Agenda item

Operations and Public Protection Savings Proposals

Report by Executive Director Communities and Public Protection – attached.

 

This report sets out proposals for achieving the portfolio savings target for 2019/20.

 

The Committee is asked to scrutinise the proposals.

 

Minutes:

55.1 The Committee considered a report by Executive Director Communities and Public Protection (copy appended to signed minutes). 

 

55.2 The report set out the proposals for achieving the Fire and Rescue Service (FRS) portfolio savings target for 2019/20.

 

55.3 The Cabinet Member for Safer, Stronger Communities thanked members for their contribution towards the scrutiny of the proposals and their work to address some of the concerns. She advised that in relation to the Technical Rescue Unit (TRU) savings proposals within the report, the County Council had recently received a letter from the government in respect of funding. In light of this, the proposed TRU savings would not be included in the proposals. 

 

55.4 Nicola Bulbeck, Executive Director for Communities and Public Protection added that there had now been alterations to the proposals for the savings, with fewer reductions being sought. She believed that the FRS was an important and valued service, but due to the current unprecedented budget challenges, savings and efficiencies had to be made in order to meet financial constraints. In her view, the proposed savings could safely be made without impacting on the County Council’s statutory duties and could be delivered to a safe and satisfactory standard.

 

55.5 Gavin Watts, Director of Operations and Chief Fire Officer introduced the report and advised that the government grant towards funding the TRU would be removed from April 2020. He recognised that this would leave the County Council with difficult decisions to be made, but that it had been given time to work through what the implications would be. Key points of the proposed savings were:

 

·        Fire Service Operations - there was a proposed reduction of £400,000 in Intervention and Prevention activities. This included the restructure of the Intervention and Prevention team and the removal or cessation of various public awareness schemes or activities, school education visits and electric blanket testing.

 

·        Public Protection - there was a proposed restructure of the Resilience and Emergencies team (RET). This included the removal of some public and parish council training courses and a reduction in assistance to the County Council directorates in terms of Business Continuity Plan preparations and the Sussex Resilience Forum.

 

·        A staff consultation on the proposals was running from 7 to 25 January 2019.

 

55.6 The Chairman then read a statement submitted to the Committee by Joe Weir, Regional Secretary of the Fire Brigades Union (FBU). Members had received copies prior to the meeting.

 

55.7 The Committee made comments including those that follow.  It:

 

·         Queried the legality of withdrawing any preventative work that had previously been included in the Integrated Risk Management Plan (IRMP), which had undergone a public consultation and been formally adopted. Also whether reputational damage to the County Council had been factored into the decision process. Mr Watts advised that in his view a further public consultation was not necessary, as these were not statutory functions that were being proposed for withdrawal. Reputation had to be factored in and opportunities for alternative funding were currently being pursued.

 

·        Raised concerns over the reduction in strength and expertise of the RET team and the reduction of support for Business Continuity Plans and questioned whether the proposals should be held back until the UK had withdrawn from the European Union. Mr Watts advised that although some support provided by the RET was being withdrawn, the County Council would continue to keep working collaboratively with partners. The Business Continuity Plans would still be in place, but a lot of responsibility would be put back onto directorates.

 

·        Highlighted the importance of prevention and the effectiveness of education, raising concerns at the removal of the ‘Safe Drive Stay Alive’ and ‘Firebreak’ courses aimed in particular at young people; noting that if they be ceased they may be harder to resurrect subsequently. Also whether the Safer Sussex Roads Partnership (SSRP) could take over responsibility for funding ‘Safe Drive, Stay Alive’. Mr Watts advised that alternative funding was actively being sought for this important scheme to ensure its continuation.  Currently there were different methods of delivery throughout the country, but a national ‘joined-up’ approach was being looked at, in which WSFRS was heavily engaged.  He added that the SSRP currently paid towards the film used on the course, as it was partnership funded, but that it was traditionally an FRS-led project across the country. He agreed to write to the Chair of The SSRP to seek his view on funding for this project.

 

·         Raised concerns that as previous objections by the County Council to the proposals to move WSFRS under the control of the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) had highlighted the work of the Intervention and Prevention service, the withdrawal of this service could leave the FRS exposed to a further take-over by the PCC. Also that alternative sponsorship opportunities for this service could be difficult to source and maintain. Mrs Bulbeck advised that there were opportunities for more collaborative prevention work, including engaging with other services within the County Council, possible commercial sponsorship and other ways of delivering preventative work which were being explored.The Cabinet Member for Safer, Stronger Communities added that alternative sources were being explored to mitigate the impacts of any funding reduction for the ‘educational’ services and was happy to provide the Committee with a report setting out the work being undertaken with the Commercial Team on this. Member input with any expertise and experience in this area would also be welcomed.

 

·        Raised concerns over any reduction in trained posts that would erode service knowledge, lessen career opportunities and reduce the appeal of the Service.

 

·        Raised concerns over the reduction of safety testing electric blankets, particularly for the elderly or infirm.

 

·         Suggested the savings proposals were delayed until after Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services (HMICFRS) report, which was due in the spring, had been received. The Cabinet Member for Safer, Stronger, Communities, advised HMICFRS had looked at the recent IRMP report and the proposed savings. Mr Watts added HMICFRS may make recommendations in the report that would then be brought back to the Committee together with any subsequent action plans. 

 

55.8 Mr Jones made the following proposal, seconded by Mr Purchese which the Committee considered: -

 

55.9 That the Cabinet Member for Safer, Stronger Communities either:

 

1)   Abandons these proposed savings; or

2)   Reviews the proposals in the light of the published conclusions of the HMICFRS Inspection report, the outcome of consultation with staff and service users and provides a further report to the Committee in June prior to taking any decisions affecting the services.

 

55.10 A recorded vote was held with the following results: 

 

For:

Mr Baldwin

Lt Col Barton

Mrs Brunsdon

Mr Jones

Mr Mcdonald

Mr S Oakley

Mr Purchese

 

Against:

Mr Barrett-Miles

Mrs Purnell

 

55.11 The vote was carried.

 

55.12 Resolved – That the Committee recommends that the Cabinet Member for Safer, Stronger Communities either:

 

1)   Abandons these proposed savings; or

2)   Reviews the proposals in the light of the published conclusions of the HMICFRS Inspection report, the outcome of consultation with staff and service users and provides a further report to the Committee in June prior to taking any decisions affecting the services.

Supporting documents: