Agenda item

Report of Jim Wallace, Chief Fire Officer, GMFRS

Please access the documents via the following link: https://manchesterfire.gov.uk/programme-for-change/

Kevin Lee, Director of Mayor’s Office, extended apologies on behalf of the Mayor Andy Burnham who was unable to attend the meeting, noting that he had attended the meeting in March 2019 to set out the Outline Business Case (OBC) for the GMFRS Programme for Change.

Supported by Jim Wallace, Chief Fire Officer, Deputy Chief Fire Officer, Dawn Docx, and Assistant Chief Fire Officers Leon Parkes, and Tony Hunter, Members were provided with a presentation (available at Appendix 1) which outlined the facts and the latest position following the end of the consultation on the Programme for Change.

The following key points were raised:

·         No final decisions had yet been made and discussions were underway with the trade unions.

·         Firefighter numbers would  be maintained at or above May 2017 levels for this year.

·         The Mayor was determined to avoid compulsory redundancies for support staff.

·         To maintain these commitments beyond 2020, GMCA would lobby the Government and request they meet the pensions shortfall and increase funding for fire and rescue services.

·         Further information on the response to Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) would be provided to the Committee at a future meeting.

Members raised the following questions and comments:

·         Members welcomed the presentation.

·         Members raised concerns regarding the timing of the consultation which had impacted on the number of opportunities afforded to the Committee to sufficiently scrutinise the proposals. The approach to scrutiny was also questioned, as the Committee had not had the opportunity to scrutinise the issues in any detail, in particularly the impacts/ effects, and the views of others. Following discussion on how best to appropriately scrutinise the proposals, it was proposed that the September meeting would focus on scrutinising the following issues in a deeper way:

-          The proposal to reduce the number of fire fighters on a pump from 5’s to 4’s (with a focus on the effect)

-          The robustness of the plans, given the expediential rate of growth within the city region in particularly inner city core, and the impact of congestion on response times. 

-          What had changed within the proposals and outline business case following the consultation? 

-          How the new prevention model would be delivered

·         It was agreed that the Statutory Scrutiny Officer would consult with Members over the summer period in order to identify how effective scrutiny could be facilitated, including how the views of others could be captured.

·         Kevin Lee accepted that the timing was not ideal, given the election period, but stressed that the proposals needed to be developed and consulted upon, with a view to addressing the budget deficit and to avoid further consequences for GMFRS.

·         Concerns were raised regarding the level of engagement on the consultation. It was felt that a communication should have been shared with all GM councillors. Kevin Lee apologised if Members felt they had not had adequate time to comment on the proposals, noting that they were provided with the OBC in March 19, and their comments from this evening would be considered. The challenges in providing the right balance of information was acknowledged.

·         Given the concerns raised, would the consultation be reopened? Jim Wallace advised that the consultation was originally scheduled to last for 6 weeks, but was extended twice, and was open for 12 weeks in total, with responses also included after this period. All responses would be factored into the final report which would be submitted to the Mayor and Deputy Mayor Beverley Hughes for decision. It was stressed that the programme needed to continue at pace to enable the organisation to meet the savings expected of them. Kevin Lee reiterated that comments were still being taken into account.

·         Concerns were raised regarding the proposal to reduce the number of crews from 5’s to 4’s. Jim Wallace reported that three feasible options had been developed, all of which were financially viable and safe. Kevin Lee added that the Mayor and Deputy Mayor had listened to Trade Unions as set out in the Mayor’s letter dated 2^nd July 2019 (Appendix 2), and had committed to using the reserves to maintain the level of staffing at or above the level at May 2017 throughout 2019/20 (subject to the Government addressing the pension deficit). It was reiterated that in 70% of cases in GM, the first fire engine arrived with a crewing level of 4, noting that no FRS’s in the country crewed all fire engines as 5’s.

·         Further clarity was sought in relation to whether the impact on performance levels was available at a local level. It was confirmed that a two pronged approach had been adopted looking at past performance levels and actual attendance rates across GM. It was agreed that local level data would be circulated to the Committee.

·         How could response times for new stations be measured if the sites had not yet been identified? Leon Parkes advised that existing response times were considered, along with where incidents happen, to measure what the response time from the station to the incident might be. It was noted that station could be moved around, and compared against actual data.

·         Were response times measured from the point an appliance leaves the station as opposed to when the call was received? It was confirmed that the IRMP does not include the call handling time, however, the 7 minute proposals included the full range; from 999 call to first intervention.

·         A Member had been anecdotally informed that a recent two-pump incident had brought the service to the knees. This had supposedly impacted on the attendance time at a fire in Irlam, which took 20 minutes. Had significant incidents such as this, or times when there are large scale events taking place been factored into the average response times? Tony Hunter advised that further information would be circulated to the committee on how average response times were derived. It was emphasised that the instances in question had not brought the service to its knees as the service regularly dealt with two protracted incidents. Tony Hunter reassured the Committee that GMFRS have a well-maintained reserve fleet based at strategic locations to provide support when required.

·         Back in 1994/5 response times in Manchester had been under 5 minutes to attend a category one fire, was this correct? It was confirmed that this time would not have included the call handling time.

·         A Member highlighted that there was no reference within the presentation to whether GMFRS were exploring opportunities to work with partners such as other blue light services to make better use of existing resources. It was advised that GMFRS had worked on a number of pilots with GMP and NWAS over the last five years, however, due to ongoing national discussions regarding firefighters pay, this work has been paused for the moment. The joint arrangements already in place with blue light services were highlighted such as the Wigan Hub. It was noted that it was not implicitly outlined within the OBC as to some degree this was classed as business as usual. Currently discussions were underway with GMCA, along with colleagues from NWAS and GMP to consider new site locations, and further opportunities to work collaboratively.

·         A Member from Salford highlighted that Salford had a younger than average population in the country, with young males accounting for most of the anti-social behaviour (ASB) within the area. The invaluable support provided by firefighters and the Prince’s Trust was emphasised, noting that reducing these interventions would most likely have a detrimental impact to the area.  Following discussion, it was agreed that the new prevention model would be considered in further detail at the September meeting.

·         Members explored whether the impact of the GMSF been considered, along with the number of housing developments, demographic changes and population projections? It was agreed that the Committee would focus on scrutinising this aspect at its September meeting.

·         If the government meet the pension deficit of £5.8m, how will we ensure that we will not fall into deficit again? Kevin Lee emphasised that the issue was a result of Government changes to the pension scheme and was a national issue. It was acknowledged that Government had lost their legal case against HMG so must address the deficit; nevertheless if government support was not received the proposals contained within the OBC would need to be revisited.

·         A Member requested clarity regarding the context of the removal second fire engines compared with the new fire engines, which were being introduced. It was confirmed that the new fire engines were being introduced to replace ageing fire engines.

·         Further clarity was sought in relation to the statement that the number of firefighters would remain at or above the 1121 in post May 2017. Had new firefighters been recruited since this? It was confirmed that due to the high turnover of staff GMFRS had to continuously recruit.

RESOLVED:

1.      That the update be noted.

2.      That the response to Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) be included within the work programme.

3.      That the Committee reconsider the following aspects of Outline Business Case in September 2019:

-          The proposal to reduce the number of fire fighters on a pump from 5’s to 4’s (with a focus on the effect)

-          The robustness of the plans, given the expediential rate of growth within the city region in particularly inner city core, and the impact of congestion on response times.

-          What had changed following the consultation?

-          How the new prevention model would be delivered

4.        That the Statutory Scrutiny Officer consult with Members and Officers over the summer period on how the discussions should be facilitated to enable effective scrutiny, including how the views of others could be considered.

5.      That the Committee be provided with further information on the methodology used to derive at the 7 minutes average response time and the local level performance levels.