Clause 27 - Inspectors

Fire and Rescue Services Bill – in a Public Bill Committee at 9:45 am on 26 February 2004.

Alert me about debates like this

Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.

Photo of Philip Hammond Philip Hammond Shadow Minister (Communities and Local Government)

Dealing with the inspectorate, the clause re-enacts the provisions of the 1947 Act, but goes further in providing that a person appointed under the 1947 Act will continue in office under the current provisions. What the clause does not tell us—the explanatory notes are also entirely silent—is the Government's intentions for the inspectorate.

If I may be blunt, during the course of the dispute there was quite a bit of rumbling in the fire authority community about the role of the inspectorate and the way in which the inspectorate collectively contributed to progress during the dispute. There was a belief among the fire authorities that there was a degree of sympathy in the ODPM for the view that the inspectorate's contribution was not at all times entirely helpful, and there was an expectation that, as part of the process of modernisation and reform, there might be substantial changes to the way in which the inspectorate operates and the role that it plays. Nothing in the Bill precludes that. It is perfectly possible that inspectors will go on being appointed by Her Majesty, as they have always been, and that assistant inspectors and other officers will be appointed by the Secretary of State, but that they will perform a quite different role.

It would be wrong of us to skip though the clause apparently confirming the status quo when, in fact, the Government might have in mind a fairly significant change in the role that the inspectorate plays. Rather than nod the clause through, I wanted to give the Under-Secretary an opportunity to explain to the Committee the role that he envisages the inspectorate having.

Given the role of the Audit Commission, and the fact that the proposals for comprehensive performance

assessment will apply to fire and rescue authorities—the best value regime—will there be some duplication? If the fire service inspectorate is to continue to inspect, why do we need the more generic local government inspection and performance assessment mechanism as well? It would help the Committee if the Under-Secretary explained not only what is in the Bill, because that is clearly understood and not contentious, but what lies behind it and how the inspectorate will operate in the future.

Photo of Phil Hope Phil Hope Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

The clause re-enacts section 24 of the 1947 Act, as the hon. Gentleman said. It gives powers to appoint inspectors and assistant inspectors to obtain information about the way in which authorities are discharging their fire and rescue functions and about technical matters relating to the service. It provides that those appointed under the 1947 Act continue to be inspectors.

Let me clarify our intentions about the role of the inspectorate and its relationship with the Audit Commission. The hon. Gentleman raised two good points in those respects. The inspectorate provides a valued source of technical and professional advice to the Government, which is vital to maintain as we modernise the fire and rescue service. The White Paper ''Our Fire and Rescue Service'' made it clear that the work of the inspectorate would be refocused and redirected to support the process of quality assurance and service improvement. It would provide professional advice to Government on good practice, operational and technical issues, and bringing on future leaders of the fire service. It would also support the Audit Commission in its new inspection function.

The hon. Gentleman is right to suggest that the Audit Commission is to implement a performance assessment of fire and rescue authorities as a key tool in support of modernisation. That work will subsume the traditional inspection of brigades that accounted for about 25 per cent. of the inspectorate's business. It is expected that the commission will wish to draw on the inspectorate's professional expertise. The remaining business of the inspectorate, especially the purpose for which its inspectors are appointed—to obtain information—will continue to be important. The skill will be in interpreting the information, drawing conclusions and making recommendations, rather than in obtaining it per se.

The change in focus will result in a smaller and more efficient inspectorate with a different set of skills, as envisaged in the independent review of the fire service. Though the change in tasks and focus makes it difficult to compare the situations before and after change, the transfer to the Audit Commission will result in a reduction in staffing levels. In future, the smaller team will provide independent advice and guidance on professional, operational and technical matters and support the modernisation of the fire and rescue service.

Photo of Phil Hope Phil Hope Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

Yes. It is, of course, an independent inspectorate, appointed by Her Majesty's commission, and its status will remain as it is now. I hope that, with those points of clarification and explanation, hon. Members will support clause 27.

Photo of Philip Hammond Philip Hammond Shadow Minister (Communities and Local Government)

I am grateful to the Under-Secretary for that explanation. I take it that he is telling the Committee that some employees of the inspectorate are likely to become employees of the Audit Commission, thus shrinking the inspectorate. Can he give us some indication of the numbers involved in the inspectorate and the intended reduction in staffing of the residual inspectorate that will be lodged in, but not part of, the ODPM? Can the hon. Gentleman also tell us something about cost, because I am concerned about the cost implications of duplication of function. I do not imagine that the same number of people will simply transfer from the fire service inspectorate to the Audit Commission. To be honest, I am surprised that only 25 per cent. of the work load of the fire service inspectorate is made up of inspecting fire authorities. One might think that inspecting would be rather more than a quarter of an inspectorate's work load, but perhaps that is a rather old-fashioned view on my part. To set the matter in context, perhaps he could tell us the overall cost of the fire service inspectorate.

I do not want to draw parallels with the Minister of State's negotiations on council tax, which are going on in parallel with the Committee's deliberations, but I emphasise that we must consider the absolute values involved and not just percentages and changes. If the fire service inspectorate budget is small, the questions that I am asking are of less significance than if it is large.

Photo of Phil Hope Phil Hope Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

I am glad that we are not going to drift into discussions of the hon. Gentleman's district council's council tax increase, which at 17.5 per cent. is wholly unacceptable given the level of grant that we have given that council. [Interruption.] I do not want to stray into that, but if the hon. Gentleman wants to intervene, I am happy to accept the intervention.

Mr. Hammond rose—

Photo of Nicholas Winterton Nicholas Winterton Conservative, Macclesfield

Order. I hope that the Opposition spokesman is not going to stray down the path of council tax increases.

Photo of Philip Hammond Philip Hammond Shadow Minister (Communities and Local Government)

I was merely going to question the Under-Secretary's definitions of terms by asking him whether he thinks that 1.7 per cent. is a large increase.

Photo of Phil Hope Phil Hope Parliamentary Under-Secretary, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

I am very wary that if I stray into the debate that the hon. Gentleman would like to take me into, you will rule me out of order, Sir Nicholas. I will endeavour not to berate Runnymede again.

I hope that I have explained about avoiding duplication in the roles of the inspectorate and the Audit Commission. I regret that I cannot provide the hon. Gentleman with the details of the costs of the inspectorate or the other details he asked for, but they are a matter of public record, so I can send him those details after the sitting. The changing role of the inspectorate and the developing role of the Audit Commission are both sensitive matters. It is important

to get them right and it would be wrong of us to rush. We must take into account the views of both the inspectorate and the Audit Commission.

The hon. Gentleman suggested a straightforward transfer, but the way in which the inspectorate will change its role and size and the way in which the Audit Commission will develop its role and functions will be a matter for more negotiation than would be found in his approach. For example, we are considering secondments and other such restructuring, rather than the simple transfer that he suggests. We want the Audit Commission to carry out the performance inspection role well, drawing upon a range of expertise, some of which is located with the inspectorate. We want the inspectorate in its refocused role to carry out that function with much greater efficiency and effectiveness, so that we have the independent advice that we need when formulating policy and making decisions.

Although I cannot offer the hon. Gentleman the details he requires now, I shall be happy to send him details of the current overall cost of the inspectorate. I will not be able to tell him the future cost, which will be discussed in the coming months. I hope that I have made clear our intentions regarding the roles of the inspectorate and the Audit Commission. A process of transition must be undertaken, but we are mindful of the concerns that he has voiced, and we have responded positively in the Bill to allay them.

Question put and agreed to.

Clause 27 ordered to stand part of the Bill.