Agenda item

The Chair invited Anjli Mapara (AM) - Deputy Head of Fire Strategy & Reform Unit and Stuart Harwood (SH) – Head of Governance, from the Home Office to give a presentation on the White Paper.

AM set out the Government’s case for the reforms proposed in the White Paper, with Covid 19, HMICFRS inspection reports and the Grenfell Tower and Manchester Arena disasters all highlighting the need for change in how FRSs are run. The proposals in the White Paper were under 3 headings:

1)    Professionalism

·         Establishing an independent College of Fire & Rescue

·         Introducing minimum entry requirements and development schemes

·         A mandatory 21^st Century leadership programme

2)    People

·         Carrying out a review of the pay structure

·         Defining the role of a firefighter

·         Unlocking talent and diversity

·         Developing a firefighter’s oath

3)    Governance

·         Transferring FRA functions to a single elected (ideally directly-elected) individual

·         Introducing operational independence for CFOs

·         Separating strategic Fire and Rescue Plans from operational Independent Risk Management Plans.

AM stressed that the Home Office was keen to have conversations with local areas, particularly around governance reform, to try and come up with solutions that were acceptable to all parties. She encouraged members to respond to the consultation which would be running until 26 July.

Lucy Ellender (LE), LGA Senior Adviser, expanded upon the proposed governance changes and their implications for FRAs and highlighted the table in the White Paper on potential demarcation of responsibilities between the political (executive) leader and the Chief Fire Officer (CFO). Feedback was requested from members on the two possible alternative governance arrangements proposed in the covering report.

Members’ comments and questions:

·         Members welcomed the Government’s commitment to improving fire and rescue services through the White Paper although it was suggested that they needed to be clearer about exactly what outcomes they wanted from the process.

·         Members felt very strongly that it should be up to local areas to determine the governance arrangements that best suited their individual circumstances, not for central Government to dictate. The rationale for changing governance of FRAs was queried and whether enforced changes would actually improve service delivery. Putting power in the hands of one individual would reduce accountability and scrutiny, and valuable local expertise in FRAs would be lost. It was considered that there were a number of other more pressing issues, such as pensions, recruitment/retention of senior officers and diversity and inclusion that needed to be resolved and would have a much greater impact on improving services. None of this was addressed in the White Paper. Members queried what the process would be, should there be disagreement between central and local government in a particular area. AM confirmed that this process had not yet been determined but reiterated that the Minister’s preference remained for a single directly-elected individual to take on governance. Members agreed that the two alternative options put forward by the LGA in the report should be worked up and put forward in the consultation response.

·         A Mayoral governance model could be made to work with the establishment of an effective Police, Fire & Crime Panel – the example of Greater Manchester was cited. SH said that the Government would seek to replicate the Manchester model in future Mayoral arrangements.

·         The costs of changing governance arrangements and wider reforms had not been factored in by Government and needed to be balanced against the perceived benefits. AM referred members to the Impact Assessment published alongside the White Paper which contained cost estimates of the proposals. A further, more detailed impact assessment would be published when the Government response to the consultation was published.

·         It was suggested that much of what was in the White Paper could be achieved without new legislation, through sharing best practice.

·         The White Paper proposals on governance had not been joined up with the proposals in the Levelling Up White Paper on changes to local authority governance.

·         The corporation sole model would not work in county council fire services.

·         Trying to abolish the current NJC structure and collective bargaining would create more problems that it would solve – the Government should work with the stakeholders to address any perceived issues.

·         The benefits of introducing a firefighters’ oath were queried.

·         Some of the proposals under professionalism were welcomed, in particular, the establishment of a properly resourced Fire College.

·         If closer integration and greater accountability of blue light services was the Government’s objective, then lack of accountability in the ambulance service should also be looked at.

·         Ring-fencing of funding was not considered a good idea from an accounting point of view as it reduced services’ flexibility to be responsive to situations.

·         With PCCs not being restricted in how much they could increase their share of council tax, there was a danger that the value for money residents received could actually reduce with the proposed governance changes.

·         A plea was made for regional variations in cost of living and other issues to be taken into account in any reform of the NJC structure and for local flexibility on possible entry requirements.

·         Introducing stricter entry requirements for firefighters could be counter-productive in terms of recruitment of a more diverse and inclusive workforce. AM stressed that the White Paper was not specifying academic entry requirements.

·         It was suggested that the White Paper proposals could help in facilitating a broadening of the role of firefighters.

The Chair thanked Anjli and Stuart for attending the Fire Commission and said that a draft response to the White Paper would be brought to the Fire Services Management Committee on 8 July for agreement.

Decision:

Fire Commission agreed the proposed direction of response to the Fire Reform White Paper, encapsulating comments made during the debate – draft response to be agreed by Fire Services Management Committee on 8 July 2022.