Clause 29 - Directions for public safety purposes
Fire and Rescue Services Bill
11:00 am
Mr Phil Hope (Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister; Corby, Labour/Co-operative)
I can provide the assurance that the hon. Gentleman seeks, but, unfortunately, I cannot accept his amendment.
The hon. Gentleman is right that the clause was specifically drafted to ensure that in the event of industrial action the Secretary of State could act swiftly to secure assets and facilities—for example, appliances—for those providing emergency fire and rescue cover. Clearly, that is not dealt with under other provisions in the Bill. I echo his point that we are not repeating the measures in the 2003 Act to impose a pay settlement on the fire service. That was the issue of most concern when the Fire Services Bill was considered in Parliament. The power that we are carrying over into this Bill is more restricted than that passed in the 2003 Act because it relates only to public safety.
I am pleased to say that negotiations between the employers and the Fire Brigades Union continue to make good progress. We hope that all parties move forward with a fresh start. The reason for the clause is that the Government have a duty to ensure that public safety is foremost in fire service actions. The amendment would undermine the Secretary of State's ability to take action, which is critical to ensuring public safety.
The hon. Gentleman makes a good point about the requisition of vehicles during a strike when some firefighters turn out in an emergency. We would
consider that carefully in the event of a dispute because it is true that some firefighters did turn out in an emergency. As he recognises, however, that might or might not be so in a future dispute, so it is important to have fall-back measures to use sensitively at the time.
Amendment No. 107 would make the failure or anticipated failure of a fire and rescue authority to discharge its core operational functions under clauses 7, 8 and 9 the trigger for the powers of intervention. It would create further delay, thereby preventing critical preparatory work were industrial action proposed. It would leave the Secretary of State vulnerable to a legal challenge by a recalcitrant fire and rescue authority that refused to allow its assets and facilities to be used by others.
Historically, fire and rescue authorities have argued that their duty to make provision to deal with fires in normal circumstances does not extend to industrial action. They took that view in the most recent dispute. In making failure to discharge an operational function the trigger, there is a real risk that, in the event of fires or road traffic accidents, the Secretary of State's powers to secure assets will be frustrated.
I want to assure the hon. Gentleman that the Secretary of State intends to use the powers only as a last resort and where absolutely necessary to ensure public safety in the event of industrial action. We expect that, in practice, most if not all authorities would co-operate if their property or facilities were needed to provide emergency cover.
Those planning for emergency cover need the assurance that they will be able to obtain equipment at relatively short notice. Those providing cover need to have access to the most appropriate equipment for their own safety and that of the public. The amendment would remove that assurance and create a serious delay in accessing vital equipment, which would result in a reduction in public safety. I understand that we agree on the clause, but I ask the hon. Gentleman to withdraw the amendment.