Another sad day with a decision from the Hampshire Fire
Authority that residents in Hampshire and neighbouring counties will pay the
price for.
I was unable to listen to the whole debate, but what I did hear
showed that Councillors did not fully understand the implications of these cuts
and were dazzled by new technology claims, which don't stack up in the real
World.
In an earlier radio interview with the Chief Fire Officer, it
was like listening to a second hand car salesman telling you that this great
car, that had been clocked, had one little old lady owner who never used it
much and it’s a bargain. The reality is:
1. They intend to dishonestly compare response times for the existing crew of four in a proper fire engine, with the response time for two firefighters in a converted van, in an effort to massage the figures.
1. They intend to dishonestly compare response times for the existing crew of four in a proper fire engine, with the response time for two firefighters in a converted van, in an effort to massage the figures.
2. To meet response times, retained (part-time) crews will
be pressured to respond with just two, rather than wait for more firefighters
to arrive at the station.
3. An inadequate response may be as quick as now, but an effective response will often take much longer.
4. The high pressure lance will only improve conditions inside for firefighters who eventually enter in breathing apparatus, but it is of no use at all for anyone in need of rescue.
5. Two firefighters will not be able to make a meaningful
intervention at many incidents. Even at fires, with just two firefighters,
it will often take longer to check the situation and carry out other essential
tasks, which will delay any use of the new technology.
6. It is a change in approach, but one which will see the fire & rescue
service being less effective, with more loss of life and more property damage
as a result.