brigades introducing new IRMP systems, which are now in their third year, to make sure that they are working effectively. The Audit Commission comprehensive performance assessment inspects fire and rescue authorities in the same way as it inspects other local authorities. At present, we are working up an operational assurance section to assist the Audit Commission in its examination of fire and rescue authorities to make sure that fire and rescue authorities and services are working effectively for their communities.
John McDonnell:
I am grateful to the Minister for his explanation of the process. Will the reserve powers enable him to call the decision in if it is not operationally effective in the area?
25 Jan 2006 : Column 1490
Jim Fitzpatrick: Where there has been concern about the decisions that are being proposed, we shall take a close interest, but we are not in that position. We are confident from the evidence that we have seen, which has been presented to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister by a research unit, that this work has been quality assured. We are confident that it will provide better protection for the people in Northumberland.
John McDonnell: I am sorry to persist and to delay the debate. The Minister said in response to a direct question about whether he has reserve powers to call the decision in that a particular interest will be taken. I ask my hon. Friend again: has he the powers to call the decision in?
Jim Fitzpatrick: I have responded to my hon. Friends in indicating that the Secretary of State has the reserve powers to direct. I cannot go further than that now. I have said also that, in this instance and at this time, from the information that has been supplied to us from the determination of the research unit within the ODPM, we are confident that these plans stand up to scrutiny. It is not the role of Ministers principally to agree operational proposals. That is a matter for the fire and rescue service.
As for the consultation exercise, from July to November the public and stakeholders were consulted on these proposals. In December 2005, the county council's executive agreed in principle to the plans and the new preferred site. The council has gone back out to engage with the public on the new preferred proposals. A letter has been sent to households in the county. Information is on the council's website and in the media. Work is planned with the key stakeholders group. It is my information that the county council will make a final decision on the proposals in March. There is an opportunity. I know that the chief fire officer and, I am sure, the fire and rescue authority, will be only too happy to meet my hon. Friend to talk through the proposals in detail. My information is that the final decision will not be made until March.
Mr. Campbell: I have not met the chief fire officer although I tried to arrange a meeting on several occasions. I wanted that meeting to include the trade union representatives. The chief fire officer would not meet me with them. If there was a meeting, he wanted it to be with me on my own. I said that I would not go unless the trade union representatives were present. We are stuck now. He will not meet anybody in the presence of the trade union representatives.
Jim Fitzpatrick:
It is most unfortunate that a meeting between my hon. Friend and the chief fire officer cannot be arranged if for no other reason than to allow him to present his petition. As he suggested, it carries the weight of 25,000 signatures. Given this exchange and the concerns that my hon. Friends and the hon. Member for Hexham (Mr. Atkinson) have articulated in raising the principal issues, I hope that the fire authority will extend an invitation. Whether that means that he will meet my hon. Friend with the local trade union representatives is something that I cannot dictate to the chief fire officer. However, dialogue is clearly the way forward. I hope that there will be an opportunity for everyone to sit
25 Jan 2006 : Column 1491
round the table to talk through the issues that are clearly of concern to my hon. Friends. The county council will make its final decisions in March, and that makes it clear to me that there is an opportunity to present the issues in due course.
The hon. Member for Hexham raised public opinion. Local authorities have many difficult decisions to make such as on the closure of a local library or other forms of public property. People are attached to such institutions and clearly have an affinity with fire stations in particular. The fire service is held in great regard and high standing by the community even if people have never used 999. They are reassured by the very presence of a local fire station. If a fire station is likely to be moved, people are naturally alarmed. That is why there has to be even greater effort to reassure them on the nature of the proposals and to try to ensure that public confidence can be maintained.
I do not for a second imagine that people will be happy about fire stations and fire appliances being moved. The important thing is to make sure that there is a major exercise in reassurance for the public. Fire authorities and fire brigades are practical organisations and they support one another across county boundaries, as described by the hon. Member for Hexham and back each other up in various situations as my hon. Friends described.
Mr. Murphy: Initially, I was persuaded that the proposals would improve fire cover for the people whom I represent. My mind was changed dramatically by the fire chief's about-face and the decision to move the station some five miles away. That is what I do not understand and will not accept. It is not acceptable for all that work to be put in and then for the proposals to be changed overnight.
Jim Fitzpatrick:
My hon. Friend has effectively expressed his concern and his dissatisfaction with the
25 Jan 2006 : Column 1492
late change. I hope that a meeting can be arranged to go through, again, the nature of the changes and why they are needed. As he said, he was reassured by the explanation given for the first changes, so it is only appropriate that he be reassured about the final changes.
Mr. Campbell: I may be able to provide some clarification. Under the original programme, the two new PFI fire stations were to be built in the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Wansbeck (Mr. Murphy). There were to be none in mine—all the fire stations would have been closed. There was a reaction to that in Blyth Valley because there was no cover. That was a big problem. There seems to have been a change of mind, and instead of both fire stations being in my hon. Friend's constituency, one is to be on the outskirts of my constituency. That has made the situation worse, but that might be the explanation—the fire chief was trying to balance the two constituencies.
Jim Fitzpatrick: The Government have put in place a comprehensive and robust framework that will ensure that the fire and rescue service will be fit to meet the challenges of the future. There will be locally determined IRMPs that best meet the risks facing our communities and offer safety and value for money to local people, notwithstanding the genuine concerns articulated by my hon. Friends. As I mentioned earlier, a national network of regional fire and rescue control centres will increase resilience, cut response times and provide more effective fall-back. Both will contribute to increasing public safety and firefighter safety and creating fire and rescue services that save more lives, including in south-east Northumberland.
| Index | Home Page |