Chamber
Plenary, 18 Nov 2004
18 Nov 2004 · S2 · Plenary
Item of business
Fire (Scotland) Bill: Stage 1
I was just about to say that the three fire brigades or authorities that indicated that three control rooms would be their preferred option represent 23 local authorities. If the minister will let me finish this time, I will also point out that COSLA, which represents all local authorities, has stated that the majority of council leaders are opposed to any reduction, including the leaders of the authorities served by the three brigades that the minister mentioned.
Paragraph 23 of the report states:
"the Minister advised that the immediate driver behind the proposal to reduce the number of control rooms"
was funding. So it is all about money. The Scottish National Party acknowledges that funding is important but believes that it should not compromise people's safety and ultimately their lives. I ask the minister to consider that point as well.
Before I move on, I want to make it clear that my rural colleagues will consider the important issue of the geography of those areas, so I will not dwell on that in my speech. However, although I accept what the minister said on that matter, I should point out that people in those areas are very concerned about the reorganisation of the fire boards. If that reorganisation goes ahead, it might lead to an increase in injuries and deaths. In response to Bill Butler, the minister said that the matter will come before Parliament, and I look forward to hearing what the minister has to say on that.
On the issue of employment, Maureen Macmillan mentioned that one area of concern was section 45, which basically refers to the rights of trade unions. Maureen said that she accepted the minister's explanation, but I cannot take any comfort from his comments. For example, he said that, although the phrase "recognised trade unions" did not present any difficulties for him, he could not include it in the bill. I would have thought that, given his previous life, the minister, of all people, would recognise trade unions and I ask him to explain why he cannot use that term.
Section 45 gives ministers the power to establish a "statutory negotiating body" that will be made up of representatives of employers and employees. Why can it not mention trade unions? I ask the minister to reconsider the matter; after all, we know that it is usually trade unions that represent employees—it is similar to Mike Pringle's point in his speech that a policeman is a policeman is a policeman. I cannot see where the difficulty lies. In any case, the rights of trade unions are enshrined in the European convention on human rights and I believe that they must be given legitimacy in the bill. If that does not happen, the unions and I will regard such an approach as an absolute farce.
Maureen Macmillan also raised concerns about the bill's approach to fire safety duties and industrial action. Although the report makes it clear that the minister has given assurances on this matter, I seek clarification on section 67. A civil offence is already set out in section 240 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, which stipulates the requirements on those who take part in lawful industrial action. However, section 67(2) of the bill would make it a criminal offence for individuals to take part in lawful industrial action. I emphasise the word "individuals", because it does not matter whether we are talking about firefighters, fire control operators or any other individual who is deemed to have a responsibility for fire safety in their workplace. Again, I know that the report says that the minister has already given assurances on this issue, but I seek his assurances about the intention behind section 67(2) and ask him to clarify categorically either through an intervention or in his summing-up that he does not intend to make it a criminal offence for a person to strike.
I thank the members of my party for giving me this opportunity to speak this morning. I am not a member of the Justice 2 Committee, but I have certainly read the report and the other evidence. Strathclyde fire brigade is one of the biggest brigades in the country—indeed, it is one of the three fire authorities that the minister said are in favour of reducing the number of control rooms to three. However, that brigade and the members of the FBU are very concerned about all their colleagues throughout Scotland and would urge the minister and the Parliament to examine carefully the bill's contentious bits and pieces such as the reduction in the number of control rooms and aspects that relate to trade unions and industrial action. I cannot support the whole bill without examining those issues.
I could highlight the many and varied incidents in which the men and women in the fire brigades have given their all—members have already mentioned Lockerbie and the Maryhill tragedy—but I will not dwell on individual actions. All I will say is that those people would not be telling us that there is something wrong with the bill and that we should look at it properly if there were no reason to do so. I am asking the Parliament not to simply take on board the minister's assurances. That said, if he can give us some assurances on the questions that I have raised, that might go some way towards allowing the SNP to support the bill.
Paragraph 23 of the report states:
"the Minister advised that the immediate driver behind the proposal to reduce the number of control rooms"
was funding. So it is all about money. The Scottish National Party acknowledges that funding is important but believes that it should not compromise people's safety and ultimately their lives. I ask the minister to consider that point as well.
Before I move on, I want to make it clear that my rural colleagues will consider the important issue of the geography of those areas, so I will not dwell on that in my speech. However, although I accept what the minister said on that matter, I should point out that people in those areas are very concerned about the reorganisation of the fire boards. If that reorganisation goes ahead, it might lead to an increase in injuries and deaths. In response to Bill Butler, the minister said that the matter will come before Parliament, and I look forward to hearing what the minister has to say on that.
On the issue of employment, Maureen Macmillan mentioned that one area of concern was section 45, which basically refers to the rights of trade unions. Maureen said that she accepted the minister's explanation, but I cannot take any comfort from his comments. For example, he said that, although the phrase "recognised trade unions" did not present any difficulties for him, he could not include it in the bill. I would have thought that, given his previous life, the minister, of all people, would recognise trade unions and I ask him to explain why he cannot use that term.
Section 45 gives ministers the power to establish a "statutory negotiating body" that will be made up of representatives of employers and employees. Why can it not mention trade unions? I ask the minister to reconsider the matter; after all, we know that it is usually trade unions that represent employees—it is similar to Mike Pringle's point in his speech that a policeman is a policeman is a policeman. I cannot see where the difficulty lies. In any case, the rights of trade unions are enshrined in the European convention on human rights and I believe that they must be given legitimacy in the bill. If that does not happen, the unions and I will regard such an approach as an absolute farce.
Maureen Macmillan also raised concerns about the bill's approach to fire safety duties and industrial action. Although the report makes it clear that the minister has given assurances on this matter, I seek clarification on section 67. A civil offence is already set out in section 240 of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, which stipulates the requirements on those who take part in lawful industrial action. However, section 67(2) of the bill would make it a criminal offence for individuals to take part in lawful industrial action. I emphasise the word "individuals", because it does not matter whether we are talking about firefighters, fire control operators or any other individual who is deemed to have a responsibility for fire safety in their workplace. Again, I know that the report says that the minister has already given assurances on this issue, but I seek his assurances about the intention behind section 67(2) and ask him to clarify categorically either through an intervention or in his summing-up that he does not intend to make it a criminal offence for a person to strike.
I thank the members of my party for giving me this opportunity to speak this morning. I am not a member of the Justice 2 Committee, but I have certainly read the report and the other evidence. Strathclyde fire brigade is one of the biggest brigades in the country—indeed, it is one of the three fire authorities that the minister said are in favour of reducing the number of control rooms to three. However, that brigade and the members of the FBU are very concerned about all their colleagues throughout Scotland and would urge the minister and the Parliament to examine carefully the bill's contentious bits and pieces such as the reduction in the number of control rooms and aspects that relate to trade unions and industrial action. I cannot support the whole bill without examining those issues.
I could highlight the many and varied incidents in which the men and women in the fire brigades have given their all—members have already mentioned Lockerbie and the Maryhill tragedy—but I will not dwell on individual actions. All I will say is that those people would not be telling us that there is something wrong with the bill and that we should look at it properly if there were no reason to do so. I am asking the Parliament not to simply take on board the minister's assurances. That said, if he can give us some assurances on the questions that I have raised, that might go some way towards allowing the SNP to support the bill.
In the same item of business
The Presiding Officer (Mr George Reid):
NPA
Good morning. The first item of business is a debate on motion S2M-1960, in the name of Cathy Jamieson, that the general principles of the Fire (Scotland) Bi...
The Deputy Minister for Justice (Hugh Henry):
Lab
I am delighted to open the debate on the general principles of the Fire (Scotland) Bill on behalf of the Executive. Our partnership agreement gave a commitme...
Mr John Swinney (North Tayside) (SNP):
SNP
Some of members' unease might be to do with the possibility of that power being used to reduce the number of fire control rooms around Scotland, a proposal t...
Hugh Henry:
Lab
I will deal with the issue of fire control rooms in a minute; if I may, I will stick to amalgamation.The power to amalgamate fire authorities has existed sin...
Mr Stewart Maxwell (West of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Does the minister understand that the unease that is shared by members of different parties and by many people outside the Parliament concerns the fact that ...
Hugh Henry:
Lab
There is no intention to rule by diktat. Any action that the Executive took on any such issues would follow thorough consultation and full discussion. We hav...
Bill Butler (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab):
Lab
There has been a great deal of interest in, and some controversy about, the discussion on the future number of control rooms. I accept some of the assurances...
Hugh Henry:
Lab
I would be happy to do that. It is my intention that, after we have reflected on the comments that have been made and done further work on the calculations, ...
Shona Robison (Dundee East) (SNP):
SNP
The minister mentioned that 23 of the 32 local authorities came down on the side of having three control rooms. The question that Mott MacDonald asked was wh...
Hugh Henry:
Lab
No, I do not, because a number of the responses argued for the status quo. The issue now is whether we are prepared to do further work and give the matter fu...
Mr Kenny MacAskill (Lothians) (SNP):
SNP
I thank the minister for his clarification of many points and for the tenor and tone of his speech. The fire service has served Scotland and her communities ...
Hugh Henry:
Lab
I hope that Mr MacAskill recognises that, as I explained to the committee, only one of the powers that he refers to—that of emergency direction—is exercisabl...
Mr MacAskill:
SNP
I accept that and welcome the tenor of the minister's words. However, the devil is in the detail and we must ask further questions about the use of ministeri...
Hugh Henry:
Lab
Kenny MacAskill has indicated that others in his party will comment on the issue of fire control rooms at some length, but I must point out that the bill is ...
Mr MacAskill:
SNP
The minister's words are factually correct, but many members of the public and many members in this chamber—not just those in my party—are concerned about th...
Miss Annabel Goldie (West of Scotland) (Con):
Con
I take this opportunity to thank my fellow committee members, the clerks to the Justice 2 Committee and the witnesses who gave evidence during the stage 1 pr...
Hugh Henry:
Lab
I am baffled and would welcome further discussion with Annabel Goldie about exactly how the situation would change. The power has existed since 1947. All we ...
Miss Goldie:
Con
That is the nub of the disagreement between us. My reading of the bill is that it will provide for a ministerial power that could be instigated by the minist...
Mike Pringle (Edinburgh South) (LD):
LD
I, too, welcome the opportunity to take part in this debate on the stage 1 report on the Fire (Scotland) Bill.A considerable amount of evidence was given to ...
Miss Goldie:
Con
If that is the member's understanding of the situation, will he confirm that that is what section 2(1) says?
Mike Pringle:
LD
That is my interpretation of it. There was considerable discussion of the matter in the committee, and we must take a view. That is my view of the bill as it...
Maureen Macmillan (Highlands and Islands) (Lab):
Lab
The fire and rescue services—especially the local brigades—are held in high regard by the people of Scotland. The area that I represent has only one full-tim...
Hugh Henry:
Lab
Maureen Macmillan's point relates to an issue that was also raised by Kenny MacAskill. Section 45 clearly states that any negotiating body should include rep...
Maureen Macmillan:
Lab
I am glad of that assurance, as I hope others will be.The Mott MacDonald report has, as the minister knows, caused anxiety in most brigade areas. I ask the m...
Ms Sandra White (Glasgow) (SNP):
SNP
I know that my colleagues will elaborate on this point, but listening to what the minister had to say about the reduction in the number of control rooms, I s...
Hugh Henry:
Lab
Will the member tell us how many local authorities are represented by those three brigades?
Ms White:
SNP
I was just about to say that the three fire brigades or authorities that indicated that three control rooms would be their preferred option represent 23 loca...
Colin Fox (Lothians) (SSP):
SSP
Two years ago today, the first national fire strike in 25 years began. I was on the picket line at Liberton fire station in Edinburgh. Little did I realise t...
Bill Butler (Glasgow Anniesland) (Lab):
Lab
As a new member of the Justice 2 Committee, I did not have the opportunity to take part in any of the evidence sessions, but I nevertheless welcome the oppor...
Bruce Crawford (Mid Scotland and Fife) (SNP):
SNP
I heard what the member said about having a single control room, but what is his view on the prospect of having three control rooms?