Agenda item

Emma Lawrence, Head of Fire Funding & Resilience - Home Office, to attend

The Chair invited Lucy Ellender, Senior Adviser, and Emma Lawrence, Head of Fire Funding Policy at the Home Office, to introduce the report.

Emma thanked the LGA and NFCC for their input, through the Senior Sector Group, into a strong fire sector funding bid which the Home Office had now submitted to HM Treasury. Discussions between Secretaries of State had now begun with a final Spending Review announcement currently expected to take place on 27 October 2021. Detailed Home Office grant allocations would be released a couple of weeks after that along with a provisional local government settlement before Christmas.

Emma said that the focus now needed to be on how best to measure and demonstrate continued improvements in efficiency and productivity across the sector - key data that HM Treasury will expect to see over the coming months. To this end, an Efficiency & Productivity Forum had been established which would look at, amongst other things, what work and research could usefully be commissioned by the Home Office, for example, to bridge any data gaps identified. A small working group had been set up to look into this in more detail, which would report back to the Forum by the end of October. HM Treasury would periodically sit on this Forum to monitor progress.

Members comments and questions:

·       Members felt that the bid was very professional and refined on this occasion thanks to excellent joint working with the NFCC and Home Office.

·       Concern was expressed about the impact of a likely rise in inflation on the value of the final settlement as the Spending Review progressed. Was there any way that this could be accounted for as part of the Review? Emma said that all departments had used the same OBR parameters for inflation assumptions and so if this turned out to be significantly different, they would all need to go back to the Treasury.

·       On pension issues, with the impact of the Matthews-O’Brien and McCloud-Sargeant cases still not clear, had a principle been established that the Treasury would cover any additional costs for FRAs? Emma said that pensions numbers were included in the bid but it is likely that the Treasury would ask that they are dealt with separately, particularly McCloud-Sargeant, as this affected all public service pension schemes. Discussions were still ongoing with the Treasury about how much they would provide and when. There had not yet been a commitment to fund all of it but the Treasury recognised the significant impact on FRAs. This was unlikely to be resolved on 27 October with the Spending Review announcement. Gill Gittins added that through the auspices of the National Employers, discussions were taking place with Government around covering all costs, making it clear that it wasn’t just about covering the remedy costs. A formal New Burdens allocation would be made if it became necessary but hopefully it could be resolved before that point. Members were reminded that there was of course no guarantee such an application would be successful.

·       Clarity was sought on the ask around protection grants in the bid. Real concern was expressed that well-qualified and experienced fire prevention officers would be tempted into the more lucrative private sector leaving FRSs in the lurch. Emma confirmed that continued protection grant funding was in the bid and the Home Office was clear on the need to invest in this post-Grenfell. They were also fully aware that staff retention was an issue for services and solutions were being looked at.

·       Members queried whether it was still expected to be a 3-year settlement? Emma confirmed that it was.

·       In the third year of the Spending Review was it still the assumption that employer pension costs would rise by 75%? Emma said that the Treasury hadn’t confirmed what the position would be with regards to employer costs. The revaluation process had been paused and so would need to restart to take into account changes in life expectancy and the McCloud-Sargeant judgement. The Treasury would cost these changes and work out the impact on employer contributions.

·       Would any productivity and efficiency savings be cash releasing? Emma said that the Minister wanted the workforce to remain stable so there would be no large cash release, although there may be some cashable savings in procurement. In terms of productivity, it would be about making sure that employees were using their time productively as much as possible in providing services to the public.

Decision:

Fire Commission noted the report and the continued work of the LGA and the National Fire Chiefs Council on this area.