Friday, 1 December 2023

County Council failing to protect West Sussex residents

Deception

Latest figures show how West Sussex County Council's poor fire service response times are getting even worse. It is the result of closing fire stations, cutting a quarter of the county's fire engines, and failing to ensure the remaining ones are always crewed.

Most of the county's fire engines depend on retained (on call) firefighters who are called from their homes or work when an emergency is received. Figures in the latest report to WSCC's Fire & Rescue Service Scrutiny Committee show that those fire engines cannot be crewed more often than they can be crewed. 

In the report to Councillors, the chart on adequate crewing is coloured all blue, conveniently ignoring the red, amber, green mentioned in the text. The chart below is properly coloured and goes back to 2011/12, the first year of the cuts.


Source - West Sussex County Council reports

Deceiving councillors & the public is unacceptable

Cover up

member of the public asked for this availability information on a station by station basis, via a Freedom of Information request, but this was refused. The reason given was, “Disclosure of the information you seek would be likely to endanger the physical or mental health of any individual or the safety of any individual.”

A ludicrous reason as that very information used to be available online on the Council’s performance dashboard, and it has been provided on request previously. The removal from the performance dashboard in 2019, along with other performance information, was presumably to cover up deteriorating performance.

Council conspiracy theories

The refusal goes onto claim that the data, “could be used to target certain areas at specific times, which could, in turn, endanger both members of the public in those areas and the firefighters involved in any such incidents.”

Imaginary people plotting imaginary action to target areas in some imaginary way is utterly fanciful. Especially so, as the data requested would not contain ‘specific times,’ just a percentage of hours a fire engine was unavailable in the past. Availability is ever changing, so past data could not be used to predict future availability.

Publishing this data could actually be positive. Public awareness of stations that are struggling to crew their fire engines could well aid recruitment and encourage local employers to release retained firefighters to improve availability.  

This misuse of legislation is not to prevent a threat, 

it is to cover up West Sussex County Council's failure to protect the public

44% increase in time taken to reach serious fires

When an emergency call is received, and the nearest fire engine is not crewed, it means another has to attend from a fire station further away. Latest Home Office  figures show how the average travelling time for the first fire engine has, since 2010/11, increased by 44%. That is a 19% greater increase than the average across England. This is the combined effect of the Council's significant cuts to the service, and their failure to properly crew fire engines. 

The figures are even more disturbing when you realise that, in 2022, over 70% of incidents were in areas covered by the six fire stations crewed by wholetime firefighters round the clock. Their travel times are unlikely to have increased, which means that in the areas covered by the other 18 fire stations the increase must have been significantly greater than the 44% average increase.

Only six fire stations with a wholetime crew 24 hours a day
Bognor Regis, Chichester, Crawley, Horsham, Littlehampton & Worthing

The other 18 fire stations depend wholly, or partly, on having enough retained firefighters available. When they are not available, those fire stations are effectively closed.

West Sussex County Council makes excuses, but takes no effective action

Instead of positive action to find solutions, the Council's Cabinet Member, Duncan Crow, fiddles whilst West Sussex burns. He expects local employers to release retained firefighters to attend emergencies during working hours, but the Council's Cabinet has refused to approve a policy to allow their own staff to do the same.

The County Council's Cabinet should have been setting an example by encouraging council staff to be retained firefighters, fully supporting them with paid time off for initial training, and allowing them to work remotely at or near a fire station. They cannot expect other employers and the self employed to solve this problem when they set such a poor example.

County Councillors must remember that the legal duty to provide an effective fire & rescue service is their responsibility alone. So, how many County Councillors have approached parish councils, partner organisations, businesses, community groups etc., where retained firefighters are needed? It would appear very few, if any. 

Sadly, the Scrutiny Committee once again kicked this down the road this week, because 30 minutes was thought not long enough. Well yes, it is not long enough but why are they not holding an urgent special meeting about such terrible performance?

If County Councillors won't solve the retained firefighter shortage, they must fund more wholetime firefighters to protect West Sussex residents

Conflict of interest

I have recently seen two freedom of information requests related to the Chief Fire Officer's commercial activities. One asked how many of the 'Service Executive Board' attended the Chief Fire Officer’s book launch earlier this year in an official capacity, and if they claimed expenses. The response was that none attended officially and that no expenses were claimed. It did not say how many attended. 

More concerning is that promoting this book, which is about gender bias, appears to have been given higher priority than a meeting of the Fire & Rescue Service Scrutiny Committee. It appears the scheduled meeting clashed with the book launch and was cancelled, which meant County Councillors had to find time for a rearranged meeting. 

The Chief Fire Officer's commercial book promotion should not be a higher priority than a County Council scrutiny meeting.

Double Standards

The other request concerned the Chief Fire Officer's secondary employment as a public speaker, and referred to an agency that arranges her paid speaking engagements. The reply says that she has County Council approval for this secondary employment, which must not conflict with the Council's interests or her employment responsibilities.

The Council also says that this secondary employment is restricted to periods of leave and in their own time. However, Chief Fire Officers don't have set hours and predecessors used to insist that they were always on duty and available. The response confirmed that no other chief officer employed by the County Council indulges in secondary employment. 

The County Council has previously dismissed firefighters when their secondary employment had any connection with firefighting, fire safety, or their employment as a firefighter. This was not because of a proven conflict of interest, but because there could be. Yet the Chief Fire Officer's paid speaking engagements will inevitably have a connection with the fire & rescue service and her County Council role. 


Of course, other chief fire officers have attended speaking engagements but, as far as I am aware, none have been paid to do so. They have always accepted it as part of their responsibility as a chief fire officer. They also often attended fire station open days, community events, meetings with local organisations, and local fund raising events for The Fire Fighters Charity in the evening or at weekends.

Prioritising a commercial book launch over a scrutiny committee meeting suggests a conflict of interest. At the very least, attending paid speaking engagements up and down the country must result in less time for the Chief Fire Officer's primary responsibility to the residents of West Sussex. 

Dismayed firefighters have said that they have more chance of seeing their Chief Fire Officer talking about her life on television, than they do of seeing her at their fire station to listen to their concerns. There is much to admire about this Chief Fire Officer, but concerns being raised about her priorities and conflict of interest are worrying.

Who monitors the Chief Fire Officer's secondary employment to ensure there is no conflict with her primary employment?

 

Saturday, 18 March 2023

Cuts and fire death concerns

Fair Pay


It is good news that firefighters and their employers have reached agreement on pay and avoided a strike. Both sides have been pragmatic, with the employers offering more than many other public sector employers, and firefighters accepting an offer that is less than would cover their inflation losses.

However, the Government has not given fire & rescue authorities additional funding to cover the cost. At the recent Fire & Rescue Service Scrutiny Committee it became apparent that the County Council has not set aside enough to cover the pay rise. Cabinet Member Duncan Crow said it will be challenging and Chairman Kevin Boram said the budget is tight.

I sincerely hope that Councillors listen to Chief Fire Officer Sabrina Cohen-Hatton, who reminded them that the service was 'lean'. 

The cuts in 2010 did leave the service lean, but the additional cuts in 2014 left it far too lean. Further cuts would seriously damage the service's response capability, and jeopardise improvements made since 2018, when HM Inspectors rated the service 'Inadequate', or 'Requiring Improvement' in every category. Inadequate funding played a significant part in those dreadful judgments.

County Councillors must fund the pay rise without further endangering West Sussex residents

Fire deaths

The County Council, in 2010 and 2014, falsely claimed that closing fire stations and cutting a quarter of frontline fire crews were 'improvements'. Despite having no evidence to support the claim, they assured residents that increased prevention work would save more lives. Despite a modest reduction in the number of fires in the last five years, the number of fire deaths has increased alarmingly.


Source Home Office Fire & Rescue Service statistics

With such concerning evidence, it was disturbing to hear the Chief Fire Officer, at a previous Select Committee meeting, incorrectly claim that the committee was informed of all fire deaths. The only fire deaths reported in the quarterly committee reports are those that occur in the home (dwellings), and where the fire was caused accidentally.

If the Chief Fire Officer did not intentionally mislead the committee, why did she get this very important detail wrong? Excluding fire deaths in other buildings, in road vehicles, in other outdoor locations, and in dwellings, when the fire was started deliberately, cannot be acceptable.

Source - FRSSC quarterly reports and Home Office Fire & Rescue Service statistics

The committee can't scrutinise properly unless they are informed of all fire deaths

Inquest questions remain unanswered

After hearing of firefighter concerns, I attended a recent Inquest into a West Sussex fire death. Although I learnt more about the circumstances of this tragic incident, some of those concerns were not addressed. 

A fundamental concern must be the adequacy of regulations. The fire occurred in the early evening, on the ground floor of a recently constructed block of retirement flats, with fire detection and connection to a careline alarm provider. Fire Investigation Officers concluded the most likely ignition source was a faulty, or damaged, trailing lead for a lamp. This then ignited a very new recliner chair that apparently met all current regulations.

Yet, despite the occupier being awake and ambulant, sufficient smoke was produced to incapacitate him. So much smoke that, even with the benefit of a thermal imaging camera, the victim was not located by firefighters immediately after they arrived. According to Area Manager Dave Bray, he was not located until two breathing apparatus teams were involved in a methodical search.

Whilst the occupier's apparent decision to try and put the fire out was relevant, it was disappointing to hear Mr Bray suggest that the victim's age was a factor in that decision. In my experience, people of all ages instinctively try and extinguish a small fire. Most succeed in extinguishing the fire, some don't but then escape, some suffer injuries in the process and, sadly, a few do not survive. 

Mr Bray did helpfully make the case for sprinklers, as a way to help avoid such deaths in the future. The Coroner indicated that she would submit a Prevent Future Deaths report that would raise the benefits of sprinklers.

Response delays

Mr Bray insisted there were no delays in the service's response, yet evidence suggests that there were. The wholetime crew in the town concerned had been mobilised to another incident, shortly before this call was received. Consequently, the town's retained crew was sent to this incident, together with the wholetime crew from a town five miles away.

Mr Bray told the Coroner that retained crews had five minutes to turn out and that they arrived in 11 minutes. However, he didn't tell the Coroner that it is only a two minute drive from the fire station to the incident. 

If there were no delays they should have been there in seven minutes, not eleven.

The Coroner was also told that the incident the wholetime crew were attending was 'an emergency'. I have been told it was not an emergency, and there are questions about why they were sent to it. The Inquest was not told the nature of that incident, or that the wholetime crew was located very close to the fatal fire.

In such circumstances, when West Sussex had its own fire control, control staff would have quickly radioed the wholetime crew to ask if they were in a position to attend the life threatening incident. That did not happen. It is alleged that, when the crew became aware of the serious incident, they requested permission to attend. It is also alleged that the Surrey based Joint Fire Control initially refused permission, insisting that incident details must first be completed on their in cab computer.

This suggests that, instead of control operators being able to use common sense and initiative, they are tied to inflexible procedures, an inflexible mobilising computer system, or both.

Although I believe my information was reliable, it was not first hand, which is why I hoped the Inquest would uncover the truth. As it did not, the service should investigate the full circumstances and ensure the removal of any obstacles that may have delayed the wholetime crew being immediately sent to this tragic incident.

'Computer says no' is unacceptable, Fire Control Staff must be free to use their initiative to save lives

Inadequate Response Targets

Mr Bray also told the Coroner that the service met their response targets. However, he did not tell her that West Sussex targets are lengthy, and differ according to where you live in the County

The targets set by the County Council do not ensure that the service is effective at saving lives and property, they are simply intended to mask the inadequate resources provided by the Council.

Research has shown that the optimum response time for life saving is no more than 10 minutes. Yet, West Sussex County Council has decided that for 66% of West Sussex the target time for the first fire engine will be a lengthy 14 minutes, for 34% of the County it is 12 minutes, and only 0.2% will receive the optimum life saving 10 minute target. 

West Sussex County Council's lengthy response times for critical fires

Green diamonds are fire stations and their designated number

Incredibly, if the first fire engine takes longer than those times for up to 11% of critical fires, the County Council can still claim to have met their target.

Nationally, the number of fires and fire deaths are reducing, although the percentage of fire deaths to fires is increasing. Slower response times are inevitably playing their part in that. Sadly, it is even worse in West Sussex where both the number of fire deaths and the percentage of fire deaths to fires are both increasing.

If West Sussex County Council genuinely want to reduce fire deaths, they must improve resources and bring response times down