Examination of Witnesses (Questions 340-359)
MR TOM
CARROLL, MR
PHIL TOASE
AND MR
STEVE MCGUIRK
6 FEBRUARY 2006
Q340 Martin Horwood: With
respect, we keep on asking about regionalisation and you keep
on telling us about technology. Surely the technology could be
implemented at local level using models like Gloucestershire's
tri-service centre as a way forward?
Mr Toase: I am sorry, perhaps
I did not say what I wanted to say about the modernisation process.
Part of this is about economies of scale and efficiency and that
cannot be avoided.
Q341 John Cummings: In
your evidence you highlighted, indeed quite scathingly, the role
of the Fire Brigades Union, as you see it, as a barrier to the
modernisation of the service. What will be the implications if
the FBU and the Fire and Rescue Service more generally are not
in support of the move to regional control centres?
Mr Carroll: Firstly, with regard
to the Fire Brigades Union, I think I would want to qualify what
we said by saying that we also acknowledge that the Fire Brigades
Union over the years has a long and very, very proud tradition
and has contributed quite positively to the fire safety and fire
service agenda.
Q342 John Cummings: That
is certainly not what your evidence says. Your evidence is very,
very—
Mr Carroll: What I would like
to go on to say is that all too often we have seen some FBU officials
who continue to resist change, usually preferring to preserve
the status quo rather than embracing the opportunities to change
that in our view would be better for the Fire and Rescue Service,
better for the taxpayer and better for their own members.
Q343 John Cummings: So
there are only certain leaders, not all leaders, to whom you were
referring in your evidence?
Mr McGuirk: If we take it back,
as my colleague mentioned, to the independent review of the Fire
Service, in CFOA's submission to that review we accepted the reality,
disappointingly, that management had lost the right to manage
and to a degree, arguably, it was given away.
Q344 John Cummings: I
remember that from the pits when the colliery manager used to
say a manager had no right to manage.
Mr McGuirk: I cannot really comment
on the pit.
Q345 John Cummings: I
can.
Mr McGuirk: The corollary of the
independent review evidence was that there needed to be a repositioning
of people to make both professional and political decisions and
an institutional framework put in train to do that repositioning.
I think our proposition is that the reordering of who makes decisions
is taking time to bed in and some colleagues in the trade union
are struggling with that concept.
Q346 John Cummings: You
also state your commitment to simplifying and communicating the
message of change to the Fire and Rescue brigade staff. How are
you communicating the benefits of the change to the regional control
centres to FRS staff?
Mr McGuirk: The Chief Fire Officers'
Association?
Q347 John Cummings: Yes.
What are you doing to get your message over?
Mr McGuirk: I think it is fair
to say, and I think this is where the confusion exists, it is
not the Chief Fire Officers' Association's project. As we have
said on a number of occasions, we are supportive of the principles
of rationalisation and so on because we can see some operational
benefits, but we have also seen some concerns and, therefore,
our support is not unqualified. We do not see ourselves in the
position of being absolute advocates and champions of the project
that as yet has some unanswered questions. We are supportive and
we have communicated the positive benefits to staff in our control
centres but at this juncture it is not an absolutely unqualified
championing of the project just yet. We are supportive of the
ODPM communications mechanisms, the various newsletters, CDs,
websites and so on that provide the vehicle for technical staff
to give feedback which we will also respond to accordingly.
Chair: Lyn, can you just deal with the
issue of the retained firefighters rather than diversity because
we need to move on.
Q348 Lyn Brown: Okay.
I am only going to deal with retained firefighters and not deal
with diversity, which I really wanted to do. Can you tell me why
there has been no real progress implementing the Bain report and
subsequent reviews around the Retained Fire Service?
Mr Carroll: The retained review
started in 2003. I know it was reported eventually in 2004 with
over 50 recommendations. It has come through the Practitioners
Forum and was accepted in principle. At the Practitioners Forum
in January of this year a small group was set up to work to move
the retained review on. It was not CFOA's responsibility but we
were one of the stakeholders involved with it along with many
others, including the Retained Firefighters Union. I think we
recognised that in trying to attack the 51 points that were made
in the initial report it was just too hefty to deal with. It is
being moved forward and it is being acted on at present.
Q349 Lyn Brown: Forgive
me, but it seems to me that you are representing the people who
are managing this process and what you have spoken to me about
has been process rather than actualities and there does not appear
to have been a fundamental change caused by the ethos of the Bain
review at all. We heard from the retained firefighters last week
how they are still not involved by your members in basic consultations
or discussions around the plans, et cetera. I just wondered why
it has taken so long even for basic measures, like consultation,
to become part of the process.
Mr Carroll: I would have to disagree
with that point of view because I do not think that is the case.
We have tried to be, and move to be, as inclusive as we possibly
can which includes involving not just the Retained Firefighters
Union but all the representative bodies, whether it be Unison,
the Fire Brigades Union or the Retained Firefighters Union. I
am disappointed that is how they feel.
Mr McGuirk: I think it is important
to add that the Retained Firefighters Union does not represent
all the retained firefighters in the Fire and Rescue Service.
There are some areas around the alterations to the constitution
of the NJC where individual fire authorities are moving between
union recognition and consultation and negotiation with the Retained
Firefighters Union. I think the position is that it is mixed at
the moment. In terms of the retained firefighters themselves,
I would agree that the actual detail of the retained view has
not been moved forward as quickly as it might have been but there
has been a massive reform agenda in the rest of the Fire Service,
which we may well go into. I think if you do a bit more of a detailed
survey and seek evidence from the brigade specifically on the
retained firefighters' point you might get a slightly different
picture.
Q350 Lyn Brown: I have
to say we were given fairly clear specifics about non-involvement
with the retained firefighters. Again, I make the point to you
that it is your members who are responsible for the management
of that. Given the time, I am not allowed to ask you why your
chief officers have failed to implement a number of the issues
around diversity but it does feel to me that there does seem to
be a failure on the part of management in implementing change.
Mr Toase: It is probably worthwhile
adding that we are well aware that the Retained Firefighters Union
were critical of ourselves in this retained review when they gave
their evidence. I have got to say the reality is something different.
The drive and the work that has been done in the retained review
has come from members of the Chief Fire Officers' Association.
Q351 Mr Betts: On control
centres it seemed to me you were saying largely we can put technology
into all the existing centres but there are economies of scale
to go with regional control centres which might make them more
cost-efficient. You have also been critical of the current models
of governance and funding of the Fire Service which you describe
as duplication and poor economies of scale. Are you looking across
the board for regionalisation and having regional fire authorities
as well?
Mr Carroll: The comment we made
within our submission was not about governance at a regional level,
it was about governance of fire authorities as they exist at the
moment and I believe also referred to the number of models. It
is not something we have not said before, it was included in our
submission to Bain and to the White Paper. It was referring to
the fact that we want to see responsibility for the Fire and Rescue
Service remaining embedded within the local community but there
are advantages to be gained by looking at wider involvement of
that community sitting alongside our elected members who we say
we recognise do a very good job, but to look at attracting people
from business and commerce alongside our politicians.
Q352 Mr Betts: So a model
like the police authority?
Mr Carroll: A model similar to
the police authority.
Q353 Mr Betts: So you
are not about changing the boundaries in that sense?
Mr Carroll: Not in there, no.
Q354 Mr Betts: I come
back to my previous point. If you have, as you will in some cases,
county councils and a fire authority which is an amalgamation
of county councils, or in metropolitan areas an amalgamation of
district councils, then a regional control centre on top with
presumably another tier of governance of some kind because someone
has to be responsible, is that not further complicating the situation?
Mr Toase: What we are saying with
regard to governance is that there are issues. You said yourself
there are county councils, CFAs, metropolitan authorities, different
types of metropolitan authorities even. The governance arrangements
currently perhaps are worth looking at to see if there could be
some consistent model arrived at that would better serve us all.
The issue, as Mr Carroll has said, was in our submission to Bain
in the past. We have long said that there is a real need for elected
member involvement at local level but we have also said that perhaps
the size of Fire and Rescue Services needs to be looked at. That
does not necessarily mean that you immediately leap to regionalisation
and nine Fire and Rescue Authorities throughout the country. What
we are saying is that if we are to truly look at economies and
efficiencies of the Fire and Rescue Service one has to consider
whether the current 46 Fire and Rescue Services in the country
is still appropriate.
Q355 Mr Betts: Just to
come back to the point, who is going to run the regional control
centres and to whom are they going to be accountable?
Mr McGuirk: In terms of their
accountability, the statutory duties will remain with the local
fire authority. The day-to-day management of the new facilities
will be through a newly created entity, currently proposed to
be some kind of local authority arms' length company.
Q356 Mr Betts: Which will
be accountable to?
Mr McGuirk: One presumes at the
moment, and this is one of the areas of concern that we want to
work through in more detail, accountability will remain with no
proposed changes in legislation with local fire and rescue authorities.
Q357 Mr Betts: All of
them, collectively?
Mr McGuirk: As it stands at the
minute individual fire and rescue authorities will retain responsibility
for their statutory function.
Q358 Mr Betts: You will
have several local fire authorities all collectively and individually
accountable for this one control centre?
Mr Carroll: Through a board with
representatives of those authorities.
Q359 Mr Betts: Is this
laid down? Is this agreed?
Mr Carroll: It is not laid down.
The consultation period on governance is not completed yet. There
was a preferred model floated by the Office of the Deputy Prime
Minister and, quite honestly, having had the chat with you a moment
ago, it would be better if there was just one model but it has
not been decided yet exactly what that model will be.
Chair: I think this is something we will
need to pursue.
| 
