|
THE FIRE Brigades Union’s opposition to fire service co-responding schemes was criticised in a Fire 2005 workshop. Speakers argued that such schemes make a significant contribution to safer communities and have widespread support among firefighters.
Sarah Messenger of the Employers’ Association said that co-responding – whereby a brigade attends medical emergencies to which it can deploy faster than an ambulance – demonstrates that fire services are focused on community needs. ‘Co-responding is not about taking jobs away from the ambulance service, nor about providing an ambulance service on the cheap, it’s about saving more lives,’ she said.
She claimed that a large proportion of firefighters want to carry out co-responding, despite the Union view that fire crews are not properly trained to respond to medical emergencies.
Acting chief fire officer of Lincolnshire, Mike Thomas, outlined the success of co-responding in the county. A pilot scheme was introduced in two retained stations in 1999; now 20 fire stations in Lincolnshire do co-responding and all of its firefighters have received suitable training from local ambulance trusts. He described the Union’s policy as odd, arguing that ‘co-responding will keep fire stations open because it is an intervention that definitely saves lives.’
Jon Webb, assistant commissioner operational planning with London Fire Brigade, said that co-responding was not just of value in spread-out rural areas, but also in urban environments.
A quicker response helps ensure a better survival rate, he added.
Another aspect of the wider role of the service – that of flooding and water rescues – was also debated. UK and international fire service representatives appealed for better flood forecasting and a continuous assessment of flooding risks in preparation of flood emergencies.
Speakers said there was a lack of clarity over the roles of responding organisations in flood situations and that the Ministry of Defence should produce guidance outlining the resources that can be made available to the emergency services in the event of a flood. There were also calls for: robust plans to be formulated and tested on a regular basis; greater co-operation with professional partners; improved training; and public awareness campaigns for flood-risk areas.
|