Hansard

It would be hard to criticise the Scottish Government's motion or the minister's sincere speech. However, I am sure the minister agrees that there are issues that need to be explored during the debate.

Any debate on the fire and rescue service is welcome, because it gives us the chance to recognise and appreciate—as members have done today—the job that our firefighters do on society's behalf. Those men and women risk their lives daily to save the lives of others, and we are all indebted to them for the exceptional service that they provide in our communities. This year in Scotland, we tragically lost a brave firefighter, Ewan Williamson; as other members have done, I express my condolences to his family and his comrades.

Angela Constance pointed out that in the past two years, there have been four fatalities in the line of duty, whereas there were two in the previous 25 years. One death is one too many, but that increase is deeply worrying and indicates that something must be wrong. Ken Ross of the FBU says that deaths in the line of duty touch everyone who works in the fire service, and we should remember the debt that we owe firefighters when we seek to reorganise the service in any way.

Like other members, I have seen what firefighters can face in the local area when they are trying to carry out their jobs. They are often attacked in our communities. There was a major incident a few years ago in Carnbroe in my constituency, and more recently there was an incident in Strathclyde in which bottles and objects were thrown at firefighters from an upper storey of a tower block.

Given firefighters' contribution to the safety and security of our communities, it was sad to see them having to strike over pay and conditions in 2002.

The FBU has wide-ranging political interests including union learning initiatives and its support for the Cuba solidarity campaign and, topically, the people's charter. If we look at fire brigades' websites, we see the diversity of what they do, for example planning for a swine flu pandemic, providing fire reach training for young people and planning for major incidents such as the Glasgow airport attack. However, their priority has to be intervention and fighting fires. To do that, the service needs more, not fewer, front-line operational firefighters.

The Parliament has taken action in the past to try to address some of the issues that face fire and rescue services. As others have said, the Fire (Scotland) Act 2005 was intended to improve the service and was put in place with the best motives. Indeed, the review of the framework is required by that very act. Unfortunately, it seems that in some areas new arrangements have left front-line firefighters overstretched and underresourced, and the review needs to address that.

In recent years, the number of fire deaths and injuries to firefighters and members of the public has increased, training and competency levels have decreased, front-line jobs have been lost, fire stations have been downgraded or closed, and response times have increased. Those are all worrying trends. Non-uniformed posts in fire and rescue authorities are necessary, but there seems to have been a vast increase in the number of such posts with no corresponding increase in front-line uniformed posts. Indeed, about 220 front-line posts have gone.

Before 2005, if an FRA altered its number of front-line posts, that had a commensurate effect on its allocated budget, which went either up or down. Since then, it has been possible to decrease the number of uniformed posts with no effect on the budget. In that way, unfortunately, savings can be made. Given that, in the long run, it is not a saving in terms of safety to have fewer front-line posts, will the minister consider re-establishing the budget link, obviously in the spirit of partnership with COSLA? I hope he will answer that at the end of the debate.

One reason that is given for cutting front-line personnel is the effectiveness of community fire safety initiatives, but even if they are successful in prevention, that does not justify a decrease in intervention levels for the fires that continue to occur. Does the minister have any plans to review or assess the effectiveness of community fire safety initiatives?

As others have said, the FBU believes that many problems in the service could be addressed through governance. Like Bill Butler, I am pleased to note that the minister says that he has an open mind on the matter. The FBU strongly believes that local flexibility must be set within national parameters that ensure that there is Scotland-wide consistency. The minister must seriously consider creating a central Scotland-level structure to oversee the eight FRAs. Perhaps the ministerial advisory group could have that role, but a forum below that level is also needed. There should be a body that can establish common standards with which FRAs are required to comply, and FRAs should be measured against those standards in a robust inspection regime. It is difficult to see how national resilience can be secured without harmonisation of policies, procedures, strategies and equipment. I reiterate that joint procurement by the FRAs would lead to significant savings and best value and would allow consistency in relation to appliances and equipment throughout Scotland.

That brings me to the somewhat contentious issue of the concordat. I do not think that a commitment not to micromanage has to extend to providing revenue funding on a non-ring-fenced basis. That does not necessarily follow. Of course FRAs should manage the day-to-day running of the services that they provide in a local context and with local flexibility, but they did that before the concordat. Scottish ministers have legal obligations, which they cannot offload, on matters such as national resilience. I believe that ring fencing of capital and revenue funding for the fire and rescue service is required in order to ensure appropriate funding levels. I was a wee bit concerned by the minister's comment that there will be competition in local authorities with the likes of education, housing and so on. That is worrying.

I conclude by quoting Strathclyde Fire and Rescue's motto, which is:

"Making our communities safe places to live, work and visit."

The revised framework must be measured against whether it will do that. Does the framework represent a better service in our communities? Will it save lives or will it result in underfunding? Our fire and rescue services are far too important to get caught up in the politics of the concordat. The people on the front line know what they need in order to provide a service that not only delivers for our people but ensures their, and their comrades', safety. The Scottish Government would be wise to pay heed to the front-line firefighters' views as expressed via the FBU. I am pleased that the minister said that he will indeed do that.