Hansard

I apologise to the member and beg his pardon. I should have said only that not one member of the Labour Party is attending the debate. I hope that there will be no repeat of this when such important issues are being debated in the future. Such debates provide a chance for members to highlight, as Roseanna Cunningham has done, issues of which we have not all been aware.

Obviously, I want to focus on the Borders. In 2004-05, there were nine rescues from water in the Lothian and Borders Fire and Rescue Service area. In March, the Fire Brigades Union in Perth—what I am saying follows on from Roseanna Cunningham's comments—passed a motion of no confidence in the management because of the lack of, or inadequate, training on rescue from water. Let us compare that with what happens in Dublin. Dublin has three main waterways and 135 fully trained and equipped swift-water rescue technicians, who are highly and specially trained to carry out rescues. Those technicians have skills in fast-current swimming, hydrology and in using technical equipment to effect such rescues. Compare that with what happens in the Scottish Borders, which has five times the number of waterways but only one specialist team, to which Roseanna Cunningham referred. That team is based in Galashiels and consists of seven specialist fire and rescue personnel. We must not think that the relatively low number of rescues from water—as I said, there were nine incidents in 2004-05—means that no further training in the use of equipment and so on is needed. Obviously, more people could be rescued if there were more highly trained people.

Lothian and Borders Police has nine part-time officers who are trained in rescue from water, but that does not constitute a 24-hour shift pattern. There are seven qualified water technicians in the Lothian and Borders Fire and Rescue Service area. An additional 24 have related water rescue qualifications, but do not have qualifications for entering the water. All front-line crews are trained as first responders in talk, reach and throw techniques, but would not enter the water to effect a rescue. That is part of the mixed pattern that my colleague highlighted.

There is a central training fund of around £40,000 for Lothian and Borders Fire and Rescue Service, which was not increased in the past five or six years under the previous Government. There have been pressures on the fund to pay for other courses, such as working at height courses, so water rescue training has been squeezed. In 2004-05, there was a mere £1,500 for it; in 2006-07, the figure was £7,500. We are talking about a pauchle and the matter must be addressed.

There is an internationally recognised set of standards and a training programme that is based on Rescue 3 International's programme. Rescue 3 International, which was formed in 1979, is a specialist water rescue organisation whose techniques, training and approach have been used by rescue professionals in 32 countries worldwide. Its approach is, of course, applied in Dublin. In Scotland, there are three Rescue 3 International course providers—in Dundee and Aviemore—which could offer the training that is needed so much.

I say to the minister that concern that there is no consistency has come out of the debate—there are delivery anomalies. I represent Galashiels and my concern is that although it is all right if a person falls in Gala Water in Galashiels, they would—because the appropriate service is located in Galashiels—be in difficulties if they were to fall in the water at Coldstream. The minister should consider the anomalies that exist, the need for consistency and clear lines of responsibility, and funding for training along the lines of that which is provided in Dublin.