Reckless and
Foolish
The fire service cuts decision must not be left to one man.
Such a crucial decision must be debated by the full County Council. The people
of West Sussex deserve to know which of their representatives will vote for
slower response times, more deaths and more property damage, and which of them
will vote to protect the people of West Sussex.
Lionel Barnard is clearly receiving some very poor advice
from his officers and it is beginning to make him look foolish, as well as
reckless. Among the ridiculous statements he has been prompted to make about
the fire service cuts are:
‘All 800,000 people in West Sussex knew about the
consultation’. Utter nonsense. Even if the proposals had been included in the
County Council’s “West Sussex Connections” newspaper, which it should have
been, it would still not be true. It is becoming clear that very few people
knew about it.
‘I’m sure that if people had seen any dangers they would
have replied’. The consultation document deliberately omitted the dangers and
falsely claimed ‘no reduction in performance’, ‘improves flexibility’ etc. It
even included blatant lies, such as ‘moving a fire engine from Horsham to
Littlehampton, when they were actually cutting a fire engine and crew. The
dangers were deliberately concealed.
‘We had a thousand replies, which is not as many as you
might expect’. Yet, he then went on to say he did not have an expectation,
which makes no sense. 1,000 replies is actually a very high figure for a County
Council consultation and shows how deeply concerned people are.
‘The types of incident crews respond to has changed’.
They have not, West Sussex firefighters are still responding to fires, road
crashes, floods and a variety of other emergencies, just as they have done
since 1948. The proportion of each may have changed, but all of them still
require the speedy response of one or more fully crewed fire engines.
‘This is about improving our service’. Do his advisers
really think the public are that gullible? A service that will take longer to
arrive at many incidents, that has fewer fire engines to attend major incidents
or multiple calls, and that will see more fire deaths and property destroyed is
most definitely not an improved one.
‘This is about building a fire service that is fit for the
21st century’. No it is about slowly dismantling a vital public service, making
it less fit than it was in the 20th century. Resources will be the worst
since before World War 2.
‘Prevention is the name of the game.’ Chief Fire Officers
and Councillors have been saying that for many years. My Grandfather was saying
that in the 1920s, my Uncle in the 1950s, so the only change is who is saying
it. Prevention has always been part of the service’s work, but it can never
replace an effective response.
‘I’ve taken the decision that I have because the evidence is
there to support it’. What Lionel Barnard claims to be supporting ‘evidence’,
is nothing more than wishful thinking and illusion. The most striking evidence
is that fire deaths have been increasing in West Sussex, that the proposals
will result in more deaths, that response times will increase, that they have
been failing to crew stations properly, and that more fire engines will be
under-crewed or unavailable in the future.
Finally, the figures don’t add up. Between the consultation
closing and the Environmental Services Select Committee meeting the saving
claimed for cutting fire engines at Midhurst, Petworth and Storrington dropped
from £41,400 to just £21,000 each. The extra cost of changes at Littlehampton
was £382,102, but by the meeting that had changed to ‘awaiting the costings’.
Other costs resulting from the changes have not been determined, so to cut
services when the real savings are unknown is reckless.
The first duty of government is to protect their citizens.
County Councillors must not neglect that duty, they must refer the decision to
full council.
Facebook: West
Sussex Fire & Rescue Stop the Cuts
No comments:
Post a Comment