Chamber
Plenary, 12 Nov 2009
12 Nov 2009 · S3 · Plenary
Item of business
Community Fire Safety
Like other members, I thank Brian Sweeney for his extensive report. I also thank the Fire Brigades Union for its extensive response to the report. We have now seen both sides of most of the arguments and are, therefore, in a good position to discuss what the issues might be.
Let us consider the statistics, which can sometimes get in the way. I will make a couple of observations. Sadly, fatalities are the easy thing to count. They are also, as all parties recognise, the very small numbers in the statistics and show a variability that is sometimes confusing. It would be useful if, in the future, we had statistics not only for the tip of the iceberg, but for the iceberg itself. Having statistics within a comparable timeframe for the number of injuries, rescues and fires would allow us to focus on the general trends of such things instead of having to concentrate on the small numbers, which might be going in the other direction.
The report suggests—we encounter this suggestion often in our statistical analysis in the Parliament—that smoothing out the data over a number of years would remove some of the inconsistencies. I fear that, by and large, that is an illusion. If we were to decide to look at the data on a cumulative basis over a three-year period, we would get a reliable number only every three years. If we were to look at the data over a three-year rolling period, we would merely substitute the variation between 2006 and 2009 for the variation between 2008 and 2009, which would not help much. We need to be careful about the numbers that we quote and what they mean.
Yesterday, like some other members, I had an interesting discussion about sprinklers with Chief Fire Officer Sweeney and Chief Fire Officer Hunter. The clear conclusion that I came away with is that the present specification for sprinklers is probably an overspecification as far as household use is concerned, for the good reason that most sprinkler systems are used in industrial premises or large buildings such as hospitals, where a much higher specification is undoubtedly appropriate. It is entirely clear to me, as a chemical engineer, that there are some interesting engineering challenges involved: there are pressure issues, substantial backflow issues and major issues of bacterial growth in stagnant water. However, it ought not to be beyond the wit of man or woman to overcome them. It would be a good idea for the Government to encourage the engineering profession in all its manifestations to look at ways of coming up with a pretty cheap standard system that could be installed in households, because it is quite clear that such a system would offer substantial benefits to our communities.
It seems clear to me, as it does to others, that RIP cigarettes have major benefits, but I am sure that members such as Stewart Maxwell will speak about those, so I will not dwell on the issue.
The main issue that worries me is the information technology that is available to public services. We have talked about the need for cross-departmental working and partnerships, of which we are all aware. People try to work across borders, if they can. By now, we should be getting to the point at which public service databases are interactable—if that is an acceptable word. I am talking about databases that can be accessed by other services so that information that is relevant—a lot of which the report that we are discussing points to—is sharable. I do not know to what extent that is the case, but I am mighty sure that the extent to which it is not the case is no longer acceptable.
That brings us back to the relatively recent but important concept of best value. I have a suspicion that every public service thinks that it must install a computer system that offers best value for that service but completely overlooks the fact that how best value can be achieved would best be looked at on a national basis across all public services. That, of course, is a function of Government—it is not something that we can expect individual public services to do for themselves. It requires Government to decide to standardise its IT systems—or at least the databases within them—over a period of time. That is a challenge for Government.
Another issue is the need for the development of a common language to cover terms such as "risk"—which has at least three meanings in the English language—and "deprivation". If we do not yet have such a common language across the public service, we must address that issue rather quickly.
I turn to alarms. Like others, I was concerned to discover that in a large number of cases, fire took hold without the smoke detector having the desired effect. I do not find that terribly surprising because I have a suspicion than a lot of smoke detectors are still sitting in the cupboard in their box and that quite a number of the ones that are on the wall are in the wrong place on the wall. Moreover, I suspect that an even larger proportion of the ones that are in the right place no longer have a working battery. It would be interesting to know what the statistics are on that. I would prefer some right answers to my guesswork, from which I draw the conclusion that hard-wiring is the only way forward. The challenge—again, it is a challenge for Government, which must lead—is to determine to what extent it is sensible, prudent and good value to insist that, in the right circumstances, hard-wiring be included in building regulations.
Let us consider the statistics, which can sometimes get in the way. I will make a couple of observations. Sadly, fatalities are the easy thing to count. They are also, as all parties recognise, the very small numbers in the statistics and show a variability that is sometimes confusing. It would be useful if, in the future, we had statistics not only for the tip of the iceberg, but for the iceberg itself. Having statistics within a comparable timeframe for the number of injuries, rescues and fires would allow us to focus on the general trends of such things instead of having to concentrate on the small numbers, which might be going in the other direction.
The report suggests—we encounter this suggestion often in our statistical analysis in the Parliament—that smoothing out the data over a number of years would remove some of the inconsistencies. I fear that, by and large, that is an illusion. If we were to decide to look at the data on a cumulative basis over a three-year period, we would get a reliable number only every three years. If we were to look at the data over a three-year rolling period, we would merely substitute the variation between 2006 and 2009 for the variation between 2008 and 2009, which would not help much. We need to be careful about the numbers that we quote and what they mean.
Yesterday, like some other members, I had an interesting discussion about sprinklers with Chief Fire Officer Sweeney and Chief Fire Officer Hunter. The clear conclusion that I came away with is that the present specification for sprinklers is probably an overspecification as far as household use is concerned, for the good reason that most sprinkler systems are used in industrial premises or large buildings such as hospitals, where a much higher specification is undoubtedly appropriate. It is entirely clear to me, as a chemical engineer, that there are some interesting engineering challenges involved: there are pressure issues, substantial backflow issues and major issues of bacterial growth in stagnant water. However, it ought not to be beyond the wit of man or woman to overcome them. It would be a good idea for the Government to encourage the engineering profession in all its manifestations to look at ways of coming up with a pretty cheap standard system that could be installed in households, because it is quite clear that such a system would offer substantial benefits to our communities.
It seems clear to me, as it does to others, that RIP cigarettes have major benefits, but I am sure that members such as Stewart Maxwell will speak about those, so I will not dwell on the issue.
The main issue that worries me is the information technology that is available to public services. We have talked about the need for cross-departmental working and partnerships, of which we are all aware. People try to work across borders, if they can. By now, we should be getting to the point at which public service databases are interactable—if that is an acceptable word. I am talking about databases that can be accessed by other services so that information that is relevant—a lot of which the report that we are discussing points to—is sharable. I do not know to what extent that is the case, but I am mighty sure that the extent to which it is not the case is no longer acceptable.
That brings us back to the relatively recent but important concept of best value. I have a suspicion that every public service thinks that it must install a computer system that offers best value for that service but completely overlooks the fact that how best value can be achieved would best be looked at on a national basis across all public services. That, of course, is a function of Government—it is not something that we can expect individual public services to do for themselves. It requires Government to decide to standardise its IT systems—or at least the databases within them—over a period of time. That is a challenge for Government.
Another issue is the need for the development of a common language to cover terms such as "risk"—which has at least three meanings in the English language—and "deprivation". If we do not yet have such a common language across the public service, we must address that issue rather quickly.
I turn to alarms. Like others, I was concerned to discover that in a large number of cases, fire took hold without the smoke detector having the desired effect. I do not find that terribly surprising because I have a suspicion than a lot of smoke detectors are still sitting in the cupboard in their box and that quite a number of the ones that are on the wall are in the wrong place on the wall. Moreover, I suspect that an even larger proportion of the ones that are in the right place no longer have a working battery. It would be interesting to know what the statistics are on that. I would prefer some right answers to my guesswork, from which I draw the conclusion that hard-wiring is the only way forward. The challenge—again, it is a challenge for Government, which must lead—is to determine to what extent it is sensible, prudent and good value to insist that, in the right circumstances, hard-wiring be included in building regulations.
In the same item of business
The Deputy Presiding Officer (Alasdair Morgan):
SNP
The next item of business is a debate on motion S3M-5172, in the name of Fergus Ewing, on the future of community fire safety in Scotland.
The Minister for Community Safety (Fergus Ewing):
SNP
The Scottish Government requested this afternoon's debate in order to give Parliament an opportunity to discuss how we can further reduce fires by working in...
John Lamont (Roxburgh and Berwickshire) (Con):
Con
In September, I spoke in the parliamentary debate on the fire and rescue framework. In that debate I paid tribute—as did members from all political parties—t...
Fergus Ewing:
SNP
It might be helpful to John Lamont and to any members who are concerned about the B and B regulations to hear that we will issue in the next few weeks a cons...
John Lamont:
Con
Indeed, I welcome that news from the minister and I am sure that many people in the sector in my constituency and throughout Scotland will also welcome it.My...
James Kelly (Glasgow Rutherglen) (Lab):
Lab
I welcome the opportunity to take part in the debate. I thank Brian Sweeney and his team for the great amount of work that they clearly put into producing su...
Stewart Maxwell (West of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
On the point about European regulation on fire-safe or RIP cigarettes, the member mentioned that Finland will introduce regulations—it will do so next April....
James Kelly:
Lab
As was indicated to David Taylor, the MP for North West Leicestershire, in reply to a question, the UK Government is sympathetic on this issue and is moving ...
Mike Pringle (Edinburgh South) (LD):
LD
I add my support to the author of the report, and to all the firemen and women throughout Scotland who protect us.As I think we are all agreed, the 62 per ce...
Nigel Don (North East Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Like other members, I thank Brian Sweeney for his extensive report. I also thank the Fire Brigades Union for its extensive response to the report. We have no...
Mike Pringle:
LD
In my speech, I suggested that an advertising campaign is needed. It is about education—we need to tell people not to have their smoke alarm in a box in a cu...
Nigel Don:
SNP
I endorse entirely the member's suggestion but—it is not the first time that I have had this conversation, even today—the lesson of life, which we well under...
Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab):
Lab
The member may want to consider the fact that people are faced with choices about how they spend their money and sometimes they cannot afford to replace the ...
Nigel Don:
SNP
Of course there is a fraction of the population for whom money is the real issue. Some square batteries are not cheap, so I can see why people might decide n...
The Deputy Presiding Officer:
SNP
I call George Foulkes, to be followed by Linda Fabiani.
George Foulkes (Lothians) (Lab):
Lab
Thank you, Presiding Officer, for calling me, and for the way in which you did so.I genuinely welcome the Scottish Government's initiative in arranging this ...
Stewart Maxwell:
SNP
I am sure that Mr Foulkes means well, and his theory is interesting, but the facts show that cigarettes have been the major contributory factor in fire injur...
George Foulkes:
Lab
I like to think so. I do not know whether Stewart Stevenson—sorry, I mean Stewart Maxwell. That was not in any way meant to be a compliment to or a slur on e...
Bill Aitken (Glasgow) (Con):
Con
Does George Foulkes accept that we find the development equally worrying?
George Foulkes:
Lab
If not more so, to judge by the worried look on Baillie Aitken's face—I always think of him as Baillie Aitken, because he made such an impact in that role.We...
Linda Fabiani (Central Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
Presiding Officer, this is a worrying day, right enough, because I find myself agreeing with both George Foulkes and Bill Aitken.Scotland needs many things, ...
Stewart Maxwell:
SNP
I appreciate what Linda Fabiani says about "Scotland Together" not covering that issue. Is she aware that Her Majesty's chief inspector of fire services for ...
Linda Fabiani:
SNP
I take on board what Stewart Maxwell says, but in a climate in which we talk about the scourge of alcohol in Scotland's society, we must consider the issues ...
Margaret Mitchell (Central Scotland) (Con):
Con
The motion highlights the Scottish Government's commitment to reduce fires and fire deaths by working in partnership with local government and the fire and r...
Stewart Maxwell (West of Scotland) (SNP):
SNP
I welcome the timely report "Scotland Together" and many of its recommendations on how we can make inroads into our unacceptably high level of fires and fire...
John Farquhar Munro (Ross, Skye and Inverness West) (LD):
LD
Like many people in the chamber, I am delighted that we are having this debate on community fire safety, because anything that we are able to do to help to r...
Stewart Maxwell:
SNP
I am sure that John Farquhar Munro is aware that hard-wired smoke detectors are the norm in new buildings. On his point about the batteries in smoke detector...
John Farquhar Munro:
LD
That is good advice, because it is difficult even for adults with all the facilities to change the batteries with ease, and older people can find that partic...
Karen Gillon (Clydesdale) (Lab):
Lab
This is an important debate. Day and daily, people throughout Scotland are faced with the devastating reality of fire. George Foulkes brought home to us the ...
Michael Matheson (Falkirk West) (SNP):
SNP
Earlier, the minister mentioned the approach that is now being taken to fire safety regulations for bed and breakfasts. Having made representations to him on...