Memorandum by the South East Regional
Management Board (SE RMB) (FRS 45)
1. EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
1.1.1 The South East Regional Management
Board (SE RMB) are a joint committee established under sections
101 and 102 of the Local Government Act 1972 and comprise the
following Fire Authorities: Buckinghamshire and Milton Keynes,
East Sussex, Hampshire, Isle of Wight, Kent and Medway Towns,
Oxfordshire, Royal Berkshire, Surrey and West Sussex. Collectively
the Fire Authorities in the south east employ approximately 8,700
people and serve a population of over 8 million, making it the
largest region in England in terms of employees and population.
1.1.2 In crafting our response to the Inquiry,
the South East RMB would wish to reiterate their commitment to
the modernisation of the Fire and Rescue Service which should
lead to continuing improvements in community safety, further reductions
in fire deaths and fire related injuries and a reduction in the
damage caused to property and the environment through fire. We
are pleased to see the statutory role of Fire Authorities extended
within the Fire & Rescue Services Act 2004, and await further
deliberations on the broader emergency response role currently
being considered.
1.1.3 The SE RMB believe there is scope
and potential for the Fire and Rescue Service to play an increasing
role in the broader civil protection and community safety agenda
and we believe Government should now give further consideration
to the benefits of extending the role of the Fire and Rescue Service
into one that encompasses a wider range of civil protection and
emergency planning duties.
1.1.4 Whilst we are of a view that the potential
for extending the role of the Service is worthy of further consideration,
and indeed the recent consultation on an Emergencies Order for
Fire and Rescue Services indicates the Government do indeed support
such a move, further funding will be required to provide the capacity
and resources that will enable Fire and Rescue Services to effectively
discharge those additional responsibilities.
1.1.5 In looking at the specific matters
described in the Inquiry and being considered by the Select Committee,
the SE RMB would wish to emphasise the following points.
— FiReControl Project. The SE
RMB whilst being cognisant of the case put forward for a rationalisation
of the number of Fire Control Centres, is supportive in principle
of a Project that delivers increased resilience, enhanced service
effectiveness and inter-operability with other emergency services,
better working between Fire Control Centres and delivers greater
value for money for local tax payers.
We remain however unconvinced, that the current
Project will deliver the savings described by the ODPM and are
fearful that additional costs will have to be borne by local council
taxpayers. We seek assurances that the enhanced service delivery
outcomes articulated by the ODPM will be achieved.
— FireLink. The SE RMB is supportive
of the replacement project for main scheme radio and will work
alongside ODPM to ensure FireLink is successfully implemented.
We do however seek assurances that there will be no additional
revenue costs falling upon South East Fire Authorities once FireLink
replaces the existing main scheme radio. Further we believe that
it would be appropriate to review the original specification to
bring within the scope of the FireLink Project, hand held radios
for the incident ground and alerting systems for retained Fire
Stations.
— Fire Prevention. The introduction
of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order in the spring of
2006 should provide a clearer and more focused legislative framework
for fire safety in the built environment. We remain however, cognisant
of the concerns expressed by the business community that a reduction
in bureaucracy whilst welcome in many quarters could lead to a
potential reduction in fire safety in places of work and other
occupied buildings.
The Fire and Rescue Service has significant professional
expertise and experience in fire safety matters and we would want
to continue supporting the business community in developing and
maintaining safety in the built environment. The SE RMB would
also wish to make the strongest possible representations that
all new school buildings or any major refurbishments to school
buildings are constructed with fire sprinkler systems. We believe
the wanton damage to the fabric of our school buildings and the
damaging cost to our children's education should not be allowed
to continue.
In extending our support for fire sprinkler systems,
we would also argue that any new residential premises constructed
have installed at build stage, domestic sprinkler systems. We
find it difficult to comprehend that with the announcement by
the Deputy Prime Minister of a massive house building programme
over the next 20 years, 500,000 alone in the south east, the protection
of future occupants from the danger of fire, has not been at the
fore front of strategic thinking. This is a once in a lifetime
opportunity to leave a legacy of safety for future generations,
and is an opportunity that must not be allowed to pass by.
— NJC and financing arrangements.
The SE RMB believe that a partnership approach with responsible
trade unions is in the best interests of the Fire Authority, our
employees and those communities we serve. The industrial tensions
over the last few years have a number of causes. We believe that
leaders and managers of change are crucial to improving the Fire
and Rescue Service and achieving the efficiencies and effectiveness
expected by local taxpayers.
In seeking to move the Service forward, we believe
it is crucial that our middle and senior managers have a credible
voice and that creating a specific NJC for those managers will
be a significant step forward. In considering financing of Fire
and Rescue Services, we remain unconvinced that the existing funding
mechanism is properly reflective of the demands on the Service.
We believe that the amount local council tax payers have to pay
towards the Fire and Rescue Service is disproportionate and hold
a firm view that central Government should contribute a greater
proportion of the overall funding provision of the Fire and Rescue
Service.
Across the South East region, our Fire Authorities
are responsible for providing a range of preventative, protective
and intervention services in densely populated urban areas and
large rural tracts of the country, interspersed with many small
towns and villages. In addition, the South East has a considerable
coastal area that attracts many visitors, with the inherent increased
risk seasonal rises in population bring. We believe we are disadvantaged
in grant in comparison to many other Fire and Rescue Authorities
including the Metropolitan Authorities. Redistribution of grant
is key to ensuring that all Fire Authorities are treated fairly.
2 TERMS OF
REFERENCE—QUESTION
1A
2.1 Regional Control Centres
2.1.1 The South East Regional Management
Board (SE RMB), whilst remaining unconvinced of the business case
for establishing one Regional Control Centre in the south east,
and specifically having concerns regarding the potential revenue
costs which may fall on local tax payers, have stated their support
in principle for a project that delivers enhanced resilience,
greater interoperability between Fire & Rescue Services, enhanced
operational effectiveness including call handling, provides for
better operational working with other partners in particular Police
Forces and Ambulances Services, and delivers better value for
money for local taxpayers
2.1.2 We are disappointed that the full
business case is not yet available to Fire Authorities and we
are informed that this document will now not be available until
the summer of 2006. Previously we have raised questions regarding
additional costs, which we consider may fall upon local taxpayers,
as well as seeking assurances with regard to governance arrangements
for the new Regional Fire Control Centres including legal accountabilities
and responsibilities stemming out of the Fire & Rescue Services
Act 2004.
2.1.3 Whilst we have received some general
responses from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM),
we await clarification on the matters we have raised, and in particular
with regard to the on-going pressures on revenue budgets, seek
absolute assurances that our local tax payers will not have to
bear the burden of any additional costs arising out of the FiReControl
project.
2.1.4 The SE RMB, recognise and understand
the need for Government to have in place effective arrangements
to secure the Critical National Infrastructure of the country,
and are mindful that there can be made an argument for larger
Fire Control Centres. However we are concerned at the large geographical
area and population to be served by one Fire Control Centre for
the south east and believe there are sound reasons to consider
whether one Fire Control Centre is sufficient to serve our region.
2.1.5 One further crucial matter is the
work currently undertaken by the existing Fire Controls that will
not be provided as part of the arrangements for Regional Control
Centres. This is known as "out of scope" work and will
remain as a legacy and cost for individual Fire Authorities. We
do not believe this has been fully taken into account by the ODPM
when they first published their findings on the merits of moving
to Regional Control Centres, leading to their conclusions on savings
to be achieved within the context of the FiReControl Project.
2.1.6 The SE RMB believe the anticipated
savings are questionable, and again reiterate their request to
receive assurances that local tax payers will not have to meet
the additional costs that will arise from implementing an ODPM
instigated project.
3. TERMS OF
REFERENCE—QUESTION
1B
3.1 FireLink
3.1.1 The SE RMB fully support the introduction
of FireLink to replace the existing main scheme radio, and recognise
the ODPMs resource and funding support in moving this project
forward. At the time of specification for FireLink, the issue
of hand-held communication on the incident ground fell outside
the initial specification, as did the provision of alerting for
retained fire stations.
3.1.2 We believe that in light of the evolving
role of Fire Authorities in supporting the civil resilience agenda
as well as the increasing role the Service now plays in responding
to a wider range of civil emergencies, it would be prudent to
re-visit the initial specification with a view to including hand-held
incident ground communication facilities (Hand-held radios) and
to re-consider extending the scope of FireLink to include alerting
systems for retained fire stations.
4. TERMS OF
REFERENCE—QUESTIONS
2A
4.1 Fire Prevention
4.1.1 Since the enactment of the Fire Precautions
Act in 1971, we have seen a significant improvement in fire safety
and fire precautions in the built environment. Fire and Rescue
Services over the past 34 years have built up considerable professional
expertise in fire safety and fire engineering which we believe
has served the business community extremely well.
4.1.2 Whilst we welcome the introduction
of the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order, and support the
drawing together of the myriad of legislation that relates to
fire safety in places of work and public buildings, we are concerned
that placing responsibility for such matters entirely on the premises
occupier or owner, may see a reduction in the high standards now
found in places of work and public buildings, with regard to fire
safety.
4.1.3 We believe that the professional expertise
of the Fire and Rescue Service in supporting the business community
through an appropriate mixture of education, encouragement and
enforcement, should be retained, and that it would be beneficial
to carefully review the introduction of the Order to ensure its
implementation meets its stated aims and objectives. Failure to
maintain necessary standards in publicly accessed buildings will
in our view, inevitably result over a period of time, in an increase
in fires and fire casualties. It is important that we maintain
safety with regard to fire and means of escape in these building
types, whilst seeking to improve fire safety and means of escape
in those premises deemed to be high or higher risk.
5. TERMS OF
REFERENCE—QUESTIONS
2B
5.1 Institutional Arrangements and Reform,
Including Transitional Arrangements and Finance
5.1.1 We have considered the matter of institutional
reform and have been supportive of the intention to review the
National Joint Council with a view to considering the establishment
of effective representative arrangements between employees and
their Fire Authorities.
5.1.2 The SE RMB are not convinced that
the current constitutional arrangements which have led to the
vast majority of the uniformed workforce being represented by
the Fire Brigades Union (FBU), are necessarily the most effective
way of progressing the modernisation of the Fire and Rescue Service.
The current arrangements which result in many of the uniformed
managers in the Service being represented by the FBU, is in our
view not appropriate for a modern public sector organisation and
is not necessarily the most effective mechanism for consulting
and negotiating conditions of service matters with our middle
and senior managers, and perhaps does not best serve the needs
of those staff.
5.1.3 We would support meaningful dialogue
with a view to establishing a middle/senior manager's representative
forum, with the remit to negotiate terms and conditions of service
on behalf of those staff.
5.1.4 In turning to matters of finance,
we would direct the Select Committee to the 2003 report by Professor
Sir George Bain, who considered the potential for Fire Authorities
to make savings to support the modernisation agenda, concluding
that the scope for savings was likely to be different across Fire
Authorities.
5.1.5 We would argue that the scope for
such savings, particularly with regard to the suggested reductions
in staff numbers amongst the SE Fire Authorities is minimal, and
that the re-distribution of grant mentioned in the Bain Report
has not materialised. All the SE Fire Authorities have a substantial
mix of wholetime and retained duty system fire fighters and cover
large rural areas as well as heavily populated city areas including
Brighton, Southampton and the rapidly expanding city of Milton
Keynes. Collectively we are responsible for providing an emergency
response to the Channel Tunnel, Gatwick Airport and other smaller
regional airports along with providing an operational response
to one of the busiest shipping highways in the world.
5.1.6 The south east has a large coastal
area with inherent associated costs. We would argue strongly that
re-distribution of grant is a matter of considerable importance
and that South East Fire Authorities should be primary beneficiaries
from any grant re-distribution.
6. TERMS OF
REFERENCE—QUESTIONS
2C
6.1 Promoting Diversity Within the Fire and
Rescue Service
6.1.1 For many years, the SE Fire Authorities
have been at the forefront of supporting a diversity agenda in
the Service, recognising the benefits that would accrue from having
a workforce that was truly representative of the communities we
serve. There are however a number of challenges to overcome, in
particular positioning the Service as a career option rather than
simply as a job. There needs in our view to be a concerted and
joined up advertising campaign, not unlike that undertaken on
behalf of the Armed Forces, to bring to the attention of prospective
job applicants, the opportunities now available in a modern Fire
and Rescue Service.
6.1.2 Such a campaign would need to be co-ordinated
and funded through the ODPM to ensure it was of the quality and
sophistication necessary to put across a strong message that raised
the profile of the Fire and Rescue Service as being an employer
of choice for those seeking dynamic, challenging and wide ranging
career opportunities.
6.1.3 Co-terminus to any advertising campaign,
there needs to be a joined up approach across all relevant Government
Departments, in particular the DfES and the Department of Work
and Pensions, to ensure young people are aware through schools
career programmes, of the opportunities now available to them,
and that those who may have left education and are now seeking
other career opportunities are also aware of the career open to
them in the Fire and Rescue Service.
7. TERMS OF
REFERENCE—QUESTIONS
3
7.1 Joint Working Between the Fire and Rescue
Service and Other Emergency Services
7.1.1 The SE RMB value the partnership working
between the Fire and Rescue Service and other emergency services,
in particular in matters related to civil resilience. We believe
such partnership working must continue if we are to provide an
effective response to emergency incidents and support joint exercises
between the emergency services. However we are mindful of the
recent debates relating to reform of Police and Ambulance structures
and would suggest that it would be prudent to await the outcome
of any structural reform of those Services, before considering
options for the Fire and Rescue Service.
7.1.2 We are clear in our view that we do
not believe there is any benefit or merit in regionalisation of
the Fire and Rescue Service and are pleased that the Fire Minister
Jim Fitzpatrick has recently stated that it is not the Government's
intention to regionalise Fire Authorities nor is it Government's
intention to pursue amalgamations of Fire Authorities. We agree
wholeheartedly with the Minister.
8. CIVIL RESILIENCE
8.1.1 As the work of the Fire and Rescue
Service has evolved in recent years to encompass a wider civil
emergency response, we have been grateful for the Governments'
support of the New Dimension agenda. We would hope that Government
continue to support the on-going training of this additional work,
which is crucial to the continuing effectiveness of the Critical
National Infrastructure.
8.1.2 In addition, we believe that the issue
of co-responding is one which the Fire and Rescue Service should
engage in through partnerships with the Ambulance Services. We
are aware of the FBUs opposition to co-responder schemes, but
cannot agree with their view and will continue to explore all
opportunities to enhance the delivery of life safety services
to local communities, including co-responder schemes. The SE RMB
would be pleased to engage further with Government to consider
whether it is necessary to put into place additional arrangements
to support Fire Authorities in implementing co-responder schemes
where there is an identified community need.
| 
